NC0034860_Permit Issuance_20020925

oFWArE�4
Michael F. Easley
�O� G Governor
rWilliam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
p North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
September 25, 2002
Gary D. Elder, Plant Engineer
Schneider Mills, Inc.
P.O. Box 519
Taylorsville, North Carolina 28681
Subject: FINAL NPDES Permit NCO034860
Schneider Mills WWTP
Alexander County
Dear Mr. Elder:
The Division of Water Quality (the Division) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, Region 4)
have reviewed your firm's request to renew the subject NPDES Permit (April 14, 2000), and also the
additional data you provided as an application supplement (received June 11, 2002). Based on this
review, the Division approves your request and hereby transmits your final permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994
(or as subsequently amended).
Please notice that the Division has resorted the table under Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Requirements by "Sample Location" to facilitate operator use. Based on plant performance, receiving
stream conditions and applicable regulations, the final permit incorporates the following changes:
Reinstated: Instream monitoring for conductivity was erroneously deleted from the draft
permit. Please note that instream conductivity monitoring is required for all
industrial discharges and has therefore been reinstated in this final permit.
Additions: Monitoring for sulfide, phenols and total chromium has been added to this
permit. These parameters are required by Federal guidelines for woven fabric
finishing [40CFR 410.42 (a)] and were inadvertently omitted in previous
permits. The monitoring frequency shall be 2/Month, consistent with
requirements for Class II WWTP facilities.
Deletions: Based on data review, instream sampling for BUDS will no longer be required.
The Division conducted EPA -mandated Reasonable Potential Analyses (RPAs)
on effluent metals and toxicants to evaluate their "reasonable potential" to
exceed receiving -stream Water Quality Standards. Because the relevant RPAs
indicated "no reasonable potential" to exceed allowable levels, cadmium, lead,
mercury and zinc have been deleted from the permit.
In contrast to the above metals, the data review indicated a "reasonable potential" for silver (based on 12
data points), therefore monitoring of this parameter shall continue. However, if silver is not detected after
one year from the permit effective date (4 additional data points), the Division will consider the
permittee's request to discontinue quarterly silver monitoring.
NCDENR
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone] Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

Schneider Mills, Inc.
Final NPDES Permit NCO034860
Page 2
Ammonia (NH3 as N) — As a permit Special Condition, the Division may re -open this permit to require
Daily Maximum limits for ammonia. After calculating allowable concentrations, the Division may
perform an analysis of past ammonia data to determine if there is reasonable potential for this discharge to
exceed these potential limits. If there is, this permit may be re -opened. If there is not, the permit will not
be re -opened, but will be modified to include Daily Maximum limits for ammonia upon renewal.
Concerning the Downstream Sampling Point — The Division understands that Schneider Mills
currently collects downstream samples near the bridge at NC Highway 16, contrary to the downstream
location identified in the existing permit. Division records indicate that the downstream sampling point
was relocated in 1988 from NC Highway 27 to a new point approximately 0.9 miles downstream (near
NCSR 1313), a location predicted by stream modeling as the likely dissolved oxygen (DO) "sag point."
The Division therefore requires that Schneider Mills begin downstream sampling at or near (depending
on access) NCSR 1313 as described in the previous and this renewed NPDES Permit.
Finally, the Division noted some irregularities and absences in quarterly metals sampling and reporting.
Please arrange your monitoring schedule such that all future metals sampling shall coincide with Whole
Effluent Toxicity (WET) testing, with sampling and analysis to be performed concurrently during the
months of March, June, September and December.
If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable,
you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days after receiving
this letter. Your request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
Please notice that this permit is not transferable except after notifying the Division of Water Quality. The
Division may require modification, or revocation and re -issuance of this permit. This permit does not affect
the legal requirements to obtain other permits required by the Division of Water Quality, the Division of
Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or other Federal or local governments.
If you have questions, or if we can be of further service, please contact Joe Corporon at [phone],
extension 597 or via e-mail: [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Central Files
trS*
Mooresville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
EPA Region IV

