NC0006190_Permit Issuance_20090615

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0006190
Maiden Plant WWTP
Document Type:
i
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
June 15, 2009
This document is printed on reuses paper - ignore any
content on the reirerse side

ern
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
June 15, 2009
Mr. Steve Slaughter, Plant Manager
Delta Apparel, Inc.
P.O. Box 37
Maiden, North Carolina 28650
Subject: NPDES Permit NC0006190 Modification
Delta Apparel — Maiden Plant
Catawba County
Dear Mr. Slaughter:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for modification of the subject
permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 17,
2007 (or as subsequently amended.)
This permit modification allows for an increase in permitted flow from 1.0 MGD to 1.1 MGD, to
accommodate increased production. Please note the following changes from the draft permit
modification sent to you on April 22, 2009.
• As requested, the Monthly Average Flow limitation was reduced from 1.2 MGD to
1.1 MGD under Section A. (1.). As a result the following corrections had to be made
to account for the new IWC of 12%.
o The water quality based Chromium limit was changed to 402 ug/L.
o Note 3 under Section A.(1.) has been .changed to Chronic Toxicity at
12%.
o In the first sentence of Section A.(2.), The Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit,
was changed to: The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable
inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at
an effluent concentration of 12%.
o The effluent concentrations cited in Section A.(2.) pertaining to the North
Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure have
been revised to 48%, 24%, 12%, 6%, and 3%.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet. www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal 0pportunity l Affirmative Action Employer
NOrthCarolina
A7atiiraIIij

o In the first paragraph of Section A (3). TOXICITY IDENTIFICATION
EVALUATION (TIE), 13% was changed to 12%.
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.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. The Division may require modification
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.
Clark Creek is listed as an impaired stream on North Carolina's 303 (d) list. Currently, the stream does not
meet all water quality standards. If the limitations in the current permits for facilities discharging to Clark
Creek do not result in improved water quality, removal of discharges to Clark Creek may be necessary for
the health of the stream.
Although the Division believes multiple sources of wastewater cause degradation to Clark Creek, we will
continue to monitor compliance at your facility. If noncompliance with your permit's effluent limits is
shown to be a direct cause of stream degradation, the Division will recommend removal of your facility' s
discharge.
Part III of your permit requires you to "continually evaluate all wastewater disposal alternatives and pursue
the most environmentally sound alternative of the reasonably cost effective alternatives" to surface water
discharge. Such an evaluation may help you find an alternative to surface water discharge that is more
appropriate for your facility.
If you have questions concerning this permit, please contact Julie Grzyb by e-mail
([e-mail]) or phone at [phone].
Si erely,
oleen H. Sullins
/
Enclosure: NPDES Permit NC0006190
cc: Central Files
NPDES Files
Mooresville Regional Office / Surface Water Protection Section (ecopy)
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
EPA Region IV
David Merryman, Catawba Riverkeeper, 421 Minuet Lane Suite #205, Charlotte, NC 28217
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N: Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
. haturalll
y:r

Permit No. NC0006190
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,
Delta Apparel, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Maiden Plant
100 West Pine Street
Maiden, North Carolina
Catawba County
to receiving waters designated as Clark Creek in the Catawba River Basin in accordance with
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III,
and IV hereof.
The permit shall become effective July 1, 2009.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31, 2011.
Signed this day June 15, 2009.
4
C . een H. Sullins, Director
tef A ‘Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0006190
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET •
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are
hereby revoked. As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this
number is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge
from this facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions
included herein.
Delta Apparel, Inc.
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing wastewater treatment facility located at Delta
Apparel, Inc., 100 West Pine Street, Maiden, Catawba County, and consisting of the
following treatment components:
• heat exchanger
• manual bar screen
dual aeration basins with mechanical aerators (1.25 Million gallons each)
• dual secondary clarifiers
• post aeration (84,000 gallons)
• parshall flume with recording flow meter
• aerated sludge storage lagoon
2. Discharge treated process wastewater from said treatment works (via Outfall 001)
into Clark Creek, a Class C water in the Catawba River Basin, at the location
specified on the attached map.

,..J� _-
rir �
t (
Latitude: 35°34'38" USGS Quad #:
Longitude: 81°13'14" E14SW
N
SCALE
1:24,000
(1" = 2000')
`�Itr
j r /yy%` 1, i=- � %
J
-- - 7-v;
2 —�_, -rQ ii
q /4--.
j •
• R 1
667
N
s/1
rf../,
,1?uc
\I.
•wtv'
. East
CV_
Delta Apparel, Inc.
NC0006190
Receiving Stream: Clark Creek
Stream Classification: C
River Basin: Catawba
Sub -Basin #: 03-08-35
County: Catawba

fit
Permit No. NC0006190
A. (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until permit expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated process wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARAC FPSTICS
, ,. ,,, ,� , �f
j Y y/J'- i �y w
. y ;
L r 4
3y' { . MONITORINGREQUIREMENTS
f..
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Monthly Avera•geDa
., _•
Y. Ma :ximy
f �-4- ,2 .._C
` } ' •• * - `,
* Mea.surement f ;
.' �_ j r,
en is
Sample Type•'
-; 's (A
• - !- .i�f'�.
Sample Loranon' ,
r
;~ �r -^ • •_
f. Y-p. � M1 7 7 L ...
Flow •
1.1 MGD
Continuous
• Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
162 pounds/day
325 pounds/day
31Week
Composite
Effluent
COD
2900 pounds/day
6271 pounds/day
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
785 pounds/day
1853 pounds/day
31Week
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
3.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
3iWeek
Composite
Effluent
Sulfide
8.0 pounds/day
16.0 pounds/day
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Phenols
4.0 pounds/day
8.0 pounds/day
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Chromium
402 Argil
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
pH
6.0 < pH < 9.0
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved 0xygen2
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Chloride
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Sulfates
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
(NO2+NO3+TKN)
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity3
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Color4
549 ADMI
Weekly
Composite
Influent and Effluent
Color (April - October)
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Total Copper (April - October)
Monthly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Dissolved Oxygen
3/Week5
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Temperature
3/Week5
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Conductivity
31Week5
Grab .
Upstream & Downstream
Notes:
1. Sample locations: Upstream = at NCSR 2007. Downstream = at NCSR 1274.
2. The daily effluent dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
3. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) at 12%; March, June, September, December;
refer to Special Condition A (2) and A (3) .
4. Refer to Special Condition A (4) for a complete explanation ofeffluent color limits and color
requirements.
5. Instream samples shall be collected 3/Week (June -September) and 1/Week (October -May).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit No. NC0006190
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (2). CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 12%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, puarteriu monitoring using test procedures outlined in
"North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or
subsequent versions using the following effluent concentrations: 48%, 24%, 12%, 6%, and 3%. The tests
will be performed during the months of March, June, September, and December. 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. If reporting pass/fail
results using the parameter code TGP3B, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is sent to the below address. If
reporting Chronic Value results using the parameter code THP3B, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be
sent to the following address:
Attention: NC DENR / DWQ / Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no later
than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate
signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if
chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test
form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the
report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to
the Environmental Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring
will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently then required by this permit, the results of such
monitoring shall be included in the calculation & reporting of the data submitted on the DMR & all AT
Forms submitted.

• Permit No. N00006190
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). TOXICITY IDENTIFICATION EVALUATION (TIE)
Should any whole effluent toxicity test produce a chronic value less than 12%, the permittee will
undertake toxicity identification evaluations (TIEs) using the procedures described in Toxicity
Identification Evaluation: Characterization of Chronically Toxic Effluents, Phase I, EPA/600/6-91/005F,
May 1992 or similar methods. A final report will be generated and submitted to the address below no
later than 60 days following the initial test producing a chronic value less than 12%. The primary
objective of the TIE activity will be to confirm or rule out polymer as the source of toxicity. The report
detailing findings of the TIE is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Section
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
A (4). COLOR PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS
Color Monitoring. The perrnittee will conduct color monitoring of instream stations (upstream,
downstream) on a weekly basis during each summer season (April -October). The permittee will record
whether a color plume was observed around the outfall pipe during the weekly instream sampling
events, and include that information on the monthly discharge monitoring report. Influent and effluent
samples will be collected weekly for color on a year-round basis. Color samples will be analyzed for
ADMI color at natural pH. Effluent/influent samples will consist of 24-hour composites, while instream
samples will be collected as grab samples. Samples will be analyzed by a state certified laboratory. The
influent monitoring station will need to be located prior to polymer addition.
Color Reopener. If data show that water quality standards for color are being violated by the
discharge permitted by the terms of this permit, then the Director may reopen this permit for the
purpose of imposing additional requirements pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0114. Alternatively, if future
conditions change and color is no longer a component of the influent wastestream, then the permittee
may request a permit modification to remove color permit requirements.

NCDENR / DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
Delta Apparel, Inc.
NPDES No. NC0006190 (Final)
Facility Information
Facility Name:
Delta Apparel's Maiden Plant, 100 West Pine St., Maiden, NC 28650
Permitted Flow, MGD:
1.1 (original request 1.2)
County:
Catawba
Facility Class:
III
Regional Office:
Mooresville
Facility Status:
Existing
USGS Topo Quad:
E14SW (Maiden NC)
Permit Status:
Major Modification
Permit writer:
Julie Grzyb
Stream Characteristics
Receiving Stream:
Clark Creek
Subbasin:
030835
Drainage Area (mi2):
66.00
Stream Index No.:
l 1-129-5-(0.3)
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
12
Stream Class:
C
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
25.5
303(d) Listed:
YES
30Q2 (cfs):
34
305(b) Status:
Average Flow (cfs):
78.00
Use Support:
Impaired
IWC (%):
13 % at 1.2 MGD
Modification revision:
Requested on 6/1/09
Permitted Flow, MGD
1.1 MGD
IWC (%):
12 % at 1.1 MGD
FACILITY SUMMARY
This is a major permit modification request for Delta Apparel, Inc., a major industrial textile facility
which knits, dyes, and manufactures cotton t-shirts. The permittee is requesting an increase in flow from
1.0 MGD to 1.2 MGD based on a production rate of 800,000 lbs/cloth/week. The facility discharges
100% process wastewater, while all domestic wastewater is treated at the Town of Maiden WWTP.
Sludge is land applied under permit WQ0006984.
This facility was originally permitted in the 1970's and operated as Duckhead Apparel. A 1992 ATC
authorized relocation of its discharge point from Shady Branch to Clark Creek. Based on planned
production increases the permit was modified in January 1998 to allow expansion from 1.0 to 1.5 MGD
after receiving an ATC. The permit was modified in 2000 to change the name from Delta Mills Inc to
Delta Apparel Inc. A permit renewal was issued in 2002 and the Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Page for 1.5 MGD was removed maintaining the permitted flow at 1.0 MGD since the facility was able to
expand production without the need for additional flow due to water conservation and reuse.
The 2002 permit was contested by Delta Apparel primarily due to concerns associated with the effluent
color limitations. After reaching a settlement agreement with DWQ on 8/27/2004, Delta Apparel
implemented a color reducing technology and achieved significant color reductions during 2004-2005. A
second color reducing technology was stipulated in the 2005 permit modification and permitted flow was
maintained at 1.0 MGD. The permit was last renewed in 2006 with Effluent Guideline Limitations for
BOD5, COD, TSS, Sulfide and Phenols frozen at the January 1998 permit levels which were based on
the 1995-97 production rates of 104, 5101bs/day or less.

NPDES PERMIT FACT SHEET (final) Delta Apparel, Inc. •
Page 2 NPDES No. NC0006190
Since about June 2008 production has increased and Delta Apparel is requesting a flow modification so
additional business can be accepted. The production expansion is for a daily maximum production rate of
114,300 lbs/day which will ultimately increase the average amount of wastewater generated at the facility
by approximately 200,000 gallons per day. During the last two years the average monthly flow has been
1.18 MGD and the facility has complied with all permit (imitations except for flow.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2), the facility evaluated five different disposal alternatives
for the additional flow. Discharging to the Town of Maiden's WWTP was deemed unacceptable since
the POTW has limited capacity and Delta would need to treat the wastewater prior to discharge. Land
application was evaluated but found to be cost prohibitive. The only applicable options were surface
water discharge, wastewater reuse, or a combination of surface water discharge and reuse. The most cost
effective choice was for Delta to continue discharging to surface water. The latter two of these potential
alternatives would require significant upgrades to the on -site system in order for the effluent quality to be
acceptable for reuse in the manufacturing operations.
The wastewater treatment plant at Delta consists of two 1.25 million gallon aeration basins which
currently receive 0.5 MGD each having 60 hours retention. At 1.2 MGD the basins would have 50 hours
of retention. Polymer for color removal is added to the flow leaving the basins which enters into dual
clarifiers to settle solids. A flocculation agent is added to the center -well of each 80,000 gallon clarifier.
After clarification the wastestream flows through a chlorine contact tank which is no longer in use and
then into an 84,000 gallon post aeration basin. Solids that settle and thicken are wasted to a sludge
storage lagoon which has a capacity of 1.8 MGD.
Treated wastewaters from the clarifiers discharge to a parshall flume with an ISCO flow recorder and a
refrigerated composite sampler. The effluent is discharged through a 7,500-foot gravity line to Clark
Creek, approximately 100-ft above the Town of Maiden's discharge point, and several miles below the
Town of Newton's discharge. Clark Creek flows into South Fork Catawba River, then into Lake Wylie.
Most of Clark Creek is considered impaired. The subject stream segment is Class C, Impaired, and listed
in the 2006 303(d) list as biologically impaired due to unknown causes.
Delta Apparel is not proposing any modifications to its wastewater treatment system due to the increase
in flow and production. The plant was originally designed to handle 1.5 MGD and increased flows
during the past two years have not resulted in any permit violations other than the monthly average flow.
Based on Discharge Monitoring Reports from September and December 2007, Mr. Slaughter of Applied
Water Technology, Inc. provides the following chart on the percent of a pollutant removed in excess of
current permit limitations with the existing treatment facility. Note that September and December
experienced flows similar to the 1.2 MGD flow proposed in this modification request.
Discharge
Parameter
Permit
Limit
Actual
Value
% Below Permit
Limit
Flow
1.0 MGD
1.17 MGD
-
BOD5
162 lbs
10.4 lbs
94
TSS
785 lbs
132.9 lbs
83
COD
2900 lbs
1173.6 lbs
60
Color, ADMI
549 su
154 su
72
Chronic Toxicit
>11%
15.6%*
42
Page 2
Version: June 10, 2009

