NC0025984_Permit Issuance_20090529

IAA
ktrA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
Mr. Charles R. Summey, II
Town of Forest City
P.O. Box 728
Forest City, North Carolina 28043
May 29, 2009
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NC0025984
Forest City WWTP
Rutherford County
Dear Mr. Summey:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject
permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is
issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
dated October 17, 2007 (or as subsequently amended.)
This permit authorizes the Town of Forest City to discharge municipal wastewater from the
Forest City WWTP to the Second Broad River, a class WS-IV water in the Broad River Basin. The
permit includes discharge limitations/or monitoring for flow, BOD5, ammonia nitrogen, total
suspended solids, dissolved oxygen, total residual chlorine, fecal coliform, and cyanide, in addition
to other constituents.
The following procedure has been recently implemented by DWQ: Total residual chlorine
(TRC) compliance level changed to 50 ug/1. Effective March 1, 2008, the Division received EPA
approval to allow a 50 ug/1 TRC compliance level. This change is due to analytical difficulties with
TRC measurements. Facilities will still be required to report actual results on their monthly
discharge monitoring report (DMR) submittals, but for compliance purposes, all TRC values below
50 ug/1 will be treated as zero. A footnote regarding this change has been added to the effluent
limitations page as noted in the draft permit.
There was a minor change in the chronic toxicity condition that was not addressed in the
permit cover letter of March 1 lth. Please review the language in Special Condition A. 2. Chronic
Toxicity Permit Limit. There are some minor additions regarding the DWQ forms to be
submitted and clarification on reporting pollutant data.
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
Natural!,

The following modifications made to the draft permit of March 11, 2009, remain in the final
permit:
• The supplement to permit cover page contains an updated description of the treatment units
of the Forest City WWTP.
• The effluent limit for total lead has been deleted from the permit based on the results of the
reasonable potential analysis. Monitoring for total lead will be continued in the facility's
pretreatment Long Term Monitoring Plan.
• Effluent monitoring for total mercury, phenols, and total silver has been deleted from the
permit based on the results of the reasonable potential analysis. Monitoring for these
parameters will be continued in the facility's pretreatment Long Term Monitoring Plan..
• Effluent monitoring for total zinc has been added based on the results of a reasonable
potential analysis which indicated the discharge had the potential to exceed the water quality
action level standard instream. Because zinc is an action level standard, no effluent limit will
be applied however total zinc will be monitored twice per month.
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.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Jacquelyn
Nowell at telephone number [phone] or email [e-mail].
Si cerely,
ttlk
oleen H. Sullins
Attachments
cc: EPA/Region IV
Asheville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section
DEH/PWS/Asheville Regional Office
PERCS/ecopy
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
NPDES File/NC0025984
Central Files

Permit NC0025984
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA •
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, the
Town of Forest City
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Forest City Wastewater Treatment Plant
397 Riverside Drive
Forest City
Rutherford County
to receiving waters designated as the Second Broad River in the Broad 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 July 31, 2013.
Signed this day May 29, 2009.
0(0
Cgleen H. Sullins, Director
ivision of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
, Page 1 of 6

Permit NC0025984
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.
The Town of Forest City is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 4.95 MGD wastewater treatment facility that
includes the following components:
o Influent screening
❑ Bar screen
o Aerated, traveling bridge grit chamber
❑ Grease chamber
❑ Five aeration basins with floating aerators
o Two secondary clarifiers
o Gas chlorination
o Sulfur dioxide dechlorination
o Two diffused air aerobic digestors
❑ Belt press
❑ Sludge dryer and storage bin
❑ Step aeration
This facility is located at the Forest City Wastewater Treatment Plant (397
Riverside Drive, Forest City) in Rutherford County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into the Second Broad River, currently a class WS-IV stream in the Broad
River Basin.
Page 2 of 6

i I
a�upfri;
Quad: Gastonia NC0025984
Subbasin: 30802
Latitude:35°1-9'38" Forest City WWTP
Longitude: 81°50'25"
Receiving Stream: Second Broad River
Stream Class: WS-IV

Permit NC0025984
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the
Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Averaze
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location'
Flow
4.95 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD5, 200C2
25.5 mg/L
38.25 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent, Effluent
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent, Effluent
NH3-N
10.0 mg/L
30.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen3
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH
Between 6 0 and 9.0 standard units
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine"
28 µg/L
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature, 0C
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cyanide
22 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
Variables
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
Variables
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Conductivity
Variables
Grab
DownUpstream,
stream
Temperature
Variables
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Footnotes:
1 Upstream: Upstream 50 feet from outfall. Downstream: 50 feet upstream of the J.C. Cowan
discharge point
2 The monthly average effluent B0D5 and total suspended solids concentrations shall not exceed
15% of their respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L.
4 The Division shall consider all effluent total residual chlorine values reported below 50 pg/1 to be
in compliance with the permit. However, the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all
values reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory (including field certified), even if these
values fall below 50 tcg/1.
5 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 18%; samples shall be collected quarterly during the
months of January, April, July, and October. See condition A. (2).
6 Instream sampling shall be conducted 3/week during June, July, August and September and
1 /week during the rest of the year.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 3 of 6

Permit NC0025984
A. (2) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (Quarterly)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 18%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterici monitoring using test procedures outlined in
the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or
subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during the months of
January, April, July and October. 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: NCDENR/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.
Page4of6

• Permit NC0025984
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.
Page 5 of 6

Permit NC0025984
A. (3) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The Permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached table. The •
analytical methods shall be in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136 and shall be sufficiently sensitive to determine
whether parameters are present in concentrations greater than applicable standards and criteria. Samples shall
represent seasonal variations. Unless otherwise indicated, metals shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1,1-dichloroethylene
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen 1,2-dichloropropane Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite 1,3-dichloropropylene 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Kjeldahl nitrogen Ethylbenzene Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease Methyl bromide 2-chloronaphthalene
Phosphorus Methyl chloride 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids Methylene chloride Chrysene
Hardness 1,1,2.2-tetrachloroethane Di-n-butyl phthalate
Antimony Tetrachloroethylene Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arse nic Toluene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium 1,1,1-trichloroethane 1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium 1,1,2-trichloroethane 1,3•dichlorobenzene
Chromium Trichloroethylene 1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper Vinyl chloride 3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead Acid -extractable compounds: Diethyl phthalate
Mercury P-chloro-m-cresol Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel 2-chlorophenol 2,4-dinitrotoluene
Selenium 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,6-dinitrotoluene
Silver 2,4-dimethylphenol 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Thallium 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol Fluoranthene
Zinc 2,4-dinitrophenol Fluorene
Cyanide 2-nitrophenol Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds 4-nitrophenol Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile orqanic compounds: Pentachlorophenol Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein Phenol Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile 2,4,6-trichlorophenol Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzene Base -neutral compounds: Isophorone
Bromoform Acenaphthene Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride Acenaphthylene Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene Anthracene N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane Benzidine N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane Benzo(a)anthracene N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2-chloroethylvinyl ether Benzo(a)pyrene Phenanthrene
Chloroform 3,4 benzofluoranthene Pyrene
Dichlorobromomethane Benzo(ghi)perylene 1,2,4-tichlorobenzene
1,1•dichloroethane Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2-dichloroethane Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- A MR-PPA1 or in a form approved by the Director
within 90 days of sampling. The report shall be submitted to the following address: Division of Water Quality,
Surface Water Protection Section, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.
A. (4) SPECIAL CONDITION FOR WTP EXPANSION
Upon receiving DEH approval for an expansion of the Forest City Water Treatment Plant above 8 MGD,
The Town of Forest City shall notify the Division. At that time the Division may re -open this permit
(NC0025984) to incorporate new limits for conventional parameters and toxicants, reflective of the new
Instream Waste Concentration.
Page 6 of 6

review of NC0025984, Forest City WWTP
Subject: review of NC0025984, Forest City WWTP
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:41:18 -0400
To: [e-mail]
EPA has no comments on this draft permit.
1 of 1 3/16/2009 10:37 AM

es !'e;-cde
Gover1`:r
MEMORANDUM
To:
NQrtri Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water C as ity
0o1eer Suii h s
Director
March 10, 2009
James P. Adams
NC DENR / DEH / Public Water Supply Section Regional Engineer
Asheville Regional Office
From: Jackie Nowell.
NPDES Western Program
Subject: Review of Draft Permit NC0025984
Forest City WWTP
Rutherford County
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the draft permit and return this form by March 20,
2009. If you have any questions on the draft permit, please contact me at 919-807-6386 or e-mail to
j ackie. nowellk ncmail.net.
RESPONSE: (Check one)
Concur with the issuance of this permit provided the facility is operated and maintained properly, the stated effluent
limits are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not contravene the designated water qualitystandards.
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Dee Freeman
Secretary
Concurs with issuance of the above permit, provided the following conditions are met:
Opposes the issuance of the above permit, based on reasons stated below, or attached:
Signed 14414C/frr& l tiI 7 r 1G if
Rec:'e.ieii
Date: 5--"Z
one
±v orthCarol ina
Aatizrally

