NC0068888_DV-2007-0028_20080212

c)F W A T�RQ Michael F.Easley,Governor
-9 G William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
7 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H.Sullins,Director
Division of Water Quality
February 12, 2008
CERTIFIED MAIL 7002 0510 0000 5461 6140
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Steve Miller, Town Manager
Town of Dallas
210 North Holland Street
Dallas, NC 28034
SUBJECT: Assessment of Civil Penalties
NPDES Permit NC0068888
Town of Dallas WWTP
Case Number DV-2007-0028
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Miller:
This letter transmits notice of a civil penalty assessed against the Town of Dallas in the amount of
$10,448.74, including $448.74 in enforcement costs.
Attached is a copy of the assessment document explaining this penalty. This action was taken under the
authority vested in me pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. Any continuing violation(s) may be the subject .f a new
enforcement action, including an additional penalty.
Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, you must do one of the following:
1. Submit payment of the penalty:
Payment should be made directly to the order of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(do not include waiver form). Payment of the penalty will not foreclose further enforcement action for
any continuing or new violation(s). Please submit payment to the attention of:
Point Source Branch
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
OR
No'thCarolina
,Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 Phone[phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwatcrquality.org Location: 512 N.Salisbury St. Raleigh,NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled/10%Post Consumer Paper

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF GASTON
IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT ) WAIVER OF RIGHT TO AN
OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST ) ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND
TOWN OF DALLAS ) STIPULATION OF FACTS
NPDES PERMIT NC0068888
FILE NO. DV-2007-0028
Having been assessed civil penalties totaling$10,448.74 for violation(s) as set forth in the
assessment document of the Division of Water Quality dated February 12, 2008, the undersigned,
desiring to seek remission of the civil penalties, does hereby waive the right to an administrative
hearing in the above-stated matter and does stipulate that the facts are as alleged in the assessment
document. The undersigned further understands that all evidence presented in support of remission
of this civil penalty must be submitted to the Director of the Division of Water Quality within 30
days of receipt of the notice of assessment. No new evidence in support of a remission request will
be allowed after 30 days from the receipt of the notice of assessment.
This the day of , 200_.
BY
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE

2. Submit a written request for remission including a detailed justification for such
request:
Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to consideration of the five factors listed
below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the amount of the civil penalty assessed.
Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for contesting whether the violation(s) occurred
or the accuracy of any of the factual statements contained in the civil penalty assessment
document. Because a remission request forecloses the option of an administrative hearing, such
a request must be accompanied by a waiver of your right to an administrative hearing and a
stipulation and agreement that no factual or legal issues are in dispute. Please prepare a detailed
statement that establishes why you believe the civil penalty should be remitted, and submit it to
the Division of Water Quality at the address listed below. In determining whether a remission
request will be approved, the following factors shall be considered:
(1) whether one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in NCGS 143B-282.1(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the violator;
(2) whether the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from
the violation;
(3) whether the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident;
(4) whether the violator has been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations; or
(5) whether payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions.
Please note that all evidence presented in support of your request for remission must be
submitted in writing. The Director of the Division of the Division of Water Quality will review
your evidence and inform you of his decision in the matter of your remission request. The
response will provide details regarding the case status, directions for payment, and provision for
further appeal of the penalty to the Environmental Management Commission's Committee on
Civil Penalty Remissions (Committee). Please be advised that the Committee cannot consider
information that was not part of the original remission request considered by the Director.
Therefore, it is very important that you prepare a complete and thorough statement in support of
your request for remission.
In order to request remission, you must complete and submit the enclosed "Request for
Remission of Civil Penalties, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of
Facts" form within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. The Division of Water Quality also
requests that you complete and submit the enclosed"Justification for Remission Request." Both
forms should be submitted to the following address:
Point Source Branch
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
OR

3. File a petition for an administrative hearing with the Office of Administrative
Hearings:
If you wish to contest any statement in the attached assessment document you must file a petition
for an administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the Office of
Administrative Hearings. You must file the petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings
within thirty (30) days of receipt of this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received
in the Office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours. The Office of
Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m.,except for official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition
must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings. The petition may be faxed- provided
the original and one copy of the document is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings
within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission. The mailing address for the
Office of Administrative Hearings is:
Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714
Telephone [phone] Facsimile: [phone]
A copy of the petition must also be served on DENR as follows:
Ms. Mary Penny Thompson, Registered Agent
DENR
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Please indicate the case number(as found on page one of this letter) on the petition.
Failure to exercise one of the options above within thirty(30) days of receipt of this letter, as
evidenced by an internal date/time received stamp (not a postmark), will result in this matter
being referred to the Attorney General's Office for collection of the penalty through a civil
action. Please be advised that additional penalties may be assessed for violations that occur after
the review period of this assessment.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone], extension 547, or via e-mail at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Robert L. Sledge
attachments
cc: Mooresville Regional Office—SWP Section
NPDES Unit -Enforcement File
Central Files

JUSTIFICATION FOR REMISSION REQUEST
DWQ Case Number: DV-2007-0028 County: Gaston
Assessed Party: Town of Dallas
Permit Number: NC0068888 Amount Assessed: $10,448.74
Please use this form when requesting remission of this civil penalty. You must also complete the
"Request For Remission, Waiver of Right to an Administrative Hearing, and Stipulation of
Facts" form to request remission of this civil penalty. You should attach any documents that
you believe support your request and are necessary for the Director to consider in evaluating
your request for remission. Please be aware that a request for remission is limited to
consideration of the five factors listed below as they may relate to the reasonableness of the
amount of the civil penalty assessed. Requesting remission is not the proper procedure for
contesting whether the violation(s) occurred or the accuracy of any of the factual statements
contained in the civil penalty assessment document. Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 143B-282.1(c),
remission of a civil penalty may be granted only when one or more of the following five factors
applies. Please check each factor that you believe applies to your case and provide a detailed
explanation, including copies of supporting documents, as to why the factor applies (attach
additional pages as needed).
(a) one or more of the civil penalty assessment factors in N.C.G.S. 143B-282.1(b)
were wrongfully applied to the detriment of the petitioner (the assessment factors are listed in
the civil penalty assessment document);
(b) the violator promptly abated continuing environmental damage resulting from the
violation (i.e., explain the steps that you took to correct the violation and prevent future
occurrences);
(c) the violation was inadvertent or a result of an accident (i.e., explain why the
violation was unavoidable or something you could not prevent or prepare for);
(d) the violator had not been assessed civil penalties for any previous violations;
(e) payment of the civil penalty will prevent payment for the remaining necessary
remedial actions (i.e., explain how payment of the civil penalty will prevent you from performing
the activities necessary to achieve compliance).
EXPLANATION:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COUNTY OF GASTON File No.DV-2007-0028
IN THE MATTER OF )
THE TOWN OF DALLAS )
) FINDINGS AND DECISIONS
FOR VIOLATIONS OF: ) AND ASSESSMENT OF
NPDES PERMIT NC0068888, AND ) CIVIL PENALTIES
15A NCAC 2B .0211(3)(b) )
Acting pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality (DWQ), I, Robert L. Sledge,
make the following:
I. FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. The Town of Dallas is a municipality organized and existing under the laws of the
State of North Carolina.
B. The Town of Dallas operates the 0.6 MGD Dallas Wastewater Treatment Plant
located in the Town of Dallas, in Gaston County, North Carolina.
C. The Town of Dallas was issued NPDES Permit No. NC0068888 on August 23,
2005 (effective October 1, 2005, with an expiration date of January 31, 2010)for
the treatment of wastewater and the discharge of treated wastewater to Dallas
Branch, class C waters of the State in the Catawba River Basin.
D. Part H, Section C (2)of the NPDES Permit states, in part, that "The permittee
shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by
the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit.
E. Part H, Section C (6)of the NPDES Permit states in part that: "Solids, sludges
filter backwash or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control
of wastewaters shall be utilized/disposed of in accordance with NCGS 143-215.1
and in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from entering the waters of the
State."
F. 15A NCAC 2B .0211(3)(b) establishes the water quality standard for Dissolved
Oxygen in Class C waters, stating that for non-trout waters, that dissolved oxygen
shall not be less than a daily average of 5.0 mg/L with a minimum instantaneous
value of not less than 4.0 mg/L.

Town of Dallas
PC-2007-0028,p.2
G. On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of
Water Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while
sampling Dallas Branch for a Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr.
Whitaker subsequently visited the Dallas WWTP, which was upstream from the
sludge spill location, and discovered that wastewater and sludge were being
discharged from the facility. Sludge was observed spilling over the weir of the
clarifier, flowing from there to the outfall line and into the receiving stream via
the effluent pipe. At the time of this event, WWTP personnel were pumping the
contents of one of the WWTP's two units (which was out of service) to the other,
active unit.
H. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Mr. Whitaker conducted an investigation into the extent of the
sludge spill and the impact to Dallas Branch. Sludge was found in Dallas Branch at
SR 2275 approximately 0.5 miles downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3 mg/L at this location.
I. Sludge was found in Long Creek at NC Hwy. 279 downstream of its confluence
with Dallas Branch, approximately 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location.
J. No sludge was found in Dallas Branch at the upstream sampling site for the WWTP.
The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 7.5 mg/L at this location.
K. Since February 2003, the Town of Dallas has been assessed penalties totaling
$30,254.51, in the matters of twenty-six enforcement actions associated with the
performance of the Town of Dallas WWTP and its compliance with the terms of
the NPDES permit.
L. The costs to the State for the investigation and enforcement procedures in this
matter totaled$448.74.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
H. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. The Town of Dallas is a"person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A
pursuant to G.S. 143-212(4).
B. NPDES Permit NC0068888 is required by NCGS 143-215.1.
C. The conditions within the subject permit regarding the proper operation of the
wastewater treatment plant and those regarding removal of solids and sludges, are
terms, conditions, or requirements of said permit.