NPDES PERMIT FACT SHEET (final) Delta Apparel, Inc.
Page 3 NPDES No. NC0006190
In addition, Mr. Slaughter has clarified that in order to maintain color removal rates, polymer dosing tests
are performed once per month by the supplier's representative (Hychem, Inc. of Tampa, FL). Color
removal is evaluated based on a 10 — minute retention time. At 1.2 MGD the clarifier retention time is
estimated at 3.4 hours, therefore; maintaining the necessary retention times for color removal at the
higher flow is not expected to be a problem.
INSTREAM MONITORING AND COMPLIANCE SUMMARY
The facility is required to conduct self -monitoring of the South Fork Catawba River at one location
upstream of the discharge and one location downstream of the discharge. The instream self -monitoring
includes: temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, total copper and color.
An analysis of DO, temperature and conductivity for the past two years showed compliance except for
one period during June 2008 when temperatures were high and the DO Water Quality standard of 5.0
mg/L was violated (Table 1; attached). A DO level below 5 mg/L has not been detected downstream
since the June 2008 occurrences. The Level B DO model analysis conducted in 1997 predicted an
increase to 300 lbs/day BOD5 would not impact the DO downstream of the outfall. For the years 2007
and 2008, Delta Apparel's effluent levels for BOD5 have been well below the permit limit of 162 lbs/day
(monthly avg.) with the calculated mean of the 24 monthly averages at 16.7 lbs/day. The mean
concentration of the 24 monthly averages for NH3-N was 0.25 mg/L which is also well below the
facility's permit limit of 3 mg/L, and effluent D.O. has averaged 7.7 mg/L. See attached Table 2 for
details.
It is recommended that existing BOD, NH3-N, and DO limits be maintained in this permit modification.
Additionally, it is recommended that this segment of Clark Creek and all its dischargers be re-evaluated
prior to the next permit renewal scheduled for the Catawba River Basin in 2011.
Discharge Monitoring Reports have been reviewed for the period January 2007 through December 2008.
The facility has been in compliance with all permit requirements except for its monthly average flow
limitation.
The Mooresville Regional staff performed an inspection of the Delta Mills — Maiden Plant on 2/26/09.
The staff report stated that Delta Mills facilities are well operated and maintained, and there is no history
of chronic noncompliance aside from the monthly average flow being exceeded. The staff had no
objection to the permit renewal provided the existing treatment facilities are hydraulically capable of
handling the increased flows.
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Reasonable potential analyses were conducted for Chromium, Copper, Zinc and Chloride (Table 3;
attached). Based on reasonable potential analysis of chromium data, there is no reasonable potential to
exceed the in -stream chromium water quality standard. However, since the WQ-based limit is more
stringent than the corresponding effluent guideline limit, the WQ-based chromium limit of 373 ug/L is
used in the modified permit along with a weekly monitoring frequency. This limit is below the current
limit of 437 ug(L since the IWC was changed from 11 to 13 percent.
Copper, Zinc and Chloride, all exhibit some reasonable potential to violate Action Level standards. If the
increased flow results in violations of the toxicity tests, the actual impact of these action level parameters
will need to be investigated and possible limitations determined.
Page 3
Version: June 10, 2009

NPDES PERMIT FACT SHEET (final) Delta Apparel, Inc.
Page 4 NPDES No. NC0006190
Federal Effluent Guideline Limits (EGLs).
The facility is a textile knit fabric dye and bleaching operation which is subject to 40 CFR 410 Subpart E
- Knit Fabric Finishing Subcategory, as a simple manufacturing operation. Although 40 CFR 410 allows
for an increase in EGLs based on the requested increase in production, the Division has elected to freeze
the EGL limits at the January 1998 permit levels due to the impaired stream status and the ability of the
permittee to already meet these more stringent limits. The production -based limits in this permit and the
2006, 2005, and 2002 permits were based on the production volume of 104,510 lbs/day or less from
previous permits (See Table 4; Textile Effluent Limits Spreadsheet). There are no Federal EGLs for
color.
Water Quality -Based Effluent Limits.
The receiving stream segment is subject to water quality standards applicable to Class C freshwater
streams. The previous permits included water -quality based effluent limits for ammonia, dissolved
oxygen, and chromium. The limits for ammonia and dissolved oxygen have been retained in the draft
modification and the WQ-based limit for chromium has been changed to 373 ug/L.
COLOR
The mean of the 24 monthly averages for color samples collected from Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2008 was 228
ADMI units (American Dye Manufacturers Institute). The monthly average permit color limit is 549
ADMI units (See Table 5) and is recommended to remain in the modified permit.
TOXICITY TESTING
The permittee has been consistently passing its WET tests with a chronic value of 15.6%.
With the increase in flow the new IWC was calculated at 13%.
Current Requirement: Quarterly Chronic Toxicity @ 11.0% MAR, JUN, SEP, DEC
Recommended Requirement: Quarterly Chronic Toxicity @ 13.0% MAR, JUN, SEP, DEC.
PROPOSED CHANGES
• Change the effluent limitation on Flow to a Monthly Average of 1.2 MGD.
• Due to the new IWC% reduce the water quality based Chromium limit to 373ug/L.
• Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit set at an effluent concentration of 13 % based on
new IWC.
• Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test concentrations changed to :
52%, 26%. 13%, 6.5% and 3.25% based on new IWC.
Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements for all the other parameters
remain the same.
Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
State Contact
04/22/09 (est.)
06/15/09 (est.)
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Julie Grzyb at [phone].
Page 4
Version: June 10, 2009

NPDES PERMIT FACT SHEET (final) Delta Apparel, Inc.
Page 5 NPDES No. NC0006190
Addendum to Fact Sheet
In a letter received from Steve Slaughter, Plant Manager, on June 1, 2009 Delta Apparel
requested that the monthly average flow limit be reduced from 1.2 MGD to 1.1 MGD in the final
permit. The original modification request was to increase the permitted flow from 1.0 MGD to
1.2 MGD. The facility is concerned that at a flow of 1.2 MGD the chronic toxicity limit of 13 %
may be difficult to meet. With a flow of 1.1 MGD the chronic toxicity limit will be 12 % and
Mr. Slaughter believes this reduction will provide a greater certainty of compliance with the
whole effluent testing limitation. Since this change in the permit results in less of a pollutant
load to the receiving stream and a greater certainty of compliance the draft permit will be made
final with the following minor changes.
• Change the effluent limitation on Flow to a Monthly Average of 1.1 MGD.
• Due to the reducedflow low of 1.1 MGD the JWC% is 12% and the water quality
based Chromium limit changes to 402 ug/L (see revision to RPA Table 3,
6/8/2009)
• Change the Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit to an effluent concentration of 12%
based on the revised IWC.
• Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test concentrations change to :
48%, 24%. I2%, 6% and 3% based on revised IWC.
The Permittee will be made aware that noncompliance with any permit limit, flow or toxicity
limitations could result in a schedule of compliance via either a permit modification or a SOC.
Page 5
Version: June 10, 2009

NC0006190 Delta Apparel
TABLE 1
NC0006190
Date
1-4-07
1/11/2007
1/18/2007
1/25/2007
2/8/2007
1/15/2007
1/22/2007
2/8/2007
2/15/2007
2/22/2007
3/1/2007
3/8/2009
3/15/2007
3/22/2007
3/29/2007
4/5/2007
4/11/2007
4/19/2007
4/26/2007
5/3/2007
5/10/2007
5/17/1997
5/24/2007
5/31/2007
6/5/2007
6/6/2007
6/7/2007
6/12/2007
6/13/2007
6/14/2007
6/19/2007
6/20/2007
6/21/2007
6/26/2007
6/27/2007
6/28/2007
7/3/2007
7/4/2007
7/5/2007
7/10/2007
7/11/2007
7/12/2007
7/17/2007
7/18/2007
7/19/2007
7/24/2007
7/25/2007
7/26/2007
7/31/2007
8/1/2007
Delta Apparel
Upstream
Temp. D.O. Conductivity
(°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm)
8.1 9.9 150
3.6 11.3 150
6.1 10.6 .170
4.9 10.6 160
5.2 10.7 160
3.6 11.1 120
9.2 9.6 150
5.2 10.7 160
3.6 11.1 120
9.2 9.6 150
- 7.9-.1•0.1 310
9.2 9.6 170
12.5 8.8 130
11.8 9 160
17 7.8 170
11.3 8.8 180
10.9 9 140
8.4 13.2 180
16.5 8.4 200
18.4 8 210
16.7 8.5 230
16.3 7.8 160
16.6 7.7 210
19.7 7.1 230
18.4 7.2 160
18.8 7.1 210
19.2 7.2 200
19.4 7.1 130
18 7.4 550
18 7.4 170
21.3 7 200
21.6 6.8 120
18.8 7.3 210
21.1 7 240
21.4 6.9 250
22.3 6.2 120
19.1 7.4 180
19.5 7.3 220
20 7.3 190
21.6 6.9 170
22.3 6.5 92
21.4 6.8 180
21.7 7 250
22.8 6.6 100
22.4 6.8 170
19.6 7.2 120
20.1 7 120
20.6 7.2 180
21.2 7.1 160
21.6 7 230
Downstream
Temp. D.O. Conductivity
(°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm)
8.2 9.8
40 11
6 10.5
4.7 10.5
5.1 10.6
3.4 10.9
9.7 9.3
5.1 10.6
3.4 10.9
9.7 9.3
8.5 9.7
9.7 9.3
13.3 8.3
12.4 8.7
17.3 7.7
12.5 8.4
11 9
8.1 13.5
17.3 8
19.1 7.4
17.3 8
17 7.2
17.4 7.4
20.5 6.6
19.3 6.8
19.7 7
20.1 6.8
19.7 7.2
18.9 7
18.9 7
21.9 6.8
22 6.5
19.9 6.9
21.9 6.3
22.5 6.5
22.7 6.1
19.9 7
20.1 6.8
20.8 6.8
22.3 5.9
22.7 6.3
22 6.6
22.4 6.4
23.1 6.5
23 6.6
19.9 7.1
20.3 6.6
20.9 7
21.9 6.8
22.7 6.7
240
280
340
320
300
250
•300
300
250
300
150
240
190
200
300
340
390
390
350
320
410
330
480
590
570
680
580
320
<10
420
590
370
720
700
670
560
680
790
860
700
260
630
850
340
620
360
320
550
660
800
Page 1

NC0006190 Delta Apparel
Date
8/2/2007
8/7/2007
8/8/2007
8/9/2007
8/14/2007
8/15/2007
8/16/2007
8/21/2007
8/22/2007
8/23/2007
8/28/2007
8/29/2007
8/30/2007
9/4/2007
9/5/2007
9/6/2007
9/11/2007
9/12/2007
9/13/2007
9/18/2007
9/19/2007
9/20/2007
9/25/2007
9/26/2007
9/27/2007
10/4/2007
10/11/2007
10/18/2007
10/25/2007
11/1/2007
11/8/2007
11/15/2007
11 /21 /2007
11/29/2007
12/6/2007
12/13/2007
12/20/2007
12/27/2007
1/3/2008
1/10/2008
1/17/2008
1/24/2008
1 /31 /2008
2/7/2014
2/14/2008
2/21/2008
2/28/2008
3/6/2008
3/13/2008
3/20/2008
3/27/2008
Temp.
(°C)
22.6
24
24.2
24.5
22.9
21.9
23
23.7
23.2
23.6
22.3
22.8
23.1
21
20.1
20.8
22.4
21.9
21.4
16.1
15.6
18.8
20.3
19.2
18
20.1
16
18.1
18.3
11.3
5
13.5
9
4.8
4.3
10.7
2.9
6.9
0
10.2
4.5
6.1
3.2
9
4.4
5.2
2.3
8.6
7.4
11.6
10.1
Upstream
D.O. Conductivity
(mg/L) (umhos/cm)
6.9 230
7.2 246
7.2 267
7.1 274
7.1 143
7.3 296
7.1 318
6.9 251
6.7 362
6.6 141
7.2 207
7.3 252
7.1 213
7.4 285
7.7 288
7.6 292
7.3 270
7.2 274
7.4 286
8.6 237
8.8 226
8.1 252
7.7 305
8 302
8.1 315
7.5 311
8.2 326
7.9 536
8 117
9.7 265
11.4 264
9.2 243
10.2 262
11.7 259
11.9 267
10 187
12.2 249
11.2 134
16.2
11.9
14
13.1
12
11
13
10.2
12.5
11.3
10.5
9.3
9.8
172
232
262
220
252
222
142
189
171
137
190
144
186
Downstream
Temp. D.O. Conductivity
(°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm)
22.2 6.6.
24.4 6.5
24.5 6.5
24.7 6.5
.22.7 6.2
22 6
23.3 5.6
23.9 5.8
23.5 5:8
24 6.3
22.8 6.7
23.1 6.5
23.4 6.7
21.1 7.1
20.2 6.7
21.1 6.9
22.4 6.4
22.2 6.1
21.6 6.3
16.5 8.5
16.2 8.7
19 7.9
7.8 7
19.3 7.7
18.5 7.7
20.7 6.9
16.1 7.5
18.3 7.3
18 8
11.5 9.3
5.7 10.9
13.6 9
9.9 9.5
5.8 11.2
5 11.5
11.6 9
3.3 12
7 10.9
0.2
10.4
5.2
6.2
3.8
9.7
4.5
7.1
4.1
8.7
7.8
11.5
10.3
15.3
11.7
13.6
12.7
9.6
10.3
11.6
10.1
12
10
9.9
9.2
9.6
• 880
899
1050
802
918
806
991
1170
931
482
896
1020
639
960
1010
1140
1130
1180
1010
701
815
807
1170
1170
1160
1370
1060
1260
305
819
762
410
789
856
912
636
790
160
617
800
733
752
851
504
404
618
570
395
498
254
173
Page 2

NC0006190 Delta Apparel
Upstream Downstream
Temp. D.O. Conductivity Temp. D.O. Conductivity
Date (°C) (mg/L) .(umhos/cm) (°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm)
• 4/3/2008 13.1 9.2 193 13.4 8.9' 589
4/10/2008 12.1 9.4 134 13 8.6 336
4/17/2008 9.5 10.2 167 10.6 9 453
4/24/2008 13.6 8.5 187 14.4 7.9 477
5/1/2008 12 9 175 12.4 8.8 459
5/8/2008 17.8 8.1 215 18.4 7.2 568
5/15/2008 16.2 8 227 16.7 7.1 614
5/22/2008 14 8.6 250 15.4 7.4. 553
5/29/2008 16.1 7.8 135 16.7 7-.3 311
6/3/2008 19.7 7.1 337 20.4 5.5 528
6/4/2008 21.1 6.8 261 21.8 4.3 468
6/5/2008 21.4 6.7 319 22.5 4.8 483
6/10/2008 22.4 6.4 349 23 4.1 816
6/11/2008 22 6.6 298 23 4.9 689
6/12/2008 21.8 6.5 325 22.6 4.8 633
6/17/2008 22 6.5 708 22.2 4.7 279
6/18/2008 18.7 7 349 19.3 5 685
6/19/2008 19.2 7 350 19.5 5.4 662
6/24/2008 19.8 6.9 231 20.8 5.7 434
6/25/2008 20.1 6.9 266 20.8 5.4 523
6/26/2008 20.3 6.7 283 21.2 5 625
6/30/2008 21.8 6.7 193 22.3 6 388
7/ 1 /2008 18.8 7.2 237 19.5 6 520
7/2/2008 18.2 7 226 19 6.2 571
7/8/2008 21.4 6.8 244 22.2 6 345
7/9/2008 21.4 6.6 127 22 6.1 210
7/10/2008 21.7 6.6 150 22.3 6.3 187
7/15/2008 21 7 243 22 6.3 419
7/16/2008 20.4 7.1 174 21.5 6.2 543
7/17/2008 20.3 7.3 240 21.5 6.2 552
7/22/2008 22.3 6.6 449 23.3 5.1 988
7/23/2008 21.7 6.3 257 22.8 6 424
7/24/2008 21.4 6.6 258 21.7 6.2 453
7/29/2008 22.5 6.5 189 23.4 5.9 768
7/30/2008 22.8 6.4 209 23.7 5.6 644
7/31/2008 23.2 6.4 113 24.1 5.9 410
8/5/2008 22.6 6.5 254 23.5 5.8 811
8/6/2008 23.9 6.4 159 23.9 6.2 706
8/7/2008 23.3 6.4 494 23.6 5.8 1040
8/12/2008 19.8 6.8 427 19.7 6.2 1420
8/13/2008 20.3 6.3 263 20.4 6.1 380
8/14/2008 19.4 7.1 199 19.9 6.7 440
8/19/2008 20 6.9 10 20.5 6.5 165
8/20/2008 20.4 6.8 209 21.3 6.3 556
8/21/2008 20.9 6.9 250 21.7 6.4 619
8/26/2008 21 6.6 196 21.5 6.4 448
8/27/2008 21.6 6.2 49 21.9 5.7 54
8/28/2008 20.5 6.3 97 21.1 5 84
9/2/2008 20.4 7.1 182 21.1 6.8 414
9/3/2008 19.4 7.3 248 20.1 6.8 351
9/4/2008 19.2 7.4 170 19.8 7 383
Page 3

