NC0023876_Special Order by Consent_19930226

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 26, 1993
TO: Janet Russell, WSRO
FROM: Trevor Clements, Technical Suppo r
�
SUBJECT: Burlington SOC Extension Request
This memo is to follow up on our telephone conversation today. As I mentioned
to you, I am not very familiar with the nitty gritty details of ongoing toxicity reduction
efforts for Burlington. Therefore, I will leave judgment of the merit of the request for
extension up to the region and Environmental Sciences. However, I would like to
comment on the quality and intent of the proposed approach by Burlington. The SIU
Toxicity Monitoring Program "hits the nail on the head" with regard to what we
intended to happen when we first derived the original SOC requirement for the
chemical management plan. Because of the wide variety of chemical compounds
received by Burlington from their industrial sources, it was thought that they needed a
process for identifying the chemical compounds and being provided with information
regarding treatability. With this information as a basis, it was thought that SIUs would
be more likely to make conscientious decisions regarding elimination of certain
chemicals through product substitution or process modification and in making direct
chemical purchases. The most recent proposal comes closer to this objective than
anything else that I've reviewed to date. It appears to be very thorough and I applaud
their efforts. Once again, you or Environmental Sciences staff are in a better position
to catch specific flaws, but from a conceptual standpoint I like the proposal.
As a related item, if the proposed program identifies specific parameters that are
likely to remain of long-term concern, then those parameters should be incorporated
with the pretreatment program's long-term monitoring program, future headworks
analyses, and subsPq,a:-!nt industrial user ' ermits.
Also, with regard to their request to update the 67(b) allowance for additional
wasteflows, Burlington will need to comply with the stipulations under 15A NCAC 2H
.1206 (d). In particular subsection (1)(E)(v) of that rule will require a headworks
analysis and supporting toxicity information in order for the Division to determine
whether a given nondomestic source can be added.
Please call me if further clarification is required.
cc: Ruth Swanek
Pretreatment File

S0G Xi4F=o.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
March 26, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kent Wiggins
THROUGH: Steven Mauney
FROM: Eric Galamb
SUBJECT: Regional Staff Report for
South Burlington WWTP
SOC, EMC WQ 90-48
Alamance County
I•r:�
{
1. The current MP screen is attached.
.(�� Q �,�,
E,�1€d
APR 0 11991
TECHNICAL SUPPORT BRANDI
2. The City will fund the toxicity problem. The City has
received construction grants for their expansion from 9.5
MGD to 12.0 MGD. The construction should be completed by
December 31, 1992.
3.
The
instream assessment is
attached.
4.
The
City requests 550,000
gallons of.additional flow.
5. The City will be conducting TIE/TRE investigations to solve
the toxicity problem. When the City expands to 12 MGD, they
will add 1 aeration basin, 2 phosphorus removal tanks, 1
secondary clarifier and 2 aerobic digesters.
6. The City is monitoring according to their current NPDES
permit.
7. Toxicity has been completely addressed (see attachment).
8. Pretreatment comments were received and incorporated into
the SOC.

- 2 -
9. The facility uses the activated sludge process with a design
flow of 9.5 MGD.
10. The facility is properly operated and maintained. A
compliance sampling inspection was performed on March 8,
1990. All areas evaluated during the inspection were
satisfactory.
11. The permit is not under adjudication.
12. There are no known special circumstances concerning the
issuance of the SOC.
13. The expiration date is April 30, 1993.
14. All of the current NPDES parameters are those listed on the
SOC with the following exceptions: fecal coliform has been
lowered to 200 colonies per 100 ml, copper, zinc and cyanide
are now required to be sampled weekly rather than monthly,
and the detection level has been set at 8 ug/l for copper.
15. The downstream water quality impacts are not affected by the
lowered fecal coliform limits because the City is already
meeting this limit. The increased monitoring frequency for
copper, zinc, and cyanide should produce data that would
dictate whether they should be included in future permits
(i.e. existing draft).
16. The compliance schedule was based on the toxicity SOC for
the City of Havelock.
17. The WSRO recommends that the SOC for the City of Burlington
be approved.
EEG/dh
Attachment
cc: Ken Eagleson
Trevor Clements
WSRO