Permit NCO034860
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
NPDES
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Schneider Mills, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Schneider Mills
NC Highway 16 North
Alexander County
to receiving waters designated as Muddy Fork Creek within the Catawba River Basin, in accordance
with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV
hereof.
This permit shall become effective November 1, 2002.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2005.
Signed this day September 25, 2002.
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCO034860
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Schneider Mills, Inc. is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue discharging 0.780 MGD of treated process -contact and domestic
wastewater via outfall 001 from a treatment facility with the following components:
• Bar screen
• Instrumented flow metering device
• Aeration basin with two mechanical aerators
• Clarifier
• Sludge return pumps
• Aerobic digester
• Cascade aeration and
• Sludge drying beds
2. Continue discharging non -contact wastewater from two (2) settling ponds connected
in series via outfall 002 (flow not limited). The discharge consists of:
• Air conditioning condensate
• Water treatment plant (WTP) filter backwash
• Boiler blowdown
• Stormwater runoff
This facility is located at Schneider Mills. Inc. off NC Highway 16 North in Alexander County.
3. Discharge from said wastewater treatment works through Outfall 001 and Outfall 002 to Muddy
Fork Creek (see attached map), classified C waters within the Catawba River Basin.

Schneider Mills, Inc.
State Grid/Ouad: D 14 NW / Taylorsville, NC
Latitude:
350 56' 13" N
Loneitude:
81, 11' 28" W
Permitted Flow:
U80 MGD
Receiving Stream:
Muddy Fork Creek
Drainage Basin:
Catawba River Basin
Stream Class:
C
Sub -Basin:
03-08-32
Facility x
Location
not to scale
North 17ES Permit No. NCO034860
Catawba Count

Permit NCO034860
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (001)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater through
Outfa11001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
'PARAMETERS
EFFLUENT LIMITS'
MONITORING_ REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly `
Average
Daily Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location'
Flow
0.780 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5 day, 200C
35.4 mg/L
230 pounds/da
68.4 mg/L
445 ounds/da
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
125pounds/day
275pounds/day
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
COD
685pounds/day
1,065pounds/day
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (April 1 through October 31) 2
1.9 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (November 1 through March 31) 2
4.7 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen3
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity4
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
H5
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Sulfide
5.1pounds/day
17pounds/day
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Phenols
2.5 pounds/da
8.5pounds/day
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Chromium
109 AWL
1022 Wft
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Silver
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Conductivity
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Temperature, °C
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Dissolved Oxygen
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Table Footnotes:
1. Upstream = at least50 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at or near NCSR 1313.
2. NH3 as N — See Special Condition A. (4.).
3. Daily average effluent concentration of dissolved oxygen shall not fall below 5.0 mg/L.
4. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) at 46 %; quarterly during March, June, September, December; See Special Condition A. (3.)
5. pH shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0 standard units.
Units: MGD = million gallons per day pounds/day = pounds per day mg/L = milligrams per liter BOD = biochemical oxygen demand
ml = milliliter µg/L = micrograms per liter
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.

Permit NCO034860
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (002)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated wastewater through Outfall 002. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored
by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETERS
EFFLUENT
-:'Monthly
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Average,
Daily
_ Maximum
Measurement
Fre `uenc
Sample
Tyle_
- `Sample Locafion'
Flow
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
Total Suspended Solids SS
30 m L
45 m /L
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Settable Solids
0.1 m L
0.2 m L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Iron
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
FH2
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
rbidi
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Table Footnotes:
1. Upstream = at 1east50 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at or near NCSR 1313.
2. pH shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0 standard units.
3. Discharge shall not cause stream turbidity to exceed 50 NTU. If natural background turbidity exceeds 50
NTU, discharge shall not increase receiving -stream turbidity.
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.
SUPPLEMENT OT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. (3.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to
Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 46%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or
"North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent
versions. The tests will be performed during the months of March June, September, and December. Effluent sampling
for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure, performed as the first test of any single quarter, results in a failure or ChV below the permit limit,
then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months, as
described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or
subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest
concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have
a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods,
exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.

Permit NC0034860
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP3B for the
pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the
following address:
Attention: NC DENR DWQ / Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no later than 30 days
after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature.
Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, the
permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility
name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the
comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited
above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be
required during the following month. Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid
test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the
month of the initial monitoring.
A. (4.) REEVALUATION OF AMMONIA LIMITS
Ammonia (NH3 as N) -- The Division may re -open this permit to require Daily Maximum limits for ammonia.
After calculating allowable concentrations, the Division may perform an analysis of past ammonia data to
determine if there is reasonable potential for this discharge to exceed these potential limits. If there is, this permit
may be re -opened. If there is not, the permit will not be re -opened, but will be modified to include Daily
Maximum limits for ammonia upon renewal.