NC0006190 Delta Apparel
Temp.
Date (°C)
9/9/2008 21.6 ' 6.8
9/10/2008 21.4 6.8
9/11/2008 19.9 7.1
9/16/2008 20.1 7.1
9/17/2008 18.3 7.5
9/18/2008 17.4 7.7
9/23/2008 16.6 7.5
9/24/2008 15.6 7.9
9/25/2008 15.6 7.8
9/30/2008 18.5 7.4
10/1/2008 18.1 7.2
10/2/2008 14.6 7.9
10/9/2008 16.6 7.5
10/15/2008 15 7.8
10/16/2008 15 7.6
10/23/2008 9.2 9.1
10/30/2008 7.5 9.5
11/6/2008 12.6 7.6
11/13/2008 11.7 8.1
11/20/2008 4.5 10.6
11/26/2008 4.1 10.5
12/4/2008 4 11.1
12/11/2008 12 8.4
12/18/2008 11.1 9
12/24/2008 6.5 10.6
12/31/2008 8 9.7
Upstream •
D.O. Conductivity
(mg/L) (umhoslcm)
226
212
94
183
125
158
222
212
261
491
168
215
150
234
258
245
227
235
243
231
275
130
144
186
233
Downstream
Temp. D.O. Conductivity
(°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm)
22.3 6.5
22.3 6.6
20.2 7.8
20.7 6.7
18.6 7.3
18 7.5
17.2 7.6
16.3 7.8
16.4 7.7
18.8 7.2
18.8 7.1
15.1 7.7
16.6 7.3
15 7.6
15.5 7.6
9.7 9.1
7.5 9.2
12.4 7.9
11 7.9
4 10.6
3.8 10.6
4 10.8
11.7 8.5
10.6 9
5.7 10.6
8.1 9.8
441
454
160
445
269
345
501
513
591
194
492
503
297
582
686
639
576
562
582
617
549
188
355
223
172
Page 4

tS fit, � ue �� a110
and 2008 Monthly'Aver.0ge,and Mi
d, 1:.�`,TcriF •?fir':`: -. VS
4Month
Mirn�`level:.'
Pa 07 69.7 37.2 1.7 0.29 7.8 8.6
0 _" ;` 38.2 20 0.94 0.18 7.8 8.6
'March'- 37.5 12.3 1.3 0.23 7.4 7.9on 26.1 12.6 1.4 0.2 7.2 7.9
'Mayo 18.2 13.5 1.3 0.3 6.9 7.7
145 16 0.53 0.14 6.7 7
20.5 17.5 0.54 0.08 6.8 6.9
84.7 22 3 0.82 6.8 7.3
>Se28.5 17 0.82 0.27 7.1 7.4
37.5 16.3 1.1 0.2 7.5 8
107.1 15.8 0.41 0.12 8 8.4
De " 36.7 9.4 0.82 0.14 6.2 8.8
F an' 08 :a 79.8 29.6 10 1.83 7.4 9.6
57.2 18.1 0.46 0.17 5.8 8.2
arch 66 9.1 0.18 0.1 5.4 8
42.3 11.2 0.35 0.1 7 7.8
ell 19.6 16.9 0.33 0.1 6.8 7.2
Junea' 17.8 13.8 0.1 0.1 6.5 6.8
18.3 15 0.1 0.16 6.3 6.7
20.4 16.6 0.1 0.1 6.2 6.6
Se `' 62.6 16.8 0,13 0.1 6.3 6.7
t:-�;;
G
27.9 16.2 0.1 0.1 6.5 7.2
30.1 15.4 0.1 0.14 7.2 7.7
32.4 14 0.17 0.1 7.1 8.5
:,$-mo avg ' ° , "mo avg ;'" Imo avg 5
McOtt j r`46 8375 16 7625 " 1 082 7. ,, 0:25291„� 6 8625tr,729, 67il
BOD5 NH3-N D.O.
,.jmi
timits_:-;_;- :162 lb/day mo. avg. 3.0 mg/L mo. avg. > 5.0m g/L

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Delta Apparel
NC0006190
Time Period
Ow (MGD)
7Q10S (cfs)
7Q10W (cfs)
3002 (cfs)
0
1.2
12
25.5
34
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 78
RecWving Stream Clark Creek
TABLE 3 •
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) (a) 7Q10S 13.42
Q 7Q10W 6.7982
© 3002 5.1868
Q QA 2.3291
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw=1.2MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS&
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS/ Y FAY1
Chronic Acute
n 0 Del Mast Prod 61v AlfoanbIe Div
Chromium
NC
50 1.022
uglL
105 5
9.6
Acute: 1.022
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ __
Chronic: 373
No reasonable potential for_ a standard violation _ _ _ _
Chronic limit is more stringent then EGr L.
,New IWC% reduces Chromium limit to 373 ug/L.
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
uglL
105 105
180.9
Acute: 7
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic:- 52
Reasonable potential toexceedstandards.—
___ __- — — _ —
No limit as this is an action level parameter.
`Maintain monitoring.
Chloride
NC
#tom# AL 250000
?3O1 a es•o
ug/L
9 9
Note: n<12
Limited data
3472000.0
set
Acute: 250.000
_ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 1.713.871
_Reason_able potential to_ exceed_ standards._ _ _ _ _ _
No limit as this is an action level parameter.
Maintain monitoring.
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
.
ug/L
49 49
256.0
Acute: 67
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 373
_Reason_able potential to_ exceed_ standards._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ w
No limit as this Is an action level parameter.
Maintain monitoring.
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
•• Freshwater Discharge
Table 2.xls, rpa
4/17/2009

e
4
5
Chromium
Copper
Date
1 2007 Month
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Month
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54 2008 Month
55
56
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
< 5 2.5 Std Dev.
< 5 2.5 Mean
< 5 2.5 C.V.
< 5 2.5 n
< 5 2.5
2 < 5 2.5 Mutt Factor
2 < 5 2.5 Max. Value
2 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred (
2 < 5 2.5
3 < 5 2.5
3 < 5 2.5
3 < 5 2.5
3 < 5 2.5
4 < 5 2.5
4 < 5 2.5
4 < 5 2.5
4 < 5 2.5
5 < 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
5 5 5.1
6 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5
7 < 5 2.5
7 < 5 2.5
7 < 5 2.5
7 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
< 5 2.5
s < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
io 8 7.8
10 < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
11 8 7.9
„< 5 2.5
„ < 5 2.5
„ < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
12;..' .
12 < 5 2.5
1 < 5 2.5
1 < 5 2.5
1 < 5 2.5
0.8983
2.6724
0.3362
105
1.2200
7.9 ug/L
9.6 ug/L
9 � 25
10 � . 33
11 321
12 3 : s 24
13 3:. : 33
14 4 ` 26
15 4 21
16 4 J 15
17 4-``". 14
18 5 21
19 5 22
20 5 19
21 5 21
22 5.._',:: 25
23 6 24
24 6 24
25 6 .. 24
26 6 31
27 7 36
28 7 31
29 7 22
30 7 36
31 8 -35
32 8 40.6
33 8 33.7
34 8 • 46.6
35 8 39
36 9 47
37 9 39.9
38 9 ::;'::";' 56.5
39 9 :'' ,-.: 40.6
40 10 ,`_ 42.4
41 10 ' . iw; 30.2
42 10 31.5
43 10 64.3
44 10„?''' 47.9
45 11 '•`:'•;'r- 53.1
46 11 42.3
47 1146.8
48 11 'x• 46
49 12 .. 47.7
50 12 t"'< 43.9
51 12 37.9
52
53 12;1 .;�4 50.3
54 2008 n 6r tt ) 50.5
55 11- 81.4
56 1"Y; 115
Date Data
1 2007 month'`
2 1
3 1 :4
4 1
5 1
6 2
7 2`t"
8 2
2''>=Y:
BDL=1/2DL Results
43 43:0 Std Dev. 25.7934
36 36.0 Mean 50.6057
43 43.0 C.V. 0.5097
34 34.0 n 105
18 18.0
20 20.0 Mult Factor 1.3400
22 22.0 Max. Value 135.0 ug/L
22 22.0 Max. Pred 180.9 ug/L
25.0
33.0
21.0
24.0
33.0
26.0
21.0
15.0
14.0
21.0
22.0
19.0
21.0
25.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
31.0
36.0
31.0
22.0
36.0
35.0
40.6
33.7
46.6
39.0
47.0
39.9
56.5
40.6
42.4
30.2
31.5
64.3
47.9
53.1
42.3
46.8
46.0
47.7
43.9
37.9
50.3
50.5
81.4
115.0

57 1 < 5 2.5
58 1 < 5 2.5
59 2 < 5 2.5
60 2 < 5 2.5
61 2 < 5 2.5
62 2 < 5 2.5
63 3 < 5 2.5
64 3 < 5 2.5
65 3 < 5 2.5
66 3 < 5 2.5
67 4 < 5 2.5
68 4 < 5 2.5
69 4 < 5 2.5
70 4 < 5 2.5
71 4 < 5 2.5
72 5 < 5 2.5
73 5 < 5 2.5
74 5 < 5 2.5
75 5 < 5 2.5
76 6 < 5 2.5
77 6 < 5 2.5
78 6 < 5 2.5
79 6 < 5 2.5
80 7 < 5 2.5
81 7 < 5 2.5
82 7 < 5 2.5
83 7 < 5 2.5
84 7 < 5 2.5
85 8 < 5 2.5
86 a < 5 2.5
87 8 < 5 2.5
88 8 < 5 2.5
89 9 < 5 2.5
90 9 < 5 2.5
91 9 < 5 2.5
92 9 < 5 2.5
93 10 7 7.3
94 10 < 5 2.5
95 io < 5 2.5
96 10 < 5 2.5
97 10 < 5 2.5
98 11 < 5 2.5
99 11 < 5 2.5
## 11 < 5 2.5
## 11< 5 2.5
## 12< 5 2.5
12< 5 2.5
## 12 < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
## 12 < 5 2.5
57 117 117.0
58 1 44 129 129.0
59 2 ,}.=;- + 75.9 75.9
60 2 58.6 58.6
61 2 4' 70.6 70.6
62 2' a 121 121.0
63 3 � , 135 135.0
64 3 81.8 81.8
65 3 79.4 79.4
66 3 62.4 62.4
67 471.8 71.8
68 4 .AA 55.5 55.5
69 4 - 53.3 53.3
70 4 62.4 62.4
71 4=` ?� 69 69.0
72 5 < 75.7 75.7
73 5 ,,;;y; 67 67.0
74 5 f: 53 53.0
75 5;_'i34.9 34.9
76 6 . t 43.4 43.4
77 6 3 48 48.0
78 6 50.9 50.9
79 6;;';:r!.;;: 43 43.0
80 7 43 43.0
81 7 r`r-; 47.5 47.5
82 7 /�,. 78 78.0
83 7 <;, • 106 106.0
84 7 `' 108 108.0
85 8 ' ' 85.1 85.1
86 8 1Lr: 81 81.0
87 8 57.8 57.8
88 8'"` '" 51 51.0
89 9 ''_ 70 70.0
90 9 ,, 61 61.0
91 9 65.6 65.6
92 9x:':< 66 66.0
93 10 81 81.0
94 10 is=: 64.2 64.2
95 10 t,;. .:'., _- 51 51.0
96 10 ; :'„:: 80.9 80.9
97 10 7 45 45.0
98 11 '"''` 42.4 42.4
99 11 48 48.0
100 11 y :x= -1: 41.9 41.9
101 11 ; 46 46.0
102 12 '; 55.9 55.9
103 12 60 60.0
104 12 60.6 60.6
105 12 50 50.0
106 12. 12 12.0

Chloride
15
Zinc
Date Data
Mar-2007 1400000
Jun.2007 1400000
Oct. 2007 1400000
Dec. 2007 1810000
Mar. 2008 2240000
Jun.2008 1130000
Sept. 2008 1800000
1550000
Dec. 2008 1,980,000
BDL=1/2DL Results
1400000.0 Std Dev. 348357.2560
1400000.0 Mean 1634444.4444
1400000.0 C.V. 0.2131
1810000.0 n 9
2240000.0
1130000.0 Mult Factor
1800000.0 Max. Value
1550000.0 Max. Pred
1980000.0
1.5500
2240000.0 ug/L
3472000.0 ug/L
Date Data
1 Month • 1
2 2007 1
3 2
4 2
5 3
6 3
7 4
8 4
9 5
10 5
11 6
12 6
13 7
14 7
15 8
16 8
17 9
18 9
19 10
20 10
21 11
22 11
23 12
24 12
25 Month 1
26 2008 1
27 2
28 2
29 3
30 3
31 4
32 4
33 5
34 5
35 6
36 6
37 7
38 7
39 7
40 8
41 8
42 9
BDL=1/2DL Results
72 72.0 Std Dev.
64 64.0 Mean
62 62.0 C.V.
61 61.0 n
85 85.0
72 72.0 Mult Factor
57 57.0 Max. Value
50 50.0 Max. Pred
70 70.0
84 84.0
100 100.0
76 76.0
• 140 140.0
68 68.0
105 105.0
97 97.0
64 64.0
83.3 83.3
92.2 92.2
66 66.0
80.1 80.1
125 125.0
90.2 90.2
91.2 91.2
144 144.0
179 179.0
154 154.0
118 118.0
176 176.0
130 130.0
118 118.0
109 109.0
69.2 69.2
66.3 66.3
52.6 52.6
63.6 63.6
46 46.0
59 59.0
91.8 91.8
71.3 71.3
64.9 64.9
60 60.0
32.0186
85.9714
0.3724
49
1.4300
179.0 ug/L
256.0 ug/L

43 9 53.8 53.8
44 10 59 59.0
45 10 85.5 85.5
46 11 67.4 67.4
47 11 65.7 65.7
48 12 88 88.0
49 12 65.5 65.5