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths, personally
appeared
Erika Meyer
who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that they are
Classified Manager
(Owner, partner, publisher, or other officer or employee authorized to make this
affidavit) of THE DAILY COURIER, a newspaper published, issued and entered as
second class mail In the town of FOREST CITY, In said County and State; that they
are authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the notice or other
legal advertisement, a true copy of which is attached hereto, was published in THE
DAILY COURIER on the following dates:
March 13, 2009
and that said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or legal
advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every such publication, a
newspaper meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning
of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 16th day of March, 2009.
Erika Meyer, Classified Man.L;:er
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 16th day of March, 2009.
Cindy B. White, ( otary Public)
My commission expires: February 18, 2012

PUBLIC NOTICE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION/NPDES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A NPDES WASTEWATER
PERMIT
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of NC General
Statute 143.215.1 and 15A NCAC 02H.0109 and other lawful standards
and regulations, the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission proposes to issue a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater •discharge permit to the
person(s) listed below effective 45 days from the publish date of this
notice.
Written comments regarding 'the proposed permit will be accepted until
30 days. after the publish date of this notice. All comments received
prior to that date are considered in the final determinations regarding
the proposed permit. The Director of the NC Division of Water Quality
may decide to hold a public meeting for the proposed permit, should the
Division receive a significant degree of public interest.
Copies of the draft permit and other supporting information on file used
to determine conditions present in the draft permit are available upon
request and payment of the costs of reproduction. Mail comments
and/or requests for information to the NC Division of Water Quality at
the above address or call Dina Sprinkle [phone] at the Point
Source Branch. Please include the NPDES permit number (below) in
any communication. Interested persons may also visit the Division of
Water Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street. Raleigh, NC 27604-1148
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to review information on
file.
The Town of Forest City [P.O. Box 728, Forest City, NC 28043] has
applied for renewal of permit NC0025984 for its WWTP in Rutherford
County. This permitted facility discharges treated municipal wastewater/
to the Second Broad River in the Broad River Basin. Currently BOD.
ammonia nitrogen. fecal coliform, total residual chlorine'and cyanide an.
water quality limited. This discharge may affect future allocations in th!
% portion of the Broad River Basin.

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit NC0025984
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Forest City/ Forest City Wastewater Treatment Plant
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 728, Forest City, North Carolina 28043
Facility Address:
Riverside Drive; Forest City, North Carolina 28043
Permitted Flow
4.95 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic and industrial with full pretreatment program
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Rutherford County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Second Broad
River
Regional Office:
Asheville (ARO)
Stream Classification:
WS-IV
USGS Quad:
Forest City, N.C.
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Jacquelyn M.
Nowell
Subbasin:
03-08-02
Date:
February 17,2009
Drainage Area (mi2):
168
Summer 7Q 10 (cfs)
34.8
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
70.6
30Q2 (cfs)
112
Average Flow (cfs):
247
IWC (%):
18%
Lat. 35° 19' 38" N Long. 81° 50' 25" W
BACKGROUND
The Forest City Wastewater Treatment Plant is a 4.95 MGD treatment facility serving 8500
residents of Forest City. The facility discharges municipal wastewater (domestic and industrial)
and has a full pretreatment program with three Significant Industrial Users and two
Categorical Industrial Users. DWQ's PERCs program will continue to implement this program
in the coming permit term. Sludge is treated to Class A standards and made available to local
farmers and residents.
The Permittee applied for renewal by submitting EPA Form 2A on February 4, 2008. The
previous permit was effective on January 1, 2004, expired on July 31, 2008 and has been
administratively extended.
The Town s treatment system consists of: mechanical bar screens, influent step screen, bar
screen, aerated traveling bridge grit chamber, grease chamber, five (5) aeration basins, two (2)
circular secondary clarifiers, gas chlorination, sulfur dioxide dechlorination, two diffused air
aerobic digestors, belt press, sludge dryer and storage bin, and step reaeration.
PERMIT LIMITATIONS
Existing limits for the Forest City WWTP:
BOD5= 25.5 mg/1
NH3 = 10 mg/1
DO = 6 mg/1
TSS = 30 mg/1
Fecal Coliform = 200/100 ml
TRC = 28 ug/1
Chronic Toxicity test = 18%
Cyanide= 22 ug/1
Lead=34 ug/1
Monitoring for copper, mercury, phenols, silver
Oxygen consuming limits (BOD5, NH3, DO) and conventional limits (fecal coliform, TRC, TSS)
will be renewed at this time. The special condition regarding reevaluation of limits for Forest
City WWTP if the upstream Forest City Water Treatment Plant (WTP) should expand beyond 8
Forest City WWTP
NPDES Renewal
Page 1

MGD withdrawal, should remain in the permit. The expansion of the water plant would effect
the 7Q10 of the Second Broad and possibly require more stringent limits for the WWTP.
Limits and monitoring requirements for cyanide, metals, and phenols were evaluated during
this renewal and evaluations included in the Reasonable Potential Analysis section.
An annual priority pollutant scan requirement will remain in the permit to ensure that
the permittee complies with the requirement in the municipal permit applications.
RECEIVING STREAM INFORMATION
This facility discharges to the Second Broad River (sub -basin 03-08-02), which is in the Broad
River Basin. The segment of the Second Broad River where Forest City discharges is not listed
as impaired on the North Carolina 2006 303(d) list. However, several miles downstream of the
discharge, the Second Broad River is listed as impaired because of standard violations for
turbidity. It should also be noted that due to the color discharge from textile manufacturers at
times the water in the Second Broad River has a red color. ARO staff has reported that a major
textile plant, Hanes Brand, has recently closed and effluent will probably not be deeply colored
in the future.
COLOR MONITORING
An email in the permit file, requested that the color status of the Forest City WWTP be
evaluated at this permit renewal. A March 2005 visit to the facility and a grab of the effluent
had a ADMI color level of 1488. Another WWTP in the state had been given color limits when
the effluent from the plant affected downstream waters. Color monitoring was placed in the
Forest City LTMP and was sampled at the influent and effluent since August 2006. In 2006,
there were two samples. In 2007, there was monthly sampling (11 values). There was
quarterly sampling in 2008. The color was sampled as both apparent and true at the influent
and effluent since August 2006. In 2006, 2007 through August 2008, there was minimal
reduction in color shown from the influent to the•effluent. The influent apparent color values
during this time ranged from lows of 330 ADMI to 3760 ADMI. Influent true colors values
ranged from 250 to 3760 ADMI. The effluent apparent color values ranged from 757 to 4684
ADMI. Effluent true colors values ranged from 703 to 4546 ADMI.
The first two quarters in 2008, showed influent and effluent color values similar to previous
years, however August and November showed tremendous reductions. August 2008 influent
values were around 420 ADMI and effluent color values were around 350. November 2008
influent and effluent values were both <70 ADMI, the lowest values reported in two years. ARO
staff has reported that a major textile plant and color contributor, Hanes Brand, has recently
closed. Will recommend that quarterly color monitoring remain the LTMP for at least
another twelve months to track and verify the reduction in effluent color.
TOXICITY TESTING
Current Requirement: Chronic Ceriodaphnia Quarterly P/F @ 18%
Testing during the months of January, April, July and October.
The City has passed most of its whole effluent toxicity tests from January 2004 through July
2008. However, the toxicity test was failed three (3) times during the last permit cycle in July
2004 , October 2005, and January 2008. Each failed test was followed by two months of
consecutive passes with the exception of the January 2008 test. Subsequent tests in April and
July 2008 were passed.
DWQ recommends that the quarterly chronic Ceriodaphnia toxicity tests @ 18% be
continued in the renewed permit.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY
Overall the Town has been in compliance with most permitted limits since the last
issuance. A retrieval and review of compliance data shows that there were several exceedances
of the cyanide limit in 2004 (4x). 2005 (Ix), 2006( 2x), 2007 (2X), 2008 (2x), failure to monitor
nutrients and toxicity test failures.
Forest City WWTP
NPDES Renewal
Page 2

