NC0079561_Wasteload Allocation_19901109

k
;=
PERMIT NO.: NC0079561
PERMITTEE NAME: Town of Elk Park
Facility Status: Proposed
Permit Status: New
Major
Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 0.1 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow):
Industrial (% of Flow):
100 %
0%
Comments:
residence near proposed discharge
RECEIVING STREAM: Little Elk Creek
a ` NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
Class: C-Trout
Sub -Basin: 04-02-01
Reference USGS Quad: C 11 NW (please attach)
County: Avery
Regional Office: AsHev:llE
Previous Exp. Date: 00/00/00 Treatment Plant Class: n/a
Classification changes within three miles:
none
Requested by:
Rosanne Barona
Prepared by: ,w (� •
/�
Reviewed by: ( "(.UL& riYda"'9'Yt
W`i) KMI T't;0 C�
Date: 8/4/90
Date: t t f _to
Dam:
/i/� �
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
8 t yc
Se/o
Drainage � (miz ) z.23 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): 4.5
7Q10 (cfs) 0. (o Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 0, $7 30Q2 (cfs) 1.3
Toxicity Limits: IWC % Acute/Chronic
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters TEA? Y&GAI.CoL.s D.O. C04Pucn1J1Ty
Upstream �z Location Ar Laq - 100' UPs-MeA^
Downstream � Location e tr,-Asr Soo nBO ,,*iABA+n
A
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (m )
30
30
NH3-N (mg/1)
.-7
D.O. (mg/1)
TSS (mg/1)
��
?JO
F. Col. (/100 ml)
Zoo
IZ-00
pH(SU)
fo-`� D
T. 4r, e wring L
ZS
DAII y
MA
-(tahPrA4 u26
'Tn1 ACAA l
L Nor
WC4FA56P Pq Ma
PISCAARZ6 ANDIN
fHAn1 0.5-C Dlt
NO CASE eXM—e
Tyff-&l 17,qNor
ro 6xCEG,
l0 NTu
F
T
ZoOC
Comments: THiS 15, h PeCPOSan FRCILITY '10 "e--_10-"• A0C&MMrAJP
FAGWTl D(-tL09JIVAM fIAZWLEMEA,-r UV P151NFEr-r(QAI.

Request No.: 5810
RECEIVED
------------------- WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM -
-Wgt€r�W itjTseCrr6n-----
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Status:
Receiving Stream:
Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Quad:
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal coliform (#/100ml):
pH (su) :
T.R. Chlorine (ug/1):
evv�pe.Y &+u re
Elk Park TP
NCO079561
OCT 1 0 1990
100% Domestic
New/Prop
Little Elk Creek
Asheville Regional Office
C-Tr
AshevilleiL" Carolina
040201
Drainage
area: 2.230 sq mi
Avery
Summer
7Q10: 0.60 cfs
Asheville
Winter
7Q10: 0.87 cfs
R. Barons
Average
flow: 4.50 cfs
8/4/90
30Q2: 1.30 cfs
C11NW
MENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS -------
PROPOSED
sum/win
0.10
30
�I
4 /10.7(iq _
30
200
6-9
28
!-AGVeCW t +evxpeva+uve slnatl Iwo be iv\cveayed b moYC
+"aA o.e°C doe. -b cl',schav(,e avid' n no ca52 8xceec��0°G
---------------------------- MONITORING ----------------------------------
Monitoring parameters: Temp., Fecal coli, D.O., conductivity
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: at least 100 ft upstream
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: at least 300 ft downstream
----------------------------- COMMENTS -----------------------------------
This is a proposed facility to Little Elk Creek which is class "C-Tr".
Nh3-N limit is based on toxicity.
Recommend the facility dechlorinate oR ImFLEME -r Ud D151nIFC-G'rI0A1.
Turbidity should not exceed 10 NTU. Temperature should not exceed 20b.
Recommended by: ,Yi,,,gati . A wl(�, Date: 2q 90
Reviewed by
Tech Support
Regional
Permits &
Supervisor:
s r:
Engineering:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY: ptlUv V1. 1JJ'
Date:
Date:
Date:

46
IXI
NG a0795�21
GUI PA r— Wwlf
GrffoE EucCrc
(Ory,r = p./ Mc'O)
/Z'/,o
SA -Ai
O9-O,ZOI
* SAJep : L,BDA'FA 24
PA a4k D-rz
pA2tl-w Dr2
1B-Tr -V"
E4� GJ6R-
9EJEwPf+FXT
5- � pi�Es uFiT¢eAk
Gtonn L�Trt.e
oN C'k ZOea
+/
Ei:= 2r Jett VCVFVflh ENT Co., LcCniED VP3—REAM Cry V1E CONFCVENGE
/J,7rr �II�LG =LjC C�F�([ f%fC U3OD- %.7`}� NP.oJ=iO.¢6. ipvm CC.�sE LvsPECno�
C: "16 MaXL, %r+ESE ✓ALUti io Z/I SY WWE 77*6 Eyc Rr✓f/2
. ReiL^F[�j GITfLE r✓(,K y� �N� e� :�-ply 'J��.-r /;%�-F-'S rN r7 E1„/eEN). L�&G2C%/-C� (/J�(.L
l'/ E-I eL, w1 w1c ozou ✓o Ce v%L j fir Pw, 4.- to —I r/JCon.,; cJ4 "7215 n 7
44

i
u54� o3480BS10o C9^
:. t J.A.°40.2
llltt'g- PA/Lll W {JTp ag Qnv4 ° 78 fs
c. 9g�pyc ia0w' I? <�5
EWt IAKK WWTP
2, Z5 usy5034808Sxao cq°
gA14=4.5 ch D.A
�QlO,d slf.'.Ab�l �Aoy _ L I rs
7ol l'l
R,*O.ar7
v
Arm Caw com
ut
Lgmc,lp (..: , 0.5Z
Scope c(•-
ISZ
Qa�u 20
II,02-0.81
-?QlgNeo
0.57,= 0.29
-COOP l
USy Ss 0348o6$f
➢.A,. L3ln�z
lglos. 0.37
7q/ow : D• 53
Cm
"145a 03¢$OBSo�o
`4D >. A.
4"4 65cis
7QIOw * II coy
—
5, r(,,
I. Z
FEZ
35
O.21
48,4 - (5.3+2_74Z
c
O•Zi
�•rll
1.6-(I,0Z+0.53)
O.2.1 =
0.Z4
O.37
a,79-
o. S3
l'Aa'MON,A %OK(r(TY iMA55 f3f�FllJC£�
M,
�5
N3oI
lv 13 -N ` 4 s
'wsysip34�ogs145 `9°
-D. A. = -1. 59 ,+c�
gwc`3.18cz
7Q ros * 0 43
?qr Lj = O. 6Z
�'v
/CeN`j/NuoUr/ �A''�j'7'�j
E Ce NTe
ef
�NeR-
(cowFtc✓ fAR1�cBvvELK
zar-= 2-0,590 =217.
/(,4 Jfla[ c) SEE f4TAi r ^ 1 )
w INTt; 2
/4 Ali�io7 Vf'AUF l/v 7(/b / op-L WILL BC IZC SiP(rTED BY AMr °(k Tox
i
— -
_oN(A r/Rs ro Br