TABLE 4
TEXTILE EFFLUENT LIMITS SPREADSHEET
PERMIT NO: NC0006190
PERMITTEE: Delta Apparel, Inc.
COUNTY: Catawba County
PERMITTED FLOW:
PRODUCTION DATA: Ibs/day
1 MGD
DAILY MAX.
104510
MONTHLY AVG.
104510
FROM 40CFR 410 SUBPART E
(all limits in Ibs/1000 Ibs)
paggityllateTat
BOD5
COD
TSS
Sulfide
Phenol
Total Chromium
pH
DAIL s
;a: .. "° ONT1ILLY AVE AGEr?
5 2.5
60 30
21.8 10.9
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.05
0.1 0.05
must be between 6 and 9 at all times
LIMITS
POI�IIFANT� r.:
BOD5
COD
TSS
Sulfide
Phenol
Total Chromium
pH
DAiLYVM
v ,��-MONTHLY AVERAGE *>�;.
522.6 261.3
6270.6
2278.3
20.9
10.5
10.5
must be between 6 and 9 at all times
3135.3
1139.2
10.5
5.2
5.2
BASED ON 40CFR410 SUBPART E
KNIT Fabric FINISHING SUBCATEGORY
according to EPA recommendation

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Delta Apparel
NC0006190
Time Period 0
Ow (MGD) 1.1
7Q10S (cfs) 12
7Q10W (cfs) 25.5
30Q2 (cfs) 34
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 78
Reeving Stream Clark Creek
Revised TABLE 3
6/8/2009
WWTP Class IV
1WC (%) @ 7Q10S 12.441
7Q10W 6.2672
@ 30Q2 4.7752
® QA 2.1391
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw =1.1 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
, POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS/ $4 FAv/
Chronic Acute
n # Det. Max prod cw AllowableCw
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
105 5
9.6
Acute: 1,022
_ __
Chronic__ _ _ _
No reasonable_ potential fora standard violation _ _ _ _ _ _
_402 Chronic limit is more stringent then EGL.
New IWC% reduces Chromium limit to 402 ug/L.
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
105 105
180.9
Acute: 7
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic_ 56
_Reasonable potential to exceed standards. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No limit as this is an action level parameter.
Maintain monitoring.
Chloride
NC
####### AL 250000
ug/L
9 9
Note: n<12
Limited data
3472000.0
set
Acute: 250,000
^_ _ _
Chronic_ 1,8 8-,768
_limitReasonable potential to exceed standards. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No as this is an'action level parameter.
Maintain monitoring.
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
49 49
256.0
Acute: 67
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic_ _ _ _ 402
_Reasonable potential to exceed standards. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No limit as this Is an action level parameter.
Maintain monitoring.
• Legend:
C Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
Table 3 rpa.xis, rpa
6/8/2009

Table 5. Delta Mills Effluent Color •
ram. ;K
M.° x 444'4
Jan. 07
E >ee 4
M . ° ° !'„ '..
monthly -"a;
162
4 Lei' °
ADNI.
Feb. 07
98
Mar. 07
100
Apr. 07
143
May. 07
129
Jun. 07
188
July.07
219
Aug. 07
196
Sept. 07.
218
Oct. 07
158
Nov. 07
154
Dec.07
179
.
Jan. 08
301
Feb. 08
269
Mar. 08
237
Apr. 08
315
May. 08
349
Jun. 08
279
July.08
354
Aug. 08
245
Sept. 08
327
Oct. 08
294
Nov. 08
235
Dec. 08
319
Mean
228

Hickory Daily Record
Advertising Affidavit
NC DENR/DWQ
BUDGET OFFICE
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699
Account Number
RECEIVEID
North Carolina Community Newspapers
PO Box 968
Hickory, NC 28603 APR 2 7 200c April 23, 2009
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Date
Date Category
Description
Ad Number
Ad Size
04/23/2009 Legal Notices
PUBLIC NOTICE
North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission/NPOES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699.1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a
NPDES Wastewater Permit
The North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission proposes to issue a NPDES wastewa-
ter discharge permit to the person(s) listed below.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit
will be accepted until 30 days after the publish
date of this notice. The Director of the NC Division
of Water Quality (DWQ) may hold a public hearing
should there be a significant degree of public in-
terest. Please mall comments and/or information
requests to DWQ at the above address. Interested
persons may visit the DWQ at 512 N. Salisbury
Street. Raleigh, NC to review information on file.
Additional Information on NPDES permits and this
notice may be found on our website: www.ncwa-
terquality.org, or by calling [phone].
Delta Apparel, Inc. requested modification of per-
mit NC0006190 for the Maiden Plant in Catawba
County; this permitted discharge is treated proc-
ess wastewater to Clark Creek, Catawba River Ba-
sin.
PUBLISH: Apra 23, 2009
Public NOTICE North Carolina Environment 0001378615
Media General Operations, Inc.
Publisher of
Hickory Daily Record
Catawba County
2 x 31 L
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of Catawba County, North
Carolina, duly commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to
administer oaths, in said County and State; that he/she is authorized to
make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the notice or other legal
advertisement, a copy of which is attached hereto, was published in the
Hickory Daily Record on the following dates:
04/23/2009
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, or legal advertisement
was published, was a newspaper meeting, all the requirements and
qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
Ncwspaperreference: 0001378615
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
i24.414.a.(C
N6tmy P4�blic
My Commission expirAsLaw.2 �o 1 n! t
THIS IS NOT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THANK YOU

DEL TA
APPAREL, INCORPORATED
NCDENR NPDES - West
ATTN: Ms. Julie Grzyb
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Subject: Delta Apparel, Inc. Draft NPDES Permit No. NC0006190
Dear Ms. Grzyb:
Delta Apparel, Inc. requests that the monthly average flow limit in our draft NPDES permit be reduced
from 1.2 MGD to 1.1 MGD prior issuance of the final permit.
We understand that this reduction will also reduce our chronic toxicity limit from 13% to 12% as a
consequence of the flow limit reduction. Our purpose in requesting this reduction is to provide a greater
certainty that our effluent's chronic toxicity will remain compliant.
Please let us know if any other information is required to accomplish the above changes to our draft
NPDES Permit. We appreciate your cooperation and understanding on this matter.
Sincerely,
Steve Slaughter
Plant Manager
RECEIVED
,11 "j - 1
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
100 W. Pine Street • P.O. Box 37 • Maiden, N.C. 28650 • [phone] • FAX [phone]
Change your shirt..

rv`a.rJ&c a Qtr� e.:.
-7-1Ads mo% (351 .01 11 5-4 Om
EPA has no comments on this draft permit.
Page 1 of 1
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=Item&a=Preview&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAA.AADL%2f mPMH... 5/5/2009

RE: Delta Apparel draft permit Page 1 of 1
RE: Delta Apparel draft permit
Grzyb, Julie
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 12:10 PM
To: Parker, Michael [[e-mail]]
Mike,
Thanks for your comments. The toxicity test is likely to be the problem given the
new IWC of 13% and their current WET test results consistently having a chronic
value of 15.6%. I have discussed this with the consultant and noted it to the plant
director as well. I will put you comment in the final cover letter with the permit
when issued if Tom thinks it is appropriate.
Julie
From: Parker, Michael [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:51 AM
To: Julie Grzyb
Subject: RE: Delta Apparel draft permit
All in all I believe Delta will be able to consistently comply with the effluent
limitations contained in the new permit, however, they also need to be aware that
should consistent noncompliance result upon their move up to 1.2 MGD, a compliance
schedule, either in the permit or an SOC may need to be considered.
Mike
Original Message
From: Julie Grzyb [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 6:22 PM
To: Michael Parker
Subject: Delta Apparel draft permit
Mike,
Attached is Delta Apparels DRAFT permit per their modification request. Please
review and let me know what you think. I am trying to get this public noticed on
Wed., so it has to be turned in by 5 on Tues. If you have a chance to look at it
by than it would be great but if you need more time please let me know. Also, the
last item attached is their consultant's response to some additional questions.
Thought you might find it interesting.
Julie Grzyb
Environmental Engineer
NPDES West/ DWQ
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]; fax [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
https://mail.nc.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAADL%2 miPMHLaQqW1cuaw... 5/5/2009

Wednesday, January 14, 2009
11:09 AM
BB HOBBS
Q m
Q
CD
COMPANY
P.O. Box 437
Darlington, SC 29540
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attn: Sarah Menser
Subject: Approval Design Letter
This letter is written confirmation that S&EC has successfully designed Advantex
Treatment System in accordance with State requirements and Orenco, Inc. manufacturer
of the Advantex Treatment System. This letter is in reference to the below site and
project.
Address: AL-AAWAR PROPERTY
Louisburg Road
Wake County, NC
This letter is issued by BB Hobbs Co., Advantex Dealer for North Carolina, South
Carolina and Georgia.
Todd Harrell
BB Hobbs Co.
1340 Harry Byrd Hwy.
Darlington, SC 29532
843-395-2120 Office
843-307-2090 Ce11
1340 Harry Byrd Highway — Darlington, SC 29532
Unfiled Notes Page 1

Catawba River Basin Subbasin 03-08-34
Assessment
Waterbody and Description Unit (AU)
Class Subbasin impaired Year
Use Listed Category and Reason for Listing
Potential Source(s)
Miles or Acres
Sugar Creek
11-137a C 03-08-34 6
0.3 FW Miles
From source to below WWTP, SR 1156, Mecklenburg
Sugar Creek
AL 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity
11-137b C 03-08-34 6
Municipal Point Sources
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
10.9 FW Miles
From SR 1156 Mecklenburg to Hwy 51
Sugar Creek
11-137c C
AL 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity
O 1998 4a Standard violation: Turbidity
O 1998 4a Standard violation: Fecal Coliform
03-08-34 6
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
2.5 FW Miles
From Hwy 51 NC/SC border
Catawba River Basin
AL 2000 6 Impaired biological integrity
O 2000 4a Standard violation: Turbidity
O 2000 4a Standard violation: Fecal Coliform
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Subbasin 03-08-35
Clark Creek 11-129-5-(9.5) WS-IV 03-08-35 6
1.8 FW Miles
From a point 0.9 mile upstream of Walker Creek to South Fork Catawba R.
O 1998 4a Standard violation: Fecal Coliform Industrial Point Sources
AL 2006 6 Impaired biological integrity Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Industrial Point Sources
Clark Creek (Shooks Lake) 11-129-5-(0.3)b C 03-08-35 6
16.6 FW Miles
From Miller Branch to 0.9 mile upstream of Walker Creek
Henry Fork
AL 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity
11-129-1-(12.5)a C 03-08-35 6
Intentional Channelization
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Industrial Point Sources
Agriculture
Industrial Point Sources
10.3 FW Milos
From Laurel Creek to State Route 1124
AL 2006 6 Impaired biological integrity
North Carolina 303(d) List- 2006 Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Catawba Basin 03-08-35 Page 35 of 125

DEL TA
APPAREL, INCORPORATED
4/14/09
Mrs. Grzyb,
Enclosed is the hard copy of the corrected page 2 of 4 for the requested increase of
effluent permit for Delta Apparel Dyeing and Finishing plant in Maiden N.C. if you have
any questions please contact me by email or by the below numbers.
Kind regards,
Steve L. Slaughter
Plant Manager
Delta Apparel, Inc.
Office [phone] ext.239
Ce11 [phone]
RECEIVED
APR 1 7 2009
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
100 W. Pine Street • P.O. Box 37 • Maiden, N.C. 28650 • [phone] • FAX [phone]
Change your shirt.

CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
C. Except for storm runoff, leaks, or spills, are any of the discharges described in
❑ YES (compkte the following table)
Items II -A or B intermittent
or seasonal?
II!) ,
ter
C�
NO (go to Section
1. OUTFALL
NUMBER (list)
2. OPERATION(s)
CONTRIBUTING FLOW
((br)
3 FREQUENCY
4 FLOW
a DAYS PER
WEEK
(spcofy
a tag')
b. MONTHS
PER YEAR
(epeclJyawr gel
a FLOW RATE (m mxnI)
8 TOTAL VOLUME
(.pmchr Karr iuun)
C. DURATION
(in'!"I'"I
1, LONG TERM
AVERAGE
2. MAXIMUM
DAILY
1. LONG TERM
AVERAGE
2. MAXIMUM
DAILY
III. PRODUCTION
guideline (imitation promulgated by EPA under Section
YES (complete Item !ll-B)
304 of the
❑
Clean Water
NO (go to Section
Act apply to your
!F)
facility?
A. Does an effluent
1511
B. Are the limitations
in the applicable effluent guideline expressed in terms of production (or other measure of operalion)?
YES (complete Item I!!-(.) ❑ NO (go to Section IV)
CI
C. If you answered 'yes' to Item III-B. list the quantity which represents an actual measurement of your level of production, expressed in the terms and units used in the
applicable effluent guideline, and indicate the affected outfalls.
1. AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION
2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS
(b.ctouttit!!numbers)
a QUANTITY PER DAY
b. UNITS OF MEASURE
c. OPERATION, PRODUCT, MATERIAL, ETC.
(sPecil,)
ACTUAL 2008
PRODUCTION:
82.25
PLANNED PRODUCTION:
114.3
IV. IMPROVEMENTS
A. Are you now required
treatment equipment or
permit conditions. administrative
❑ YES (complete
1,000 pounds cloth
1,000 pounds cloth
by any Federal, State or local
practices or any other environmental
or enforcement orders,
the.lollowmg table)
Dyeing and Bleaching
Dyeing and Bleaching
authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction,
programs which may affect the discharges described in this application?
enforcement compiiance schedule letters, stipulations, court orders. and
FA NO (go to hem f('-H)
001
001
upgrading or operations of wastewater
This includes, but is not limited to.
grant or loan conditions.
1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONDITION.
AGREEMENT, ETC.
2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS
3. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
4. FINAL COMPLIANCE DATE
a. NO
b. SOURCE OF DISCHARGE
a REQUIRED
b. PROJECTED
B. OPTIONAL: You may attach additional sheets describing any additional water pollution control programs (or other environmental projects which may affect your
discharges) you now have underway or which you plan. Indicate whether each program is now underway or planned, and indicate yolg actual or planned schedules for
construction.
❑ MARK "X' IF DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL PROGRAMS IS ATTACHED
EPA Form 3510-2C (8-90)
PAGE 2of4
CONTINUE ON PAGE 3