Town of Dallas
PC-2007-0028,p.3
D. Dallas Branch constitutes waters of the State within the meaning of G.S. 143-
215.1(a)(1)pursuant G.S. 143-212(6).
E. 15A NCAC 2B .0211(3)(b) is a water quality standard established pursuant to
G.S. 143-214.1.
F. The conditions observed at the Town of Dallas wastewater plant on August 30,
2007 constituted a failure to properly operate and maintain systems of control, in
violation of Part II, Section C (2) of NPDES Permit NC0068888.
G. The Town of Dallas violated Part II, Section C (6) of NPDES Permit NC0068888
on August 30, 2007 by failing to properly dispose of solids and by discharging
sludge into waters of the State.
H. General Statute 143-215.6A (a)(2)provides that a civil penalty of not more than
twenty-five thousand dollars per violation may be assessed against a person who
violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of
a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1.
I. The Town of Dallas violated 15A NCAC 2B .0211(3)(b)by creating conditions
that caused the dissolved oxygen in Dallas Branch and Long Creek to drop below
5.0 mg/L, the dissolved oxygen water quality standard for class C waters.
J. General Statute 143-215.6A(a)(1) provides that a civil penalty of not more than
twenty-five thousand dollars per violation may be assessed against a person who
violates any classification, standard, limitation, or management practice
established pursuant to G.S. 143-214.1.
K. The State's enforcement costs in this matter may be assessed against The Town of
Dallas pursuant to G.S.143-215.3 (a)(9) and G.S. 143B-282.1(b)(8).
L. Robert L. Sledge, pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the
Division of Water Quality has the authority to assess civil penalties in this matter.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:

Town of Dallas
PC-2007-0028,p.4
III. DECISION:
The Town of Dallas is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ T 000. D0 For one violation of Part II, Section C (2)of NPDES Permit
NC0068888, by failing to properly operate and maintain the
wastewater treatment plant on August 30, 2007.
$ 2 500. 00 For one violation of Part II, Section C (6) of NPDES Permit
NC0068888, by permitting sludge to enter waters of the
State on August 30, 2007.
$ 000. 00 For one violation of 15A 2B .0211(3)(b), the water quality
standard for dissolved oxygen, on August 30, 2007.
$ /0, 000. 00 TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
$ 448.74 Enforcement Costs
$ 487q. 7171 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have
considered the factors listed in G.S.143B-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health,or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
/2
2 /200 . ` XP-/ty,
/
(Date) Robert L. Sledge
Division of Water Quality

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY -CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT
Violator: Town of Dallas WWTP
County: Gaston
Case Number: DV-2007-0028
ASSESSMENT FACTORS
1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State,to the public health,or
to private property resulting from the violation;
/� /, I / J
�X,t+c�I/ ,« .S/4>-<,fv -� t1nz<,t' L�A/6
/��.,4/.9.�C�c�f�e c-��. 6.o _2[, �e�a,e �.cc,.:.� ns�� c-wy CA- ./ �'.tt..n/
-(ajj��_,,„ t.Hajt J21I 2 lit"- JGt /,76:4,4„...../ j(} I/Ve/J/cz.,..N ev4/�i.sp, 1(66 I ,u. C ,+ .�5e sec .i...i N-ue%V ) �We>A
el L z.aLi 4,,,,,/ ...kpa.c. , (Z,uA LC .z[?..., Y ./ Ywlt 1-,,,/�„.t{R,
2) The duration and gravity of the violation;S f
/ rf
� f c%.�..te Le, �241 1 4a �kk P1 �:w�6 .ca✓.1 S /112:1.
_ 1 1 'ha(
4 I 666 ✓ J
6,4 .W ZA,.t aut 'ha(4 /v.c21 S Lj/0-• 1 I, c l'.,al,
3) j� /The effect on ground or surface/ water quantity0. 1„,
or quality or on� air® quality; l
�/ 0, yf, ` ,,,,(N 3.s BCc,it.42 .„„s„.,,,,...,41 . , V. 1,A. Ak ly (�.d.?4,1 J `t Ml L ti.
4) The cost oflf rectifying the damage; ///999 //q 4,1
/
IL A.k .L v:-9[/Ii..Y JO-1 ,(9-.1x0 v.etA -!.td+� f�iV e H._ (i,j CL, u�c5.,51:24j (XG'0,,rY ,1,,i+.
1,4, 4.,,,A. .2...J.,- , A4 la A.,.../
c4-7(..., ().94,,,,:6117 ,..). ill) V, 9-",i,rik. .
5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
C04 6 !L/JI C CA.r 6 i w:cif', /....y, /g4,,6'INC 4/U: ^�C 51 j:2 1 .02 c G7
r ,j �i 4 ii • 6l / 1,4 lure fat Lt[t7/diti:.
6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally; /
/ V J-/S {Pl2la C+, iie, _ fr..( 1 C'' .3 SLA ci.4 a i�LeVe 6.C/2d47/ ( day eSt•
7) 'l'he prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;and
/t" 2A"" 14=141.s -.b et czmaj C 4-+-1_24 lie ./,aelisrki 1<t AyDC' S/„., .
8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
bac. �� 0616 e/ /� 8. 2 V.,.., c . (1P/'�"'a,�,) c4-9 : �.�E i f
,. 7 j .Z.,-,0,- ..5 tk.cti j t f
2//a/.106F �, �C, or. J/„..
Date Rob t L.Sledge

Town of Dallas
PC-2007-0028,p.4 o
•
Fn 1
III. DECISION: ,, �r (LC)
The Town of Dallas is hereby assessed a civil penalty of: +at ,
4 $ 8.000.00 For one violation of Part II, Section C (2)of NPDES Permit
NC0068888, by failing to properly operate and maintain the
wastewater treatment plant on August 30, 2007.
elf 2 $ 1,000.00 For one violation of Part II, Section C (6)of NPDES Permit
NC0068888, by permitting sludge to enter waters of the
State on August 30, 2007.
PY $ 1.000.00 For one violation of 15A 2B .0211(3)(b), the water quality
standard for dissolved oxygen, on August 30, 2007.
$ TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY
$ 448.74 Enforcement Costs
$ TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of the penalty I have
considered the factors listed in G.S.143B-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation;
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation;
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
(Date) Susan A. Wilson, Supervisor
NPDES Western Unit
Division of Water Quality

Table B-15 Summary of Use Support Ratings by Use Support Category in Subbasin 03-08-36
Use Support Aquatic Fish Water
Rating Life Consumption Recreation Supply
Monitored Waters
Supporting 17.2 mi 0 0 0
Impaired 0 0 0 0
Not Rated 0 0 15.3 mi 0
Total 17.2 mi 0 15.3 mi 0
Unmonitored Waters
Supporting 0 0 0 19.5 mi
Impaired 0 55.9 mi 0 0
Not Rated 0 0 0 0
No Data 38.7 mi 0 40.6 mi 0
Total 38.7 mi. 55.9 mi 40.6 mi 19.5 mi
Totals
All Waters 55.9 mi 55.9 mi 55.9 mi 19.5 mi
Note: All waters include monitored,evaluated and waters that were not assessed.
7.3 Status and Recommendations of Previously and Newly Impaired
Waters
The following waters were identified in the 1999 basin plan as Impaired or arc newly Impaired
based on recent data. The current status and recommendations for addressing these waters are
presented below. These waters are identified by assessment unit number(AU#). Refer to the
overview above for more information on AUs.
7.3.1 Dallas Branch [AU# 11-129-16-7b1
Current Status and 2004 Recommendations
Dallas Branch is a tributary to Long Creek and the 0.8-mile segment from the Dallas WWTP
(NC0068888) to Long Creek was listed as Impaired in the 2002 Integrated 305(b) and 303(d)
Report due to municipal point source discharges. The Dallas WWTP has had compliance issues
with quarterly chronic toxicity and weekly fecal coliform limits. Effluent chlorine values are
elevated at times. In response, the facility has recently added a dechlorination system. Upon
permit renewal in 2005, a total residual chlorine limit will be added. Upon inspection in October
2003, the plant was meeting its permit requirements and appeared to be well maintained. DWQ
will resample this stream once the chlorine limit is in place.
Section B: Chapter 7—Catawba River Subhasin 03-08-36 171

Catawba River Basin South Fork of the Catawba River 8-Digit Subbasin 03050102
Assessment Unit Number Name Use Use
Description Support Support Reason for Parameter of ('ollection Listing IR
Classification DWQ Subbasin Miles'Acres Watershed(s) Category Rating Rating Interest Year Year Category
11-129-16-7b Dallas Branch 030501020604 Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria Ecological/biological Integrity 1992 1998 5
Exceeded Benthos
From Dallas WWTP to Long Creek
C 03-08-36 0.8 FW Miles
11-129-3-(0.7) Pott Creek 03 0501 02 03 02 Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria EcologicaUbiological Integrity 2006 2008 5
Exceeded • FishCom
From a point 0.3 mile upstream of Lincoln County SR 1217 to
South Catawba Fork River
\VS-IV 03-08-35 3.2 FW Miles
11-129-5-(0.3)b Clark Creek(Shooks Lake) 030501020401 Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria Ecological/biological Integrity 2000 1998 5
From Miller Branch to 0.9 mile upstream of Walker Creek 030501020403 Exceeded Benthos
C 03-08-35 16.6 FW Miles
11-129-5-(9.5) Clark Creek 030501020403 Aquatic Life Impaired Standard Violation Turbidity 2006 2008 5
From a point 0.9 mile upstream of Walker Creek to South Fork
Catawba R.
WS-IV 03-08-35 1.8 FW Miles
11-129-5-7-2-(l) Maiden Creek 030501020402 Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria Ecological/biological Integrity 2002 2006 5
Exceeded Benthos
From source to a point 0.7 mile upstream from backwaters of
Maiden Reservoir
WS-11;1QW 03-08-35 4.9 FW Miles
11-129-8-(6.5) Indian Creek 030501020502 Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria Ecological/biological Integrity 2006 2006 5
Exceeded FishCom
Front a point 0.3 mile upstream of Lincoln County SR 1 169 to
South Fork Catawba River Aquatic Life Impaired Biological Criteria Ecological/biological Integrity 2006 2006 5
Exceeded Benthos
WS-IV 03-08-35 6.0 FW Miles
Catawba River Basin 8-Digit Subbasin 03050103
11-(123.5)b CATAWBA RIVER(Lake Wylie Aquatic Life Impaired Standard Violation Turbidity 2006 2008 5
South FK Catawba Arm)North
Carolina portion
South Fork Catawba River Arm of Lake Wyly
WS-V,B 03-08-34 1,291.0 FW Acres
B. Draft 2008 303(d) List-Integrated Report Category 5 Version-20080107 Page 25 of 96