Nc '079.5 (o l
SAW
SR✓sv= rwxPAKK ¢✓o c�xP/Gcul
f 6 D•o, 5ACi Is 6,14 ��/t Ar 7d6 '0,9Jfhie4E Popd-r of :"c %lt2k AlurrP-
I,
r5 A srloNpA,ey SAS ,fir -,u �It /7,o. Ar m1ccaoin/r CL7S
i
III v& COn1G U NCE OF wlne� 6ULC2 /c /{i✓/j �LIL 2 dE2�, No coN✓wiEnlT
pCCCss PO/n�T �/l�/LF ,
. C(lo2iNE
L/M !'r i iA�cawRRitt hAs�=O Onl
TN�fL'�s
���r.�/,2 STFNOA,�p
- �.��li�.l�
Fur
Ttr XOZECT ro/R Au-6 Tax I/J
TA£ /M,Xl N4 ZW E
(,ALU-l'q/3L6 ) c ZB�lb�.L
"ILL
iI
12CCo-4y)C—WO 7�(i/Loe/n/PT c7N
(714&2e MAY Bf; CvN;/Lo✓ERsy D✓E/L 77h-1; (3£CAu sE of rWE Lo CAT/oN - OtQ
SrgFF &&2-7-)
i2our WR�E25 - %u/z/':aplTj' �D Nrd 7
—A06 - W(c( NET G7EL E
Tilt Morr6 /'grTcGT�: jot

AMMONIA ANALYSIS:
SUMMER
7Q10: 0.60 cfs
NH3-N Effl. Conc: 0.00 mg/1
Standard (1 mg/1): 1000 ug/1
Upstream NH3-N Conc.: 220.00 ug/l
Design Flow: 0.1000 MGD
Predicted NH3-N Instream: 174.83 ug/1
0.1748 mg/1
NH3-N Limit: 4019.3 ug/l
4.0193 mg/l
WINTER
7Q10: 0.87 cfs
NH3-N Effl. Conc: 0.00 mg/l
Standard (1.8 mg/1): 1800 ug/l
Upstream NH3-N Conc.: 220.00 ug/l
Design Flow: 0.1000 MGD
Predicted NH3-N Instream: 186.73 ug/l
0.1867 mg/l
NH3-N Limit: 10668. ug/l
10.668 mg/l

O
4-J
J
2
,Stream : ; .
(liki(Aste.m _ BCOaAc l
Slope C41CU latlan s
3000 —2880 ��L � m um� cum rr;ze
SLWC A _ ---- -- - J
ZSj 0 - ZSoo Z
Cr�ML 1 c-L(• cIVFic
a J_
Cum
elcv
list
diSt
ji
arts%7
p
a
2^?
0.¢6
-
f
28
Y. 0 115

'
SUMMER
BOD5=30 MG/L,
NH3-N=4
MG/L
•
QEFF=0.1 MGD
---------- MODEL
RESULTS ----------
Discharger
:
ELK PARK WWTP
Receiving Stream
LITTLE ELK CREEK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End
D.O.
is 8.51
mg/l.
The End
CBOD
is 2.45
mg/l.
The End
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NBOD
is 1.11
mg/l.
WLA WLA
WLA
DO Min
CBOD NBOD
DO
Waste Flow
(mg/1)
------
Milepoint Reach
----------------
# (mg/1) (mg/1)
---- ----
(mg/1)
--
(mgd)
----------
Segment
1
6.14
0.00 1
Reach
1
45.00 18.00
0.00
0.10000
Reach
2
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
Reach
3
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
Reach
4
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
smeep : & L- (-PA 4-
Q0