Agenda Item
Explanation:
Consideration of Water Quality
Special Order by Consent for
The City of Burlington
Alamance County
This Special Order by Consent,
EMC WQ 90-48, if issued to the
City of Burlington will allow the
facility to exceed final effluent
limitations for toxicity. The
City of Burlington operates a 9.5
MGD design flow WWTP (expanding
to 12.0 MGD) that discharges
treated wastewater to the Big
Alamance Creek, Class C-NSW
waters, in the Cape Fear River
basin.
On or before December 31, 1990,
the City will develop a
monitoring program for a
headworks analysis. This has
been met. The City will develop
a plan by February 28, 1991, to
inventory industrial chemicals
that could be discharged to the
wastewater plant. This has been
met. On or before April 30,
1991; the City will develop an
enforcement response plan. On or
before May 30, 1991, revise and
implement the HWA. On or before
June 28, 1991, the City will
.submit a report on toxicity
identification evaluations.
Conduct a long term HWA on or
before June 30, 1991. The City
will initiate the inventory for
industrial chemicals on or before
June 30, 1991. On or before July
1, 1991, the City will revise and
implement the enforcement
response plan. On or before
August 15, 1991, the City will
revise the HWA based on comments
received from DEM. On or before
September 30, 1991,, revise and
implement.the schedule of
activities for conducting
identification/confirmation
toxicant procedures and/or
evaluation for in -plant control
measures. On or before October
15, 1991, the City will review

-2-
the results of the HWA and modify
the City's sewer use ordinance
and pretreatment permit limits.
On or before June 30, 1992 submit
a report for toxicity
identification and plant
performance evaluation. Progress
reports will be submitted on or
before July 1, October 11, 1991
and April 1, 1992. On or before
December 31, 1992 the City will
achieve compliance with final
chronic toxicity permit limits.
The SOC shall expire on April 30,
1993.
Enforcement action for previous
violations was taken.
This Special Order by Consent was
noticed as required by G.S.
143-215.2(a)(1). A determination
was made by the Director that
insufficient interest was shown
to warrant a public meeting.
Recommendation: The Division recommends the
Order by Consent for the City of
Burlington be approved as
proposed.

Division of Environmental Management
September 18, 1990
MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Mauney
Through: Larry Ausley,
Ken Eagleson
From: Matt Matthews
Subject: Burlington South VJWTP, NPDES No. NCO023876
Special Order By Consent
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. NRCD
S E P 24 1990
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
This office has reviewed the draft SOC for the subject facility. All requirements pertaining to toxicity monitoring and toxicity
reduction activities appear appropriate. Particularly encouraging is the language in item #3 which requires review by DEM of
toxicity testing of bench scale treated effluent.
If there are any further questions concerning this SOC, please contact Matt Matthews or Larry Ausley at [phone].
cc: Eric Galamb, WSRO

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
September 11, 1990
Memorandum
To: Steve Mauney
From: Susan A. Wilson
Through: Trevor Clement
Carla Sanderson
Subject: Instream Assessment
City of Burlington - Southside WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO023876
Alamance County
SOC EMC WQ No. 90-48
Technical Support has received the request for an instream assessment for the City of Burlington
and has completed the review of the Southside Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
Burlington South WWTP wishes to increase their flow by 550,000 gallons per day. The City also
requests that their toxicity limit be modified to monitoring only.
EMC criteria state that no industrial sources should be added under an Order. DEM has interpreted
this as "no toxics in toxic amounts". Therefore, it is recommended that Burlington be required to
demonstrate that any proposed additions are treatable to non -toxic levels. This can be
accomplished via a bench scale bioassay test and by evaluating the biodegradability of the major
compounds in the industrial wastewater. Review and approval by DEM of the test results should
be required prior to any addition of industrial wastewater.
In addition, it is recommended that Burlington be required to develop a plan for inventorying
industrial chemicals which could reasonably be expected to be discharged to the wastewater
treatment plant. The plan must include procedures for: obtaining an initial inventory; determining
the treatability of those chemicals identified in the inventory; requiring the industries to continually
track chemical use; and requiring industries to provide prior notification to the City when new
chemicals are being added to the inventory.
Finally, Technical Support suggests that milestones be incorporated in the Order so that the facility
will be in compliance with their whole effluent toxicity limit upon expiration of the Special Order of
Consent. Technical Support concurs with the Environmental Sciences Branch recommendation
that the facility perform chronic value or "full range" toxicity tests on a monthly basis to establish
progress made toward final compliance. Technical Support also agrees with the Winston Salem
Regional Office's implementation of the 200 colonies per 100 ml Fecal coliform limit. In addition,
recommendations made by the Pretreatment Unit should be adhered to.