NPDES PERMIT
DRAFT / FINAL
CHECK LIST
/ r
cc,,c�>1ec(��
FILE CONTENTS' Facility J
Permit No.
3
Left side:
❑ New Tracking Slip.
f3� Old Tracking Slip. �/
NPDES Permit Writer: YY
Right side:
❑ Streamline Package Sheet (to region, only if strea ned)
CtY Draft Permit Cover Letter. (add new policy text; minaa1Zeef uent sheets special cto onditions)
0' Draft Permit (order: cover, supp p.
R9 Facility Map (E-Map: Include,facility; Outfalls; U and D sample locations)
per/ Fact Sheet. (document permit writer's issues and re -issue logic)
Permit Writer's Notes (if not in Facts Sheet -- chronology, strategy, DMR Review, RPA, etc.)
[iC Staff Report from Region (as appropriate -- not needed if streamlined)
[3'*�/ Old Permit (Text, Effluent Sheets and Special Conditions)
C Permit Application. (New Permit or Renewal; any additional permittee correspondence)
El� Acknowledgement Letter (for Renewal Application, from NPDES Unit)
❑ Permittee Responses (to acknowledgement letter, if any)
f� Waste Load Allocation (reference date; recalculated for current action?)
Note: Italics indicate special conditions not always required or applicable.
p U Submitted to S �t_�L for Peer Review: Date
/ c c� C �
Q Peer Review completed by S S� S Date i I
i F4i A-" b , ` Date 52 &1
� Permit Mailed -Mailed o Regional Staff y
/ MtC�A� P�CR Date 3h
Q' Regional Office Review completed by � A-lYr� �
/ CS initiated by Date
f3 Additional Review by � � PpA ,
— / ��� - 1s��
f9' Additional Review completed by �`,,S\
n y n on: Date
(�"
/Submitted to C�Q SV6 U�J' ` for Public Notice on - &W V : Notice Date -O�LSL•
—/ r? �O f ja ( Date
(D/ FIN
L� /Update ublic Nou a and IMS databases. Date
AL submitted to Dave Goodrich for signature on ^A
f'� Additional Review TVA 80V—
Frn1rr3�0
AJ
c�� r4FIfJN6?
AWNML [�F— 9'c(-SI 19A OF- �MLLCA50
L
rir� 1'rNAt ja P*JF, 6 wkA b3jiLb-Z �

J��tEo sr��s
O � �
v
0
tFir�< vRotE°t r
June 27, 2002
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
lv r. Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Unit
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: NPDES Permit for Scheider Mills
NCO034860
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
i_ J U L 2 2002
L _ 1
C �� WY'[01)LI1ITV
r ,hi so: iar,E rkA5CH
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR MOA, we have completed our review of the
revised draft permit referenced above and received by EPA Region 4through e-mail on June 13,
2002, with supporting data faxed on the same date. EPA's concerns as documented in a June 14,
2001, letter and a March 7, 2002, e-mail havt been addressed. We request that we be afforded an
additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made to the permit prior to issuance,
or if additional significant comments to the permit are received. Otherwise, please send us one
copy of the final permit when issued. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me
[phone] or at stewart.decOn ena.sov .
Sincerely,
Dee Stewart
Program Manager
Permits, Grants and Technical Assistance Branch
NPDES & Biosolids Section
Water Management Division
J
Internet Address (UHL) • http://www.apa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable •Pdnled with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 3(rPostconsumer)

DENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit No. NCO034860
INTRODUCTION
Schneider Mills, Inc. (also herein referred to as Schneider Mills or the permittee) requires a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to dispose treated wastewater to the surface
waters of the state. The permittee's 5-year NPDES permit has expired and they have requested
renewal from the Division of Water Quality (the Division). This Fact Sheet summarizes background
information and rationale used by the Division's NPDES Unit to determine permit limits and
conditions. This document also contains references to information sources relevant to this permit
renewal (superscripted numbers in order of appearance, See References).
FACILITY RECORDS REVIEW
Facility Description. Schneider Mills (Table 1) is a synthetic textile weaving facility discharging
process -contact wastes and non -process wastes through two separate outfalls. Influent to the onsite
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) includes waste from "water jet weavers" (roughly 85%) and
fiber coating or "sizing" waste (about 15 %). Sanitary sewer (-1,200 gallon per day) comprises only
0.03 % of the WWTP influent. The WWTP discharges through Outfall 001 with a permitted flow of
0.780 MOD. Actual discharge averages 0.340 MOD (based on two years of data) or about 44%
permitted capacity. Non -contact wastewater (Outfall 002; flow not limited) includes air-conditioning
condensate, boiler blowdown, Water Treatment Plant (WTP) filter backwash, and stormwater.t 2
Table 1. Schneider Mills, Inc.
Facility Information
Ap licant/Facili Name
Schneider Mills, Inc.
Z];cant Address
P.O. Box 519, Ta lorsvilie, North Carolina 28610
lit Address
1170 Hwy 16 North
Permitted Flow (MGD)
0.780 (Outfall 001); Outfall 002 not limited
Type of Waste
Industrial process wastewater. Primary SIC Codes 2221; 4941
WW Code Prim. 55, 21, 02; Treatment Unit Code 02003
Facility/Permit Status ' '
Class II, Minor / Renewal
Drainage Basin / Count
Catawba Basin / Alexander Count
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream "2,4Muddy
Fork Creek
Regional Office
Mooresville
Stream Classification
C
State Grid /
USGS To o Quad
D 14 NW /
Taylorsville, NC
303(d) Listed?
Not listed
Permit Writer
Joe R. Corporon
Subbasin 503-08-32
Date:
09Ian01
Draina a Area (s . mi.)7
8.0
Ll
Lat. 350 56' 10" Long. 81° 11' 29"
Lat. 350 56' 11" Long. 81° 11' 29"
Summer 7Q10 (cfs) '
1.4
Winter 7Q10 (cfs) '
2.2
30Q2 (cfs) '
3.0
Average Flow (cfs) '
8.8
IWC (%) '
46%
Face Sheet
Renewal -- NPDES Penim M1Y'0034t;h0
R,ne l
��r