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : ELK PARK WWTP Subbasin : 040201
Receiving Stream : LITTLE ELK CREEK Stream Class: C-TR
Summer 7Q10 : 0.6 Winter 7Q10 : 0.87
Design Temperature: 23.0
ILENGTHI SLOPEI
VELOCITY
I DEPTHI Kd I
Kd
I Ka I
Ka I
KN I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mile I ft/mil
fps
I ft
Idesignl
@204
Idesignl
@2034 Idesignl
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.521182.001
0.273
I
1 0.44
I I
1 0.65 10.57
I I
153.37 1
I
50.001
I
0.63 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.101182.001
0.315
I
1 0.51
I I
1 0.65 1
0.57
I I
153.37 1
I
50.001
I
0.63 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.111 35.001
0.195
I
1 0.65
I I
1 0.40 1
0.35
I I
113.14 1
I
12.311
I
0.63 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
Segment
1
I I I
1 1.201 35.001
0.399
I
1 1.23
I I
1 0.41 1
0.36
I I
126.84 1
I
25.151
I
0.63 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
I
Flow
I
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste I
0.155
Headwatersl
0.600
Tributary I
0.000
* Runoff I
0.190
Segment 1 Reach 2
I CBOD
I NBOD I
D.O. I
I mg/1
I mg/l I
mg/1 I
45.000
118.000 I
0.000
I 2.000
I 1.000 I
7.720
I 2.000
I 1.000 I
7.720
1 2.000
I 1.000 I
7.720
Waste
I 0.000 1
0.000 I
0.000 I
0.000
Tributary
I 0.370 I
2.000 1
1.000 1
7.720
* Runoff
I 0.140 I
2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720
Segment 1
Reach 3
Waste
I 0.000 I
0.000 I
0.000 I
0.000
Tributary
I 0.000 I
2.000 1
1.000 1
7.720
* Runoff
I 0.140 I
2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720
Segment 1
Reach 4
Waste
I 0.000 1
0.000 I
0.000 I
0.000
Tributary
I 7.800 1
2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720
* Runoff
I 0.000 I
2.000 I
1.000 I
7.720

I Seg #
Reach #
I Seg Mi
D.O.
1
1
0.00
6.14
1
1
0.05
7.19
1
1
0.10
7.75
1
1
0.16
8.05
1
1
0.21
8.22
1
1
0.26
8.30
1
1
0.31
8.35
1
1
0.36
8.38
1
1
0.42
8.39
1
1
0.47
8.40
1
1
0.52
8.41
1
2
0.52
8.20
1
2
0.53
8.22
1
2
0.54
8.25
1
2
0.55
8.27
1
2
0.56
8.29
1
2
0.57
8.30
1
2
0.58
8.32
1
2
0.59
8.33
1
2
0.60
8.34
1
2
0.61
8.35
1
2
0.62
8.36
1
3
0.62
8.36
1
3
0.63
8.36
1
3
0.64
8.35
1
3
0.65
8.35
1
3
0.66
8.34
1
3
0.68
8.34
1
3
0.69
8.33
1
3
0.70
8.33
1
3
0.71
8.32
1
3
0.72
8.32
1
3
0.73
8.31
1
4
0.73
7.80
1
4
0.85
8.08
1
4
0.97
8.25
1
4
1.09
8.35
1
4
1.21
8.41
1
4
1.33
8.45
1
4
1.45
8.48
1
4
1.57
8.49
1
4
1.69
8.50
1
4
1.81
8.51
1
4
1.93
8.51
I Seg #
I Reach #
I Seg Mi 1
D.O.
SUMMER
BOD5=30
QEFF=0.1
CBOD I
NBOD 1
10.83
4.49
10.63
4.41
10.44
4.34
10.26
4.26
10.08
4.19
9.90
4.12
9.73
4.06
9.57
3.99
9.41
3.92
9.25
3.86
9.10
3.80
6.95
2.95
6.94
2.95
6.92
2.94
6.91
2.94
6.89
2.93
6.88
2.93
6.86
2.92
6.85
2.91
6.84
2.91
6.82
2.90
6.81
2.90
6.81
2.90
6.79
2.89
6.78
2.88
6.76
2.87
6.75
2.86
6.73
2.85
6.72
2.85
6.70
2.84
6.69
2.83
6.67
2.82
6.66
2.81
2.64
1.25
2.62
1.24
2.61
1.22
2.59
1.21
2.57
1.19
2.55
1.18
2.53
1.17
2.51
1.15
2.49
1.14
2.47
1.13
2.45
1.11
CBOD I
NBOD I
MG/L, NH3-N=4 MG/L
MGD
Flow 1
0.76
0.76
0.77
0.78
0.79
0.80
0.81
0.82
0.83
0.84
0.85
1.22
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
9.05
Flow I
['p/JF �lli N[G
Nir.l Eu� CiJc2