Backffround Information
The City of Burlington, Southside WWTP, discharges into Big Alamance Creek, which is
classified "C-NSW" in the Cape Fear River Basin. The drainage area at the point of discharge is
262 square miles. The 1987 wasteload allocation for Burlington at the pre -expansion design flow
of 9.5 MGD indicates a 7Q10 flow of 3.2 cfs (summer) and an average stream flow of 240 cfs.
Burlington WWTP is required to conduct a chronic quarterly pass/fail test at an instream waste
concentration (IWC) of 82% at the design flow of 9.5 MGD under their current permit. The City
was recently under an SOC for total phosphorous, which expired in June 1990. The SOC also
included monthly pass/fail toxicity testing at an IWC of 82%. Within the past year, Burlington
South WWTP has had six toxicity test failures, with the last failure occurring in May 1990. The
facility passed their chronic tests during June and July.
Analysis and Discussion
In addition to whole effluent toxicity problems, Burlington South WWTP may also have future
problems with the copper and zinc action levels.
J
A current mass balance for copper indicates that the facility is exceeding the instream action level of
7 ppb. The average yearly copper value of 9.9 ppb at the current average effluent flow of 7.1871
MGD yields an instream copper concentration of 7.7 ppb under 7Q10 conditions.
The average value for zinc for the past year is 62.6 ppb. Using the current average effluent flow of
7.1871 MGD, the instream value for zinc is 48.8 ppb under 7Q10 conditions. This value is very
close to the instream action level of 50 ppb zinc, which the facility may exceed should it continue
on its current trends.
The facility should also make efforts to reduce their chlorine level while at the same time meet their
SOC fecal coliform limit of 200 colonies per 100 ml. At the design flow of 9.5 MGD, the facility
should maintain a chlorine level of 21 ppb to prevent chronic toxicity to aquatic life in the stream.
A chlorine limit of 19 ppb will be implemented when the facility expands their flow above 9.5
MGD.
cc: Steve Tedder
Kent Wiggins
Doug Finan
Ken Eagleson

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
COUNTY OF ALAMANCE
IN THE MATTER OF )
NORTH CAROLINA )
NPDES PERMIT )
NO. NC0023876 )
HELD BY The City )
of Burlington )
SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT
EMC WQ. NO. 90-48,
Pursuant to provisions of North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.2
and 143-215.67, this Special Order by Consent is made and entered
into by the City of Burlington, hereafter referred to as Burlington,
and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, an agency
of the State of North Carolina created by NCGS 143B-282, and
hereafter referred to as the Commission:
1. Burlington and the Commission hereby stipulate the following:
(a) That Burlington holds North Carolina NPDES Permit No.
NC0023876 for operation of an existing wastewater treatment
works and making an outlet therefrom for treated wastewater to
Big Alamance Creek Class C-NSW waters of this State; in the Cape
Fear River Basin, but is unable to comply with the final
effluent limitations for toxicity as set forth in the Permit.
Compliance will require preparation of plans and specifications
for and construction and operation of additional treatment
works.
(b) That noncompliance with final effluent limitations
constitutes causing and contributing to pollution of the waters
of this State named above, and Burlington is within the
jurisdiction of the Commission as set forth in NCGS Chapter 143,
Article 21.
(c) That Burlington desires to cause or allow the discharge of
up to 550,000 gpd of additional wastewater to the treatment
works, and that the discharge of such additional wastewater will
not result in any significant degradation in the gdality of any
waters.
(d) That Burlington has secured financing for planning and
construction for treatment works which, when constructed and
operated, will be sufficient to adequately treat the wastewater
presently being discharged and the additional wastewater desired
to be discharged, to the extent that Burlington will be able to
comply with final permit effluent limitations.