1
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Sledge
FROM: Robert B. Krebs II "
i'
DATE: January 2, 2008
PREPARED BY: Marcia Allocco
SUBJECT: Enforcement (DV-2007-0028)
Violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B .0211(2)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b)
The Town of Dallas
Dallas WWTP
Gaston, NC
Attached is an enforcement report, which details a violation of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A
NCAC 2B .0211(2) and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b). Also enclosed is MRO's NOV/NRE, the
complaint made by the Environmental Sciences Section which found the sludge spill, the 5-day
report regarding the WWTP bypass, and the Dallas WWTP ORC NOV/NRE response. Based
upon our review of the responses, etc., an enforcement action is still recommended.
If you have questions or require additional information, please contact Marcia or me.
Attachments
MAA

CERTIFICATION PAGE
I certify that the information in this report is true to the best of my
knowledge. All violations of self-monitoring data (if applicable) have been verified
by hard copy review of the monthly reports and the appropriate permit.
Signature of Principle Investigator(s): c- \
Marcia Allocco, Environmental Chemist
1 ,1 ,;1 Date:

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ENFORCEMENT CASE ASSESSMENT FACTORS
Type: (DV) Discharge Violation (DV-2007-0028)
Violator: The Town of Dallas
Responsible Official: Steve Miller, Town Manager
Address: 210 North Holland Street
Dallas, North Carolina 28034
Facility: Dallas WWTP
NPDES Permit NC0068888
Regional Office: Mooresville
1. The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public health,
or to private property resulting from the violations:
On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of Water
Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while sampling Dallas
Branch for a Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker subsequently visited
the Dallas WWTP, which was upstream from the sludge spill location and discovered that
wastewater and sludge were being discharged from the facility. Mr. Fisher and Mr.
Whitaker conducted an investigation to determine the extent of the sludge spill and any
impacts to waters of the State.
The investigation by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker found the following:
• Sludge was found in Dallas Branch, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at
SR 2275 approximately 0.5 miles downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3 mg/L at this location.
• Sludge was found in Long Creek, a class C water in the Catawba River basin at
NC Hwy. 279, downstream of the confluence with Dallas Branch and
approximately 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The dissolved oxygen concentration in
Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location.
• No sludge was found in Dallas Branch at the upstream sampling site for the
WWTP NPDES permit. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch
was 7.5 mg/L at this location.
• No sludge was found in Long Creek at Dallas-Spencer Mountain Road. The
dissolved oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 6.3 mg/L at this location.

2. The duration and gravity of the violations:
The sludge spill at the Dallas WWTP occurred on August 30, 2007, and was found at
11:30 am by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker of the Division of Water Quality. The 5-day
report submitted on September 6, 2007, by the Operator in Responsible Charge
(hereinafter ORC) stated that the sludge discharge did not end until 4:30 pm. No estimate
of the volume of sludge released from the Dallas WWTP was made in the 5-day report.
The ORC also stated in the 5-day report that WWTP personnel had checked Dallas
Branch and there seemed to be no solids accumulation. However, no dissolved oxygen
measurements were taken to verify the impacts to Dallas Branch and Long Creek had
ceased.
3. The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality:
The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was decreased from 7.5 mg/1 at the
upstream sampling location (as specified in NPDES permit NC0068888) to 0.3 mg/1 at
the downstream sampling location (as specified in NPDES permit NC0068888). The
sludge spill also impacted Long Creek as the dissolved oxygen concentrations was
measured at 0.0 mg/1 downstream of the confluence with Dallas Branch and
approximately 0.6 miles from the Dallas WWTP effluent discharge.
4. The cost of rectifying the damage:
Personnel at the Dallas WWTP did not take any steps to rectify the damage.
5. The amount of money saved by noncompliance:
The Town of Dallas saved money equivalent to the cost of pumping and removing the
sludge from the treatment process.
6. Whether the violations were committed willfully or intentionally:
The sludge spill at the Dallas WWTP on August 30, 2007, was caused by the pumping of
one treatment train under repair to the remaining operational treatment train, which
overloaded the operational treatment system. The overload occurred when the operator
(not the ORC) left the plant unattended to check lift stations.
7. The Town of Dallas' prior record of compliance for the last 3 years with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority is as
follows:
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2005-0042) of$1,085.04 was assessed on January 24,
2005, for one effluent Biological Oxygen Demand limit violation (hereinafter BOD) and
one effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation in October 2004. The penalty was paid in
full on February 14, 2005.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2005-0061) of$335.04 was assessed on February 1, 2005,
for one effluent fecal coliform limit violation in November 2004. The penalty was paid
in full on February 14, 2005.

A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2005-0365) of$335.04 was assessed on September 19,
2005, for one effluent fecal coliform limit violation in May 2005. The penalty was paid
in full on September 28, 2005.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2006-0282) of$580.15 was assessed on August 8, 2006, for
one effluent BOD limit violation and one effluent fecal coliform limit violation in May
2006. The penalty was paid in full on August 30, 2006.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2006-0372) of$1,080.15 was assessed on October 3, 2006,
for one effluent BOD limit violation, one effluent fecal coliform limit violation, one
effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation, and one effluent Total Suspended Solids
(hereinafter TSS) limit violation in June 2006. The penalty was paid in full on October
18, 2006.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2006-0470) of$2,580.15 was assessed on December 5,
2006, for one effluent BOD limit violation, four effluent fecal coliform limit violations,
and two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in April 2006. The penalty was paid
in full on January 5, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0053) of$831.50 was assessed on February 2, 2007,
for one effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation in September 2007. The penalty was
paid in full on March 7, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0076) of$1,331.50 was assessed on February 13,
2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and one effluent TSS limit
violation in October 2006. The penalty has not been paid and the case is still open.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0121) of$1,331.50 was assessed on March 26, 2007,
for three effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in October 2006. The penalty was
paid in full on April 10, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0208) of$394.00 was assessed on June 6, 2007, for
one TSS limit violation and three pH limit violations in January 2007. The penalty was
paid in full on July 5, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0472) of$1,581.20 was assessed on December 7,
2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in March 2007. The case is
within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0474) of$581.20 was assessed on December 10,
2007, for twenty effluent total residual chlorine limit violations in April 2007. The case
is within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2007-0475) of$2,331.20 was assessed on December 11,
2007, for three effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and one effluent BOD limit
violation in June 2007. The case is within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LM-2007-0050) of$1,981.20 was assessed on December 11,

2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations, one effluent BOD limit
violation, and one temperature monitoring violation in July 2007. The case is within the
30-day response window.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0477) of$3,456.20 was assessed on December 11,
2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and four effluent BOD limit
violations in August 2007. The case is within the 30-day response window.
8. The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures:
Central Office Review and Processing = $100.00
10 hours by investigator for investigating and
drafting the Notice of Violation and the enforcement
package @ $29.73/hour = $297.28
1.0 hour for Supervisory review @ $36.46/hour = $ 36.46
1.0 hour for clerical support @ $15.00/hour = $ 15.00
TOTAL = $448.74
9. Type of violator and general nature of business (i.e. individual vs. large corporation):
The Town of Dallas is a municipality that operates a water treatment plant and a
wastewater treatment plant. Both facilities have discharge permits with the Division of
Water Quality.
10. Violator's degree of cooperation(including efforts to prevent or restore) or recalcitrance:
The Town of Dallas was cooperative in addressing the sludge spill at the Dallas WWTP.
11. Mitigating Circumstances:
The Dallas WWTP is classified as a Grade III plant. Recently, the Mooresville Regional
Office of the Division of Water Quality discovered that the Back-up ORC (Mr. M. Hurt)
for the Dallas WWTP had been reassigned to the Dallas WTP. In addition, the WWTP
ORC (Mr. G. Hughes) was spending minimal time at the WWTP due to work obligations
at the WTP. This left an inexperienced operator(Mr. K. Case) with Grade I certification
to run the daily operations of the Grade III WWTP. It appears that no Dallas WWTP
personnel were on site during the August 30, 2007, sludge spill.
12. Assessment Factors:
a. Receiving Streams: Dallas Branch and Long Creek, Class C waters of the State
b. Damage: Dissolved Oxygen concentrations in two stream segments below the
minimum required water quality standard of 4.0 mg/1.
c. Damage: The dissolved oxygen concentration was 0.3 mg/L in Dallas Branch
approximately 0.5 miles downstream from the Dallas WWTP.
d. Damage: The dissolved oxygen concentration was 0.0 mg/L in Long Creek
approximately 0.6 miles downstream from the Dallas WWTP.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL
RESOURCES
COUNTY OF GASTON
File No. DV-2007-0028
IN THE MATTER OF THE TOWN OF )
DALLAS )
)
FOR VIOLATIONS OF: ) FINDINGS AND DECISIONS
) AND
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL ) ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES
STATUTE G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), )
15A NCAC 2B .0211(2), AND )
15A NCAC 2B 0.211 (3)(b) )
Acting pursuant to delegation provided by the Secretary of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the Director of the Division of Water Quality, I, Matt
Matthews, Division of Water Quality Point Source Branch Manager, make the following:
I. FINDING OF FACT:
A. The Town of Dallas (hereinafter Town) is a municipality organized and existing
under the laws of the State of North Carolina.
B. The Town owns and operates the Dallas Wastewater Treatment Plant (hereinafter
WWTP) in Gaston County.
C. On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of
Water Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while
sampling Dallas Branch for a Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr.
Whitaker subsequently visited the Dallas WWTP, which was upstream from the
sludge spill location, and discovered that wastewater and sludge were being
discharged from the facility.
D. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Mr. Whitaker conducted an investigation into the extent of the
sludge spill and the impact to Dallas Branch. Sludge was found in Dallas Branch at
SR 2275 approximately 0.5 miles downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3 mg/L at this location.
E. Sludge was found in Long Creek at NC Hwy. 279 downstream of the confluence
with Dallas Branch approximately 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location.