WINTER
BOD5=30 MG/L,
NH3-N=10.7 MG/L
QEFF=0.1 MGD
---------- MODEL
RESULTS ----------
Discharger
:
ELK PARK WWTP
Receiving Stream :
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LITTLE ELK CREEK
The End
D.O.
is 10.67
mg/l.
The End
CBOD
is 2.39
mg/l.
The End
----------------------------------------------------------------------
NBOD
is 1.49
mg/l.
WLA WLA
WLA
DO Min
CBOD NBOD
DO
Waste Flow
(mg/1)
------
Milepoint Reach
----------------
# (mg/1) (mg/1)
---- ----
(mg/1)
--
(mgd)
----------
Segment
1
8.23
0.00 1
Reach
1
45.00 48.20
0.00
0.10000
Reach
2
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
Reach
3
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
Reach
4
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00000
SA46D ' eL1tPAR44V"/

WINTER
BOD5=30
MG/L, NH3-N=10.7 MG/L
QEFF=0.1 MGD
Seg #
I Reach # I
Seg Mi
I
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flow I
1
1
0.00
r.2371
8.50
8.14
1.02
1
1
0.05
2
8.37
8.01
1.04
1
1
0.10
9.55
8.25
7.89
1.06
1
1
0.16
9.90
8.13
7.78
1.07
1
1
0.21
10.14
8.01
7.66
1.09
1
1
0.26
10.30
7.89
7.55
1.10
1
1
0.31
10.40
7.78
7.45
1.12
1
1
0.36
10.48
7.67
7.34
1.13
1
1
0.42
10.53
7.57
7.24
1.15
1
1
0.47
10.56
7.46
7.14
1.16
1
1
0.52
10.58
7.36
7.05
1.18
1
2
0.52
10.31
5.70
5.17
1.71
1
2
0.53
10.33
5.69
5.16
1.71
1
2
0.54
10.35
5.68
5.15
1.71
1
2
0.55
10.37
5.67
5.14
1.71
1
2
0.56
10.39
5.66
5.14
1.72
1
2
0.57
10.41
5.65
5.13
1.72
1
2
0.58
10.42
5.64
5.12
1.72
1
2
0.59
10.44
5.63
5.11
1.72
1
2
0.60
10.45
5.62
5.10
1.72
1
2
0.61
10.47
5.62
5.10
1.73
1
2
0.62
10.48
5.61
5.09
1.73
1
3
0.62
10.48
5.61
5.09
1.73
1
3
0.63
10.48
5.60
5.08
1.73
1
3
0.64
10.48
5.59
5.07
1.74
1
3
0.65
10.48
5.58
5.06
1.74
1
3
0.66
10.49
5.57
5.05
1.74
1
3
0.68
10.49
5.56
5.04
1.74
1
3
0.69
10.49
5.55
5.03
1.75
1
3
0.70
10.49
5.54
5.02
1.75
1
3
0.71
10.49
5.53
5.01
1.75
1
3
0.72
10.49
5.52
5.00
1.75
1
3
0.73
1 0
5.51
4.99
1.76
1
4
0.73
9.8
2.48
1.55
12.76
1
4
0.85
1 .03
2.47
1.54
12.76
1
4
0.97
10.20
2.46
1.54
12.76
1
4
1.09
10.33
2.45
1.53
12.76
1
4
1.21
10.43
2.45
1.53
12.76
1
4
1.33
10.50
2.44
1.52
12.76
1
4
1.45
10.55
2.43
1.51
12.76
1
4
1.57
10.60
2.42
1.51
12.76
1
4
1.69
10.63
2.41
1.50
12.76
1
4
1.81
10.65
2.40
1.50
12.76
1
4
1.93
10.67
2.39
1.49
12.76
Seg #
I Reach #
I Seg Mi
I D.O. I
CBOD I
NBOD I
Flow i