(e) Since this Special Order is by Consent, neither party will
file a petition for a contested case or for judicial review
concerning its terms.
2. Burlington, desiring to comply with conditions of the permit
identified in paragraph l(a) above, does hereby agree to do and
perform all of the following:
(a) Provide the Winston-Salem Regional Office located 8025
North Point Boulevard, Winston-Salem, N.C. 27106 with a list of
flow added under all Special/Judicial Orders and update this
list each time flow is added to the system.
(b) Comply with all terms and conditions of the
permit except those effluent limitations identified in paragraph
l(a) above. See Attachments A and B for monitoring requirements
and effluent limitations. The permittee may also be required to
monitor for other parameters as deemed necessary by the Director
in future permits or Administrative letters.
(c) Upon execution of this Order, undertake the following
activities -in accordance with the indicated time schedule:
1) On or before December 31, 1990, submit a plan for a
monitoring program to collect site specific data needed to
complete a headworks analysis (HWA). This.program shall
cover the data needed to immediately update the City's HWA
as well as the long term monitoring needs for future HWA
updates. Met November 28, 1990.
2) On or before February 28, 1991, develop a plan to
inventory industrial chemicals which could reasonably be
expected to be discharged into the facility. The plan
must include procedures for: obtaining an initial inventory
of chemicals; determining the treatability of those
chemicals identified in the inventory; requiring the
industries to provide prior notification to Burlington when
new chemicals are being added to the inventory. Met
February 25, 1991.
3) On or before April 30, 1991, develop and submit to DEM
for approval an enforcement response plan.
4) , On or before May 30, 1991, revise and implement
the headworks monitoring program (based on DEM comments
received).
5) On or before June 28, 1991, submit a report on
toxicity identification evaluations. The report shall
include a schedule of activities for conducting toxicant
confirmation procedures and/or evaluation for in -plant
control measures for effluent toxicity reduction. The
report shall also describe the design for the pilot plant.

6) After implementation of the "Immediate Update" portion
of the long term monitoring program, conduct and submit a
Headwork analysis (HWA) for DEM approval on or before June
30, 1991.
7) In addition, initiate the inventory for industrial
chemicals on or before June 30, 1991.
8) On or before July 1, 1991, revise and implement the
enforcement response plan (based on DEM comments received).
9) On or before August 15, 1991, revise the HWA (based
on DEM comments received).
10) On or before September 30, 1991, revise and implement
the schedule of activities for conducting identification/
confirmation toxicant procedures and/or evaluation for
in -plant control measures for effluent toxicity reduction
(based on DEM comments received). Begin operation of the
pilot plant.
11) Review the results of the HWA and modify the City's
sewer use ordinance (SUO) limits and pretreatment permit
limits as necessary on or before October 15, 1991.
12) On or before June 30, 1992 submit a report for
toxicity identification and plant performance evaluation.
The report shall correlate the findings of the performance
evaluation with the results of the Phase I characterization
tests (see EPA Reference Documents). The report shall also
address the known sources of plant influent, include
results of an industrial waste survey,. and identify
potential sources of toxicity.
13) On or before July 1, October 1, 1991 and April 1,
1992, submit a progress report on planned activities.
14) On or before December 31, 1992, achieve complia.nce
with final chronic toxicity permit limits.
(d) During the time in which this Special Order by Consent,
is effective, comply with the interim effluent limitations
contained in Attachment A and B. The following reflects only
the limitations that have been modified from NPDES requirements
by this Order.
Effluent
Characteristics
Chronic Toxicity
Chronic Toxicity
(Other Limitations)
Monthly
Units Average
P/F No Limit at IWC 82%-(9.5 MGD design)
P/F No Limit at IWC 86%-(12.0 MGD design)