Town of Dallas—Dallas WWTP
DV-2007-0028
Page 2
F. No sludge was found in Dallas Branch at the upstream sampling site for the WWTP
NPDES permit NC0068888. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch
was 7.5 mg/L at this location.
G. DWQ file review and site visits revealed that the Town of Dallas discharged
sludge into Dallas Branch and Long Creek from their Dallas WWTP without a
permit for such activity.
H. North Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1(a)(6) requires that a permit be secured
in order to "cause or permit any waste, directly or indirectly, to be discharged to or
in any manner intermixed with waters of the State in violation of the water quality
standards applicable to the assigned classifications or in violation of any effluent
standards or limitations established for any point source, unless allowed as a
condition of any permit, special order or other appropriate instrument issued or
entered into by the Commission under the provisions of the Article."
I. Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2B .0211 (2) requires that Class C
waters maintain conditions related to best usage including"be suitable for aquatic
life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture. Sources of water pollution which preclude any of
these uses on either a short-term basis shall be considered to be violating a water
quality standard".
J. Title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 2B .0211 (3)(b) requires
"dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/L for trout waters; for non-trout waters,
not less than a daily average of 5.0 mg/L with a minimum instantaneous value of
not less than 4.0 mg/L; swamp waters, lake coves or backwaters, and lake bottom
waters may have lower values if caused by natural conditions".
K. On November 5, 2007, the Division of Water Quality Mooresville Regional
Office issued a Notice of Violation and Notice of Recommendation for
Enforcement to the Town for violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B
.0211(2) and 15A NCAC 2B 0.211 (3)(b).
L. The Town's prior record of compliance for the last 3 years with programs over
which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority is as
follows:
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2005-0042) of$1,085.04 was assessed on January
24, 2005, for one effluent Biological Oxygen Demand limit violation (hereinafter
BOD) and one effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation in October 2004. The
penalty was paid in full on February 14, 2005.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2005-0061) of$335.04 was assessed on February 1,

Town of Dallas—Dallas WWTP
DV-2007-0028
Page 3
2005, for one effluent fecal coliform limit violation in November 2004. The
penalty was paid in full on February 14, 2005.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2005-0365) of$335.04 was assessed on September
19, 2005, for one effluent fecal coliform limit violation in May 2005. The penalty
was paid in full on September 28, 2005.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2006-0282) of$580.15 was assessed on August 8,
2006, for one effluent BOD limit violation and one effluent fecal coliform limit
violation in May 2006. The penalty was paid in full on August 30, 2006.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2006-0372) of$1,080.15 was assessed on October
3, 2006, for one effluent BOD limit violation, one effluent fecal coliform limit
violation, one effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation, and one effluent Total
Suspended Solids(hereinafter TSS) limit violation in June 2006. The penalty was
paid in full on October 18, 2006.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2006-0470) of$2,580.15 was assessed on
December 5, 2006, for one effluent BOD limit violation, four effluent fecal
coliform limit violations, and two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in
April 2006. The penalty was paid in full on January 5, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0053) of$831.50 was assessed on February 2,
2007, for one effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violation in September 2007. The
penalty was paid in full on March 7, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0076)of$1,331.50 was assessed on February
13, 2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and one effluent TSS
limit violation in October 2006. The penalty has not been paid and the case is still
open.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0121) of$1,331.50 was assessed on March
26, 2007, for three effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in October 2006.
The penalty was paid in full on April 10, 2007.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2007-0208) of$394.00 was assessed on June 6,
2007, for one TSS limit violation and three pH limit violations in January 2007.
The penalty was paid in full on July 5, 2007.
A civil penalty (Case No. LV-2007-0472) of$1,581.20 was assessed on
December 7, 2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations in March
2007. The case is within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2007-0474) of$581.20 was assessed on December
10, 2007, for twenty effluent total residual chlorine limit violations in April 2007.

Town of Dallas—Dallas WWTP
DV-2007-0028
Page 4
The case is within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2007-0475) of$2,331.20 was assessed on
December 11, 2007, for three effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and one
effluent BOD limit violation in June 2007. The case is within the 30-day response
window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LM-2007-0050) of$1,981.20 was assessed on
December 11, 2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations, one
effluent BOD limit violation, and one temperature monitoring violation in July
2007. The case is within the 30-day response window.
A civil penalty(Case No. LV-2007-0477) of$3,456.20 was assessed on
December 11, 2007, for two effluent ammonia-nitrogen limit violations and four
effluent BOD limit violations in August 2007. The case is within the 30-day
response window.
M. Dallas Branch and Long Creek are classified as C waters in the Catawba River
Basin.
N. The costs to the State for enforcement procedures in this matter totaled $448.74.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact, I make the following:
II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
A. The Town of Dallas is a"person" within the meaning of G.S. 143-215.6A
pursuant to G.S. 143-212 (4).
B. Dallas Branch and Long Creek constitute waters of the State within the meaning
of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(1).
C. The Town of Dallas violated NCGS 143-215.1(a)(6) by discharging sludge from
the Dallas WWTP to waters of the State without first applying for and securing a
permit.
D. The Town of Dallas violated Title 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (2) by discharging sludge
to waters of the State, resulting in the violation of water quality standards for
conditions related to best usage.
E. The Town of Dallas violated Title 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b) by discharging
sludge to waters of the State, resulting in the violation of water quality standards
for dissolved oxygen.

Town of Dallas—Dallas WWTP
DV-2007-0028
Page 5
F. The Town of Dallas may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A (a)(1), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000)per violation per day may be assessed against a
person who violates any classification, standard, limitation, or management
practice established pursuant to G.S. 143-214.1, 143-214.2, or 143-215.
H. The Town of Dallas may be assessed civil penalties in this matter pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6A (a)(2), which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-
five thousand dollars ($25,000) per violation per day may be assessed against a
person who is required but fails to apply for or to secure a permit required by G.S.
143-215.1, or who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions,
or requirements of such permit or any other permit or certification issued pursuant
to authority conferred by this Part.
I. The Town of Dallas may be assessed civil penalties pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6A
(a)(6) which provides that a civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000.00)per violation may be assessed against a person who violates a
rule of the Commission implementing this Part, Part 2A of this Article, or G.S.
143-355(k)
J. Matt Matthews of the Division of Water Quality, pursuant to delegation provided
by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the
Director of the Division of Water Quality, has the authority to assess civil
penalties in this matter.
Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, I make the following:
III. DECISION:
Accordingly, The Town of Dallas is hereby assessed a civil penalty of:
$ for violation of NCGS 143-215.1(a)(6) by discharging or causing sludge to
be intermixed with waters of the State without securing a permit.
$ for of 2 violations of 15A NCAC 2B .0211(3)(b) by discharge
resulting in a dissolved oxygen concentration which did not meet the
minimum instantaneous water quality standard range of 4.0 mg/I in two
stream segments.
$ TOTAL CIVIL PENALTY, authorized by G.S. 143-215.6A
$ 448.74 Enforcement Cost
$ TOTAL AMOUNT DUE

Town of Dallas—Dallas WWTP
DV-2007-0028
Page 6
As required by G.S. 143-215.6A(c), in determining the amount of penalty, I considered
the factors set out in G.S. 143B-282.1(b), which are:
(1) The degree and extent of harm to the natural resources of the State, to the public
health, or to private property resulting from the violation(s);
(2) The duration and gravity of the violation(s);
(3) The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air quality;
(4) The cost of rectifying the damage;
(5) The amount of money saved by noncompliance;
(6) Whether the violation(s)was committed willfully or intentionally;
(7) The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply with programs
over which the Environmental Management Commission has regulatory authority;
and
(8) The cost to the State of the enforcement procedures.
Date Matt Matthews, Point Source Branch
Division of Water Quality

tr/71
O�o W A 7- A? G Michael F.Easley,Governor
✓ William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
CO r
Coleen H.Sullins,Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
November 5, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7007 0710 0005 2882 1516
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. George Hughes
Town of Dallas
210 North Holland Street
Dallas, North Carolina 28034
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION and
RECOMMENDATION FOR ENFORCEMENT
NOV-2007-DV-0272
DWQ Incident No. 200702691
Violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B .0211(2)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b)
Discharge of wastewater and sludge
Town of Dallas, Dallas WWTP
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Hughes:
On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of Water
Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while sampling Dallas Branch for a
Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker then visited the Dallas WWTP, which was
upstream from the sludge spill location and discovered that wastewater and sludge were being
discharged from the facility. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker conducted an investigation to
determine the extent of the sludge spill and any impacts to waters of the State.
The investigation by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker found the following:
1. Sludge was found in Dallas Branch, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at SR 2275
downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3
mg/L at this location.
2. Sludge was found in Long Creek, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at NC Hwy.
279 downstream of the confluence with Dallas Branch and 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The
dissolved oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location. one
NorthCarolina
Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave.,Suite 301 Mooresville,NC 28115 Customer Service
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone] 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Internet:h20.enr.state.nc.us
50%Recycled/10%Post Consumer Paper