INSTREAM MONITORING
Upstream site: 74 Business
Downstream site: 1/4 mile below 74 Bypass Bridge
A review of temperature, DO, fecal coliform and conductivity data showed that most of the time
water quality standards were met for temperature and DO. In 2006, upstream and
downstream fecal coliform values were > 200/ 100m1; upstream conductivity levels averaged
around 80, but downstream conductivity averages were > 250. This trend in conductivity data
continued in 2007, with downstream conductivity values being >350 most of the time. In 2007
fecal coliform values were mostly within the standard upstream and downstream. In late 2008,
October, November and December, the upstream and downstream conductivity were around
100. This may coincide with the closing of the textile mill in late 2008.
Recommend that instream monitoring remain in the permit to evaluate the effect of the
discharge on the receiving stream.
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS (RPA) RESULTS
Reasonable potential analyses were conducted for cyanide and metals based on sampled data
in discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) from January 2006 through November 2008. The
DMRs contained permitted data as well as LTMP data. See attached RPA analyses.
• Cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, molybdenum, total recoverable phenols,
selenium and silver demonstrated no reasonable potential to exceed state water quality
standards or acute criteria. Most data were reported below detection levels (exceptions
were mercury and phenols). No effluent limits or monitoring will be required with the
permit, but the City will have to continue to monitor these parameters through the
Pretreatment Program's Long Term Monitoring Plan.
• Cyanide - the maximum predicted value indicated a reasonable potential to exceed the
chronic and acute allowable concentrations. Based on this result, it is recommended
that the daily maximum limit of 22 ug/1 remain in the permit.
• Copper and Zinc - maximum predicted values for both parameters demonstrated a
reasonable potential to exceed both the chronic and acute allowable concentrations.
However, these are both Action Level standards and should be reviewed in conjunction
with toxicity testing. It is recommended that 2/month monitoring be continued for
copper and that 2/month monitoring be added for zinc.
• Antimony - a limited dataset (3 values) causes the maximum predicted value to exceed
chronic allowable concentration. However, 2 of the 3 datapoints were below detection
and the detected value of 6 ug/1 is well below the allowable. No monitoring or limit
recommended for the permit. Constituent will be sampled yearly in the priority
pollutant analysis.
RPA - Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
The application contained APAM data from the years 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007. The
following chlorinated phenols were sampled. See attached RPA analyses.
• 2,4,6 trichlorophenol (carcinogen) - 4 values reported and all below detection. No
reasonable potential shown to exceed the NC standard for chlorinated phenols. No
monitoring or limit required in the permit. Continue to monitor in the annual priority
pollutant analysis.
• Chlorinated Phenols - 12 values reported and all below detection. Although reasonable
potential shown to exceed the NC standard for chlorinated phenols, this is based on
varying detection levels, all values below detection. No monitoring or limit required in
the permit. Continue to monitor in the annual priority pollutant analysis. (Note that
the Forest City WTP is located upstream of the WWTP and therefore monitoring or limit
for chlorinated phenols is not required for protection of the water plant intake.)
Forest City WWTP
NPDES Renewal
Page 3

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
In keeping with Division policies, the following will be incorporated into the permit:
• Lead limit of 34 ug/1 will be deleted. No reasonable potential to exceed the
water quality standard shown. Quarterly lead monitoring will continue in
the pretreatment LTMP.
• Mercury, Phenols, and Silver monitoring will be deleted from the permit. No
reasonable potential to exceed the action level water quality standard shown.
These will continue to be monitored in the pretreatment LTMP.
• Zinc monitoring (2/month) will be added to the permit.
Attachments: RPA summary
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: March 10, 2009
Permit Scheduled to Issue (tentative): May 4, 2009.
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact J kie Nowell at [phone].
Zdo,
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Forest City WWTP
NPDES Renewal
Page 4