RE: Delta Apparel permit modification request
Subject: RE: Delta Apparel permit modification request
From: "Moore, Cindy" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:34:49 -0400
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, James Mckay <[e-mail]>,
Charles Weaver <[e-mail]>, Gil Vinzani <[e-mail]>, Tom Belnick
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Meadows, Susan" <[e-mail]>
We have had a couple of questions about tox info for permits. I have included a
couple of references.
Attached is a memo (August 2, 1999) that explains our tox strategy for DWQ. This
memo explains our policy for rounding the IWC % to a whole number. If the IWC was
13.4, then the Effluent concentration that is listed in the NPDES permit should be
13%. We then could recommend the following concentrations if they are asked to
perform a Phase II test: 3.25%,6.5%,13%, 26% & 52% .
In determining effluent dilutions, here is our Phase II document that explains how to
determine %.
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/esb/ATUwww/NC%2ODWQ%20Procedures/P-IIMethod 2-98.pdf
At least two of the effluent test treatments must be of a lesser effluent
concentration than the IWC, with
one being one-half the concentration of the IWC. No concentration should be greater
than two times that
of the next lower concentration or less than one half of the next higher
concentration. The following are
possible test concentrations for a facility with an IWC of 45%:
22.5%t
35.0%t
45.0%t
70.0%
90.0%
tlndicates required concentrations for this example, i.e. IWC and two lower
concentrations
If you have any further questions, please let me know.
Cindy
Original Message
From: Meadows, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 2:02 PM
To: Moore, Cindy
Subject: FW: Delta Apparel permit modification request
Original Message
From: Julie Grzyb [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 1:59 PM
To: [e-mail]; Tom Belnick
Subject: Delta Apparel permit modification request
1 of 2 4/13/2009 9:59 AM

RE: Delta Apparel permit modification request
Susan,
I am the new engineer in the NPDES West group. I am working on a
major permit modification for Delta Apparel - Maiden Plant (NC0006190)
in Catawba County who is proposing to increase flow from 1.0 MGD to 1.2
MGD. Currently their IWC is 11 % with the increase it will be 13.4 %
discharging to Clark Creek.
The facility's current Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit requires the Phase
II test procedure at the following effluent concentrations: 44%, 22%,
11%, 5.5% and 2.75%. Given the change in the IWC could you please
evaluate this discharge and propose new effluent concentrations to put
in the permit modification. I was given your name by Charles Weaver, if
you do not handle this could you please pass this on to the appropriate
person.
Some general information:
Most of Clark Creek is considered impaired. The subject stream segment
is C Class, impaired in the 2006 303(d) list as biologically impaired
due to unknown causes. Sub basin is 030835 and Clark Creek has a summer
7Q10 of 12 cfs. Delta has been passing their WET tests at a chronic
value of 15.6% during the last several years. Existing permit
limitations are expected to remain the same in the modified permit.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this facility in more
detail, please call me at 919-807-6389 or email me back.
Thanks,
Julie
Julie Grzyb
Environmental Engineer
NPDES West/ DWQ
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]; fax [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Content -Description: NC WET Strategy-8-99.pdf
NC WET Strategy-8-99.pdf Content -Type: application/pdf
Content -Encoding: base64
2 of 2 4/13/2009 9:59 AM

Phonels
Sulfides
monthly
avg.
lb/day
daily
max.
lb/day
monthly
avg.
lb/day
daily
max.
lb/day
Jan. 07
<0.06
0.29
<0.31
<0.43
Feb. 07
<0.06
<0.08
<0.32
<0.39
Mar. 07
<0.07
0.14
<0.34
<0.38
Apr. 07
<0.08
<0.09
<0.39
<0.46
May. 07
<0.07
<0.09
<0.35
0.66
Jun. 07
<0.10
0.18
<0.42
<0.49
JuI.07
<0.09
0.38
<0.45
<0.49
Aug. 07
<0.09
0.33
<0.44
<0.50
Sept. 07
<0.09
<0.10
<0.43
<0.49
Oct. 07
<0.08
<0.10
<0.41
<0.51
Nov. 07
0.11
<0.95
<0.39
<0.51
Dec. 07
<0.07
<0.1
<0.36
<0.48
Jan. 08
0.09
0.1
<0.45
<0.48
Feb. 08
0.09
<0.10
<0.43
<0.50
Mar. 08
<0.01
<0.10
<0.03
<0.51
Apr. 08
<0.09
<0.09
<0.44
<0.45
May. 08
<0.09
<0.09
<0.45
<0.47
Jun. 08
0.07
<0.09
<0.34
<0.44
JuI.08
<0.08
0.13
<0.79
<0.91
Aug. 08
<0.08
0.1
<0.83
<1.02
Sept. 08
<0.08
<0.10
<0.85
<0.98
Oct. 08
<0.09
<0.10
<0.94
<1.00
Nov. 08
<0.08
0.13
<0.77
<0.91
Dec. 08
0.02
0.1
<0.03
<0.83
Possible Max
0.11 0.95 0.94 1.02
Limits 4.0Ib/d 8.0Ib/d 8.0Ib/d 16.0Ib/d

IWC Calculations
Facility: DELTA APPAREL
NC0006190
Prepared By: Julie Grzyb
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 1.2
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 12
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 25.5
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/l)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
12
1.2
1.86
17.0
0
13.42
127
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
7.45 Upstream Bkgd (mg/l)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/l)
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/I, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals); capped at 35 mg/I
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis); capped at 35 mg/I
4. BAT for Minor Domestics: 2 mg/I (summer) and 4 mg/I (winter)
5. BAT for Major Municipals: 1 mg/I (year-round)
12
1.2
1.86
1.0
0.22
13.42
6.0
25.5
1.2
1.86
1.8
0.22
6.80
23.5
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)
NPDES Server/Current Versions/WLA; TB 1/16/2009

April 9, 2009
Dear Mr. Steve Slaughter,
To complete my review on Delta's permit modification request a few items need to be
addressed.
1) Mr. Slaughter please correct and resubmit page 2 of 4 answering Yes to questions
A. and B. under the section, III. Production, since this facility is subject to 40
CFR 410 Subpart E, Knit Fabric Finishing.
2) Per my discussion with Mr. Blackwell, I am using the number 800,000
lbs/cloth/week to determine a maximum daily production rate of 114,300 lbs/day.
The Effluent guidelines use daily maximum and 30 day average rates to determine
limitations. Planned production rates expected from this modified flow should be
discussed in these terms. These numbers can be addressed under section, III.
Production, C. a. along with the other revisions.
3) Discuss the facility's wastewater treatment plant and its ability to maintain the
same treatment level and meet current permit limits given the increased flow in
more detail. The table on page 9 under section D. is helpful in indicating that the
treatment system has handled the higher flow for at least one month, however; it
is important to illustrate that the system can hydraulically handle 1.2 MGD on a
consistent basis.
Illustrate that the System can Handle 1.2 MGD Hydraulic Flow on a Consistent Basis
As previously mentioned on page 9 of our initial submittal, the system has successfully
treated an average monthly flow of 1.17 MG.D in November 2007, producing an average
effluent quality for the month significantly below the permit's discharge limits for a 1.0
MGD flow. This monthly flow average was within 2.5 percent of the proposed flow limit
of 1.2 MGD, and is therefore considered indicative of the system's performance at a 1.2
MGD flow level. During this month, there were twelve days with flows exceeding 1.2
MGD, including a daily flow of 1.3 MGD and five consecutive days with daily flows all
above 1.2 MG. There was also an additional ten days during this month when the flow
was between 1.17 and 1.2 MGD.
Not mentioned in the application is the fact that this month (November 2007) was
preceded by six consecutive months each with average monthly flows above 1.0 MGD,
with the last four months prior averaging 1.13 MGD. Subsequent to November 2007,
average monthly flows were again above 1 MGD for eight out of the next twelve months.
During the month of September 2008, the plant experienced a ten-day period with daily
flows averaging 1.21 MG. Since monthly average flows under the requested permit limit
of 1.2 MGD will place an upper limit on the system's flow average, the above flows
should closely approximate the flows expected and system performance under the limit
requested. That is, approaching but not exceeding 1.2 MGD as a monthly flow average,
as is the case described above.

Aeration basin retention times for the currently permitted flow and for the proposed flow
are shown below, and were calculated based on the flows shown and an overall basin (2
basins) volume of 2.42 MG.
Plant Flow Limit
1.0 MGD
1.2 MGD
Difference
Retention Time
(Days)
2.42 Days
2.02 Days
- 0.4 Days
Retention Time
(Hrs)
58.1 Hours
48.5 Hours
- 9.6 Hours
Information about the clarifiers for these two flow rates is presented below, and is based
upon the information contained in the previously submitted Wastewater Treatment Plant
Schematic.
Parameter
1.0 MGD Flow
1.2 MGD Flow
Change
Surface Loading
Rate, gpd/sq. ft.
441
529
+ 88
Retention Time,
Hrs.
4.1
3.4
- 0.7
Weir Overflow
Rate, gpd/lf
4,188
5,025
+ 837
4) Can the necessary detention times for color removal be maintained?
Can Necessary Detention Times for Color Removal be Maintained?
Color removal is accomplished by polymer feeds into the outlet of the aeration basins as
the flow leaves the basins going to the clarifiers. Currently, polymer (HyperFloc CP627)
is fed at the rate of 88 gallons per basin per day, and is based on a total flow of 1.0 MGD.
Polymer dosing tests are performed once per month by the polymer supplier's
representative (Hychem, Inc. of Tampa, Florida). Color removal is evaluated based on a
10-minute retention time. Based on the above clarifier retention time (3.4 hours at 1.2
MGD), maintaining the necessary retention times for color removal at the higher flow
limit is not expected to be a problem.
5) Will removal rates for other parameters decrease because of the increased flow?
Will Removal Rates for Other Parameters Decrease because of Increased Flow?
Since plant influent parameters are not monitored, it would be difficult to evaluate the
effect of the increased flow on plant removal rates without that information. However,
given the performance of the plant as described on page 9 of the submittal, slight
decreases should not adversely impact compliance at the higher flow rate. A table of the
information from page 9 of the submittal is presented below.

Discharge Parameter
Flow
Permit Limit
1.0 MGD
Actual Value
1.17 MGD
% Below Permit
Limit
-
BOD5
162 lbs
10.4 lbs
94
TSS
785 lbs
132.9 lbs
83
COD
29001bs
1173.6lbs
60
Color, ADMI
549 su
154 su
72
Chronic Toxicity
>11%
15.6%*
42
* Based on values from September and December 2007
6) Will COD and chlorides increase?
Will COD and Chlorides Increase?
Based on a flow rate of 1.0 MGD, the total mass discharged would be expected to
increase as the flow approaches 1.2 MGD. Concentrations of these parameters should
remain relatively constant. However, plant performance near the 1.2 MGD limit still is
60 percent below the 1.0 MGD limit for COD. Extrapolation of the effluent chloride data
for the months of June and September 2008 based on flow rate indicates that effluent
chlorides at a flow of 1.2 MGD might be expected to be approximately 1,845 mg/l. This
concentration is still within the currently expected range for this parameter. The
September and June data are shown below.
Month
June 2008
September 2008
Extrapolation to 1.2 MGD
Flow, MGD
0.96
1.143
1.2
Effluent Chloride
Concentration, mg/1
1,130
1,675
1,845
Records indicate the original treatment system would eventually be designed to
handle 1.5 MGD. This flow increase was never needed and the system has since
been modified to handle color removal not just provide biological treatment as
identified in your letter attached to June 2008's Discharge Monitoring Report.
Given these changes what is the actual design capacity of this system (if known)?
What is the actual design capacity of the system (if known)?
The system is designed for 1.5 MGD
7) Delta Apparel should be aware that downstream D.O. sampling during the month
of June 2008 showed State Water Quality Standards were violated on six

occasions. When Catawba Basin permits come up for renewal in 2011 this
segment of Clarks Creek may have to be re-evaluated in more detail.
The next DWQ Public Notice period starts on April 22, 2009. If you are able to respond
early next week I will try to issue the Draft Permit by that time. US EPA will review this
draft Permit during the public notice period as well.
Please call me at 919-807-6389 or email: [e-mail] if you have any
questions.
Julie Grzyb
Environmental Engineer, NPDES West
DWQ, Surface Water Protection

CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT
C. Except for storm
❑
runoff. leaks. or spills. arc any of the discharges described In Items II -A or B intermittent or seasonal?
YES (umrpterc rhufai rm•rng rohle) El NO (go to Section I11) .
1. OUTFALL
NUMBER (tiro
2. OPERATION(s)
CONTRIBUTING FLOW
]
3 FREQUENCY
4 FLOW
a. DAYS PER
WEEK
Iwo)"
mvrb):)
b. MONTHS
PER YEAR
(srxcrljrncrrrta)
a FLOW RATE fur mW
B TOTAL VOLUME
(.gxriJy M ith wit.)
C. DURATION
1"i1il-.)
it.
AVERAGE
2. MAXIMUM
DAILY
1. LONG TERM
AVERAGE
2. maximum
DAILY
I11. PRODUCTION
A. Does an effluent
tY l
guideline (imitation promulgated by EPA under Section
YES (camp/err /km III-B)
304 of the
❑
Clean Water
NO (go to &cuorr
Act apply to your
IV)
fadfity?
B. Are the limitations
in the applicable effluent guideline expressed in terms of production (or other measure of operation)?
YES (complete Item 111.0 ❑ NO (go to Seettrm IV)
Q
C. It you answered -yes' to Item III-B. list the quantity which represents an actual measurement of your level of production. expressed in the terms and units used in the
applicable effluent guideline, and indicate the affected outfalls.
1. AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION
2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS
(list autjullnbmhers)
a. QUANTITY PER DAY
b. UNITS OF MEASURE
c. OPERATION, PRODUCT. MATERIAL. ETC.
(Nk rify)
ACTUAL 2008
PRODUCTION:
62.25
PLANNED PRODUCTiOH!
114.3
IV. IMPROVEMENTS
A. Are you now required
treatment equipment or
permit conditions. administrative
❑ YES (crimp/etc
1,000 pounds cloth
1,000 pounds cloth
by any Federal. State or local
practices or any other environmental
or enforcement orders,
theJollon•mg ruble)
Dyeing and Bleaching
Dyeing and Bleaching
authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction.
programs which may alert the discharges described in this application?
enforcement compliance schedule letters. stipulations. court orders. and
Pil NO (go to Item 11/41)
001
001
upgrading or operations of wastewater
This Includes, but Is not limited to.
grant or loan conditions.
f. IDENTIFICATION OF CONDITION.
, AGREEMENT. ETC.
2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS
3. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
4. FINAL COMPLIANCE DATE
a. NO
b. SOURCE OF DISCHARGE
a REQUIRED
b. PROJECTED
B. OPTIONAL: You may attach additional sheets describing any additional water pollution control programs (or other environmental protects which may affect your
discharges) you now have underway or which you plan. Indicate whether each program is now underway or planned, and indicate your actual or planned schedules for
construction.
❑ MARK °X' IF DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL PROGRAMS IS ATTACHED/
EPA Form 3510-2C (8-90)
PAGE2of4
Plh 'do
CONTINUE ON PAGE 3