Mr.George Hughes
NOV-2007-DV-0272
Page 3 of 2
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director, along with the enforcement package for her
consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms.
Allocco or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
1- I
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: Bob Sledge, NPDES Western Program
Jim Fisher, Environmental Sciences Section-Intensive Survey Unit
Gaston County Health Department
Central Files

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
of \PiAr�9 f -= :�-- i�v -CO.-4,DN i✓) J7L)
(rin 7—
WWTP Upset , Spill, or Bypass 5-Day Reporting Form
(Please Print or Type Use Attachments if Needed)
Perrnittee: 1 c t c' ; i_. Permit Number: ' ' t'',=''-/ 'Sc%`<
Facility Name: [, (rL \ County: )
Incident Started: Date: <, S '`- Time: IL) ,� t ��
Incident Ended: Date: Time: it-) +211
Level of Treatment: r
None _Primary Treatment Secondary Treatment_Chlorination/Disinfection Only
•
Estimated Volume of Spill/Bypass: (must be given even if it is a rough estimate)
Did the Spill/Bypass reach the Surface Waters? Yes No
If yes, please list the following:
Volume Reaching Surface Waters: Surface Water Name: •%r0--'r< )
Did the Spill/Bypass result in a Fish Kill? Yes No
Was WWTP compliant with permit requirements? Yes No
Were samples taken during event? Yes • No —' /'!. /', c.',. C2ti-'-
Source of the Upset/Spill/Bypass (Location or Treatment Unit):
Cause or Reason for the Upset/Spill/Bypass:
L ( Vit.
mac, ( 'L
Describe the Repairs Made or Actions Taken:
Spill/Bypass Reporting Form (August 1997)

'NWIP Upset , Spill, or Bypass 5-Day Reporting Form
Page 2
Action Taken to Contain Spill, Clean Up and Remediate the Site if applicable):
( v;Y1°? : td.t Q���1C tt. �t� � r �� i°V3- L`L„1 71
t'�L.
<< v
•
Action Taken or Proposed to be Taken to Prevent Occurrences:
Additional Comments About the Event:
el7 .Z4itte,§C_.)
24-Hour Report Made To: Division of Water Quality L/ Emergency Management
Contact Name: i U._.1;t.Gi.t.t a,A~�LI+tie. Date: / &/c 7 Time: i47.' 30
ti
Other Agencies Notified (Health Dept, etc): t-t;'C=' Li;-nc_ -k"-t:-►
Person Reporting Event: ` C1Sst Phone Number. '2C - q/ - 3/
Did DWQ Request an Additional Written Report? %/Yes _No
If Yes, What Additional Information is Needed: _,� ,
Spill/Bypass Reporting Form (August 1997)

SEP-6-2007 12:25P FROM:TOWPJ OF DALLAS WTP 704-922-1309 TO: 17046636040 P. 1
FACSIMILIE COVER SHEET
TOWN OF DALLAS WTP/ WWTP
210 North Holland Street Phone Number 1-704.922-1309
Dallas, North Carolina 28034 Fax Number 1-704-922-1309
SEND TO FROM
!
W 8µ c^-
� � Y
ATTENTION DATE
- - 01
FAX NUMBER PHONE NUMBER
-\ -6 (. 3- 66 k,ZoI.
Urgent Reply ASAP Please Comment Please Review FYI
Total pages including cover sheet r/ o�+�� 4 e—S
r

SEP-6-2007 12:25P FROM:TOWN OF DALLAS WTP 704-922-1309 TO:17046636040 P.2
September 6,2007
Wes Bell
NCDENR
610 East Center St
Mooresville,N.C.28115
Subject Plant Upset,Dallas WWTP
Dear Mr.Bell,
At approx. 12:00 noon on Thur(8-30-07)the operator at the plant was notifyed by Mr.Jim Fisher that we
had solids running Into the creek in which we dicharge into.The operator was somewhat confused,being he just
concluded his process control approx.a hour and half before and everthing appeared ok.When notifyed by Mr.Fisher
he was Just returning from checking the lift stations. He checked the unit,solids were coming over the weir.
Mr.Fisher suggested reporting it has a spill.At this time the operator notifyed me,I intumed notified the Mooresville office.
The operator increased the return,started wasting to minimise the solids overflowing the weir.
After talking with Barber and explaining what had taken place,and what was going on she recommend.
opening flow to the unit that was down for repairs.Which was done at approx.13:30,the flow over the weir cleared up
at approx. 16:30,at approx. 19:00 flow to the unit that was not in service was closed off.
I feel this problem was caused by several factors,We had took 1 Unit out of service for repairs to a diffuser
which put all the flow on the unit In service,which didn't pose a problem at this time, since each unit is rated for 300,000
gallons.We also started pumping the unit to be serviced into this unit at approx.63,000 gallons a day over the next 8 days
We had increased wasting to try and offset the increase in solids,but appears that it was not enough,this led to
the sludge blanket to increase,This combined with the flow at that time which was approx.289,000 led to the blanket
overflowing the weir.
To keep this from occuring again we have took serveral steps,we have increased wasting,also during the high
flow we are opening the flow to the basin out of service which has stopped the hydrulic overload,we have had as of this
letter approx.222,000 gals.Of sludge removed from the daffier,also approx. 110,000 gals of sludge removed from the
contact chamber where it seems most of the solids overflowing the weir were collected,We also have contacted
Southern Soil Builders to remove the solids&water in the unit not in service so that the repairs can be made, samples
were pulled on 9-5-07 Just has soon has the results are completed,Southern Soil should start hauling hopefully by the
end of next week.We also checked the stream there seems to be no solids accumlation,that night of 8-30-07 we had
a shower that showed a rainfall reading of approx. 1/2"of rain.
Hopefully this will not occure again.Thank you for your understanding.If I can be of further help
please call,704-913-4315.
Thank You,
G e Hughes

Re: SludgeSpill -Dallas Branch - Dallas NC
Subject: Re: Sludge Spill - Dallas Branch - Dallas NC
From: Dianne Reid <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:21:02 -0400
To: Jim Fisher <[e-mail]>, Sar: Whitaker <[e-mail]>
Thank you for your work on this and for the concise report. I've passed it on to
Jimmie. Dianne
Jim Fisher wrote:
DWQ Environmental Sciences Staff, Jim Fisher and Sam Whitaker, while sampling
Dallas Branch in the Catawba Basin for Watershed Stressor Studies, noted a sludge
spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 Gaston Co. ( Robinson - Clemer Rd.) in Dallas
NC on 8/30/2007 at 1130 AM. Physical data was taken ( Temp. - 26.5 °C, DO - 0.3
mg/1, pH - 7.0 su, SP. Cond. - 624 umhos)and the chemical samples slated ( Tot. P
& metals) for this stream were taken.
We then went to the Dallas wastewater treatment plant to see what was going on
and found one of the operators, a Mr. Kirby Case and told him there was sludge in
Dallas Branch at Robinson - Clemer Rd. ) . We then walked over to one of the two
waste treatment plants on the site and saw that sludge was going over the weir in
the clarifier and then checked a manhole to the outfall pipe and saw sludge in
it. I asked Mr. Case if there was anyway to shut the flow of sludge off. He
informed me that the ORC, a Mr. George Hews, had just left, and that they were
pumping sludge from one plant to another because they had lost that plant a few
weeks earlier. Mr. Case said he would call Mr. Hews about the spill. I told him
that they needed to call the Field Office in Mooresville and report a spill and
that I would call the Mooresville Office also. I called the Field Office and
talked to Barbara Sifford and reported the spill. We then went to the upstream
sampling site for the treatment plant on Dallas Branch and saw that it was clear
and took physical measurements ( Time 1240, Temp. - 23 .0 °C, DO - 7.5 mg/1, pH -
6.9 su. , Sp. Cond. - 105 umhos. ) . I walked down to where the effluent pipe went
into the stream and saw that sludge and wastewater were coming out of the pipe.
In subsequent phone calls to Barbara Sifford she said that Mr. Hews had called
her and they decided to divert the wastewater flow to the plant off line, stop
pumping sludge, and let the plant with the hydraulic overload settle down.
Barbara Sifford asked how far the sludge had traveled, so we went down to the next
larger creek which was Long Creek at NC Hwy. 279 and found the sludge in the
stream and took physical measurements (Time 1315, Temp. - 27.0 °C, DO - 0.0
mg/1, pH - 7.0 su. , Sp. Cond. - 240 umhos) .
We went back to the Dallas wastewater treatment plant and Mr. Hews was there
and we talked about his conversations with Barbara Sifford and the solutions to
the problem they had discussed. We looked at the clarifier and saw that the
effluent was clearing up and the sludge blanket in the clarifier was going down.
Mr. Hews asked about pumping the sludge out of the stream and I told him I didn't
see that much access to the stream only a small section at the road crossing,
don't know how that was resolved. We talked to Barbara Sifford again and told her
what was going on and that we would go check the next downstream bridge on Long
Creek and call her. On the way to Long Creek we stopped by Dallas Branch at
Robinson - Clemer Rd. and saw that the stream was still dark with sludge and that
the flow was down and that a thin layer of sludge had coated the sand in the
stream where the flow had receded. We checked Long Creek at Dallas- Spencer
Mountain Rd. and determined that the sludge hadn't gotten that far and took
physical measurements ( Temp. - 25.2 °C, DO - 6.3 mg/1, pH - 7.1 su, Sp. Cond. -
199 umhos) . Called Barbara Sifford again and reported our findings and told her
that we were going on to Stanly NC to sample two streams near there.
Dianne Reid
Supervisor - Intensive Surveys Unit
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality
p (919) 733-6510
f (919) 733-9959
1621 Mail Service Center
1 of 2 9/12/2007 1:44 PM

December 2, 2007
RECEIVED
DEC 7 2007
Mr. Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
610 East Center St. ` r NC DEUR MR0
Mooresville, N.C. 28115 DY�V�'.�t-Surface Water Protection
Subject: Notice of Violation and Recommendation for Enforcement
DWQ incident No. 200702691
Dear Mr. Krebs,
The letter that was faxed to Mr. Wes Bell on 9/6/07 was the response to your NOV letter dated
November 5, 2007. I have nothing to add to it.
Sicerely, 11
Ii
,A -e-
tiL,
George Hughes