L.
Schneider Mills has been in business in North Carolina since 1951. At this location Division records
date from 1972. The current permit expired on June 30, 2000 and the Division received
documentation to renew (Short Form C) on April 14, 2000. 1'4
Waste Load Allocation (WLA). The Division prepared the last WLA in April 1995 and developed
effluent limits and monitoring considering an in -stream waste concentration (IWC) of 46 % and an
average production level of 50,000 pounds of product per day.'
Verifying Existing Stream Conditions. This facility discharges to Muddy Fork Creek, a Class C
stream within the Catawba River Basins Muddy Fork Creek is not "impaired" [not 303(d) listed], and
is rated in "Good to Fair" condition.5,6
CORRESPONDENCE
Staff Report. Mooresville Regional Office (MRO) prepared a Staff Report dated November 2, 2000.
The MRO staff found the facility "...in good operational condition..." and noted that there are no
system modifications requested in the permit renewal, nor have any occurred since the permit was last
reissued. The MRO further stated that the WWTP appeared adequate to meet existing effluent limits.
They confirmed that Outfall 001 discharges treated, locally derived domestic wastewater and
industrial wastewater generated by water jet looms and sizing (fiber coating) operations. Non -contact
cooling water, boiler blow down, and WTP filter backwash are discharged through Outfall 002.
Pending a final technical review, the MRO recommended that the NPDES Unit renew this permit.
COMPLIANCE REVIEW
Notices of Violation (NOVs). The Division has issued several NOVs within the last two years for
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) test failure beginning in December 1999 extending through March
2000.
Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Test. Quarterly monitoring results for chronic WET
testing indicate "pass" for 15 quarters beginning in 1996. However, failures occurred for four months
beginning in December 1999, recovering in April, then passing through December 2000:91i0
Dec ' 99
Fail
Jan '00
Fail @28.2
Feb '00
NR/Fail @<23
Mar ' 00
Fail
Apr'00
Pass @56.34
May '00
Pass @>90
June '00
Pass
Sep '00
Pass
Dec '00
Pass
Fact. Shot
Renewal -- i\MES IAC0034560
Pit- 2

The Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC) conjectured that related cold weather disrupted the bio-
processes requiring a recovery period,12 but the reason for the temporary failures has not been
established. Considering the recent five passes in the last nine months and the previously clean record
for four years, the Division does not recommend altering chronic WET Test compliance and
reporting.
PERMITTING APPROACH
The Division judges previous permit limits and monitoring requirements to be appropriate for renewal
considering recent data supplied by the permittee indicating similar product use averaging about
52,000 pounds per day (lbs./day) over two years (1999 and 2000).118 Limits for parameters regulated
under 40CFR 410.30 and 410.40 have been verified. Although renewal calculations suggest less
stringent limits for some parameters, the ermittee's compliance with existing limits is well
documented and the Division is bound unde 40C 303(d); 402(c); an122.44(l) not to "backslide"
permit limits.,
Further consideration of required compliance under 40CFR 410.43(a), induced mandatory parameters
not previously permitted. These will be added to the permit for this cycle. New parameters include
sulfide, phenols, and total chromium (Table 2). Based on data provide by the permittee, limit
calculations assume 52,000 lbs./day as the average production rate with an anticipated daily
maximum of 85,000 lbs./day. Parameters required under 40CFR are summarized in Table 3.
Table 2. Parameter Limits Calculation
40CFR
410.42 (a)
Monthly
Average
40CFR
410.42 (a)
Daily
Maximum
per 10001bs.
Per 1000 lbs.
Sulfide
0.1
x 52
1 5.1 lbs./day
0.2
x 85
1 17.0 lbs./day
Phenols
0.05
x 52
2.5 lbs./day
0.1
x 85
8.5 lbs./day
Total Chromium
0.05
x 52
2.5 lbs./day
1 0.1
x 85
8.5 lbs./day
Table 3. Applicable 40CFR Permit Limits Summary46
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
BOD, 5-day
2301bs./day
35.4 mg/L
445 lbs./day
68.4 mg/L
COD
685 lbs./day
10651bs./day
TSS
125lbs./day
275lbs./day
Sulfide
5.1 lbs./day
17.0 lbs./da
Phenols
2.5 lbs./day
8.5 lbs./da
Total Chromium
2.51bs./day
8.5 lbs./da
aid dv9 . P'rod '^ SZ,wa geld , r► a 5, i�SJ Il��
Ao oJ�o«a�.PCt �or dow�:-Erc W0.
Fiu t Sleet
Reti w;i] -- NPI:)ES ti("003,1860
N-e 3

Further Consideration of Total Chromium. Technology -based calculations for chromium
(40CFR) were compared to the acute and chronic NC State Standards (Chronic = 50 µg/L; Acute =
1022 µg/L — 1/2 FAV for freshwater) to evaluate which permit limits are more stringent, i.e. more
environmentally conservative.
Chronic Chromium -- Weekly Average Limit
Considering dilution (IWC 46 %): 50 = 109 µg/L
0.46
compared to technology -based: 2.5 lbs/day = 0.780 MGD (flow) x 8.34 x (?) mg/L
= 0.384 mg/L or 384 µg/L
Therefore: because 109 µg/L is less than the technology -based limit of 384 µg/L, the more
environmentally conservative 109 µg/L will be implemented to protect against the
chronic affects of chromium as a Weekly Average.
Acute Chromium -- Daily Maximum Limit
Considering: 1,022 µg/L (freshwater 1/2 FAV,11 intentionally not accounting for dilution)
compared to Technology -based : 8.5 lbs/day = 0.780 MGD (permitted flow) x 8.34 x (?) 1 mg/L
= 1.307 mg/L or 1,307 µg/L
Therefore: because the 1/2 FAV of 1,022 µg/L is less than the technology -based limit of 1,307
µg/L,1,022 µg/L is more environmentally conservative and will be implemented as a
Daily Maximum to protect against acute toxic affects.
In -stream and Effluent Data Review.
The Division reviewed 32 months (1998 through September 2000) of Discharge Monitoring Reports
(DMRs).12 Reports appear regular, thorough, and complete. Total discharge of treated wastewater
through Outfall 001 for this time period averaged about 0.340 MGD or 43% of permitted capacity.
Domestic waste (1,200 gallons per day) was determined to be <1% of the influent to the WWTP,
based on 250 employees each using an average of 50 gallons per day.
Effluent COD, TSR, and BODS_ Effluent BOD5 monthly averages during the year 2000 ranged from
a minimum of 5.7 lbs./day to a maximum of about 45 lbs./day, with a daily maximum peak for the
year at 133 lbs./day occurring on May 3. All BOD5 values are in compliance with the permit (limit
230 lbs./day). Similarly, TSR and COD monthly average concentrations are half to one tenth of
permit limits. It appears therefore that this facility has little problem meeting permit limits, and there
does not appear to be a correlation between BOD5 and WET test failure.
Fact Slicer
Renew-;1 -- \l IA'S 1C0034800
Noe 4