CONTINUED FROM THE FRONT ' ` `Le L ,4 4.
C. Except for storm runoff. leaks, or spills. are any of the discharges described in Items MA or B intermittent or seasonal?
YES (L uny-A a the lollowolg table) IZI NO (go to Section /11) ,
•
3. FREQUENCY
4 FLOW
a DAYS PER
a TOTAL VOLUME
2. OPERATION(s)
WEEK
b. MONTHS
a. FLOW RATE (mmi:,l)
tirveiyn, ho+nh)
I.OUTFALt
CONTRIBUTING FLOW
(specie•
PER YEAR
q, LONG TERM
2. MAXIMUM
1. LONG TERM
2. MAXIMUM
C. DURATION
NUMBER (is,)
(lot)
mvnlle)
(rprcifj'mrn )
AVERAGE
DAILY
AVERAGE
DAILY
fin "dap)
III. PRODUCTION
A. Does an effluent guideline limitation promulgated by EPA under Section 304 of the Clean Water Act apply to your facility?
YES (eomple!s t!:rn 111-8) ❑ NO (go to Section IV)
B. Are the limitations in the applicable effluent guideline expressed in terms of production (or other measure or operation)?
✓ YES (urnrpht!c item 111-1.) ❑ NO (pa to Section 111
C. If you answered 'yes" to Item III-B, list the quantity which represents an actual measurement of your level of production. expressed ,n the terms and units used in the
applicable eftluenl guideline, and indicate the affected outfalls.
1. AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCTION
2 AFFECTED OUTFACES
a QUANTITY PER DAY
b. UNITS OF MEASURE
C. OPERATION, PRODUCT, MATERIAL ETC.
lspcciy)
(kg mrja!!numbers)
ACTUAL 200E
PRODUCTXOH:
82.25
1.000 pounds croon
Dyeing and Bleaching
001
PLANNED PRODUCT.r)N:
114.3
1.000 pounds cloth
Dyeing and Bleaching
001
IV. IMPROVEMENTS
A. Are you now required
by any Federal. State or local authority to meet any implementation schedule for the construction, upgrading or operations of wastewater
treatment equipment or practices or any other environmental programs which may affect the discharges described in this applcation? This includes. but is not limited to.
permit conditions. administrative or enforcement orders, enforcement compliance schedule letters. stipulations, court orders, and grant or loan conditions.
III YES (complete ti t: followrtig (able) FA NO (go to !trot IRA)
1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONDITION,
2. AFFECTED OUTFALLS
4. FINAL COMPLIANCE DATE
AGREEMENT. ETC.
3. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
a. NO
b SOURCE OF DISCHARGE
a REQUIRED
b. PROJECTED
B. OPTIONAL: You may attach add( ional sheets describing any additional water pollution control programs (or other environmental projects which may affect your
discharges) you now have underway or which you plan. Indicate whether each program is now underway or planned. and indicate your actual or planned schedules for
construction.
II MARK "X" IF DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL PROGRAMS IS ATTACHED
EPA Form 351 D-2C (8-90)
PAGE 2of4
21114 two
CONTINUE ON PAGE 3

To: Western NPDES Unit
Surface Water Protection Section
Attention: Julie Grzyb
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
Date: April 2, 2009
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
County: Catawba
NPDES Permit No.: NC0006190 / 6 /o
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
I. Facility and address: Delta Mills, Inc.- Maiden Plant
Post Office Box 37
408 South Main Avenue
Maiden, N.C. 28650
2. Date of investigation: N/A
3. Report prepared by: Michael L. Parker, Environmental Engineer II
4. Person contacted and telephone number: No one.
5. Directions to site: From the jct. of Hwy. 321 (Main Street) and SR 2003 (South Main
Avenue) in the Town of Maiden, travel south on SR 2003 z 0.2 mile and turn right (west)
onto West Pine Street. Travel 0.1 mile and the Delta Mills Plant will be on the left (south)
side of West Pine Street.
6. Discharge point(s), list for all discharge points: -
Latitude: 35° 34' 38"
Longitude: 81° 14' 13"
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No.: E 14 SW
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Clark Creek
a. Classification: C
b. River basin and subbasin no.: Catawba 030835
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Excellent flow
observed in the receiving stream at the time of the site inspection. The receiving
stream receives effluent from other WWTPs both above and below the Delta Mills
discharge point. The Town of Maiden's WWTP discharge is located immediately
below Delta Mills discharge point 100± feet).

• PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater: 1.5 MGD (Design capacity according to Delta Mills)
b. What is the current permitted capacity: 1.0 MGD, 1.2 MGD (proposed)
c. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: The existing
WWT facilities consist of a heat exchanger followed by a bar screen, dual aeration
basins (1,250,000 gallon capacity each), dual secondary clarifiers, disinfection, post
aeration, sludge dewatering facilities, a parshall flume with a recording flow meter,
and an aerated sludge storage lagoon. Delta Mills adds lime and extracellular
polymeric substance (EPS) to the aeration basins to enhance color removal. A
flocculent is added to the clarifiers to improve solids settling.
d. Description of proposed WWT facilities: There are no proposed WWT facilities at
this time.
2. Compliance background: Delta has recently been assessed civil penalties for effluent
violations for flow (see Part IV below).
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None at this time.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Delta Mills (DM) has requested a modification to the subject permit to increase the
permitted flow from 1.0 MGD to 1.2 MGD. The primary reason for this flow increase is to provide
for additional water use expected as a result of a proposed increase in cloth production from 600K
pounds per week up to 1.0 million pounds of cloth per week. This increase in production will allow
DM to be cost competitive and allow them to accept additional business.
The main issue that will need to be resolved is whether the existing WWT facilities are
capable of handling and treating an additional 0.200 MGD of flow. In a DMR review, it appears
that DM has reached or exceeded their monthly average permitted capacity on several occasions in
the past two years; however, overall effluent quality does not appear to have been compromised. In
a letter dated June 18, 2007, DM's Plant Manager indicated that a number of steps have been taken
to reduce overall wastewater flows, including a re -programming of existing dye machines to shorten
rinse cycles and the replacement of dye machine flow meters, which we found to be inaccurate and
did not function properly during low flow events. These steps should aid DM in reducing current
flows, however, anticipated increases in production may off -set any improvements seen in this area
— hence the need to increase the permitted flow.
In the letter mentioned in the paragraph above, DM indicates that the existing WWT
facilities are capable of treating flows up to 1.5 MGD. If that is the case, a review of the MRO files
failed to determine why the existing permitted flow limit was set at 1.0 MGD. It may have just been
an arbitrary number chosen during DM's early production days or it may coincide with a (negative)
change in effluent limitations should the permitted flow limit exceed 1.0 MGD. In the June 18th
letter, DM characterizes the flow exceedances as "temporary", but it appears with the planned
increase in production that monthly average effluent flows above 1.0 MGD will become the norm.

Page Three
It would appear from a review of DMR data and the capacities of the existing treatment
components that DM may have the capability of treating up to 1.2 MGD of wastewater without
having to add additional treatment units. DM has certainly shown the capability to comply with
their effluent limitations (with the exception of flow) using existing treatment technology.
Typically, DM's facilities are well operated and maintained, and there is no history of chronic
noncompliance at this facility aside from the recent monthly average flow exceedances. Such being
the case, if DM can establish that the existing treatment facilities are hydraulically capable of
handling wastewater flows up to 1.2 MGD, this Office would have no objection to granting the
requested increase in permitted flow.
Signature of Report Preparer P ate
/ Oh?
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
h:ldsrldsr091deltami 1. doc
Date

APPAREL, INCORPORATED 17_REc pv ./;!,„
NCDENR NPDES — West
ATTN: Mr. Sergei Chernikov
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
DENR - WATER
RI
Subject: NPDES Permit ModificationPA is t o OU R -
NPDES Permit No. NC0006190 — Catawba County
Dear Mr. Chernikov:
3-13-
Enclosed is an application in triplicate requesting that our wastewater treatment plant's monthly
average permitted flow limit be increased from 1.0 MGD to 1.2 MGD. This increase will allow
Delta Apparel -Maiden to increase production to meet current and projected product demands
from our customers. Although we continue to work on ways to produce more with Tess water, this
limited increase is necessary to respond to our customer demand.
Our submittal includes the following documents and information:
➢ A check for $1,030.00 payable to NCDENR for the NPDES permit application fee.
➢ Three (3) documents which each include the following:
• EPA General Form 1 and attached topographic map
• EPA Form 2C and attachments
■ Engineering Alternatives Analysis and supporting information
As previously indicated to you by our environmental consultant, Applied Water Technology, Inc.,
submission of a Local Government Review Form is not included with this submittal because it is
not applicable to our situation. Namely, we are not a "non -municipal domestic wastewater
treatment facility", and the proposed alternative (surface water discharge) does not affect or alter
the current zoning status of our treatment facility.
If there are any questions about this submission and request, please contact either Jackie Harvell
of Delta Apparel -Maiden at 828-428-9921, extension 235, or our environmental consultant
contact, Charle Blackwell of Applied Water Technology, Inc., at 919-L'.SE
or 6� l- t,�(S/
We appreciate the continuing cooperation of the NPDES — West Permit Unit and look forward to
working with you concerning this matter. Please make every effort to process our application as
soon as possible. Thank you.
Yours truly,
Steve Slaughter
Plant Manager
s'- eve , S 1 a ti� G., � -(46LP P eb.S. .. c c ►�
100 W. Pine Street • P.O. Box 37 • Maiden, N.C. 28650 • [phone] • FAX [phone]
Change your shirt.

CtrJ_\
iSCHARGE f$001 N35 34' 36' W81 14' 25 y '
3•D TopoQuads Copyright ®1999 DeLorme Yarmouth, ME 09096 Source Data: USCS I 000 ft Scale:1: 25,000 Detail: 13-0 Datum: WGS84

WATER FLOW SCHEMATIC
DELTA APPAREL, INC. <> MAIDEN, NC
Water Intake from Town of Maiden
392.96 MG
Delta Apparel, Inc.
30.11 MG
V
Boilers
0.78 MG
Blowdown
355.88 MG
29.33 MG
Steam
Dyeing & Finishing
3.17 MG
3.80 MG
Restrooms
Maiden
Sewer
7.24 MG
Cooling Towers
2.86 MG
To Atmosphere
•
377.97 MG
Heat Exchanger
Steam & Dryer
Evaporation to
Atmosphere
0.31 MG
379.06 MG
•
Delta Apparel, Inc.
Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES No. NC0006190
Blowdown
2.85 MG Water in Land
Application of
2.95% Solids
Sludge
376.21 MG
•
Discharge from Outfall No. 001
to Clark Creek
Water Volumes Shown Are Based On CY2008 Totals For 347 Days of Operation Out of 366 Days
MG = Million Gallons

1.19
rari
r+4
mro
r=t
11111
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SCHEMATIC
DELTA APPAREL, INC. <> MAIDEN, NC
Bar
Screen
Aeration Basin #2
Vol. =1,250,000 gallons
(3) 50 H.P. Floating Aerators
180' L x 90' W x 12' D
0.5 MGD
Polymer Feed
Points
Aeration Basin #1
Vol. = 1,250,000 gallons
(3) 50 H.P. Floating Aerators
180' L x 90' W x 12' D
0.5 MGD
Sludge Retum
b AA
Flocculent
38 Ft. Dia.
10 Ft. Sidewater Depth
Waste Sludge
4
Sludge Retum
Flocculent
Sludge
P.S.
Chlorine Contact
& 2.0 MGD Flow Meter
Sludge Storage Lagoon
Surface Area = 49,170 Sq. Ft.
1.8 MG Holding Capacity
(5) 7.5 HP Surface Aerators
(2) 5 HP Surface Aerators
117
1.5 MGD Effluent
Row
Measurement
Device
Reaeration Basin
(2)10 H.P. Floating Aerators
i d
o'°3a,k‘ eI^s
Clark Creek Discharge No. 001
(7,500 Ft. From Effluent & Flow
Measurement & Sampler)
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
CATAWBA COUNTY
MAIDEN, NC
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC0006190

PRESENT WWTP OPERATING STATUS
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
Wastewater from the dye and bleaching process goes to the heat
reclaimer equipment for heat recovery from the hot (120°F)
wastewater. Lint is filtered at this point before being
discharged to the WWTP. Wastewater enters the WWTP through a bar
screen, then goes into dual aeration basins. Each aeration basin
is 180 feet long by 90 feet wide by 12 feet deep, and contains
1,250,000 gallons with 60 hours retention at 1 MGD of total plant
flow. Polymer for color removal is added to the flow leaving the
aeration basins. From aeration, the flow goes into dual
clarifiers to settle solids, where a flocculation agent is added
to the center -well of each clarifier. Each clarifier is 38 feet
in diameter and 10 feet deep with a capacity of 80,000 gallons.
From the clarifiers the flow goes through the old chlorine
contact chamber and a float and cable flow recorder. From here,
the flow goes into the post aeration basin that is 50 feet long
and 25 feet wide and 9 feet deep with a capacity of 84,000
gallons. The flow then goes to the parshall flume with an ISCO
flow recorder and refrigerated composite sampler. From here, the
flow travels 7,500 feet through a 14-inch gravity line (Outfall
No. 001) discharging to Clark Creek.
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
CATAWBA COUNTY
MAIDEN, NC
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC0006190

r+�
12114
rmi
Owl
SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN NARRATIVE
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
Solids that settle and thicken in the clarifiers are wasted at a
rate of 50,000 gallons-100,000 gallons per week. The waste rate
can vary with the mixed liquor total solids, flow, and sludge
depth in the clarifiers. Sludge is wasted into the sludge
storage lagoon, which has a capacity of approximately 1,800,000
gallons. During wasting and storage, the sludge is aerated with
seven (7) surface aerators. Decant is pumped back into the
aeration basins. When the lagoon nears capacity, a professional
contractor hauls the solids to various sections on 240 acres of
pasture for land application. Land application of these
biosolids is carried out within the regulations of Permit No.
WQ0006984.
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
CATAWBA COUNTY
MAIDEN, NC
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC0006190