\ �1 j • • • 1`\ 1'\� /�'-->`��"7,, V ' I+'� l�lV I ( II/(._,,,______,/..---- /.
f�i/ ` �r1v `• 8•31-7.11 y�v• re 1 -(4%0.-7,..y., 1\ jlN \..\...,./
`\ , /V � II 'Cl�
' •• \ ♦ (' //•' C-.•
r‘,` . i_', , //��/ '�"1 1l V,\ i ,IkI v A� �. /� `• •,�"� r...`\. .�b ..1 ) ) / ��!',II v / -„
7 • .II1 ,��
•
i \\\ •
•.! t- •'h/•„.-%„,
\ �▪\ _)1\ ) ./�7`��f'1,��1� ntZ_ 1;••• I 1 1 63e - 1 ( ( I�V`� _ --J Ir • L':./ '�c
� l' • •
• ' •• • , . • 1 /ra .�•�1ieR7 -•_ `1 . g % i '- V \\ � 1. 6 \let
i'i: ll I L� //'''/�!'C t1 \'^ � /,{ r`_ tr/2:,Z.S\\ •\' Ji, :I \J / I _ .. - / �� \:...,,''''.
.;, _- '.."/
i r' �
ek !\, ;1/I •c% 3'i�� i / �\/'.\ /' if (� - 1 J Mountain View M1 ji-;. ';-;:-.3-7"\-\.�.
ry 1 •- �'• : I + I s'^--
.'�• •\ / r '�• I r .• 1...`y , /.�/ /'�!!! ,/,,-/' - Ch jrG'- , \� II (•
1/. ..‘j
,0 . '''''Thij \'/n '� ))J J I } ( I i -��' ,_._.„..-/---/
,/ f /r !r ' r 1 �� * 1:� �-,.i /-�^ 6<<x _ ry
� . j /1T % 4-,:--fl i 1 I -,, i N.,,,,k-7-‘, al y/f } \l��! tt , , 1 1� / \i„:„.._...,--) n 1
., (.• ((,,,;/-- , 1'-..((- ) il )1)•'-' I,il''-' ,•, ••.1"-) .711:1•.. .t.'/•.i.„••//,.._ ‘'t.-tr- •:.'',... • t\t$.
C 1 . 1 l / ;
y/✓ 1� I� � i, I \! j ���i /� '`� q'��1C I✓�^' }��o �, � • I '% / u \ Ir �'^ O�
1• a, i I II �Ts1 ®��•POu /�r;�'� ly j/ �1� ��I�,1I c-\.\��) Jl/� °) i � .`�� i.._, (Rl4y:.. '� . ..--”/ •1•
/ • 1. • \
rt v II \
= / .' L If 11� •"31111 �• (� e)- --v\ -- '- '' \\ '
11 \\•. Ce�•.
I
e/ T _141 Foo! •
„ I -----7614 !rEpic Till �' •-_, .,\ Srai a! \)1\21 '' r`'1'J', ' .\ i cu\ ~�'� , !��� (��. ,,,../ ' • a �rx 5� _
l
•Wat LI , M ,Carr ( •r- �-\� .l ��\ -TJ/-`, • r 1. •.' i• i-� • \ 1 47- 4i
FTanfc ; o ;` I Sch I ` / 'h ` - sr / / -� _ /\k `G. 1;2321 , + I • , - 1+1003 ;-- -�__�
' u t I Con Qe`,b '\ � w 4 et /� •;' :• 7 .y '7s7 �.1�`�ii\ - - J �� �V . "i_�`l; /
ill r. , \_� rr 'ak +/e
..\,;.k.)--- b•1 :1 _.:- \� r /II t _y';' •, r\• ▪/ !t•,1`\ 1 \ \11 2 Ik' 4 - \.t Lo1\ t'. 1 it---: ; }: ``ge`+ \ I'.1•/,';-/••-", \. ..,:...-....:j.)L\ - ,� V. -H., ...:.,s:-..._...%Y� �3r `I r-\ ho t � `\ )I 'Oo , r �' !— _) 1 tl• l ; 1,1.,',ng^tr,C'l •� r -7/ I
II .. ' \ �� � 1 1) • J i1)• , ' '•a "77 • \Sev4See009sa • a- -� l� LO 4.) •-_
II ' -_ �e o / \ titin / y; -r ;;_, \-):., __ '• ;\'�. - '� `- -. •Oa`o J.. - „,:-.,..,.-..,„.„9::,,,.../!,i ” ;yf �,:'' -') 1
11%..._ mss•/ @�,� _� �� ;� .�+,-; 1 Ir 1 - __ _ - ,- •/,,f '.1..t < I ' ;Tanly-rf . .I
N \' :Lr.• mal. ; 1.\� i▪ '�� ! .1 ;'; �\•\ / (is -.,f •L •-‘:.•._......"•< --!--z-1 ,-1,--j- ee r!qJ;' �_ '/ e'Narter . �: .`1 :1/
\
l i ;:4,e., i Ry. \ i _........fl_ _r• 'f •f.•,;1,•• \\ . t,,\„'\,\,_, // j I 0 c a I it + I 1
,. r 1. J •\ •i1 ,i. ., o d ax !! n S �+ I
� '\s . \\.•\____..- -;‘..'1.--)•\ ti U \`.', 1-r' h -.\ /�O CPI d ntArn\ .
- - 1 .' .• I �•;''� ��� �s'ti •fl ___ � s `-'' 1 \S •-\.)
) .--�. � da � 11. � `2� � i.y
y'* a/ ',.././
•p• { \ -••.\ II(' moi\ `♦ ••l b, C ,. 1" I \‘‘r
' L i n=a z.�- f� c
(.J \vl i v. A ,, .fir • t.••{f`� \ '\ / ..A kt N ( ir' Q ". -�? 2f
'H• 1 -.. ca, / o�-' ,, '/ 1 I r' ! 1• r x-11 / \'�'' { µ\ ,!
1 6 i \Radio..Towera_j o r f - :•/ "� ', 1: 1( . ) \�, ',� i
i' D; , ; i ; ... { ems �- 1J :,:;\ j. u:�'•.. ,' ; _1�
w ,_ c
' N, .—. / \/ .4k.. /,. i /` n ' �rr�� 1 •( 1•a �'�4 . a r I ti:�pe ce �-l. t 1
GravetX may, ,•11 / i _ 6..✓ _ 134.6 ]L' \-- �' gulp 1V J. r /
P-it :. / '+' /� _ ( U � �.. ��i yf
:: • •• J i -.l -�! .l 111((7 ��r ( ( ( pl?5 � J ,l
BM r W41. )
n 732 ;';\ .n;a•. // f ;����.\,�'� ', ' r-. �• JJJ 'II.II \ .. (-- _ //� �
, - ro.2 ) \,`_...141, '
Park ••o'
Rankin Lake a �O
• l
:I
,', ,.....,,"!•'- 4„.„1 G://'ce ...... 1., t . ,. ; •..' : /, i, 7 ;'" I--,---'-•;-
-------'5-''.'""r
;:.-•"!-\--1
-c a-----z":.-----:.
_ � \. -i /! �' ,.�- `\ Cr4a.J.• ••�• ''I•
--' i / r/ /` '� i ( '� -- —' . • r .J'+,\ r / •
` \
fi - -�_ '''-.1"1(r / ��� /„..,\. �' ! �0 r C 1�. h_' Ranld � ,i1 ( \ �. -\ _-----).
J �/ �; ▪ ,� \ :::;"2.--. i' r \‘\,1,, \• 'I, I ( / . :ih •• ii • ` \ �? \
r // ^ \ \"•.---.ril `\ II(�',�. �� j \ �i I ,'
tl 4 \ \`',..--„,'..%
1 I i \il 1i :'
i ..I s'.. 0 I.
_ 7 �I: .' ,...1.,/"--
" , `
•
r • �, x
cnkin Lake 1-, 1 1 '� 7.:2____./.: \�_,1 '., ,r' .,+ X• ,•. I , 1 •'r, \• 1 ..„____,, s ,..„, t _ _:• ... sR• .. •A• `,�, , ..1
\ / '1 r.,•f ,�_ l ( rte/ T:\\.}• i• --,•:.‘\ 1;<�i ' ,-a0•• _i I I , ..1 ■' .� 4k-19
3 � /,. s% _ it ,'i li • / I,�` \ \ �S gntAsid �' \6 t r•_s _:: ,l� +
O • I (.- i :e'' :/ l v �_ •:Q ;�-�` +•' i '.. ./ 1` j r. IIV ,. .-2..` '' •.ZL'�,., /! uu '1', ;« Y/
- : . . : - z„.•:.•-••-•, - ...„_v• ,--/-;:"...-. . --__ -.--, / . :• :1E r. , 4,"eft . • • --,,..
j ,/ ~O� irr Q Li G vf---,-,•:•,,/'. o -.� _.....\,,,,F1'1111415,-Ch•+i+' •1! / /,.' \ •hg , o I ! i - I //..."-'1 G, / \
`� l I Q \• /cam- 7�l 9�k 1 •
/
• � --- ��� j r\ ._• 18.1 _.� ` v. 1^ I€a `\ �a1_ II i •V•i .. II�.- ' i e, 1 ;(i8J� % /_/ j r1I,;Wa,Sth�_JAi' 11 -_ L`- •�I \1>` -V �.