Instream Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature and BOD5. Instream dissolved oxygen (DO) and
temperature data appear reasonable and seasonally appropriate. All DO values are well above and
consistently compliant with the Stream Standard minimum of 6 mg/L.12 Year 1999 instream BOD5
monthly averages were reported regularly below detection (<2 mg/L). Monthly average BOD5, when
detected, ranged from about 3 mg/L to a maximum of 6 mg/L reported in August of 1999. Year 2000
BOD5 monthly averages fell below detection (<2 mg/L) with the exception of April when upstream
averaged 4.5 mg/L (max 9 mg/L), and downstream averaged 10.5 mg/L (max. 21 mg/L).12 The
Division's early stream modeling efforts included BODS in the permit, but following data evaluation,
this parameter was judged inadequately useful in efforts to evaluate the environment or compliance.
Therefore, in keeping with current NC permitting guidelines this parameter will be deleted from
instream monitoring.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA).
The Division conducted EPA -recommended RPA analyses on 32 months of data to determine the
"reasonable potential" for identified toxicants to exceed Water Quality Stream Standards. The
Division compiled five parameters of concern listed in the previous permit: cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb),
mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), silver (Ag), and zinc (Zn).a,lz Results suggest no "reasonable potential" for
cadmium, lead, mercury, nickel, or zinc to exceed Water Quality Stream Standards. Therefore, these
parameters will be deleted from the permit.
Lastly, data suggest "reasonable potential" for silver, based on two sample hits during February and
October of 1997. Considering that there are subsequently three years of non -detects (12 samples), the
Division will consider the permittee's request to discontinue quarterly sampling after one year from
the effective date, if silver is not detected during that time period. For now, silver monitoring will
remain in the permit.
SUMMARY OF PERMITTING APPROACH
The Division recommends no changes for technology -based effluent Limits for BOD5, COD, and
TSR (Outfall 001)
Recommended Additions: Sulfide, Phenols, and Total Chromium with limits [40CFR 410.42(a)
— Chromium limits modified considering NC State Standards];
2/month monitoring for toxicants per Class II facility.
Recommended Deletions: Cadmium, Lead, Mercury, Lead, and Zinc (based on NO
reasonable potential)
BOD5 will be deleted from instream monitoring per current
guidelines.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
Fact Sheet
Page 5
May 2, 2001.
June 25, 2001

I.
NPDES UNIT CONTACT
If you have questrat3
diof the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Joe Co r3 ext. 597.
NAME: DATE:
REFERENCES
1. 2000. NPDES Permit Application Short Form C, Schneider Mill, Inc., due Dec. 31, 1999,
received April 14, 2000.
2. 2000. NPDES Regional Staff Report and Recommendations for the Renewal, for Schneider
Mill, Inc., NPDES Permit No. NC0034860, Mooresville Regional Office, November 2.
3. 2000. Active NPDES Permits List, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, NPDES Unit, on
the web at http:/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES/NPDESweb.htm].
4. 1995. NPDES Permit No.NC0034860. Issued to Schneider Mill, Inc., expired June 30, 2000.
Copies obtained through The Division of Water Quality, Central Files, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury St., Raleigh, North Carolina.
5. 1999. Catawba Basinwide Water Quality Plan. North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
Water Quality Section.
6. 2000. 303(d) List of North Carolina Impaired Waters - Draft. North Carolina Division of Water
Quality, Water Quality Section. Copies obtained through Planning Branch, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury St., Raleigh, North Carolina.
7. 1995. NPDES Waste Load Allocation Work Sheet, NPDES Permit No. NC0034860, for
Schneider Mill, Inc., (reviewed by Carla Sanderson), June 6.
8. 2000. NPDES Staff Plant Tour and Orientation Meeting, by Gary Elder, Plant Engineer and
Darren Webb, ORC of Schneider Mills, June 29.
9. 2000. NPDES Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Results, January 1996 through September 2000,
DENR, Environmental Services Branch, Aquatic Toxicology Unit, November 20.
10.2001 Correspondence - Telephone conference between Joe Corporon (NPDES Unit) and
Kristy Robeson of Aquatic Toxicology, February 13.
11.2000 Acute toxicity Values Final Acute Values ('/2 FAVs), DWQ/NPDES internal Memo,
Susan Wilson, January 2.
12. 1998-2000. Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) for Effluent (DEM Form MR-1) and instream
monitoring (DEM Form MR-3), Schneider Mill, Inc.
Fact Shwa
Pauc. 6