(e) No later than 14 calendar days after any date or time
identified for accomplishment of any activity listed in 2(c)
above, submit to the Division Director and the Regional Office
written notice of compliance or noncompliance therewith. In the
case of noncompliance, the notice shall include a statement of
the reason(s) for noncompliance, remedial action(s) taken, and a
statement identifying the extent to which subsequent dates or
times for accomplishment of listed activities may be affected.
(f) Enforce the water conservation provisions of the State
Building Code as it applies to new residential construction
(Volume 11, Chapter IV 401.2, 401.3).
(g) Develop and adopt sewer use ordinance limits for
non -conventional pollutants. Implement the pretreatment program
as approved by the Director, including the enforcement of both
categorical pretreatment standards and local limits.
(h) Identify any Infiltration and Inflow problems
associated with the facility and establish a program to correct.
(i) Use forty percent (40%) of the revenue received by a
municipality from additional one-half percent (1/2%) sales and
use taxes levied during the first five fiscal years in which the
additional taxes are in effect in the municipality and thirty
percent (30%) of the revenue received by a municipality from
these taxes in the second five fiscal years in which the taxes
are in effect in the municipality for water and sewer capital
outlay purposes or to retire any indebtedness incurred by the
municipality for these purposes.
3. In accordance with the provisions of NCGS 143-215.67(b) the
Commission allows Burlington to accept the additional waste specified
below to its waste -disposal system.
550,000 gallons wastewater
Burlington is required to demonstrate that the proposed
industrial wastewater is treatable to non -toxic levels. This will be
accomplished via a bench scale bioassay test and by evaluating the
biodegradability of the major compounds in the industrial wastewater.
Review and approval by DEM of the test results is required prior to
any addition of industrial wastewater.
4. Burlington and the Commission agree that the stipulated
penalties are not due if Burlington satisfies the DEM that
noncompliance was caused solely by:'
a. An act of God;
b. An act of war;

C. An•intentional act or omission of a third party but this
defense shall not be available if the act or omission is that of
an employee or agent of the defendant or if the act or omission
occurs in connection with a contractual relationship with the
permittee;
d. An extraordinary event beyond the permittees control.
Contractor delays or failure to obtain funding will not be
considered as events beyond the permittees control; or
e. Any combination of the above causes.
Failure within 30 days of receipt of written demand to pay the
penalties, or challenge them by a contested case petition pursuant to
G.S. 150B-23, will be grounds for a collection action, which the
Attorney General is hereby authorized to initiate. The only issue in
such an action will be whether the 30 days has elapsed.
5 Burlington agrees that unless excused under paragraph 4,
Burlington will pay the Director of DEM, by check payable to the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, stipulated penalties according to the following schedule
for failure to meet the deadlines set out in paragraphs 2(c) and
2(e), or failure to attain compliance with the effluent
limitations/monitoring requirements contained in Attachments A and B.
Deadline Penalty Amount
1) Failure to meet a $100/day for first 7 days,
schedule date $500/day thereafter
2) Failure to maintain com- $500/violation
pliance with any permit
limit contained in the
SOC in Attachment A and
B
3) Submit progress report(s).$50/day for the first 7 days;
$250/day thereafter
4) Monitoring frequency $100 per omitted value per
violations parameter other than toxicity,
$500 for toxicity.
5) Implement appropriate $13,000
toxicity reduction
measures and achieve
compliance

6. Any violation of terms of this Special Order by Consent,
including paragraphs 2(c) and 2(e) above and Attachments A and B
shall terminate paragraph 3 of this Order and any authorized
additional waste not previously connected to the system shall not
thereafter be connected until the necessary sewerage system
improvements have been completed and placed in operationn.
7. Noncompliance with the terms of this Special Order by Consent is
subject to enforcement action in addition to the above stipulated
penalties, including injunctive relief pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6.
9. The permittee, upon signature of the Special Order by Consent,
will be expected to comply with all schedule dates, terms, and
conditions of this document.
9. This Special Order by Consent shall expire on April 30, 1993.
Entered into this the day of A-- AR--- �J- , 1991.
Mr. W. R. Baker of Th City of Burlington
BY:
City Manager
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
BY:
Chairman of the Commission