CM
MI
MI
MI
MI
MI
FM
Alternatives Analysis
Delta Apparel, Inc.
NPDES Permit No. NC0006190
March 2009
For:
n
Delta Apparel, Inc.
100 West Pine Street
c, Maiden, North Carolina 28650
Catawba County
[phone]
rm
FM,
...., By:
WI
Applied Water Technology, Inc.
311 South Academy Street
Cary, North Carolina 27511
[phone]

n
MI
r�
Pal
MI
IM
IM
MI
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
SUMMARY 3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION 3
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
EVALUATION OF DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES 5
A. Connection to a Sewer Collection System 5
1. Existing Sewerage System 5
2. Planned Sewerage System 6
B. Land Based Disposal 6
1. On -Site Land Based Disposal 6
2. Off -Site Land Based Disposal 7
C. Wastewater Reuse 7
D. Surface Water Discharge 9
E. Disposal Combinations 10
Surface Water Discharge and Wastewater Reuse Combination 10
F. Economic Feasibility of Alternatives 11
Attachments
mo
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Schematic
• Aerial View of Site and Adjacent Property Use
• Land Availability for Land Based Disposal Alternative Letter
• Land Area Required for 0.2 MGD Flow
• Land Area required for 1.2 MGD Flow
• Estimation of WWTP Effluent Characteristics at 1.2 MGD
r, • Delta Apparel WWTP Characteristics [See EPA Form 2C Item V]
• Derivation of Present Value Factor for Economic Feasibility Analysis
• Quote from Calgon Carbon Corporation
c► • Quote from Koch Membrane Systems
Map Pocket
• Catawba County Tax Map
• To -Scale Facility Site Map
TM
r,

n
l
SUMMARY
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 3
�, Delta Apparel, Inc. would like to increase their monthly wastewater flow limit to provide
for increased production at their Maiden Plant as soon as possible to continue to be
competitive and to meet consumer demand. The current permitted flow of this facility is
,.--, 1.0 MGD. This increase will result in an increase in wastewater generated of 0.2 MGD
as a monthly average.
r, Since May 2007, the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) has experienced numerous
days when the flow exceeded 1.0 MGD, and where the monthly flow average has
approached 1.2 MGD. Review of the monthly flow data since May 2007 indicates that a
monthly flow limit of 1.2 MGD should allow the facility to meet its consumer demand
production and remain within its NPDES permitted flow limits. In part, the overall flow
increase has been and will be offset by ongoing water reduction and minimization
r measures within the manufacturing operations. Although flows have exceeded 1.0 MGD
since May 2007, the WWTP still maintained its compliance with all other NPDES permit
limits during this period, and expects this to continue with the 1.2 MGD permit limit.
MI
To comply with both state and federal requirements for requesting a NPDES permit
modification due to an increase in flow, an alternatives analysis has been completed.
.1 This alternatives analysis is an evaluation of the available disposal alternatives, their
relative costs, and applicability to determine the most cost effective alternative. The
results of this analysis indicate that the most cost effective alternative available to Delta is
to continue surface water discharge of their wastewater.
,
MI
The only additional costs associated with continuing to discharge to surface waters result
from an increase in flow -variable operating costs at the existing on -site wastewater
treatment plant to handle the additional flow. The other applicable disposal alternatives
require additional treatment of the wastewater.
Costs provided in this analysis represent preliminary budgetary costs on a relative basis,
and are not necessarily representative of actual construction costs. Costs were provided
by vendors based on telephone conversations about the systems or equipment being
evaluated for the purposes of a general cost comparison designed to verify a technology's
,.., initial viability in this analysis. Costs for treatment of Delta Apparel's existing WWTP
flow are based on Delta's expenditure records for 2008.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Delta Apparel, Inc. (NPDES Permit NC0006190) is a manufacturer of cotton and
F, synthetic fabrics using circular knitting machines. The manufacturing process includes
bleaching, dyeing, and finishing these fabrics using a variety of chemicals and dyes.

r1
1.
pal
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 4
There are two separate wastewater streams generated at this facility, sanitary and
manufacturing wastewater. The sanitary wastewater is discharged to the Town of
Maiden's sewer system and treated by their domestic wastewater treatment plant. The
manufacturing wastewater includes wastewater from the boilers, cooling tower, and the
dyehouse that is discharged to Delta's on -site wastewater treatment plant.
This on -site wastewater treatment plant has been used by Delta for the past forty-two (42)
years to treat the industrial wastewater generated at this facility. The performance of this
treatment plant has been very good thus far. The treatment plant has consistently
discharged an effluent which meets its NPDES discharge permit limits, even during the
times that the treatment plant has been operating at or above its permitted capacity of 1.0
MGD. As indicated on the attached wastewater treatment plant schematic, the plant
consists of a bar screen, two aeration basins, two clarifiers, a chlorine contact chamber, a
reaeration basin, and a 1.8 MGD sludge storage lagoon. Each aeration basin and its o!aL_IL
LSIr
associated clarifier receive one-half of the total wastewater flow. , '
s�-a
Prr C4- )
Each aeration basin has a volume of 1.2 MG and is equipped with three 50 h.p. floating
aerators. Each clarifier is 38 feet in diameter with a 10-foot sidewater depth. The surface
loading rate is calculated to be141 gallons per day per square foot at a flow of 1.0 MGD.
The chlorine contact chamber is i can tive since t ere is no sanitary waste discharged to the
WWTP. The reaeration basin contains two 10 h.p. floating aerators. Currently, all of the
treated wastewater flows from the reaeration basin through a parshall flume for effluent
flow measurement, and then is discharged into Clark Creek which is the receiving water
designated under Delta's NPDES permit, NC0006190. Sludge is wasted to a 1.8 MGD
sludge storage lagoon. ,,-. , , a rA �.h /0 d Sa °I P e/ -�
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Delta Apparel would like to increase their production rates at this facility as soon as
possible. Production by Delta for the last six to seven months of 2008 indicates that sales
have increased and will continue increasing. Production for the first month of 2009
indicates an upturn as well. By not being able to increase the production rate at this
facility, the amount of additional business that can be accepted by the facility will be
limited. 6,,,jczckc.�!7�/ .�i' '�� 3 (Cik�a
Currently, Delta is operating at an average production rate of approximately 600,000
pounds of cloth per week, based on 2008 data. The goal of this facility is to increase the
production rate to an estimated average production rate per week of 800,000,.Wieeteefr
pounds of cloth. Production at this rate will enable Delta to be more cost competitive and
enable them to produce a sufficient amount of their products to meet customer demand,
and to take advantage of immediate production opportunities as the overall economy
rebounds.

r-i
•
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 5
This production increase will ultimately result in an increase in the average amount of
wastewater generated at this facility of approximately 200,000 gallons per day. Since
monthly flows at this facility averaged 1.03 MGD in 2008, with a daily maximum of 1.28
MGD, the facility has been able to treat these flows to levels below its current permit
limits. Within the last two years, the facility produced a monthly flow average of 1.18
MGD (in November 2007), and even that flow resulted in an otherwise compliant
effluent.
This alternatives evaluation reveals that of the options available to be considered, the
only applicable options are surface water discharge, wastewater reuse, and a combination
of the surface water discharge and reuse; however, the most cost effective choice would
be for Delta to continue discharging to surface water, namely Clark Creek. The latter two
of these potential alternatives will require upgrading the on -site WWTP to provide
additional treatment for the increased flow; whereas, surface water discharge only incurs
an increase to Delta in the flow -variable cost of their current treatment. For wastewater
reuse to be workable, the wastewater will require additional treatment. Delta must be
able to have treated wastewater that is free of color and chlorides if this treated water is to
'R be reused in the dyehouse. Since this facility relies on the quality of their product, Delta
must be able to depend on the treated water to be consistent with their quality standards.
Not only will Delta have to treat the wastewater more thoroughly for reuse, pilot studies
will need to be performed to determine if enough treatment is being applied.
The size of flow, 1.2 MGD, is the major factor limiting the options available for
treatment of this wastewater. An evaluation of the available disposal alternatives, their
relative costs, and applicability are discussed in the following sections.
EVALUATION OF DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
A. Connection to a Sewer Collection System
1. Existing Sewerage System
There is an existing sewer line and manhole located on Delta Apparel's property. Delta is
currently discharging the facility's sanitary wastewater to this sewer system, which
discharges into the Town of Maiden's wastewater treatment plant. The maximum
capacity that the Town of Maiden's WWTP can handle is 1.0 MGD.
1=1 The volume of industrial wastewater currently generated by Delta Apparel's facility
averaged above 1.0 MGD in 2008, which is also above the maximum capacity of
wastewater that the Town's WWTP is designed to treat. When production is increased at
Delta, the volume of wastewater generated will be approximately 1.2 MGD. This 1.2
MGD flow is more than the Town's domestic WWTP was designed to handle, and if
discharged would preclude any capacity for the town's domestic flows; therefore,

n
•
r-1
f
f
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 6
discharging this entire wastewater flow to this WWTP is not an option that is available to
Delta Apparel.
Currently, the Town of Maiden's WWTP is only receiving approximately 400,000 gallons
per day of wastewater. It is possible that Delta could discharge on a temporary basis the
200,000 gallons per day increase to the Town's WWTP. Unfortunately, this could only
be on a temporary basis because the Town will need the remaining WWTP capacity for
its domestic growth. When the flow from these other sources is received, there will not
m► be enough capacity available for Delta to use for the increased flow amount. In addition,
the Town has also experienced infiltration problems in the past and if the Town agreed to
accept this additional flow on either a temporary or permanent basis, Delta would not be
mi able to discharge to the Town on any rainy days, otherwise the Town's effluent would not
meet the permit's effluent flow limits. The town would also require Delta to pretreat its
industrial wastewater before discharge to the Town's WWTP and would require
negotiation of pretreatment levels and wastewater treatment charges. Unfortunately,
Delta and the Town have recently extensively explored this possibility as well as other
similar options, and no agreement could be reached due to the costs to Delta and the tight
`-' pretreatment level requirements. Therefore, this option, despite the prior good faith
attempts by Delta and the Town, is not an option that is available to Delta Apparel.
'a 2. Planned Sewerage System
n
There is no planned sewerage system in this area that would be available to Delta
Apparel at this time, nor is it likely that any system will be planned for this area in the
near future. Therefore, this alternative is not an option that is available to Delta.
B. Land Based Disposal
1. On -Site Land Based Disposal
There are a number of options listed under the land based disposal alternative that could
be considered: nitrification systems, low pressure pipe systems, drip irrigation systems,
WI
mound systems, and spray irrigation systems. However, the only land -based option that
is even remotely feasible to consider for this large wastewater flow, 1.2 MGD, is a spray
irrigation system. Spray irrigation could be used for this amount of flow; however, there
is not enough land available on the approximately 25-acre Delta site (See Site Diagram in
Map Pocket) for Delta to use this system to dispose of their wastewater. The land
,., requirement for the 1.2 MGD flow is approximately 84 acres. In fact, it is not possible
for any reasonable portion of this wastewater to be land applied on -site. The land
requirement for only the additional 200,000 gpd flow is approximately 14 acres.

I' 1
2. Off -Site Land Based Disposal
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 7
�► There is no adjacent land available for Delta Apparel to acquire for use in this disposal
system (See Catawba County Tax Map in Map Pocket and Google Earth® Aerial Map
attached). Delta Apparel is almost completely surrounded by other developed properties.
These properties are either commercial or industrial and currently have buildings located
on these lots. Based on a review of the Catawba County tax map, and confirmed by
Catawba County GIS personnel (Greta Bumgarner on 2/18/2009), there is insufficient
open land available or a farm nearby to land apply all or a portion of this wastewater. A
letter from Delta Apparel confirming this lack of available adjacent land is attached.
r, C. Wastewater Reuse
Fral
Wastewater reuse at this facility is a possible alternative to consider for the 1.2 MGD
wastewater stream. However, the cost of reusing the wastewater will be quite expensive.
To make this option viable, Delta must provide additional treatment to the wastewater so
that the effluent quality will be acceptable for use in the manufacturing operations. The
two main parameters of concern for treatment and reuse are color and chlorides removal.
To reuse the wastewater at this facility, this wastewater will need to be treated for not
only additional color removal, but also for the presence of chlorides. Since the current
treatment operations do not address either of these two issues to the degree necessary for
reuse, additional treatment systems will be needed if an acceptable level of effluent
quality for reuse is to be achieved. The technology available to address the removal of
color and chlorides is very expensive. The reuse of this wastewater would not be cost
effective when compared to continuing to discharge to surface waters.
Reverse osmosis would be the treatment system necessary to remove chlorides. The cost
provided in this analysis is based on information provided by Koch Membrane Systems
(see attached). To remove all TSS and to reduce the effluent organic load, Koch has
recommended a UF system to precede the RO system; and has suggested that a
temperature reduction to less than 100° F might also be necessary. The UF capital cost is
estimated to be approximately $1 million, and the RO capital cost is estimated to be
approximately $750,000 (see attached).
To remove color, carbon adsorption was evaluated. Information provided by Calgon
Carbon (see attached) is based on a .2 MGD flow rate using Filtrasorb® #300 for four
(4) carbon vessels of 20,000 pounds capacity each, in two parallel trains of two vessels
each. The Calgon system is estimated to have an installed cost of approximately
$1,000,000 (see below). As with the reverse osmosis system, the carbon adsorption
system would require additional treatability studies before final sizing could commence.
The cost of these studies is not included in these cost estimates.

0
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 8
Equipment or Item
Capital Cost Estimate
Reverse Osmosis System:
Ultrafiltration Unit
$1,000,000
Reverse Osmosis Unit
$750,000
Design, Permitting, etc. @
25%
$437,500
Sub -Total
$2,187,500
Carbon Adsorption:
4 vessels @$200,000 each
$800,000
Design, Permitting,
Installation, etc. @ 25%
$200,000
Sub -Total
$1,000,000
Total
$3,187,500
Annual recurring operating cost estimates for reverse osmosis (including UF) were
estimated by Koch Membrane Systems to be $300,000. Annual operating costs for the
carbon adsorption are based on information provided by Calgon Carbon, and only include
the cost of carbon replacement. Carbon replacement would be approximately $30,000
per vessel, with an assumed monthly replacement cycle for two vessels each. This yields
an estimated annual carbon replacement cost of approximately $720,000.
Of course, in a water reuse scenario, Delta Apparel would be able to reduce the volume
of raw water purchased from the Town of Maiden by the amount reused. This cost would
''' offset some of the annual operating costs presented below. For purposes of this analysis,
an 80 percent volume reduction is assumed (i.e., 20 percent would still require treatment
and discharge). According to Delta Apparel, in 2008 their cost for raw water from the
town was approximately $3,000 per MG. At a WWTP flow of 1.2 MGD, the annual
savings is estimated to be approximately $1.051 million.
The costs associated with handling the additional flow of 200,000 gpd and for additional
treatment for the removal of chlorides and color are provided below.
Vat

ral
C=1
RI
!=1
MCI
,
fail
mil
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 9
Wastewater Reuse
Additional Treatment
Equipment
Ca ' ital Cost
Comments &
Estimate
Annual
OperatingCost
Estimate
Reverse Osmosis (with UF)
$2,187,500
1.2 MGD
(chlorides)
$300,000
Activated Carbon Adsorption
$1,000,000
1.2 MGD (color)
$720,000
Less Annual Water Savings
-
($1,051,000)
Plus Cost to Treat 0.2 MGD
-
$91,031
Total Cost for Wastewater Reuse
$3,187,500
1.2 MGD
$60,031
It is quite possible that even with additional treatment, the wastewater quality will not be
acceptable for reuse at this facility. Pilot studies will inevitably need to be performed to
determine the exact treatment scenario that will be needed to provide an acceptable
effluent quality. The costs associated with implementing extensive pilot studies have not
been included in this analysis.
D. Surface Water Discharge
This is the current disposal method being used at Delta Apparel for the wastewater
discharge of 1.0 MGD. The facility's on -site wastewater treatment system is operating
near its maximum capacity; however, effluent limits are still being continuously met, and
in almost all cases, the WWTP discharge values are well below the permitted limitations.
When actual monthly flows have approached the requested WWTP flow limit of 1.2
MGD, as in November 2007, the WWTP effluent was still compliant with its current
limits, as shown below based on the November 2007 Discharge Monitoring Report
(DMR) averages.
Discharge Parameter
Permit Limit
Actual Value
% Below Permit Limit
Flow
1.0 MGD
1.17 MGD
-
BOD5
1621bs
10.4 lbs
94
TSS
785 lbs
132.9 lbs
83
COD
2900 lbs
1173.6 lbs
60
Color, ADMI
549 su
154 su
72
Chronic Toxicity
>11%
15.6%*
42
* Based on values from September and December 2007
n