�0' VVAT�R Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
> Coleen H.Sullins,Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
November 5, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7007 0710 0005 2882 1516
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. George Hughes
Town of Dallas
210 North Holland Street
Dallas, North Carolina 28034
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION and
RECOMMENDATION FOR ENFORCEMENT
NOV-2007-DV-0272
• DWQ Incident No. 200702691
Violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B .0211(2)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b)
Discharge of wastewater and sludge
Town of Dallas, Dallas WWTP
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Hughes:
On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of Water
Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while sampling Dallas Branch for a
Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker then visited the Dallas WWTP, which was
upstream from the sludge spill location and discovered that wastewater and sludge were being
discharged from the facility. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker conducted an investigation to
determine the extent of the sludge spill and any impacts to waters of the State.
The investigation by Mr. Fisher and Mr.Whitaker found the following:
1. Sludge was found in Dallas Branch, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at SR 2275
downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3
mg/L at this location.
2. Sludge was found in Long Creek, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at NC Hwy.
279 downstream of the confluence with Dallas Branch and 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The
dissolved oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location. one
NorthCarolina
Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave.,Suite 301 Mooresville,NC 28115 Customer Service
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone] 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Internet:h20.enr.state.nc.us
50%Recycled/l 0%Post Consumer Paper

Mr.George Hughes
NOV-2007-DV-02 72
Page 2 of 2
3. No sludge was found in Dallas Branch at the upstream sampling site for the WWTP NPDES
permit. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 7.5 mg/L at this location.
4. No sludge was found in Long Creek at Dallas-Spencer Mountain Road. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 6.3 mg/L at this location.
As a result of the site visit the following violations are noted:
Item I. Discharge without a permit
G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6)
Cause or permit any waste, directly or indirectly, to be discharged to or in any manner
intermixed with waters of the State in violation of the water quality standards applicable to the
assigned classifications or in violation of any effluent standards or limitations established for any
point source, unless allowed as a condition of a permit, special order or other appropriate
instrument issued or entered into by the Commission under the provisions of this Article.
Item II. Removal of Best Usage
Title 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (2)
The waters shall be suitable for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity,
wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture; sources of water pollution which preclude any of
these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis shall be considered to be violating a water
quality standard.
Item III. DO Standard
Title 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (3)b
Dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/L for trout waters; for non-trout waters, not less than a
daily average of 5.0 mg/L with a minimum instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/L; swamp
waters, lake coves or backwaters, and lake bottom waters may have lower values if caused by
natural conditions.
Be advised that G.S. 143-215.6A provides for a civil penalty assessment of not more than
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000),or twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000)per day when the
violation is of a continuing nature, against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to
secure a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1. Penalties may also be assessed for any damage to the
surface waters of the State that may result from the unpermitted discharge.
This Office is in receipt of your faxed letter dated September 6, 2007,providing information
on the August 30,2007, unpermitted discharge from the Town of Dallas WWTP and the
implementation of corrective actions to eliminate the potential for recurrent illegal discharges.
This letter is also to advise you that this Office is considering sending a Recommendation
for Enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Quality for the subject violation. If you
have any additional information that you wish to present, please forward it to this Office
within 10 days of receipt of this letter. Your September 6, 2007, faxed letter and any additional
information you submit will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,

Ar.George Hughes
NOV-2007-DV-0272
Page 3 of 2
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director, along with the enforcement package for her
consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms.
Allocco or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: Bob Sledge, NPDES Western Program
Jim Fisher, Environmental Sciences Section-Intensive Survey Unit
Gaston County Health Department
Central Files

�F W A-/- 4 Michael F.Easley,Governor
r OCA QG William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
. Colcen H.Sullins,Director
0 '< Division of Water Quality
November 28, 2007
CERTIFIED MAUI,#7007 0710 0005 2882 1523
RFTITRN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Steve Miller, Town Manager
Town of Dallas
210 North Holland Street
Dallas, North Carolina 28034
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION and RECOMMENDATION
FOR ENFORCEMENT
NOV-2007-DV-0272
DWQ Incident No. 200702691
Violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B .0211(2)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b)
Discharge of wastewater and sludge
Town of Dallas, Dallas WWTP
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Miller:
Attached is a copy of the Notice of Violation and Recommendation for Enforcement that
was sent to Mr. George Hughes on November 5, 2007. As of today this Office has not received any
additional information from the Town regarding the sludge spill in Dallas Branch on August 30,
2007.
This letter is to advise you that this Office will be sending a Recommendation for
Enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Quality for the subject violation.
Should you have questions,please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Marcia Allocco or me at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection
cc: Robert Sledge,NCDENR-DWQ
Noe Carolina
® � ,111 tura!!y
NCDENR
Mooresville Regional Office Division of Water Quality
Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: \ ,_ n�',\atehiu;i_in, 610 East Center Ave,Suite 301 Mooresville,NC 28115 Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled110%Post Consumer Paper

Dv\J A rF.4pG Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
y Coleen H.Sullins,Deputy Director
< Division of Water Quality
November 5, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL 7007 0710 0005 2882 1516
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. George Hughes
Town of Dallas
210 North Holland Street
Dallas, North Carolina 28034
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION and
RECOMMENDATION FOR ENFORCEMENT
NOV-2007-DV-0272
DWQ Incident No. 200702691
Violations of G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6), 15A NCAC 2B .0211(2)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0211 (3)(b)
Discharge of wastewater and sludge
Town of Dallas, Dallas WWTP
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Hughes:
On August 30, 2007, Mr. Jim Fisher and Mr. Sam Whitaker of the Division of Water
Quality discovered a sludge spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 while sampling Dallas Branch for a
Watershed Stressor study. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker then visited the Dallas WWTP,which was
upstream from the sludge spill location and discovered that wastewater and sludge were being
discharged from the facility. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker conducted an investigation to
determine the extent of the sludge spill and any impacts to waters of the State.
The investigation by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Whitaker found the following:
1. Sludge was found in Dallas Branch, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at SR 2275
downstream of the WWTP. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 0.3
mg/L at this location.
2. Sludge was found in Long Creek, a class C water in the Catawba River basin, at NC Hwy.
279 downstream of the confluence with Dallas Branch and 0.6 miles from the WWTP. The
dissolved oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 0.0 mg/L at this location. one
No hCarolina
turafly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave.,Suite 301 Mooresville,NC 28115 Customer Service
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone] 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Internet:h20.enrstate.nc.us
50%Recycled/10%Post Consumer Paper

Mr.George Hughes
NOV-2007-Dv-0272
Page 2 of 2
3. No sludge was found in Dallas Branch at the upstream sampling site for the WWTP NPDES
permit. The dissolved oxygen concentration in Dallas Branch was 7.5 mg/L at this location.
4. No sludge was found in Long Creek at Dallas-Spencer Mountain Road. The dissolved
oxygen concentration in Long Creek was 6.3 mg/L at this location.
As a result of the site visit the following violations are noted:
Item I. Discharge without a permit
G.S. 143-215.1(a)(6)
Cause or permit any waste, directly or indirectly, to be discharged to or in any manner
intermixed with waters of the State in violation of the water quality standards applicable to the
assigned classifications or in violation of any effluent standards or limitations established for any
point source, unless allowed as a condition of a permit, special order or other appropriate
instrument issued or entered into by the Commission under the provisions of this Article.
Item II. Removal of Best Usage
Title 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (2)
The waters shall be suitable for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity,
wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture; sources of water pollution which preclude any of
these uses on either a short-term or long-term basis shall be considered to be violating a water
quality standard.
Item III. DO Standard
Title 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (3)b
Dissolved oxygen: not less than 6.0 mg/L for trout waters; for non-trout waters, not less than a
daily average of 5.0 mg/L with a minimum instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/L; swamp
waters, lake coves or backwaters, and lake bottom waters may have lower values if caused by
natural conditions.
Be advised that G.S. 143-215.6A provides for a civil penalty assessment of not more than
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000),or twenty-five thousand dollars($25,000)per day when the
violation is of a continuing nature, against any person who is required but fails to apply for or to
secure a permit required by G.S. 143-215.1. Penalties may also be assessed for any damage to the
surface waters of the State that may result from the unpermitted discharge.
This Office is in receipt of your faxed letter dated September 6, 2007,providing information
on the August 30, 2007,unpermitted discharge from the Town of Dallas WWTP and the
implementation of corrective actions to eliminate the potential for recurrent illegal discharges.
This letter is also to advise you that this Office is considering sending a Recommendation
for Enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Quality for the subject violation. If you
have any additional information that you wish to present, please forward it to this Office
within 10 days of receipt of this letter. Your September 6,2007, faxed letter and any additional
information you submit will be reviewed and if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate,

Mr.George Hughes
NOV-2007-DV-0272
Page 3of2
your explanation will be forwarded to the Director,along with the enforcement package for her
consideration.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms.
Allocco or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
cc: Bob Sledge, NPDES Western Program
Jim Fisher, Environmental Sciences Section-Intensive Survey Unit
Gaston County Health Department
Central Files

,
Bob Sledge {
Point Source Compliance
Division of Water Quality -_- -.-- - —
Bob, `
Can you review this WWTP bypass to see if we should send an NOV or NOV/NRE?
Apparently the ambient monitoring group was doing sampling near the Dallas WWTP
and found that the plant was discharging sludge directly into the stream. When they
went to the WWTP I was told no one was there (Back-up ORC) checking pump stations
so no one was at the plant to oversee the transfer of wastewater from one treatment
train to the other.
Although we have not taken action on bypasses in the past I was thinking this should
receive at the minimum an NOV since it was preventable.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Marcia

- North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
GF `•N Ac9
\pG
>
WWTP Upset , Spill, or Bypass 5-Day Reporting Form
(Please Print or Type Use Attachments if Needed)
Permittee: c, �_ , 1 :.,lit Permit Number: .? !-1_2(../iC
Facility Name: -s Vit . •U. ��_+\ ' County:
Incident Started: Date: Time: +
Incident Ended: Date: S i t.' Time: )/.
Level of Treatment: A j r
_None_Primary Treatment_Secondary Treatment_Chlorination/Disinfection Only
Estimated Volume of Spill/Bypass: (must be given even if it is a rough estimate)
Did the Spill/Bypass reach the Surface Waters? ,/"Yes_No
If yes, please list the following:
Volume Reaching Surface Waters: Surface Water Name:
Did the Spill/Bypass result in a Fish Kill? Yes No
Was WWTP compliant with permit requirements? Yes No
Were samples taken during event? Yes _No -'., /(. .! 1 t...; •? '..
I ?
Source of the Upset/Spill/Bypass (Location or Treatment Unit):
ri
Cause or Reason for the Upset/Spill/Bypass:
"// /lift
E Lt
Describe the Repairs Made or Actions Taken:
1 C'Lt
J
Spill/Bypass Reporting Form (August 1997)