ATTACHMENT A
Part I
Page 1 of 5
Permit No. NCO023876
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -.SOC WINTER: November 1 - March 31
SOC until expansion above 9.5 MGD
Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as -specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharqe Limitations Monitoring Reauirements
Units as
specified.
Measurement
Sample
Sample
Monthly
Avg.
Weekly Avg.
Frequency
Type
Location*
Flow
9.5
MGD
Continuous
Recording
I
or
E,
BOD, 5Day, 20 Degrees C **
24.0
mg/l
36.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
I
Total Suspended Residue **
30.0
mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
I
NH as N
8.0
mg/1
12.0 mg/l
Daily
Composite
E
DAsolved Oxygen (minimum)
5.0
mg/1
5.0 mg/1
Daily
Grab
E,
U,
D
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
2.00/100
ml.
400/100 ml.
Daily
Grab
E,
U,
D
Residual Chlorine
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Gray
E,
U,
D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
2.0
mg/1******
Weekly
Composite
E
Toxicity
***
***
Monthly
Composite
E
Priority Pollutants
****
****
Annually
E
Chromium
58.0
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Mercury
0.2
ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Cadmium
2.0
ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Nickel
61.0
ug/l
*****
Weekly -Composite
E
Copper
$$
Weekly
Composite
E
Zinc
Weekly
Composite
E
Lead
Monthly
Composite
E
Aluminum
Monthly
Composite
E
Cyanide
Weekly
Grab
E
Conductivity
+
Grab
U,
D

ATTACHMENT A
Part I
Page 2 of 5
Permit No. NC0023876
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - SOC SUMMER: April 1 - October.31
SOC until expansion above 9..5 MGD
Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharqe Limitations Monitorinq Reauirements
Units as specified
Measurement
Sample- Sample
Monthly
Avg.-
Weekly Avg.
Frequency
Type
Location*
Flow
9.5
MGD
Continuous
Recording
I
or E
BOD, 5Day, 20 Degrees C **
12.0
mg/l.
18.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
I
Total Suspended Residue **
30.0
mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
.I
NH as N
4.0
mg/1
6.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen (minimum)
5.0
mg/l
5.0 mg/1
Daily
Grab
E,
U, D
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100
ml.
400/100 ml.
Daily
Grab
E,
U, D
Residual Chlorine
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Gray
E,
U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Monthly
Composite.
E'
Total Phosphorus
2.O
mg/l******
Weekly
Composite
E
Toxicity
***
***
Monthly
Composite
E
Priority Pollutants
****
****
Annually
E
Chromium
58.0
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Mercury
0.2
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Cadmium
2.0
ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Nickel
61.0
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Copper
$$
Weekly
Composite
E
Zinc
Weekly
Composite
E
Lead
Monthly
Composite
E
Aluminum
Monthly
Composite
E
Cyanide
Weekly
Grab
E
Conductivity
+ .
Grab
U,
D

ATTACHMENT A
Part I
Page 3 of 5
Permit No.
NCO023876
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS
- SOC WINTER:
November 1
- March 31
During the period
beginning after expansion
above
9.5 MGD and
lasting until
expiration
the Permitttee is
authorized to discharge
from outfall
serial
number 001..
Such discharge shall be limited and
monitored by
the permittee
as specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge
Limitations
Monitoring
Requirements
Units as
specified
Measurement Sample
Sample
Monthly Avg.
Weekly Avg.
Frequency
Type
Location*
Flow
12.0 MGD
Continuous Recording
I or E
BOD, 5Day, 20 Degrees C **
18.0 mg/l
27.0 mg/l
Daily
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Residue **
30.0 mg/l
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
NH as N
h
6.0 mg/l
I
9.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E
Di olved Oxygen (minimum)
Daily
Grab
E, U, D
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 ml.
400/100 ml.
Daily
Grab
E, U, D
Residual Chlorine
19.0 ug/1
28.5 ug/1
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Gray
E, U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 +
TKN)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
2.0 mg/1******
Weekly
Composite
E
Toxicity
***
***
Monthly
Composite
E
Priority Pollutants
****
****
Annually
E
Chromium
58.0 ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Mercury
0.014 ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Cadmium
2.0 ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Nickel
102.0 ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Copper
$$
Weekly
Composite
E
Zinc
Weekly
Composite
E.
Lead
Monthly
Composite
E
Aluminum
Monthly
Composite
E
Cyanide
5.0 ug/1
Weekly
Grab
_E
Conductivity + Grab U, D
Color Monthly Composite E
Long-term BOD******* Monthly Composite E,U,D

