NC0000361_Waste Load Allocation_19860702 (2)

5+42- B Enq ineer Dat Rec. 4
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION R-64. 7 7..j.1/4 _ 334L7
Facility Name: 61/1..m iA C,rppr-,-4 Date 7- ,- -Sf(c"
•
Existing 0
Proposed ai cia4S Permit Nb. : /U C 0 0 o0 3 G l Pipe Nb. : 00 County: ,4v'-t j
rADesign Capacity (MGD) : 0, 3 Industrial ( % of Flow) : I 00 Ibmestic ( % of Flow) : C)
'L i— l z Pau-e�13 b `
o Receiving Stream: AClass: � - /T Sub-Basin: v V 0
< Reference USGS Quad: /J / / /U i. ) (Please attach) Requestor: L I-5 cc Cr Regional Office A /2 o
1 L,"n v;ll�. -�OQ;
a (Guideline limitations, if applicable, are to be listed on the back of this form. )
Design 'Damp.: Drainage Area (mit) : 1 ‘ .5- Avg. Streamflow (cfs) : (.6S'�
7Q10 (cfs) 3 0 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 3 / 30Q2 (cfs) 55---
Location of D.O. minimum (miles below outfall) : Slope (fpm)
Velocity (fps) : K1 (base e, per day) : K2 (base e. per day) :
it-8y
N -6A. AJG. bit- halk R, D©) : 3.14 w _
Effluent Monthly Effluent :'a ntn�y
Characteristics Average Comments Characteristics l.verage Comments
g 1-55 ( *l ) -x-07 view 1-5S C•.SI2) 2.40 f g o ,
s> I+ tsu ) 6-1 Qtk Lt-0) k. -1
aH
W
/ / PLOTTED
Z . _,, , (,d
Original/ 1111 c Cion 0Comments: Pi-. I%.....„`t-45 �-�'1-�e t .rR
Revised A11' ationO
ConLy(
L1°
n
0 /p�
i r. Cep JReviewed By: IN Ifre4 Date: /1 /2/
pared By: (-2t,,,_ �r,C

For Appropriate Dischargers, List Complete Guideline Limitations Below
Effluent Monthly Maximum Daily
Characteristics Average Average Comments
—0. (o r6�i,octo c-�.uL ! Z l�'�i.(3,0o l//6 (-Is_(-Is_(Wo-t ; dam- o,r3 "V/000/6cvL b G ( /rano 107;4.
FN _ l5 � b Rs«
Type of Product Produced Lbs/Day Produced Effluent Guideline Reference
l�1 F Pro c o 4KI, n� r,� ((c'o - ti 36
'-15Q," s 5-40,,-t. A .Z
s 614

• •
'
-5-
fluoride processes (fluoride interference with other ore processing
activities) . Therefore, while the waste handling demands for pure
quartz are higher than for feldspar, that demand is likely to be
lower than indicated by HF use information. Another factor available
that points to this conclusion is that IMC which has the only operat-
ing high purity quartz system, also has the lowest mass discharge of
three facilities. It is true, however, that IMC's wastewater control
system represents what the Regional Office considers the standard for
the industry. What these points show is that there are technologies
which can, when applied with a strong management commitment, effec-
tively reduce the quantity of fluoride released to the receiving
waters.
The final issue that must be discussed in recommending a weight-
ing factor, is certainly equal to those just noted: i.e. ,the real
world impact of the facilities receiving the allocations. In this
matter we are dealing with four separate industrial corporations
involved (or soon to be involved) as competitors in the same busi-
ness, all located in the same general area, and all sharing a common
riparian resource. Real and perceived conflicts make negotiating
very difficult. Add to this a common view from all the companies
that the fluoride standard is too restrictive and the recent emer-
gence of the fourth competitor and you have a sensitive environment
in which existing allocations must be reduced. The only way to
examine this aspect of the allobation process is to calculate fluo-
ride distributions for a variety of weighting factors. In doing so
it will be necessary to provide the distributions- over the entire
range of near term configurations:
Configuration I - Unimin Corporation not producing feldspar or
quartz. The Feldspar Corporation operating
without the planned high purity quartz
facility, Indusmin at current feldspar
production, and IMC producing feldspar and high
purity quartz at current levels.
Configuration II - Unimin Corporation not producing feldspar or
quartz, The Feldspar Corporation operating with
the high purity quartz facility and Indusmin,
Inc. and IMC as described in I.
Configuration III - Unimin Corporation producing feldspar and quartz,
and other three companies as described in I.
Configuration IV - Unimin Corporation as in III, The Feldspar
Corporation producing high purity quartz and the
other two companies as described in I.