r,
r,
rWO
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 10
For a flow increase from 1.0 MGD to 1.2 MGD, no additional capital expenses, or
equipment will be required, only plant flow -variable operating costs will increase. These
costs include electricity, chemicals, and sludge disposal and hauling. Based on Delta
Apparel's 2008 records, these combined costs were approximately $1,247 per million
gallons of treated wastewater. Consequently, under this option the annual cost to treat the
additional 200,000 gpd of wastewater, averaged over 365 days for a total of 73 MG per
year, is estimated to be $91,031.
E. Disposal Combinations
Surface Water Discharge and Wastewater Reuse Combination
The only disposal combination that is available for Delta to consider is the combination
of surface water discharge and wastewater reuse. Under this option, initial treatment of
the additional 0.2 MGD would be performed by the existing WWTP, with the additional
0.2 MGD flow being diverted before surface water discharge to smaller carbon
adsorption and reverse osmosis units for additional treatment and reuse. The cost values
below were determined by pro -rating the 1.2 MGD full-size costs above to 0.2 MGD, a
reduction factor of 0.17. Consequently, these values are expected to be low because a
significant economy of scale has been lost.
Surface Water Discharge and Wastewater Reuse
Additional Treatment
Equipment
Ca s ital Cost
Comments &
Estimate
Annual
OperatingCost
Estimate
Reverse Osmosis (with UF)
$371,900
0.2 MGD
(chlorides)
$51,000
Activated Carbon Adsorption
$170,000
0.2 MGD (color)
$122,400
WWTP Additional Costs to Treat 0.2 MGD
-
$91,031
Total Cost for Wastewater Reuse
$541,900
0.2 MGD
$264,431

oniq
Trm
1,
Ma,
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 11
F. Economic Feasibility of Alternatives
Both capital and recurring annual costs for each alternative evaluated above are
summarized below. Economic feasibility of alternatives is based on a comparison of
their present worth costs using a planning period of 20 years and a USEPA mandated
interest or discount rate of 4.875 percent. Although the recurring costs are expected to
escalate through the planning period, for purposes of this analysis they were assumed to
remain constant throughout the planning period. The present value or present worth
factor applied to the annual recurring costs is 12.5954 (see attached).
Alternative
Capital Cost
Recurring
Annual Cost
Present Worth
of Recurring
Annual Cost*
Present Worth
Value of
Alternativet
Wastewater
Reuse
$3,187,500
$60,031
$756,114
$3,943,614
Surface Water
Discharge
N/A
$91,031
$1,146,572
$1,146,572
Surface Water
Discharge &
Wastewater
Reuse
Combination
$541,900
$264,431
$3,330,614
$3,872,514
*n = 20 years, USEPA annual discount rate = 4.875%
tSum of Capital Cost and Present Worth Recurring Annual Cost

7
7
Attachments
Delta Apparel, Inc.
March 2009
Page 12

n
n
Fug
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SCHEMATIC
DELTA APPAREL, INC. <> MAIDEN, NC
Bar
Screen
Aeration Basin #2
Vol. = 1,250,000 gallons
(3) 50 H.P. Floating Aerators
180'Lx90'Wx12'D
0.5MGD
Polymer Feed
Points
Aeration Basin #1
Vol. = 1,250,000 gallons
(3) 50 H.P. Floating Aerators
180'Lx90'Wx12'D
0.5 MGD
Sludge Return
Flocculent
38 Ft. Dia.
10 Ft. Sidewater Depth
Waste Sludge
Sludge Return
Flo
lent
T Sludge
P.S.
Chlorine Contact
& 2.0 MGD Flow Meter
Sludge Storage Lagoon
Surface Area = 49,170 Sq. Ft.
1.8 MG Holding Capacity
(5) 7.5 HP Surface Aerators
(2) 5 HP Surface Aerators
,
ir
1.5 MGD Effluent
Flow
Measurement
Device
Reaeration Basin
(2)10 H.P. Floating Aerators
Clark Creek Discharge No. 001
(7,500 Ft. From Effluent & Flow
Measurement & Sampler)
DELTA APPAREL, INC.
CATAWBA COUNTY
MAIDEN, NC
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC0006190

1
Source: Google Earth Maps
Printed on 2/18/2009
Aerial View of Delta Apparel and Adjacent Property
Maiden, NC
Eye alt 5053 ft

n
DELTA
APPAREL, INCORPORATED
2/24/09
Mr. Sergei Chemikov
NCOivision of Water Quality-NPDES West
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Alternatives Analysis
Land Availability for Land -Based Disposal Alternative
Delta Apparel, Inc. — Maiden Plant
NPDES No. NC0006190
Dear Mr. Chemikov
Our consultant, Applied Water Technology, Inc., is preparing the wastewater permit application
for the proposed increased flow from our facility. During the evaluation of the land -based
disposal alternative, the option of acquiring land adjacent to our facility was reviewed.
Unfortunately, there is not any land adjacent to our facility that could be acquired for this use.
If there are any questions regarding this issue, please contact either Charles Blackwell with
Applied Water Technology at [phone] or Jackie Harvell of our facility at [phone]
Extension 235.
Sincerely,
Steve Slaughter
Plant Manager
100 W. Pine Street • P.O. Box 37 • Maiden, N.C. 28650 • [phone] • FAX [phone]
Change your shirt.

Land Area Required for 0.2 MGD Flow
0.1
Pul
rtal
rtzfl
,m,
Water losses, inches
Water applied, inches
Month
lEvapotrans (1)
Percolation (2)
Total (3)
Precip (4)
WW,Lwp (5)
Total (6)
Jan
0.1
18.144
18.244
3.87
14.374
18.244
Feb
0.1
18.144
18.244
4.58
13.664
18.244
Mar
1.2
18.144
19.344
5.05
14.294
19.344
Apr
1.8
18.144
19.944
3.96
15.984
19.944
_
May
3
18.144
21.144
4.67
16.474
21.144
Jun
4
18.144
22.144
5
17.144
22.144
J u l
4.5
18.144
22.644
4.03
18.614
22.644
Aug
4.1
18.144
22.244
4.87
17.374
22.244
Sep
2.9
18.144
21.044
3.91
17.134
21.044
Oct
1.8
18.144
19.944
3.31
16.634
19.944
Nov
0.6
18.144
18.744
2.98
15.764
18.744
Dec
0.1
18.144
18.244
4.18
14.064
18.244
Total
24.2
217.728
241.928
50.41
191.5
241.928
percolation(Wp)= (0.63 in/h)*(24 hr/d)*(0.04)*(30 d/mon)
Wp = 18.144
Area Needed (Aw)= Q*365/Lwp
Aw= [(0.2MGD*0.134 cu ft/gal*365 d/yr)/(191.5 in/yr"1ft/12 in*43560 sq ft/acre)]
Aw= 14.1 acres
Column explanations:
1 - data for Brevard, NC. Reference Metcalf & Eddy.
2 - data for Maiden, NC. Reference Soil Survey
3 - column 1 + column 2
4 - data for Hickory, NC. Reference NC Office of Climatology Report No. 185
5 - column 3 • column 4
6 - column 4 + column 5
Notes: Calculation procedure from Metcalf & Eddy 3rd ed, p. 960

n
Land Area Required for 1.2 MGD Flow
Mel
ran
n
Water losses, inches
Water applied, inches
Month
Evapotrans (1)
Percolation (2)
Total (3)
Precip (4)
WW,Lwp (5)
Total (6)
Jan
0.1
18.144
18.244
3.87
14.374
18.244
Feb
0.1
18.144
18.244
4.58
13.664
18.244
Mar
1.2
18.144
19.344
5.05
14.294
19.344
Apr
1.8
18.144
19.944
3.96
15.984
19.944-
May
3
18.144
21.144
4.67
16.474
21.144
Jun
4
18.144
22.144
5
17.144
22.144
Jul
4.5
18.144
22.644
4.03
18.614
22.644
Aug
4.1
18.144
22.244
, 4.87
17.374
22.244
Sep
2.9
18.144
21.044,
3.91
17.134
21.044
Oct
1.8
18.144
19.944
3.31
16.634
19.944
Nov
0.6
18.144
18.744
2.98
15.764
18.744
Dec
0.1
18.144
18.244
4.18
14.064
18.244
Total
24.2
217.728
241.928
50.41
191.5
241.928
percolation(Wp)= (0.63 in/h)*(24 hr/d)*(0.04)*(30 d/mon)
Wp = 18.144
Area Needed (Aw)= Q*365/Lwp
Aw= (1.2MGD*0.134 cu ft/gal*365 d/yr)/(191.5 in/yr"lft/12 in*43560 sq ft/acre)
Aw= 84.4 acres
Column explanations:
1 - data for Brevard, NC. Reference Metcalf & Eddy.
2 - data for Maiden, NC. Reference Soil Survey
3 - column 1 + column 2
4 - data for Hickory, NC. Reference NC Office of Climatology Report No. 185
5 • column 3 - column 4
6 - column 4 + column 5
Notes: Calculation procedure from Metcalf & Eddy 3rd ed, p. 960

•
r-,
Estimation of WWTP Effluent Characteristics at 1.2 MGD
Based on the WWTP November 2007 DMR Data averages where average flow = 1.17 MGD
Flow Increase Multiplier = 1.2 MGD/1.17 MGD = 1.03
BOD5
(10.4 lbs/day) (1.03) = 10.7 lbs/day
COD
(1173.6 lbs/day) (1.03)= 1208.8 lbs/day
TSS
(132.9 lbs/day) (1.03) = 136.9 lbs/day
0.1 Ammonia
Pa,
(0.12 mg/1) (1.03) = 0.12 mg/1
Chromium
(1.98 µg/1) (1.03) = 2.04 µg/1
Sulfides
(0 lbs/day) (1.03) = 0 lbs/day
Phenols
(0.11 lbs/day) (1.03) = 0.11 lbs/day

n
Derivation of the Present Value Cost Factor for Recurring Annual Costs
Where:
PV = Present value of costs
Co = Costs incurred in the present year
Ct = Costs incurred in time t
t = Time period after the present year
n = Ending year of the life of the facility
r = Current discount rate
Assume: r = 4.875% and n = 20 years
Then, the PV cost factor is:
PV Factor = [(1+ r)" — 1] / [(r(1+r)"]
= [(1+0.04875)2° — 1] / [(0.04875)(1+0.04875)20]
= (2.5908 — 1) / [(0.04875)(2.5908)]
= (1.5908) / (0.1263)
PV Factor = 12.5954
Then, PV = Co + (PV Factor)(Ct)
and
PV = Co + 12.5954Ct

Subj:
Date:
From:
To:
Model 10 Budgetary Quote
2/23/2009 4:17:11 PM Eastern Standard Time
BJohnston©calgorjcatbon-ass.com
[e-mail]
Charles,
Here is the budgetary quote. Again, Filtrasorb 300 may or may not be
the
right carbon for this application.
(Embedded image moved to file: pic00491.jpg)
NOTE
Prices are Ex -Works Shipping Point for both carbon and equipment.
Installation is NOT included. Field Service supervision included.
125 ASME code design.
Backwashable
Plasite 4110 vinyl ester vessel lining.
8" carbon steel pipe w/cast iron fittings.
40,000 pounds Filtrasorb 300.
Internal cone underdrain with polypropylene septa nozzles or
external
header w SS septa.
(See attached file: 2008 CCC T&C's.PDF)
Thank you,
Brett M. Johnston
Inside Technical Sales Representative
Calgon Carbon Corporation
Tele: 412.787.4762
Fax: [phone]
Cell: 412.535.3352

M,
Page 2 of 2
M
bjohnston©calgoncarbon-us.com
www.calgoncarbon.com
Please visit our website at www.calgoncarbon.com, for all MSDS
requests and
Product Literature

rodud #
efoduct Name
Model 'l{ y ri) 300
•
Packaging Type
quantity
system
rice
Paymeld
mreleht
await
WOO, OMPatsy/ern Price does not include an Wight or applicable sales tax.
MastetCard, VISA and Discover cards
OrNet 30days
Carbon Acceptance Fee: (one-time fee before Calgon Carbon can take back any spent carbon)
n
f 00 Non-RCRA
$1000 RCRA
)N LY applicable if customer wants CCC to dispose/reactivate spent carbon
!Mush Shlpmett' is necessary, there will be a service charge as fdlows:
;�a flat fee of $500 will be applied to every complete order that must ship the same day it is received.
a flat fee of $400 wil be applied to every complete ceder that must ship the day attar it le received.
- a flat fee of $300 will be applied to every complete ceder that must ship two days after it is received.
Dude is valid for 30 days.
*Subject to CCC Terms and Conditions
..Pease fax or erred your purchase order to my attention.

Telephone Conversation Dotes. with CaIvan:Pax ottitkideSale.s Representative
Date: February 20, 2009
With: Brett Johnston, Inside Technical Sales Representative — [phone]
Digest:
Based on flowrate of 1.2 MGD (1.5 MGD maximum) a Model #10 system with 4 vessels
of 20,000 lbs carbon each, using Filtrasorb® #300 could be used. (2 parallel trains of 2
each in series)
Cost of one vessel w/carbon would be approx. $200,000. w/o shipping or installation.
Replacement Carbon: For 1 . vessel @ $4/lb for 20,000 lbs/vessel.; say $25-
$30K/vessel/charge.
n

Page 1 of 3
Pal
Subj: RE: Chlorides Removal for 1.2 MGD Flow
Date: 2/25/2009 12:59:47 PM Eastem Standard Time
From: jjcanglgno©kochmembrane.com
0.1 To: Awtmailbox aol.com
Rol
Pool
Hi Charles,
In order for an RO system to work properly you have to remove all the
TSS and reduce the organic Toad as well. I would recommend a UF in
front
of the RO assume the UF budget price to be $1MM and the RO to be
$750K.
The temperature may have to be reduced to be <100 F at the feed to
the
RO.
Assume the operating cost to be $300k per yr.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
Jack Cangiano
Regional Manager
Koch Membrane Systems Inc.
850 Main St.
Wilmington, MA 01887
978-694-7114
jjcangiano©kochmembrane.com
Fsn www.kochmembrane.com
Original Message ----
From: Awtmailbox [e-mail] [mailto:Awtmailbox@aoLcom]
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 12:14 PM
To: Cangiano, Jack
Subject: Chlorides Removal for 1.2 MGD Flow

Page 2 of 3
Jack,
Per our telephone conversation, here are some of the effluent
characteristics. We would like to consider reuse of this w/w and would
want to reduce the chlorides to <25 mg/I. Can you provide us with
some
preliminary budgetary costs for 1)capital installed cost, and 2}annual
operating cost. Please call me if you have any questions. Thank you!
Flow 1.2 MGD average, 1.5 MGD maximum
Temperature 30 degrees C average, 47 degrees C maximum
TSS 40 mg/I average, 114 mg/I maximum
pH 7.88-9.0
COD 644 mg/l maximum, 241 mg/I average
Chlorides 1000 mg/I
if you need any other information, please call or e-mail. Thank You!
Charles D. Blackwell
Charles D. Blackwell, President/Environmental consultant
APPLIED WATER TECHNOLOGY ,:IN C. (AWT)
311 South Academy Street
Cary, NC 27511
Direct Phone: [phone]
Cell: 919-418-6651
Main Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: awtmailbox [e-mail]
Website: http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-AWTINC
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!