ATTACHMENT A
Part I
Page 4 of 5
Permit No. NCO023876
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - SOC SUMMER: April 1 - October 31
During the period beginning after expansion above 9.5 MGD and lasting until expiration,
the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number 001.
Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitorinq Reauirements
Units as specified
Measurement
Sample Sample
Monthly
Avg.
Weekly Avg.
Frequency
Type
Location*
Flow
12.0
MGD
Continuous
Recording
I
or E,
BOD, 5Day, 20 Degrees C **
9.0
mg/1
13.5 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
I
Total -Suspended Residue **
30.0
mg/l
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E,
I
NH as N
3.0
mg/1
4.5 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen (minimum)
Daily
Grab
E,
U, D
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
2,00/100
ml.
400/100 ml.
Daily
Grab
E,
U, D
Residual Chlorine
19.0
ug/l
28.5 ug/1
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Gray
E,
U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
2.0
mg/1******
Weekly
Composite
E
Toxicity
***
***
Monthly
Composite
E
Priority Pollutants
****
****
Annually
E
Chromium
58.0
ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Mercury
0.014
ug/l
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Cadmium
2.0
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Nickel
102.0
ug/1
*****
Weekly
Composite
E
Copper
$$
Weekly
Composite
E
zZinc
Weekly
Composite
E
Lead
Monthly
Composite
E
Aluminum
Monthly
Composite
E
Cyanide
5.0
ug/1
Weekly
Grab
E
Conductivity + Grab U, D
Color Monthly Composite E
Long-term BOD ******* Monthly Composite E,U,D

ATTACHMENT A
Part I
Page 5 of 5
Permit No. NCO023876
A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - SOC Continued
Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified
below:
Effluent'Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitorina Reauirements
Units as specified . Measurement Sample Sample
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg. Frequency Type Location*
*Sample Location: I -influent, E-effluent, U-upstream, 1) Big Alamance Creek at NC Highway,'87,
D-downstream 1) three locations in Saxapahaw Lake, 2) at Saxapahaw Dam at SR 2171 2171 3) above
Saxapahaw Dam) at NCSR 1005
+Daily upstream and downstream monitoring may be reduced at each sampling station to one time per wee
k
except' during the months of June, July, August, and September when the frequency must be no less than
three times per week at each station.
** The monthly average effluent BOD and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent values 5(85% removal).
*** See Ch V Toxicity Monitoring Requirement (Monthly) See Attachment B - 82% at 9.5 MGD
86% at 12.0 MGD
**** See Part III, Condition No. J of the Permit.
***** Daily Maximum Limitation.
****** Quarterly Average Limitation.
J'
******* See.Part III, Condition No. I of the Permit
$$ Detection Limit 8.0 ug/1
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be
monitored daily by grab sample at the effluent.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The permittee may also be required to monitor for other parameters as deemed necessary by the Directo
in future permits or Administrative letters.

ATTACHMENT B
10/89
Facility Name South Burlington Permit # NCO023876
ChV TOXICITY MONITORING REQUIREMENT (MONTHLY)
The permittee shall conduct chronic toxicity tests using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions, using full range option
outlined in Appendix A.
The test concentrations for this test series will be established around the mstream waste
concentration of 82 % by factors of three as outlined in Appendix A. The permit holder shall
perform monthly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit
condition. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final
effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code THP3B. Additionally, all testing results will be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N:C. 27611
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream. I
Should any test.data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management indicate. potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival -and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.