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : ELK PARK WWTP Subbasin : 040201
Receiving Stream : LITTLE ELK CREEK Stream Class: C-TR
Summer 7Q10 : 0.6 Winter 7Q10 : 0.87
Design Temperature: 12.0
ILENGTHI SLOPEI
VELOCITY
I DEPTHI Kd I
Kd
I Ka I
Ka I
KN I
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mile 1, ft/mil
fps
I ft
Idesignl
@204
Idesignl
@204 Idesignl
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.521182.001
0.345
I
1 0.46
I I
1 0.45 10.65
I I
142.01 1
I
50.001
I
0.27 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
I I I
I
I I
I I
I
I
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.101182.001
0.404
I
1 0.53
I I
10.45 1
0.66
I I
142.01 1
I
50.001
I
0.27 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
Segment
1
I I I
1 0.111 35.001
0.251
I
1 0.68
I I
1 0.26 1
0.38
I I
113.31 1
I
15.841
I
0.27 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
Segment
1
I I I
1 1.201 35.001
0.516
I
1 1.28
I I
1 0.27 1
0.39
I I
119.73 1
I
23.491
I
0.27 1
Reach
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
I
Flow I
1
cfs I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1
0.155 I
Headwatersl
0.870 1
Tributary 1
0.000
* Runoff 1
0.290 I
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 1
Tributary I 0.530 1
* Runoff I 0.240 1
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste 1 0.000 I
Tributary I 0.000 1
* Runoff I 0.240 1
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste 1 0.000 1
Tributary 111.000 1
* Runoff I 0.000 1
CBOD
I NBOD I
D.Q. I
mg/l
I mg/l I
mg/l I
45.000
148.200 I
0.000
2.000
I 1.000 I
9.700
2.000
I 1.000 I
9.700
2.000
I 1.000 I
9.700
0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
2.000 I 1.000 I 9.700
2.000 I 1.000 I 9.700
0.000 1 0.000 I 0.000
2.000 I 1.000 I 9.700
2.000 I 1.000 1 9.700
0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
2.000 I 1.000 I 9.700
2.000 I 1.000 1 9.700

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
October 8, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dennis Ramsey
Trevor,..Clements
Regional Supervisors
FROM: Alan Clark AU
SUBJECT:` EA/EIS-Guidance-for DEN -Permitted Activities
The attached September 18, 1990 memo is being.provided for
your information. Copies were sent to all county and municipal
goverments as well as to engineering -consultants on DEW S
mailing list. Please feel free to contact me if you - have any
questions.
AC/kls
EA/EIS.mem/D-2
cc: Don Saf rit RUNVED
Dale Overcash OCT 0 9 1990
Carolyn McCaskill
TECHWiC46,. S' VPRRT BRANCH
S

S,r r FIs'
S`
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
G. Martin, Govemor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
September 18, 1990
George T. Everett. Ph.D.
Director
TO. Local Government Managers and Utility Directors
Sewer Authority Officals
Sludge and Wastewater Consultants
FROM: Steve Tedder, Chief Water Quality Section
SUBJECT: Reminder of Environmental Assessment (EA) and
Impact Statement (EIS) Requirements for Certain
DEM-Permitted Wastewater Treatment Plants, Sludge
Disposal/Reuse Projects, Sewer Lines, Pump Stations,
Spray Irrigation and Rotary Distributor Systems
This memo is intended to provide you with information
critical to the planning, scheduling and permitting of publically
funded wastewater treatment, conveyance and sludge disposal/reuse
projects. Its purpose is two -fold.
First, it is intended to serve as a reminder of North
Carolina Environmental Policy Act requirements, formally
established one year ago, that necessitate preparation of an EA
or EIS for certain publically-funded DEM-permitted activities. A
list of these activities is presented in Section A, below. It
should be noted that DEM wi L2ot accept a permit application for
a proiect revuirino an EA or EIS unt,
review of that 1 the formal environmental
Second, the memo outlines procedures and time requirements
associated with the review and processing of EAs and EISs. The
time required to complete the formal review of an EA averagQs
about four months. An EIS will generally require a year or
A. Activities ReQuiring an EA or EIS
1. New wastewater treatment plants or plant expansions whose
flows:
equal or exceed 500,000 gallons per day, or
Polludon Pm rrdon Pays