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Forest City WWTP
NC0025984
Time Period 1 r2006-1 V2008
Qw (MGD) 4.95
7QIOS (its) 34.8
7Q1OW (its) 70.6
30Q2 (cis) 112
Avg Stream Flow, QA (its) 247
Reeving Stream Second Broad River
WW7P ilacc N
/WC (%) 7Q10S 18.065
7Q1OW 9.8023
30Q2 6.4112
QA 3.0127
Stream Gass WS-IV
Outfall 001
Qw = 4.95 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS b
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WO/
phonic
X51V!
A lle
n >r Det Ya RdQr AllambL Cut
*
NC
5.6
ug/L.
3 1 390.8
Note: nv:12 i
Limited data set
Acute:
_ _ _
Chronic
WA
_ - _
3
Lirvtted data set causes max. pied. value 10 exceed chronic
allowable icon. Review of data shows 2 of 3_values below
detect d andetected vakre of 6 ugA is —well —below- allowable.
No monitoring recommended. Sample in annual PPA
Ail marry
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
18 0 I
0.5
Ante:
Chromic
15
— 11
All data below detection. Max. pied. value is < both chronic
and acne allowable icon.
No reasonable potential shown. No moritori g refit 'red in
permit.
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
ug/L
18 0
32
Acute:
Chronic:
1,022
277
AA data below detection. Max. pied. value is < both chronic
and acute allowable icon.
No reasonable potential shown. No monitoring required in
permiL
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
71 70
6142ra_
Acute:
Clrc
7
_ _ _ _ _
-39
Reasonable Potential shown to violate both acute and
chronic allowable conc. _ _ _ _
RECOMMENDED AC11 -4- Since NC Action Level, no fimi1
recommended but caratiued 2hr.,rrth monitoring
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ugtl
155 124
85.7
Acute:
Chrome:
22
28
Reasonable Potential shown to violate both acute and
chronic allowable conc. _ta_ _ _ _
RECOMMENDED ACTION- continuan of daffy max. Ymit
for CN=22ugA
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
154 1
WA
Acute:
Chronic
34
7 138
AN data below detection except 1 value of 5 ugA. No mutt.
factor calaiated because CV is <0.1.
No reasonable potential shown. Recommend that daily man
fmit be dropped from permit.
11
Mercury
NC
12
2.0000
ngnL
70 70
23.5470
Acute:
Clonic
WA
66
No reasonable potential shown. Monitoring requied in
permit w8 be dropped. Recommend continued monitoring
in LTMP.
Molybdenum
A
3.500
ugA.
14 7
18.1
Acu o:
Choic
N/A
54,592
No reasonabe potential shown. No monitoring required in
Perms
Nickel
NC
25
251
ug/L
18 0
25
Acne:
c1wvii=
261
138
No reasonable potential shown. No monitoring required in.
permit
Phenols
A
300
N
ug/L.
71 30
837.9
Acute:
Chromic
N/A
_ _
4,679
_ — - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No reasonable potentshown t0 exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring reconrnended. Sample in annual PPA.
Selenium
NC
5 0
56
ug/L
14 1
182
AWe:
Chronic:
56
28
No reasonable potential shown. No monitoring required in
permit.
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1 23
uglL
68 0
Acute:
3.1
Chronic:
I
1
0
Ai reported values below detection. Recommend that
monitoring in permit be removed.
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ugA_
I Acute:
18 17 282.2
Chrwrc:
67
277
Reasonable Potential shown to violate both acute and
chronic allowable conc. _ _ _
RECOMMEM3EO ACTION- Sitce NC Action Level, no imi
recommended but continued 2fli 'di monitoring
Legend
C = Catiocyenio
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
" Freshwater Discharge
25984rpa08.xls, rpa
2/18/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
1
Antimony
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Nov-2004 < 50.0 25.0 Std Dev.
2 Dec-2005 < 5 2.5 Mean
3 Mar-2006 6.0 6.0 C.V.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
12.1072
11.1667
1.0842
3
15.6300
25.0 ug/L
390.8 ug/L
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 1 - 1 /22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
3
4
Cadmium
Chromium
Date
1 Aug-2006
2 Nov-2006
3 Jan-2007
4 Feb-2007
5 Mar-2007
6 Apr-2007
7 May-2007
8 Jun-2007
9 Jul-2007
10 Aug-2007
11 Sep-2007
12 Oct-2007
13
14
15 Mar-2008
16 Jun-2008 <
17 Aug-2008 <
18 Nov-2008 <
19
20
21
22
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Data
BDL=112DL Results
1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
1 0.5 Mean 0.5000
1 0.5 C.V. 0.0000
1 0.5 n 18
1 0.5
1 0.5 Mutt Factor = 1.0000
1 0.5 Max. Value 0.5 ug/L
1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw 0 5 ug/L
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1 0.50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Date Data
Aug-2006 <
Nov-2006 <
Mar-2008 <
BDL=1/2DL
2 1.0
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
Results
Std Dev. 0.3536
Mean 2.4167
C.V. 0.1463
n 18
5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.2600
5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 3.2 ug/L
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
25984rpa08.xls, data
1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
6
Copper
Cyanide
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2006 31 31.0 Std Dev. 52.6574
2 57 57.0 Mean 74.8915
3 150 150.0 C.V. 0.7031
4 190 190.0 n 71
5 130 130.0
6 96 96.0 Mult Factor = 1.6600
7 84 84.0 Max Value 370.0 ug/L
8 73 73.0 Max. Pred Cw 614.2 ug/L
9 120 120.0
10 61 61.0
11 110 110.0
12 74 74.0
13 13 13.0
14 85 85.0
15 47 47.0
16 51 51.0
17 47 47.0
18 42 42.0
19 39 39.0
20 56 56.0
21 39 39.0
22 39 39.0
23 38 38.0
24 57 57.0
25 Jan-2007 64 64.0
26 100 100.0
27 230 230.0
28 370 370.0
29 31 31.0
30 35 35.0
31 76 76.0
32 42 42.0
33 81 81.0
34 100 100.0
35 99 99.0
36 100 100.0
37 120 120.0
38 70 70.0
39 95 95.0
40 - 74 74.0
41 70 70.0
42 53 53.0
43 52 52.0
44 52 52.0
45 62 62.0
46 66 66.0
47 84 84.0
48 93 93.0
49 Jan-2008 74 74.0
50 71 71.0
51 46 46.0
52 62 62.0
53 82 81.7
54 91 90.7
55 100 100.0
56 98 97.5
57 98 97.5
58 116 116.0
59 89 89.2
60 84 84.2
61 62 61.8
62 65 64.5
63 58 57.9
64 37 36.5
65 19 18.7
66 16 15.9
67 16 16.2
68 17 17.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 Mar-2006
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41 Sep-2006
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62 Jan-2007
63
64
65
66
67
68
Date Data
Jan-2006
BDL=1/2DL Results
15. 15.0 Std Dev. 7.7150
14. 14.0 Mean 9.5548
5. 5 0 C.V. 0.8074
17. 17.0 n 155
13. 13.0
6. 5.0 Mult Factor = 1.3600
21. 21.0 Max. Value 63.0 ug/L
19. 19.0 Max. Pred Cw 85.7 ug/L
63. 63.000
14. 14.000
13. 13.000
13. 13.000
10. 10.000
12. 12.0
5. 5.0
15. 15.0
5 5.0
11. 11.0
7. 5.0
5 5.0
5 5.0
8. 5.0
5. 5.0
5 5.0
7. 5.0
12. 12.0
,,. 11 0
7. 5.0
5 5.0
1t. 11.0
8. 5.0
12. 12.0
8. 5.0
6. 5.0
5 5.0
5. 5.0
6. 5.0
39. 39.0
6. 5.0
5 5.0
5 5.0
5 5.0
5. 5.0
6. 5 0
5 5.0
5 5.0
6. 5.0
1t. 11.0
8. 5.0
5 5.0
8. 5.0
5 5.0
5. 5.0
5 5.0
5 5.0
5 5.0
4. 5.0
5. 5.0
7. 5.0
8. 5.0
7. 5.0
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 7 - 1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
13 13.4
55 55.1
5 2.5
69 6. 5.0
70 5. 5.0
71 7. 5.0
72 5. 5.0
73 11. 11.0
74 5 5.0
75 9. 5.0
76
77 5 5.0
78 9. 5.0
79 5 5.0
B0 13. 13.0
81 13. 13.0
82 14. 14.0
83 5 5.0
84
85 14. 14.0
86 21. 21.0
B7 7. 5.0
88 17. 17.0
89 5 5.0
90 8. 5.0
91
92 13. 13.0
93 17. 17.0
94 15. 15.0
95 <_ 5. 5.0
96 9. 5.0
97 < 5. 5.0
98 < 5. 5.0
99 11. 11.0
100
101 25. 25.0
102 34. 34.0
103 12. 12.0
104 16. 16.0
105 23. 23.0
106 14. 14.0
107 9. 5.0
108 11. 11.0
109 19. 19.0
110 16. 16.0
111 16. 16.0
112 9. 5.0
113
114
115 15. 15.0
116 10. 10.0
117 16. 16.0
118 8. 5.0
119 4. 5.0
120 Jan-2008 15. 15.0
121 12. 12.0
122 12. 12.0
123 12. 12.0
124 13. 13.0
125 4. 5.0
126 8. 5.0
127 33. 33.0
128 26. 26.0
129 29. 29.0
130 < 5. 5.0
131 10. 10.0
132 18. 18.0
133 4. 5.0
134 11. 11.0
135 13. 13.0
136 6. 5.0
137 6. 5.0
138 7. 5.0
139 8. 5.0
140 12. 12.0
141 16. 16.0
25984rpa0B.xls, data
- 8 - 1 /22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
142 11. 11.0
143 10. 10.0
144 c 2. 5.0
145 9. 5.0
146 13. 13.0
147 9. 5.0
148 8. 5.0
149 8. 5.0
150 8. 5.0
151 13. 13.0
152 9. 5.0
153 8. 5.0
154 7. 5.0
155 3 5.0
156 3 5.0
157 6 5.0
158 < 2 5.0
159 6 5.0
160 < 2 5.0
161 < 2 5.0
162 < 2 5.0
163 < 2 5.0
164 3 5.0
165 Sep-2008 7 5.0
166 4 5.0
167 10 10.0
168 5 5.0
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 9 - 1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
8
9
Lead
Mercury
Date
1 Mar-2008
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 Aug-2008
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43 < 5. 2.5
44 < 5. 2.5
45 < 5. 2.5
46 < 5. 2.5
47 < 5. 2.5
48 < 5. 2.5
49
50 < 5. 2.5
51 < 5. 2.5
52 < 5. 2.5
53 < 5. 2.5
54 < 5. 2.5
55 < 5. 2.5
56 < 5. 2.5
57 < 5. 2.5
58 < 5. 2.5
59 < 5. 2.5
60 ' < 5. 2.5
61 < 5. 2.5
62 < 5. 2.5
63 < 5. 2.5
64
65 < 5. 2.5
66 < 5 2.5
67 < 5. 2.5
68 < 5. 2.5
Data
<
BDL=1/2DL Results
5. 2.5 Std Dev. 0.2015
5. 2.5 Mean 2.5162
5. 25 CV 0.0801
5. 25 n 154
5. 2.5
5. 2.5 Mult Factor = N/A
5. 2.5 Max Value 5.0 ug/L
5. 2.5 Max. Pred Cw N/A ug/L
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2 5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Apr-2008 9.16 9.2 Std Dev. 2.4831
2 11.4 11.4 Mean 5.5764
3 11.9 11.9 C.V. 0 4453
4 8.79 8.8 n 70
5 6.2 6.2
6 7.18 7.2 Mult Factor = 1.41
7 5.59 5.6 Max. Value 16.7 ng/L
8 6.57 6.6 Max. Pred Cw 23.5 ng/L
9 602 6.0
10 9.02 9.0
11 Jan-2006 5.0 5.0
12 5.0 5.0
13 4.0 4.0
14 4.0 4.0
15 6.0 6.0
16 8.0 8.0
17 1.0 1.0
18 5.0 5.0
19 5.0 5.0
20 3.0 3.0
21 5.0 5.0
22 4.0 4.0
23 9.0 9.0
24 4.0 4.0
25 5.0 5.0
26 7.0 7.0
27 5.0 5.0
28 4.0 4.0
29 6.0 6.0
30 6.0 6.0
31 10.0 10.0
32 4.0 4.0
33 4.0 4.0
34 3.0 3.0
35 Jan-2007 2.0 2.0
36 4.0 4.0
37 4.0 4.0
38 3.0 3.0
39 5.0 5.0
40 3.0 3.0
41 4.0 4.0
42 4.0 4.0
43 4.0 4.0
44 7.0 7.0
45 8.0 8.0
46 7.0 7.0
47 6.0 6.0
48 5.0 5.0
49 .. 6.0 6.0
50 4.0 4.0
51 4.0 4.0
52 5.0 5.0
53 2.0 2.0
54 4.0 4.0
55 3.0 3.0
56 4.0 4.0
57 6.0 6.0
58 5.0 5.0
59 Jan-2008 5.0 5.0
60 4.0 4.0
61 4.0 4.0
62 5.0 5.0
63 5.0 5.0
64 3/52008 7.0 7.0
65 7.5 7.5
66 Nov-2008 16.7 16.7
67 4.9 4.9
68 7.2 7.2
25984rpa08 xls, data
- 10 - 1122/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
69 < 5. 2.5
70 <' 5. 2.5
71 <€ 5. 2.5
72 i <:; 5. 2.5
73 `. �c 5. 2.5
74 . 5. 2.5
75 <4 5. 2.5
76 < 5. 2.5
77
78
79 <'
80
81 r;
82
83
B4 c?
85
86 <<;
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98 Mar-2007
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116 ° 5. 2.5
117 5. 2.5
118 = 5. 2.5
119 5. 2.5
120 5. 2.5
121 5. 2.5
122 i . 5. 2.5
123 5. 2.5
124 5. 2.5
125
126 5. 2.5
127 5. 2.5
128 5. 2.5
129 5. 2.5
130 5. 2.5
131 ' G, 5. 2.5
132 5. 2.5
133 5. 2.5
4.6
134 E° 5. 2.5
135 k 5. 2.5
136 ` .". 5. 2.5
137 ;;;e 5. 2.5
138
139
140 5. 2.5
141 ' C 5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
;
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 5.0
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
qt4 5. 2.5
4 5. 2.5
!15. 2.5
5. 2.5
014 5. 2.5
t,<' 5. 2.5
... 1 5. 2.5
<` 5. 2.5
E 5. 2.5
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
5.1 5.1
6.1 6.1
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 11 - 1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
5. 2.5
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154 r,y
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 12 - 1 /22J2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
10
Molybdenum
11
Nickel
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Apr-2006 < 5 2.5 Sid Dev. 2.21 1 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 < 5 2.5 Mean 4.46 2 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.50 3 Jan-2007 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 May-2006 6 6.0 n 14 4 < 5 2.5 n 18
5 5 5.0 5 < 5 2.5
6 5 5.0 Mult Factor = 2.2600 6 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.0000
7 6 6.0 Max. Value 8.0 ug/L 7 - < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 7 7.0 Max. Pred Cw 18.1 ug/L 8 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L
9 8.0 8.0 9 < 5 2.5
10 8.0 8.0 10 < 5 2.5
11 < 5 2.5 11 < 5 2.5
12 412 5 2.5 12 < 5 2.5
13 5 2.5 13 < 5 2.5
14 cr 5 2.5 14 < 5 2.5
15 15 Mar-2008 < 5 2.5
i!
16 16 Jun-2008 •< 5 2.5
17 17 • <. 5 2.5
18 18 < 5 2.5
19 19
20 20
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 ; 27
28 ?,` 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 ' 38
39 39
40 6+ 40
41 <'e 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
61 61
62 62
63 63
64 64
65 65
66 66
67 67
68 68
25984rpa08.xls, data
-13 - 1 /22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
12
13
Phenols
Selenium
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 30. 30.0
10 K7 10 5.0
11 10 5.0
12
13 ; 13. 13.0
14 r[ 10 5.0
15 27. 27.0
16 C 10 5.0
17 10. 10.0
18 <- 10 5.0
19
20 <` 10 5.0
21 ;�1� 10 5.0
22 14. 14.0
23 12. 12.0
24 11. 11.0
25 :. 22. 22.0
26
27 14. 14.0
28 10 5.0
29
30
31 c r
32 �38� 38.0
33 0 5.0
34 10 5.0
35 <; 10 5.0
36 10 5.0
37 "'" 10. 10.0
38 21. 21.0
39
40
41
42
43
44 < 10 5.0
45 < 10 5.0
46 • o_ 10 5.0
r.
47 zc
48 10 5.0
49 �? 20 20.0
50 KC1 10 5.0
51
52 ' 10 5.0
53 10 5.0
54 10 5.0
55 11.0
56 Nov-2007 •,M ( 227.0
57 11. 11.0
58
59
60 `r 10. 10.0
61 12. 12.0
62 12. 12.0
63 10 5.0
64 15. 15.0
65 10 5.0
66 10 5.0
67 10 5.0
68 fi 10 5.0
Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
17. 17.0 Std Dev.
19. 19.0 Mean
10 5.0 C.V.
22. 22.0 n
12. 12.0
10 5.0 Mult Factor =
10. 10.0 Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
10 5.0
10 5.0
10. 10.0
26.7795
12.7887
2.0940
71
2.8100
227.0 ug/L
637.9 ug/L
Date Data
1 May-2007 <
2 Feb-2007 <
3 Jan-2007 <
4 Jun-2007 <
5 Jul-2007 <
6 Aug-2007 <
7 Sep-2007
8 Oct-2007 <
9 Nov-2007 <
10 Dec-2007
11 Mar-2008
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
BDL=1/2DL Results
10 5.0 Std Dev.
10 5.0 Mean
10 5.0 C.V.
10 5.0 n
10 5.0
10 5.0 Mult Factor =
10 5.0 Max. Value
10 5.0 Max. Pred Cw
10 5.0
11 11.0
< 10 5.0
• 10 5.0
< 10 5.0
< 10 5.0
1.6036
5.4286
0.2954
14
1.6500
11.0 ug/L
18.2 ug/L
25984rpa08.xls, data
-16 - 1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
69 < 10 5.0
70 < 10 5.0
71 c 10 5.0
72 14. 14.0
73 < 10 5.0
74 <S 10 5.0
75 < 10 5.0
76 , <' 10 5.0
77 11. 11.0
78 Nov-2008 < 10 5.0
79 20 20.0
B0 " " 28 28.0
81 <' 10 5.0
82 <• 10 5.0
83 <- 10 5.0
84 • < 10 5.0
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
B0
B1
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
25984rpa08.xls, data
- 17 - 1 /22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
14
Silver
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Data
L
6
BDL=1/2DL Results
2 1.0 Std Dev. 0.6110
2 1.0 Mean 2.1912
5 2.5 C.V. 0.2789
5 2.5 n 68
2 1.0
2 1.0 Mult Factor = 1.2500
2 1.0 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw 3.1 ug/L
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
2 1.0
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
15
Zinc
Date
1
2
3 Jan-2007
4 Feb-2007
5 Mar-2007
6 Apr-2007
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Dec-2007
14 Nov-2007
15 Mar-2008
16
17 Aug-2008
18
19
20
21
22
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
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Data
F'
Y
Ij++ui
BDL=1/2DL Results
55 55.0 Std Dev. 27.9026
49 49.0 Mean 64.7611
52 52.0 C.V. 0.4309
92 92.0 n 18
65 65.0
71 71.0 Mult Factor = 1.9200
65 65.0 Max. Value 147.0 ug/L
56 56.0 Max. Pred Cw 282.2 ug/L
71 71.0
53 53.0
147 147.0
57 57.0
10 5.0
51 51.0
61.3 61.3
56.9 56.9
61.7 61.7
96.8 96.8
25984rpa08.xls, data
-19 - 1/22/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
5 2.5
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
25984rpa08.xls. data
- 20 - 1 /22'2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Forest City WWTP
NC0025984
Time Period 1/2005-2008
Ow (MGD) 4.95
70 10S (cfs) 34.8
70 10W (cfs) 70.6
3002 (cfs) 112
Avg. Stream Flow, OA (cfs) 247
Rec'ving Stream Second Broad River
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) ® 7010S 18.065
@ 7Q10W 9.8023
® 3002 6.4112
0 QA 3.0127
Stream Class WS-IV
Outfall 001
Ow = 4.95 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
11)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NCWOS/ 4FAVi
Chronic Acute
n x Der Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
2,4,6 trichlorophenol
C
1.0
ug/L
4 0 29.5
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute: N.,A
_
Chronic: 33
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Only 4 data points and all below detection. No reasonable
potential shown. No monitoring required. Continue in PPA
Chlorinated Phenolics
A
1 N
ug/L
12 0
225.0
Acute: NIA
Chronic: 16
Although RP shown, all data points are below detection w/
varyingg levels. No limit or monitoring required. Continue to
sample in the annual PPA
Selenium
NC
5 0 .
ugJL
0 0
N/A
Acute: 56
---28 -------------------------------•--
Chronic:
Silver
NC
0 06 AL 1 23
un 1.
0 0
N/A
Acute: 1
--- —-----------
Chronic:0
----------------------
Zinc
NC
SC. AL i-37
ug/L
0 0
NJA
Acute: 67
Chronic:---277-----------------------
— -----•----
•Legend.
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
" Freshwater Discharge
25984phenolsrpa2008.xls, rpa
1/27/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
2
2,4,6 trichlorophenol
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Nov-2004 < 10 5.0 Std Dev. 2.5000
2 Dec-2005 < 10 5.0 Mean 6.2500
3 Mar-2006 < 10 5.0 C.V. 0.4000
4 Jun-2007 < 20 10.0 n 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Mult Factor = 2.9500
Max. Value 10.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw 29.5 ug/L
25984phenolsrpa2008.x!s, data
- 1 - 1/27/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
12
Chlorinated Phenolics
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
1 Nov-2004 < 10 5.0 Std Dev. 14.1234
2 < 10 5.0 Mean 14.6667
3 Dec-2005 < 10 5.0 C.V. 0.9630
4 Nov-2004 < 51 25.5 n 12
5 < 10 5.0
6 Dec-2005 < • 51 25.5 Mult Factor = 4.5000
7 Mar-2006 < 10 5.0 Max. Value 50.0 ug/L
8 < 10 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 225.0 ug/L
9 < 50 25.0
10 Jun-2007 < 20 10.0
11 < 20 10.0
12 < 100 50.0
13
14
15
16
17
25984phenolsrpa2008.xls, data
- 2 - 1/27/2009