WW1 P Upset , Spill, or Bypass 5-Day Reporting Form
Page 2
Action Taken to Contain Spill, Clean Up and Remediate the Site If applicable):
- � l
Action Taken or Proposed to be Taken to Prevent Occurrences:
Additional Comments About the Event:
^ ? Y
,1 1,\x• )ix L.)Ltt-. (� -V '�..�''(, .��/' y. _ �• ��� i.<. 1 �.-t L,. tce--i.
i.
24-Hour Report Made To: Division of Water Quality ;,i ,Emergency Management
J n .
Contact Name: r r,1E.L .`r`ti t �,� . .<_ Date: ` =?C f Time: /47.7.
Other Agencies Notified (Health Dept, etc): (1)0D•t_.' Y J i-Y\
Person Reporting Event: ( CI(cePhone Number. ''C / -- V-7/3—
_1
Did DWQ Request an Additional Written Report? /Yes_No
If Yes, What Additional Information is Needed:
/ A l
C/CiChh' (TCr'l.�fccei - ; lG'l;Ci -/�` /' ,/V.ff.' z
id -7 /
:t Lam - c. r“ --
Spill/Bypass Reporting Form (August 1997)

SEP-6-2007 12:25P FROM:TOWN OF DALLAS WTP 704-922-1309 TO: 17046636040 P.1
FACSIMILIE COVER SHEET
TOWN OF DALLAS WTP/WWTP
210 North Holland Street Phone Number 1-704-922-1309
Dallas, North Carolina 28034 Fax Number 1-704-922-1309
SEND TO FROM
W 'e CU \.\,�r L 8w �- c".-
ATTENTION
ATTENTION DATE
FAX NUMBER PHONE NUMBER
f? v \ —6 (43' 669 a ' off, --ev=2- ‘,30ct
Urgent Reply ASAP Please Comment Please Review FYI
Total pages including cover sheet A Q.`, S e—S
1
AIL !\k
t

SEP-6-2007 12:25P FROM:TOWN OF GALLAS WTP 704-922-1309 TO: 17046636040 P.2
September 6,2007
Wes Bell
NCDENR
610 East Center St.
Mooresville, N.C.28115
Subject:Plant Upset, Dallas WWTP
Dear Mr.Bell,
At approx. 12:00 noon on Thur(8-30-07)the operator at the plant was notifyed by Mr.Jim Fisher that we
had solids running Into the creek In which we dicharge into.The operator was somewhat confused,being he just
concluded his process control approx.a hour and half before and everting appeared ok.When notifyed by Mr. Fisher
he was Just returning from checking the lift stations. He checked the unit,solids ware coming over the weir.
Mr.Fisher suggested reporting it has a spill.At this time the operator notifyed me,I intumed notified the Mooresville office.
The operator increased the return,started wasting to minimise the solids overflowing the weir.
After talking with Barber and explaining what had taken place,and what was going on she recommend.
opening flow to the unit that was down for repairs.Which was done at approx.13:30,the flow over the weir cleared up
at approx. 18:30,at approx. 19:00 flow to the unit that was not in service was dosed oft.
I feel this problem was caused by several factors,We had took 1 Unit out of service for repairs to a diffuser
which put all the flow on the unit In service,which didn't pose a problem at this time, since each unit is rated for 300,000
gallons.We also started pumping the unit to be serviced into this unit at approx.63,000 gallons a day over the next 8 days
We had increased wasting to try and offset the increase in solids,but appears that it was not enough,this led to
the sludge blanket to increase,This combined with the flow at that time which was approx.289,000 led to the blanket
overflowing the weir.
To keep this from occuring again we have took serveral steps,we have increased wasting,also during the high
flow we are opening the flow to the basin out of service which has stopped the hydrulic overload,we have had as of this
letter approx.222,000 gals. Of sludge removed from the darifer,also approx. 110,000 gals of sludge removed from the
contact chamber where it seems most of the solids overflowing the weir were collected,We also have contacted
Southern Soil Builders to remove the solids&water in the unit not in service so that the repairs can be made,samples
were pulled on 9-5-07 Just has soon has the results are completed,Southern Sal should start hauling hopefully by the
end of next week.We also checked the stream there seems to be no solids accumlatlon,that night of 8-30-07 we had
a shower that showed a rainfall reading of approx. 1/2"of rain.
Hopefully this will not occure again.Thank you for your understanding.If I can be of further help
please cell,704-913-4315.
Thank You,
G a Hughes

Re: Sludge Spill- Dallas Branch - Dallas NC
•
Subject: Re: Sludge Spill - Dallas Branch - Dallas NC
From: Dianne Reid <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 12:21:02 -0400
To: Jim Fisher <[e-mail]>, Sam Whitaker <[e-mail]>
Thank you for your work on this and for the concise report. I 've passed it on to
Jimmie. Dianne
Jim Fisher wrote:
DWQ Environmental Sciences Staff, Jim Fisher and Sam Whitaker, while sampling
Dallas Branch in the Catawba Basin for Watershed Stressor Studies, noted a sludge
spill in Dallas Branch at SR 2275 Gaston Co. ( Robinson - Clemer Rd. ) in Dallas
NC on 8/30/2007 at 1130 AM. Physical data was taken ( Temp. - 26.5 °C, DO - 0.3
mg/1, pH - 7.0 su, SP. Cond. - 624 umhos)and the chemical samples slated ( Tot. P
& metals) for this stream were taken.
We then went to the Dallas wastewater treatment plant to see what was going on
and found one of the operators, a Mr. Kirby Case and told him there was sludge in
Dallas Branch at Robinson - Clemer Rd. ) . We then walked over to one of the two
waste treatment plants on the site and saw that sludge was going over the weir in
the clarifier and then checked a manhole to the outfall pipe and saw sludge in
it. I asked Mr. Case if there was anyway to shut the flow of sludge off. He
informed me that the ORC, a Mr. George Hews, had just left, and that they were
pumping sludge from one plant to another because they had lost that plant a few
weeks earlier. Mr. Case said he would call Mr. Hews about the spill. I told him
that they needed to call the Field Office in Mooresville and report a spill and
that I would call the Mooresville Office also. I called the Field Office and
talked to Barbara Sifford and reported the spill. We then went to the upstream
sampling site for the treatment plant on Dallas Branch and saw that it was clear
and took physical measurements ( Time 1240, Temp. - 23 .0 °C, DO - 7.5 mg/1, pH -
6.9 su. , Sp. Cond. - 105 umhos. ) . I walked down to where the effluent pipe went
into the stream and saw that sludge and wastewater were coming out of the pipe.
In subsequent phone calls to Barbara Sifford she said that Mr. Hews had called
her and they decided to divert the wastewater flow to the plant off line, stop
pumping sludge, and let the plant with the hydraulic overload settle down.
Barbara Sifford asked how far the sludge had traveled, so we went down to the next
larger creek which was Long Creek at NC Hwy. 279 and found the sludge in the
stream and took physical measurements (Time 1315, Temp. - 27.0 °C, DO - 0.0
mg/1, pH - 7.0 su. , Sp. Cond. - 240 umhos) .
We went back to the Dallas wastewater treatment plant and Mr. Hews was there
and we talked about his conversations with Barbara Sifford and the solutions to
the problem they had discussed. We looked at the clarifier and saw that the
effluent was clearing up and the sludge blanket in the clarifier was going down.
Mr. Hews asked about pumping the sludge out of the stream and I told him I didn't
see that much access to the stream only a small section at the road crossing,
don't know how that was resolved. We talked to Barbara Sifford again and told her
what was going on and that we would go check the next downstream bridge on Long
Creek and call her. On the way to Long Creek we stopped by Dallas Branch at
Robinson - Clemer Rd. and saw that the stream was still dark with sludge and that
the flow was down and that a thin layer of sludge had coated the sand in the
stream where the flow had receded. We checked Long Creek at Dallas- Spencer
Mountain Rd. and determined that the sludge hadn't gotten that far and took
physical measurements ( Temp. - 25.2 °C, DO - 6.3 mg/1, pH - 7.1 su, Sp. Cond. -
199 umhos) . Called Barbara Sifford again and reported our findings and told her
that we were going on to Stanly NC to sample two streams near there.
Dianne Reid
Supervisor - Intensive Surveys Unit
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality
p (919) 733-6510
f (919) 733-9959
1621 Mail Service Center
1 of 2 9/12/2007 1:44 PM

4111141111114100.
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
• Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Sig :ture /
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. �i ilf�C 0 Agent
• Print your name and address on the reverse X I `'� 0 Addressee
so that we can return the card to you. eceived by(Printed Name) C Date of Delivery
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, - --14-41/
or on the front if space permits. :;(1( •
D. I.delivery address different from item 1? 0 Yes
1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No
MR STEVE MILLER
TOWN MANAGER
TOWN OF DALLAS 3. Service Type
210 NORTH HOLLAND STREET ❑Certified Mail ❑Express Mail
DALLAS NC 28034 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Number 7 0 0 2 0 510 0 0 0 0 5 4 61 614 0
(Transfer from service label)
PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540

_ 1
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
r ;i11,1,!L.O f.. t' :': „P fla t
±'! 'Pflt tt No.G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
BOB SLEDGE
NCDENR DWQ PSB NPDES
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1617
,r0,3 -7 - 0,1Z n Fl;