4
5.
6.
B
The review procedures for EAs and EISs, discussed
individually, below, both require review and approval by the
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (EHNR)
and the State Clearinghouse (located in the Department of
Administration). The time required to process an EA or EIS
varies considerably depending on the magnitude of the project,
public interest and the sensitivity of the natural resources that
may be impacted by the project.
b. exceed one-third of the 7Q10 of the receiving stream, or
icy would result in loss of an existing use.
Land application of sludge on sites equal to or exceeding 200
acres in size (refers to actual area of application not
including buffers).
Sewer lines greater than three miles in length and/or having
a design flow of one MGD or greater. (Contact DEM's
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator for further guidance
on applicability of this requirement to your sewer line
project)
Pump stations with a pumping capacity of one MGD or more.
Wastewater spray irrigation and rotary distributor systems
greater than 100,000 gallons per day.
New and expanded subsurface wastewater systems with a final
design capacity greater than 100,000 gallons per day.
EA/EIS Review Procedures and Time Requirements
1. Environmental Assessments
The purpose of an EA is to determine whether or not a project
will have a significant impact on the environment. If it is
determined through processing of an EA that the impacts will
not be significant, then a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) can be prepared and circulated for final review
through the State Clearinghouse. If, however, the impacts
are determined to be significant, then an EIS must be
prepared.
The time required to process an EA ranges from two and
one-half months to over one year with the average being about
four months. Below is a listing of the basic review steps:
a. Preliminary DEM Review - one to three weeks
b. EHNR Review - four weeks
C. Clearinghouse Review - five to seven weeks
These review times do not include time required by the
project sponsor to respond to reviewer comments. If major
revisions are needed, response time could be considerable and
2

one or more of the review steps might have to be repeated.
Environmental Impact Statements
An EIS is prepared if it is known or strongly suspected at
the outset that the impacts associated with a project will be
significant. An EIS can be done without first doing an EA.
Unlike the EA procedure, EIS preparation and review requires
a scoping stage which is done to define what the EIS should
address. This generally includes a public meeting and
preparation and approval of an outline of the scope of the
EIS. In addition, two Clearinghouse reviews are required
(draft and final) and a public hearing is usually held during
the draft Clearinghouse review stage.
Processing time for an EIS is considerably longer than that
of an EA and will range from six months to over two years.
a. Scoping Process - four to six weeks
b. Preliminary DEM,Review - one to four weeks
C. EHNR Review - five to seven weeks
d. Draft Clearinghouse Review - six to eight weeks
e. Final Clearinghouse Review - five to seven weeks
As with the EA procedure, the above times do not include time
spent by the project sponsor in responding to reviewer
comments. For example, after the scope has been prepared in
step a, it may take anywhere from several months to over a
year to prepare a draft suitable for review in step b.
Prior to preparation of an EA or EIS you should contact Mr.
Alan Clark, the Division's NC Environmental Policy Act
coordinator. Mr. Clark will provide you with information,
including an example EA or EIS, that will be useful in preparing
either of these documents. He can also provide you with names of
agency reviewers that should be contacted as part of the docment
preparation and can assist you in determining which of the two
documents would be most appropriate for your situation.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to
contact Mr. Clark (919/733-5083).
EAEIS.Mem/SEPA1
I