Town of Forest (ity
PO Box 728
Forest City, MC 28o43
February 18, 2009
To: Keith Haynes
DENR/DWQ
Water Quality Section
2090 US Highway 70
Swannanoa NC 28778
From: Sonny Penson
ORC/Pretreatment Coordinator
Town of Forest City
PO Box 728
Forest City, NC 28043
RECEIVED
MAR - 5
DENR , WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Subject: Mandatory Public Notification of violations for
Town of Forest City NPDES # 0025984
For calendar year January 1, 2008 — December 31, 2008
In accordance with federal and state, laws, rules and regulations; the Town of Forest City is hereby providing the
following summarization of performance of the Town's wastewater treatment plant.
• January 15, 2008 Toxicity fail
• January 18, 2008 Toxicity fail
• February 21, 2008 Cyanide daily max violation 33ug/L (Limit 22ug/L)
• February 27, 2008 Cyanide daily max violation 26ug/L (Limit 22ug/L)
• March 5, 2008 Cyanide daily max violation 29ug/L (Limit 22ug/L)
• December 2008 Ammonia monthly average violation 11.49 mg/L (Monthly avg limit 10 mg/L)
Toxicity Identification Evaluation study was entered into to Target toxicity issues from January 2008. Cyanide issues
were eliminated after laboratory comparison study. Also tightened permitted cyanide limit as much as possible on
Hanes Brands INC. Believed Hanes Brands INC to be largest contributor to toxicity, cyanide and selenium (sludge)
issues incurred by the Town of Forest City. Hanes Plant announced its closing in September 2008. After closure of
Hanes Brands ammonia became an issue as loss of warm influent flow from the industry impacted plant performance.
Steps have been taken to address this issue by not over aerating, and pH/alkalinity adjustment as needed. Selenium
was not reported as violation because no out of spec sample was released for land application. All dried sludge that
did not meet permit requirements was sent to Palmetto Landfill for disposal. As of November 21, 2008 sludge has
returned to full compliance. The silo storage system was emptied of all sludge and disposed of at the Palmetto facility
before permitting land application
Please address any questions, comments, or concerns to the Town's wastewater treatment plant using the information
provided below.
Respectfully submitted,
,~49)"\---
Sonny Penson
ORC/Pretreatment Coordinator
Town of Forest City, Wastewater Treatment Plant
PO Box 728
Forest City, NC 28043
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Email address: wwtp(Mtownotforestcity.com
www.townofforestcity.com