a
Addendum
Su-c- 90-48 NPDES No.N00023876
Whole Effluent Toxicity Reduction - Investigative Approaches
Efforts to reduce whole effluent toxicity may include but not be limited
to the following approaches:
In-house audit of available plant data to evaluate treatment efficiency
in correlation with whole effluent toxicity test results. Subsequent
examination of operation and maintenance practices ma%• be included;
Consideration of other potential best management practices such as waste
minimization techniques, spill prevention/.containment, runoff
containment;
'Evaluation through phases of toxicity identification/source investigation
and confirmation as well as control options. A series of analytical
procedures may be used to characterize the effluent in search of the
source of its toxicity. Whole effluent characterization techniques may
include degradation, air stripping, filtration, organic compound
extraction, and metals chelation. For each specific characterization
technique. used, toxicity tests are also performed for that portion of the
effluent subjected io the characterization procedure. These test results
as compared to the baseline whole effluent toxicity test result can
indicate the physical/chemical nature of causative toxicants. If the
causative toxicant can be identified in an effluent, its concentration
may be controlled using process modification, product substitution,
pretreatment of individual wastestreams, effluent treatment, and/or other
best management practices.
EPA reference documents:
Mount, D. I. and L. Anderson -Carnahan. Pfetho'ds for Aquatic Toxicity
Identification Evaluations: Phase I Toxicity Characterization Procedures.
EPA/600/3-88/034. September 1988, USEPA Environmental Research Laboratory,
Duluth, Minn.
Mount, D. I. Phase III -Toxicity Confirmation Procedures. EPA 600/3-88/036.
1989, Environmental Research Laboratory, Duluth, Flinn.
Mount, D. I. and L. Anderson -Carnahan Phase II -Toxicity Identification
Procedures. EPA 600/3-88/035. 1989, Environmental Research Laboratory, Duluth,
Minn.
U.S. EPA. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Protocol for Municipal Wastewater
Treatment Plants. EPA/600/2-88/062. April 1989, EPA'Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.
U.S. EPA. Generalized Methodology for Conducting Industital Toxicity Reductions
Evaluations (TREs). EPA 600/2-88/070. 1989, EPA Water Engineering Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio.

z
Request Form for In -stream Assessment for 67B
SUBBASIN �""OL"
NAME OF FACILITY-
COUNTY /��-��1L�---- REGION r/(%/_/A--Cq e,4,hDESIGN FLOW Z,0-- f �
�)
RECEIVING STREAM q-- G•-------------
BACKGROUND DATA :
A. Why is SOC needed?
effluent limits?)
(Facility is out
ld,.Q-
of comp dance with
i&q
which
.
B.
History of SOC requests: ��� W�
p%ios�u
1. Monthly Average waste flow
prior to any SOC
l , b mgd
�v
Time period averaged ©7 thru b
2. Previously approved'��SOC's: G
ck( Wq Date: �3-/`%-�/ flow: 5-00/ OpC� gd
Date: flow: ----mgd
total of previously approved SOC flow: 0.C60I mgd
3. Flows lost from plant
(facilities that have gone
off line)
4. Current SOC request
S. Total plant flow post-SOC
(sum of original flow and
SOC flow minus losses)
flow: mgd
flow: 00 _�(gd
sancoo Cie~ Ai ,
5oer� ,.edks/rc,sl .
flow: , 7 mgd
6. Is this an accurate flow balance for plant? Why/why not?
4(0w
Soo o� d �B�e� C . A
ret (es t,ed J�
b 166, quo v,,a_S added. 4� ��- �n s.

C. Please attach DMR summary for past year for all permitted parame-
ters. If possible, include reports from previous years if
facility has been under SOC for more than a year.
6 d
CURRENT SOC—REQUEST
A. Request is for domestic or industrial waste? If it is a combin-
ation, please specify percentages.
G�DYKeS�l�L
fin ©
0o d �Usly1r( , �� r,� A
B. What type of industry? Please attach any pertinent data.
r h6i�L'{ h1{
C. The region proposes the ol�owing SOC limits:
c n Su,vn
BOD5 Z� Q. mg/1 fZ_O
NH3 D.G mg/1 q-O
DO J<O mg/1
TSS mg/l
fecal coliform ZoU #/100ml.
p g 6 -- g S U
other parameters �CL
GT
Zo v
82
D. What is the basis
for these
limits?
1017