-6-
Configuration V - Unimin Corporation as in III, The Feldspar
Corporation and Indusmin, Inc. producing high
purity quartz and IMC as described in I.
Configuration VI - The Feldspar Corporation, IMC, Indusmin, Inc.
and Unimin Corporation as described in V and
Indusmin, Inc. with a 50% expansion of the
feldspar plant.
The process in developing a specific allocation can be described
as follows:
A. Calculate an allocation factor (Af) for each facility
within a specific configuration:
Af = F + Wf x Q
where:
Af = Allocation factor,
F = Finished feldspar in tons per month (information
supplied by the company) ,
Wf = Weighting factor for quartz production,
Q = Finished high purity quartz, tons/mo.
B. Project a percentage share (PS) of available fluoride for
each facility under each configuration.
PS = Af x 100
SUM Af
where:
SUM Af = sum of all four Af's for a particular
configuration.
C. Calculate the specific fluoride allocation (A-lbs/day) for
each company.
A = PSxAW
100
where:
AW = Available wasteload to North Toe River = 574
lbs/day.

IAllocations Proposed
Facility AF PS (%) A (#/day)
Configuration I
Unimin 0 0 0
' Feldspar 21181 32 183
Indusmin 17043 26 149
IMC 27306 42 242
65530 100 574
Configuration II
Unimin 0 0 0
Feldspar 28082 39 224
Indusmin 17043 23 132
IMC 27306 38 218
72431 100 574
Configuration III
Unimin 15800 19 109
Feldspar 21181 26 149
Indusmin 17043 21 121
IMC 27306 34 195
81330 100 574
Configuration IV
Unimin 15800 18 103
Feldspar 28081 32 183
Indusmin 17043 19 109
IMC 27306 31 179
88230 100 574
Configuration V
Unimin 15800 17 98
Feldspar 28081 31 178
Indusmin 20043 22 126
IMC 27306 30 172
91230 100 574
Configuration VI
Unimin 15800 16 92
Feldspar 2808 28 161
Indusmin 2.pt3 15(64 29 166
IMC 27306 27 155
99630 100 574

•
r Request No . :3347
............._........_..__......................._._......_.... WAS:;T'ELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM ••_.._..»..__..____..._.._.__..._.__ _... __...._.._
y [ CEIVE1
vi _r `,,1a'ity Oivislon
Facility Name . UNIMIN CORP OCT 29 1986
Type of Wiiu;te : FELDSPAR MINING
Status PROPOSED
w'sirxrr. ri.r: Of ficl
Receiving Stream : NORTH TOE RIVER f vi11>t, North Caroline
Stream Class : C:--TR
S;u bbisss:i.n : 040306
County - M:I:TCHEL..L.. Drainage Area ( sq mi ) : 96 .5
Reg:ionia:l. Office . ASHEVII_L.E Summer 7Q:L0 (c_f ) : 30
1-iaque!iitor : I...:ESA SAl_.L.H Winter 1Q:1.0 (C`fri) : 39
Date of Request 7/2/86 Average Flow (c:f a ) 165
Quad : I_.:I:NVIL_LE 30Q2 (cf!:i ) : 55
_...._...._..........._._.._...___._..........._.................._......_ RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS -•-........-
04- oo 4s P'!!��
DA AVC, DA MAX #11, Debi Air. D � AX•
Wiasstefi. ow (mcjci) : 0 . '30
5–Day EOC) (mc;J/]. ) : . •/ 6
Ammonia Nitrogen (mg/1 ) :
Dissolved OxyL7en (mg/1 ) :
TSS (:1F•/I:) ) : 707 1414 20 Ms i�.. 3a �
Fecal C;to l:i.f to r m (*/100m1 ) :
pH ( SU) : 6-9 4-9
•
_... ......_._.._.__.....___._..........__.._..__...._._..___.__.....__.... .».._.. .._. _ COMMENTS _ .._._�...... ..__.._......_»_._.
THE DISCHARGE. Sl-IAI...L. NOT CAUSE THE TURBIDITY OF THE RECEIVING WATERS TO
EXCEED 10 NTU . IF THE TURBIDITY EXCEEDS :I.0 NTU DUE TO NATURAL.. CONDITI9NS ,
THE DISCHARGE SHALL NOT CAUSE ANY INCREASE: IN TURBIDITY .
FLUORIDE WASTEL.OAD ALLOCATION ATTACHED .
THE 7t;1:1.0 OF BRUSHY CI:EEK :1:S 1 . 1. CFS . THEREFORE , 15 */D OF FLUORIDE COULD BE
ALLOCATED IF A PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR A DISCHARGE TO BRUSHY CREEK . THIS
ALTERNATIVE IS NOT CONSIDERED IN THE ATTACHED FLUORIDE ALLOCATION.
LGvI iAr/I1N ��C i
Atopeenift44 14.1 d r:CI44p ..oto A. 44. /ki p d 1;e0+ ZAi.j.I 81444714,44A.414 s
a:sc�a OW ON!/cdAfi�� ♦. r ��G (:sr/.I ,de 40/.4,' - 744._
My&t.Gc. GeAi i 1 40443"t w46-4-- /
Rcrc•�tatnlnrrncleci by �`�- .... .._.C Q44) r.... Dat 120 b
Reviewed by :
Tech . Support Supervisor �.._._.,_.... Date .10.4/4W%
Regional Sii :Liar ..-_.. .._ Da.te JAp.,r../.Sf-1
Per m:i.tsii & E:: r ]i. •rcaror•inS) ....... ... ...._...._.... ...................... Date .....�l..J� c!�'.....