NPDES/Aquifer Protection Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART:
Check all that apply
Date of Request
8/15/2008
municipal renewal
Requestor
Jackie Nowell
new industries
Facility Name
Forest City WWTP
WWTP expansion
Permit Number
NC0025984
Speculative limits
Region
Asheville
stream reclass.
Basin
Broad
stream relocation
7Q10 change
other
other
PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER you get this form
back from PERCS:
Notify PERCS if LTMP/STMP data we said shoulc
be on DMRs is not really there, so we can get it for
you (or NOV POTW).
- Notify PERCS if you want us to keep a specific
POC in LTMP/STMP so you will have data for next
permit renewal.
- Email PERCS draft permit, fact sheet, RPA.
- Send PERCS paper copy of permit (w/o NPDES
boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet. Email RP.
if changes.
check applicable PERCS staff:
CTB, CHO, LUM, ROA - Dana Folley (76311)
HIW, LTN, NEU, YAD - Monit Hassan (76314)
BRD, FRB, TAR, CPF - Sarah Morrison (76310)
Other Comments to PERCS:
PERCS PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status o Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
3) facility has Sills and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV" if program still under development)
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
Flow, MGD
Industrial
Uncontrollable
Permitted
Actual
Time period for Actual
3.1
2.7166
2002-2003
n/a
1.017
2002-2003
STMP time frame:
Most recent:
Next Cycle:
POC in
LTMP/
STMP
Parameter of
Concern (POC)
Check List
POC due to
NPDES/ Non-
Disch Permit
Limit
Required
by EPA*
Required by
503 Sludge"
POC due
to SIU'"
POTW POC
(Explain
below)""'
STMP
Effluent
Freq
LIMP
Effluent
Freq
-4
BOD
X
X
4
TSS
X
X
4
0
-1
NH3
X
X
4
Q
Arsenic
x
4
Q
4
Cadmium
4
x
X
4
Q
'J
Chromium
J
X
4
Q
'
Copper
'1
x
X
4
Q
41
Cyanide
X
X
4
Q
'1
Lead
X
-J
x
X
4
0
41
Mercury
x
4
Q
Molybdenum
x
X
4
Q
'
Nickel
41
x
X
4
Q
J
Silver
X
4
Q
4
Selenium
x
4
0
4
Zinc
J
x
X
4
Q
Total Nitrogen
4
Q
4
Phosphorus
4
Q
I1
phenols
X
4
Q
oil & grease
X
4
0
4
Q
Q = Quarterly
M = Monthly
all data on Dry
YES
NO (attach data)
If all data is not on DMRs
let me know and I will cont
the City to get data.
data in spreadsh
YES (email to writer)
NO
*Always in the LTMP/STMP " Only in LTMP/STMP if sludge land app or composte dif POCs for incinerators)
"' Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW "" Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
Comments to Permit Writer (ex., explanation of any POCs; info you have on IU related investigations into NPDES problems):
Frequency increases to once per month the year before the HWA due. Next HWA due 9/2008.
P I RF_ForesiCity_2008.xls
Revised: July 24, 2007

Second Broad River, SR 1973, Rutherford County
This site near QIj Side was just upstream of th.
Cone Mills-Cliffside WWTP discharge. The.cIrainagg
area is approximately 220 square miles. The
conductivity (226 µmhos/cm) was yea_ high at this
site and the water was red in color. The substrate
was mostly rubble (55%) with the remainder
comprised of gravel (20%), sand (10%), boulder
(10%) and silt (5%). Infrequent pools, some
erosional areas on the banks, and a narrow riparian
zone on one bank lessened the final habitat score
(72).
This site has been sampled eight times since 1983.
Over that time, water quality has improved, but not
above a Good -Fair rating. This location was rated
Poor in 1983, Fair in 1985 and 1989, and Good -Fair in 1987, 1991, 1995, 2000, and 2005. Similar to
many streams in the Broad Basin, the total taxa number was greater in 2000 (83) than in 2005 (62), but
this was mostly due to a greater number of midges in 2000 (26 versus 11). A notable difference in the
2000 and 2005 sample was the decrease in Trichoptera taxa in 2005. The 2000 sample contained 16
caddisfly taxa, while the 2005 sample contained 11. Several of these taxa (Nectopsyche pavida, and
Oecetis persimilis) are considered summer taxa, so seasonal differences may partially account for the
decrease. Overall, the 2005 sample (EPT S=26, BI= 5.6) was similar to the 2000 (EPT S=29, B1= 5.8).
This site has had stable Good -Fair water quality since 1987.
Special Studies
Catheys Creek and Hollands Creek WRP/EEP Study, Rutherford County
Catheys Creek and Hollands Creek were selected as a WRP/EEP study area based on Fair
macroinvertebrate ratings assigned to some sections of these streams, especially below the Spindale
wastewater treatment plant. The Town of Spindale originally discharged to Hollands Creek and was
found to have problems with chronic toxicity and mercury concentrations. The wastewater plant relocated
the discharge further downstream to Catheys Creek in 1999 in order to achieve greater dilution. The
June 2003 study included three sites on Catheys Creek, including the basinwide site at SR 1549, three
sites on Hollands Creek, and four other sites on tributaries and reference sites. All six sites on Catheys
Creek and Hollands Creek rated Good -Fair. Taxa collected in Catheys and Hollands Creek compared
with habitat assessments suggested both habitat and water quality problems exist in these streams
(Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum B-030815).
The fish communities in Catheys Creek at US 221 and at SR 1549 and in Hollands Creek at SR 1547 and
SR 1548 were sampled on March 23, 2004 at the request of staff from the Ecosystems Enhancement
Program. The two upstream sites on each creek, at US 221 and at SR 1547, had better instream and
riparian habitats and rated higher (Good and Good -Fair, respectively) than the lower sites on each creek
which both rated Fair. The habitat score (25) for Hollands Creek at SR 1548 was one of the lowest
scores ever recorded for the approximately 1,100 fish community samples evaluated across the state.
Sedimentation from the Towns of Rutherfordton and Spindale contributed to the poor instream habitats at
the downstream sites and restoration efforts were recommended to improve the habitat qualities at both
of these sites (Biological Assessment Unit Memorandum F-20040430).
Little Whiteoak Creek at SR 1324, Polk County
A benthic sample was requested by the Asheville Regional Office (ARO) due to development concerns in
the Little Whiteoak Creek watershed, which is located southeast of Lake Adger. Little Whiteoak Creek
rated Good -Fair (19 EPT taxa). For the most part, the taxa collected were moderately tolerant to tolerant
(EPT BI = 5.2); however, several fairly intolerant taxa (Eccoptura xanthenes, Pteronarcys, and
Brachycentrus nigrosoma) were collected in the sample.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Broad River Basin - April 2006
30

sf6,6
North Carolina 2006 303(d) List
Broad River Basin
Subbasin 03-08-02
Assessment
Waterbody and Description Unit (AU)
Impaired Year
Class Subbasin
Use Listed Category and Reason for Listing
Potential Source(s)
Miles or Acres
Broad River Basin Subbasin 03-08-02
Catheys Creek 9.41-13-(6)a C 03-08-02
6
1.9 FW Miles
From 0.4 miles downstream of Rutherford County SR 1538 to confluence with
Hollands Creek
Catheys Creek
9-41-13-(6)b C 03-08-02
0 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity Municipal Pretreatment (indirect
dischargers)
Agriculture
6
1.9 FW Miles
From confluence with Hollands Creek to S. Broad R.
Hollands Creek
AL 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Minor Municipal Point Source
9-41-13-7-(3) C 03-08-02 6 2.8 FW Miles
From Duke Power Co. old Auxiliary Raw Water Supply Intake to Catheys Creek
AL 1998 6 Impaired biological integrity Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Minor Municipal Point Source
Second Broad River 9-41-(24.7) C 03-08-02 5 2.2 FW Miles
From Cone Mills Water Supply Intake to Broad River
AL 2004 5 Standard violation: Turbidity
Impaired Uses
AL- Aquatic Life
Shellfish Harvesting
0- Overall
REC- Recreation
Fish Consumption
Broad Summary Information
Category Miles and Acres Category Count of AUs
2 813.0 FW Acres 2 55
2 491.2 FW Miles 3 358
3 959.9 FW Miles 5 1
5 2.2 FW Miles 6 3
6 6.6 FW Mites
FW- Freshwater
S- Salt water
North Carolina 303(d) List- 2006 Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Broad Basin 03-08-02 Page 1 of 125

Forest City WWTP @ 4.95 MGD
Residual Chlorine
7010 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (l
IWC (%i
Allowable Concentration (ugi
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 4.5 :1
34.8
4.95
7.6725
17.0
0
18.06
94.11
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (m
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (m
34.8
4.95
7.6725
1.0
0.22
18.06
4.54
70.6
4.95
7.6725
1.8
0.22
9.80
16.34
1/2712009

Forest City WWTP Color Data
Color (ADMI) Color (ADMI)
Influent Effluent
Date Apparent TRUE Apparent TRUE
Aug-06 1951 1904 1616 1104
Dec-06 1079 1025 757 703
average 1515 1465 1187 904
Jan-07
360 286
927 1035 inf/eff values may have been switched
Feb-07 1636 1637 904 919
Mar-07 1809 1683 769 786
Apr-07 1739 915 1739 915 inf/eff values the same
May-07 330 250 4684 4546 huge increase from inf to eff
Jun-07 2701 2584 791 793
Jul-07 1035 1090 1040 1041 inf/eff values nearly the same
Aug-07 1615 1588 1023 1064
Sep-07 2804 2864 1362 1442
Oct-07 3760 3760 1760 1720
Nov-07 1740 1690 895 895
average 1775 1668 1445 1378
Mar-08 889 881
1330 1310
Jun-08 1690 1570 696 678
Aug-08 417 435 348 376
r Nov-08 59_ 66 47 46
average 764 738 605 603
** LTMP requires sampling for color
increase from inf to eff
1/22/2009

STAFF REPORT
TO: Susan Wilson
FROM: Roy Davis
DATE: May 30, 2008
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit Renewal
Town of Forest City
Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES Permit Number NC0025984
Rutherford County
The Town of Forest City is served by an excellent WWTP having a nominal
capacity of 4.95 MGD and consisting of the following units:
• Influent step screen
• Bar screen
• Aerated, traveling bridge grit chamber
• Grease chamber
• Five aeration basins with floating aerators
• Two circular secondary clarifiers
• Gas chlorination
• Sulfur dioxide dechlorination
• Two diffused air aerobic digestors
• Belt press
• Sludge dryer and storage bin
• Step reaeration
The number of units gives the Town a great deal of flexibility in treating
wastewater. I recommend that the NPDES permit be reissued.
Xc: Keith Haynes
G:IWPDATA\DEMWQ\Rutherford183275 DRG Harris125984 Permit Renewal Staff Report.08.doc

/•/
3
77
7-
v
7y
/6P
/i7 3ZY
If ” /
d 5"Y(4.
/6S— ycy
/9t, z/
/5"3 ZY7
3, q z 8 l
zy7 Z5.8
Zoo Zlt
37 /72
/ 1/ L-/

FA/Asfeve. y z z/ t5
l 2 -44 3 r 3 d // 3 i}
- Aff-, 4<40,-
(� te - ..»�- ", %�''*-.i / 7� /lG/fc f44
riff.1
ofird 11*"'" G4-'-
sia lg73 a CJilit, 6.4.1c rE,C w✓ '~'
24/41-1
G,
0/zip e
(3‘•-c-a (4-,1
GiA45
s
Cdc-1774 *2441 /.44-74:-.1"6- Ae- A /eld j,
6 ifeictis,
r Iv+

1_7064312 OT JO2E5f City
Box 728
C7oeEst eiiy, SUort/ eazolina 28043
February 1, 2008
Mrs. Frances Candelaria
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
RE:
Dear Mrs. Candelaria:
FEB — 4 2008 /
a
NPDES Permit No. NC0025984
Forest City Water Reclamation Facility
Town of Forest City
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Forest City is requesting the renewal of NPDES Permit No. NC0025984 for the Forest
City WWTP. In support of this request, please fmd enclosed one (1) original and two (2)
copies of NPDES Form 2A and pertinent enclosures. Missing from this package is Form 2A
Part E (Toxicity Testing: Biomonitoring Data). This supporting documentation will be
forwarded to your office as soon as the information is compiled.
We have authorized McGill Associates, P.A. of Asheville, North Carolina to prepare
the renewal package included in this submittal but have taken the opportunity to review and
certify the materials before submitting them.
Thank you for consideration of our request. Please call if you have any questions or
need additional information.
Sincer
TOW ' OF OREST CITY
CH 'i1 S R. SUMMEY, II
City Manager
Enclosures
cc: Keith Webb, P.E. (w/encl.)

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Forest City WWTP, NC0025984
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have. or
© Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical
types of industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical Sills. 3
b. Number of CIUs. 2
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit
additional pages as necessary,
Name. Haynes Brand Incorporated
Mailing Address: 1331 West Main Street
Forest City, North Carolina 28043
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Textile dye process waste water, wash down water, cooling water (HVAC), and domestic
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the
SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): T-Shirts, Sport Shirts
Raw material(s): Cotton, Polyester fabric dyes and chemicals
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
2 572,000 gpd (X continuous or intermittent)
into the collection system in gallons
discharged into the collection
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily
system in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is
Est. 15 000 gpd ( continuous
volume of non -process wastewater flow
continuous or intermittent.
or X intermittent)
to the following:
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject
a. Local limits X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards U Yes © No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit
additional pages as necessary
Name. Eaton Corporation
Mailing Address: '240 Daniel Road
Forest City. North Carolina 28043
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Process Waste water from automotive, air conditioning, and industrial hoses, cooling water, boiler
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the
Sills discharge
Principal product(s): Low pressure air and hydraulic. Liquid propane gas and automotive truck and bus air conditioning hoses, and automotive
power steering hoses
Raw material(s): Rubber, yarn wire, inks, dyes, lubricants, release reagents
F.6. Flow Rate.
c. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
Avg. 17,450 gpd (X continuous or
intermittent)
d. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection
system in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
11,550
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits CI Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes ❑X No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works. copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit
additional pages as necessary
Name: Simpus Foods International
Mailing Address: 212 Nuwav Packing Road
Forest City North Carolina 28043
F.4. Industrial Processes, Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Pork slaughter, processed foods
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the
SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): Pork sausage, fresh ham, chili, country ham, roast beef, cookies
Raw material(s): Fat, live hogs, seasonings (salt. sugar, nitrates, nitrite, phosphates, liquid smoke, butter, flour. pepper)
F.6. Flow Rate.
e. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
100,000
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
f. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection
system in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
93.000
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ❑X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes 0 No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit
additional pages as necessary
Name: AGI Schutz
Mailing Address 376 Pine Street Ext.
Forest City. North Carolina 28043
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Manufacture point-ot-purchase displays from woo. metal, and vacuum formed plastic
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the
SIU's discharge
Principal product(s): Point of purchase displays
Raw material(s): Wood, particle board, masonite, laminate, metal, plastic. solvent paint and powder paint
F.6. Flow Rate.
g. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
30,000
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
h. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection
system in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
Est. 21 700
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits
b. Categorical pretreatment standards
❑X Yes
EI Yes
❑ No
❑ No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
40 CFR 433 and 463
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit
additional pages as necessary
Name: Parker Hannifin
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 429 Pine Street
Forest City, North Carolina 28043
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Manufacture hydraulic valves for industrial. mobile, government, and commercial applications
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the
SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s):
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
Hydraulic valves
Gray cast iron, dura cast, dura bors, steel, aluminum, oils, coolants
Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
11,000
gpd (X continuous or
intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection
system in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
Est. 700
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X❑ Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards X❑ Yes ❑ No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards. which category and subcategory?
40 CFR 433.15
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

SLUDGE MANAGEMENT PLAN
TOWN OF FOREST CITY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NPDES Permit # NC0025984
GENERAL
The Town of Forest City is located in Rutherford County, North Carolina, and currently
owns and operates three (3) wastewater treatment plants. The Town's primary treatment
plant is the Forest City WWTP (NPDES Permit No. NC0025984), which has a capacity
of 4.95 million gallons per day (MGD). This plant began operation in 1960, and was
originally designed with a capacity of 4.25 MGD. The capacity of the plant was
upgraded to 4.95 MGD in 1994. The last significant upgrade to the Forest City WWTP
was in 1998 when a sludge drying unit was added to the treatment process.
The Town also owns and operates the Riverstone Industrial Park WWTP (NPDES Permit
No. NC0087084), which serves the Riverstone Industrial Park and has a design capacity
of 50,000 gallons per day (GPD). This plant is currently inoperative due to the low flows
being generated by the industrial park. These small flows are held at the Riverstone Plant
and periodically transported by truck to the Town's primary plant.
The third plant owned and operated by the Town is the Harris WWTP (NPDES Permit
No. NC0083275). This plant was recently purchased by the Town and served the DRG
Harris facility which is no longer in operation. This WWTP is inoperative and treats no
wastewater.
SLUDGE GENERATION AND TREATMENT
Sludge at the Forest City WWTP is produced daily in the activated sludge processes, and
is collected from the secondary clarifiers and treated in two (2) aerobic digesters with a
total volume of 670,688 gallons. The two digesters provide a retention time of 13.5 days.
From the aerobic digesters, sludge is pumped at a rate of 375 GPM to a 2.0 meter belt
filter press where it is dewatered to approximately 14% solids. The dewatered sludge is
then transported to a dryer, which pasteurizes the sludge and dries it to approximately
95% solids. The current sludge drying process is run, on average, (3) three consecutive
days over a (2) two week period.
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
After the sludge has been pasteurized and dried to 95% solids
and classified as a Class "A" product. The final product i
local farmers and residents at no charge for land application
WWTP has produced approximately 800 tons of Class "A"
red on -site in a silo,
y made available to
'cally, the Forest City
ct per year.
_2 g

LOCATION MAP
TOWN OF FOREST CITY
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT NC ;0025984_
FOREST CITY, RUTHEPEORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROL NA
1
1
1
1
\trt
r�o
ezr
U.S. 74 BYPASS
\cc
LOCATION
OUTFALL - 001
/ SEWAGE
TREATMENT
PLANT
CARo mpi
NEBBS STREAM ...
ROAD
McGill
A S S O C I A T E S
ENGINEERING • PLANNING • FINANCE
55 BROAD STREET • ASHEVILLE, NC • PR. [phone]

I 'crest Gity & Eden Co
2,005
Subject: Forest City & Eden Color Discharges
From: "Dennis Asbury" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:52:44 -0400
To: "Tom Belnick" <[e-mail]>
Tom,
edg4 A/CGV 2 sa7i
eff'!JfCIV7 N000ZS9'8'`7
Hale i 63'miJ G/i' {✓ and R'4'wwf_
/1/6 dSCyij /ol S fk i hi/ # / o4#
oirCp at/Pi a/01/l c i a J ,' CO/t.' !J
..171 / 4 C?4 Gam, %gc/Mick
I made a trip to Forest City a couple of months ago. Here's a photo of their effluent. We also took a
sample of the effluent and tested it for color using the ADMI method. The sample tested at 1,488 ADMI
color units.
Charles Van Zandt and I visited Forest City on March 22, 2005. The WWTP Superintendent, Mike Wall,
reluctantly provided us with a sample of the plant's effluent. Forrest City does not test for color. Our
analysis of their effluent grab sample indicated an ADMI color level of 1,488 units. Forest City makes up
18% of the Second Broad River. Eden's Mebane Bridge WWTP makes up about 6% of the 7Q10 of the
Dan River. The entire river downstream of the Forest City WWTP is deep purple. According to Mr. Wall
the Forest City WWTP is permitted at 4.95 MGD and is averaging 3.5 MGD. National Textiles contributes
about 2.6 MGD of the plant's total flow.
It is my understanding that there have been complaints about the color problem in the Second Broad
River downstream of Forest City. The Broad River flows into South Carolina 22 miles downstream of
Forest City. This is precisely the same distance Danville, Virginia is downstream of Eden.
Dennis
1 of 1
5/23/2005 11:09 AM

RF: Forest City & Eden Color Discharges
Subject: RE: Forest City & Eden Color Discharges
From: "Dennis Asbury" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 10:18:07 -0400
To: "Tom Belnick" <[e-mail]>
Tom,
The photos were identical. One was attached and one was inserted in the body
of the message. The photo is of the Forest City effluent. My point is that
Forest City receives waste from a National Textiles plant as does Eden.
Forest City is discharging wastewater with an color of 1,488 ADMI color
units while Eden is limited to 300 color units at 13.5 MGD. Both Eden's
Mebane Bridge WWTP and Forest City's WWTP are about 20 miles from the state
line. Eden makes up only about 6% of the 7Q10 of the Dan River while Forest
City makes up about 18% of the flow of the Second Broad River. Eden does not
add any detectible color to the Dan River but the Second Broad River is
highly colored below the Forest City discharge. In 1990 Eden issued
$19,300,000 in bonds to pay for expansion of its water and wastewater
plants. The Wastewater plant capacity increased from 7.0 MGD to 13.5 MGD.
Eden is still paying for those 1990 bonds. It is a bitter pill to swallow to
have to relinquish the 13.5 MGD flow limit when we are still paying for the
bonds that financed the plant expansion. Given Eden's history of compliance
and cooperation I think it would be better for DENR to issue a flow based
limit in units of "Q X ADMI". The chart I sent earlier showed how a "Q X
ADMI" limit of 4050 complies with and does not exceed the maximum amount of
color the City is currently able to discharge given the current limits of
13.5 MGD and 300 ADMI. Note 13.5 X 300 = 4,050.
I find it distressing that Eden and Forest City are so similar in location
relative to the state line and that Eden makes up a smaller percentage of
the flow of its receiving stream and yet Eden has color limits and treats
for color and Forest City does not have color limits and does not treat for
color and DENR seems to be adamant that Eden must relinquish plant capacity
that it is still paying for. I think our record of compliance in the area of
color warrants some consideration of the idea of the 4,050 "Q X ADMI" limit.
Let me know what you think. Thanks!
Dennis
Original Message
From: Tom Belnick [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:39 AM
To: Dennis Asbury
Subject: Re: Forest City & Eden Color Discharges
Dennis- both photos are the same. Are they both of the final effluent
from Eden -Mebane Bridge?
Dennis Asbury wrote:
[e-mail]
N.C. DENR/DWQ/NPDES
919-733-5083,ext. 543
1 of 1 5/23/2005 11:04 AM