PUBLIC NOTICE l
Publisher's Certificate
STATE OF JI
NORTH CAROLINA
'
ENVIRONMENTAL
AGEMENT COMMISSION
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA i
North Carolina
NOTIFICATION OF
Alexander County:
INTENT TO ISSUE
A STATE NPDES PERMIT
I, Walter Lee Sharpe, Publisher ofoft i
On the basis of thorough staff,
review and application of Article 21
Taylorsville Times fa weekly newspaper
of Chapter 143, General Statutes of
North Carolina, Public Law 92-500
published at Taylorsville, Alexander County,
and other lawful standards and
regulations, the North Carolina
North Carolina, being duly sworn says, that
Environmental Management Com-
mission proposed to issue a permit
the attached notice was duly published in said
to discharge to the persons listed
below effective and subject to spe-
paper for
weeks, beginning
cial conditions.
C
Persons wishing to comment
with the issue dated the day
upon or object to the proposed
determinations are invited to sub -
of ti Q / anc) (_ F
trait same in writing to the above
.
address no later than 30 days from
the publish date. All comments
received prior to that date will be
considered in the formulation of
final determinations regarding the
Signed 4ti! Publisher
proposed permit. A public hearing
6 —7
may be held where the Director of
Date
the Division of water Quality finds
a significant degree of public inter -
Fee
est in a proposed permit.
A copy of the draft permit is
available by writing or calling the
Division of Water Quality/NPDES
Subscribed and swom before me this day
Unit,. 1617 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-
of l 0200
1617, [phone], extension 538.
d
The application and other infor-
mation may be inspected at these
locations during normal office
r
hours. Copies the information on
Hie are available upon request and
payment of the costs of reproduc-
iD, as d
tion. All such comments or
requests
My Commission Expires
regarding a proposed per-
mit- should make reference to the
�`��SSi lii 9tJtJlOI
NPDES permit .number listed
• •, `C�
below.
NPDES Permit Number
NC0034860, Schneider Mills, Inc.,
P.O. Box 519, Taylorsville, NC
m
•28681, has applied for a permit'
�f° Ci
�� �'r°�•�
renewal for a facility located in
°
Alexander County discharging
a,,9yli .......
tr6ated wastewater into Muddy
FR°
Fork Creek in the Catawba River
Basin. Currently ammonia and
total chromium are water quality
limited. This discharge may affect
future allocations in this portion of
the receiving stream.
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
may9-01c

The Knight Publishing Co., Inc.
Charlotte, NC
North Carolina } as Affidavit of Publication
Mecklenburg County}
THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER
--------------------------------------------------+---------------------------
NCDENR/DWQ/BUDGET OFFICE
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1617
REFERENCE: 30019881
4109697 NCO034860 SCHNEIDER
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said
County and State, duly authorized to administer
oaths affirmations, etc., personally appeared,
being duly sworn or affirmed according to law,
doth depose and say that he/she is a
representative of the Knight Publishing Company a
corporation organized and doing business under the
laws of the State of Delaware, and publishing a
newspaper known as The Charlotte Observer in the
city of Charlotte, County of Mecklenburg and State
of North Carolina and that as such he/she is
familiar with the books, records, files and
business of said Corporation and by reference to
the files of said publication
the attached advertisement was inserted. The
following is correctly copied from the books and
files of the aforesaid Corporation and
Publication.
PUBLISHED ON: 05/08
PUBLIC NOTICE
ENVIflONMEMALFMpNpBENTMEOLINA
COMMISSION
NOTIFICATION OFNA
1f�1T1EONfNORTH
O ISSUEA STATE NPDESt PERMIT
On 0ChBP er I General S1 tole utes It of Nouth Cane f n and %PlPublOia Of "ide 21 of
aq other IaWluI Mandares and reguWtions, Me Notts Cx blue
Etrvironmedy
Maruyemed Commbsbn Proposetl W issue a pernYt to tliscbargB id Ile
Persons GSlee below eHecli as aria 6ubjecl ip sped al cdndsure.
Persons wkhing 1p O,Osh upon or object to Me Pmpoaal Celarmna-
tiManpns are Invited fp sublain the pmuu same in writing ro the above aetlress no later
Ca s W ll peyrgtnodded M Ibhe bljujh muBlalloin of final tlBtB l outhehints mLlatiori5 roegaltllug two pamkL A pul hearing may be held sinshe M. Coed a
the Division d Vyat. Quaint, finds a sgnifiranl Ergree of Public inlereat0
a Pmposee Parma.
A copy Of the draft Pdm4 is a lsa ble by writing or calling the ohnsion of
Water OualiN/NPOES Unit, 1617 Mall Service Oagw.. Peleigb. Noah
Caroline 27 ifil), (918)] SO9g, odensom W8.
■ ilia applicatge arq abler insnne,an may pe l^sPecledm Mass bcatkxa +■■■ eunrlg normal OfFBe hours. Copies of the nbrtnaton on file are avellabo upon request arp paymeM o the msts of es'neuI - al sum coo.
me n6 M requests regardin
the POP11111 nr g a pfoposBd parmll5houtl make ]B14fepq¢ IO
NE6 uBlpBpstep bBlow.
i Cats: SNMI David Gone k
Mt Nan T. Sensual Besides
Publo notice d intent m issue a SIaIB NPDES Drifie� of AMO,OWlay
NPOES Permit Number NCO0.NM Schn uder I ills'oInd,, P.O. Bag 519, 0 Abivilie,NC 28681 nas sopped for a ppBrmit hahw lorafacilitylocated n Alexadler County a tonarging IrealBd yrd5lewater into Muddy prork
Creek in Ina Catawba flrvd Darin. Currently amrrgnld and idol chromium arewaterquNityllmireQThistlisa Wmayelfedluturea1Idle, pIv inthis penion oftheraearamsaeam.
LP410969]
AD SPACE: 82 LINE
FILED ON: 05/14/01
NAME: TITLE:
DATE:
In TestimoAly Whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal, the
day and y r aforesaid.
Notary: �'/I My Commission Expires:

Re: Schneider Mills Revisited -- Downstream Sample Location
Subject: Re: Schneider Mills Revisited -- Downstream Sample Location
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 14:41:56 -0400
From: Michael Parker <Michae][e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR - Mooresville Regional Office
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
Joe, note suggested cha
"Concerning the Downstream Sampling Point - The Division understands that Schneider Mi
currently collects downstream samples near the bridge at NC Hwy 16, contrary to the
downstream location identified in the existing permit. Division records indicate that
downstream sampling point was relocated in 1988 from NC Hwy 27 to a new point approxim,
0.9 miles downstream (near SR 1313), a location predicted by stream modeling as the li.
dissolved oxygen (DO) "sag point". The Division, therefore, requires that Schneider M
begin downstream sampling at NCSR 1313 as set forth in the current NPDES Permit.
access is a proble nd that might be the issue), they should sample DS where
d- ques ions), please advise.
MLP
-;�')E v6 Pcs c
Joe Corporon wrote:
> Michael, take a look at the attached cover letter (downstream sample
> point). Is there any reason for them not to sample @ NCSR 1313? The ORC
> Mr Webb asked me to correct the location in the draft to read Hwy 16
> (where they currently sample), but I've since looked it up and NCSR 1313
> is NOT an error. The permittee has not yet seen this revised letter.
> Thanks in advance for your input,
> --Joe
CUT �PAZ714-
ICA$ (0
> ----------------------------------------
> Name: Schneider DRAFT cover letter 4
> Schneider DRAFT cover letter 4.doc Type: WINWORD File (applicationlmswo.
> Encoding: base64
> Download Status: Not downloaded with message
Michael Parker - [e-mail]
Environmental Engineer II
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
919 N. Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: 704.663.1699 Fax: [phone]
Michael Parker <[e-mail]>
Environmental Engineer II
NC DENR - Mooresville
Division of Water Quality
I of 2 6/7/01 3:15 PM
LP

DENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit No. NC0034860
INTRODUCTION
7,DC:-
r4P. DEPT. OM
ENVIROWMENT, HEALTit;
6 NATURAL RESOURCES
APR 26 2G0I
PSION OF EVINONMENTAL MANAOEME U
tOOIEBYU IEOIOMAE OFRCI
�\ Schneider Mills, Inc. (also herein referred to as Schneider Mills or the permittee) requires a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to dispose treated wastewater to the surface
waters of the state. The permittee's 5-year NPDES permit has expired and they have requested
renewal from the Division of Water Quality (the Division). This Fact Sheet summarizes background
information and rationale used by the Division's NPDES Unit to determine permit limits and
conditions. This document also contains references to information sources relevant to this permit
renewal (superscripted numbers in order of appearance, See References).
FACILITY RECORDS REVIEW
Facility Description. Schneider Mills (Table 1) is a synthetic textile weaving facility discharging
process -contact wastes and non -process wastes through two separate outfalls. Influent to the onsite
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) includes waste from "water jet weavers" (roughly 85%) and
fiber coating or "sizing" waste (about 15 %). Sanitary sewer (-1,200 gallon per day) comprises only
0.03 % of the WWTP influent and is judged insignificant. The WWTP discharges through Outfall 001
with a permitted flow of 0.780 MGD. Actual discharge averages 0.340 MGD (based on two years of
data) or about 44% permitted capacity. Non -contact wastewater (Outfall 002; flow not limited)
includes air-conditioning condensate, boiler blowdown, WWTP filter backwash, and stormwater.t'Z
Table 1. Schneider Mills, Inc.
Facility Information
Applicant/Facili Name
Schneider Mills, Inc.
A ]!cant Address '
P.O. Box 519, Ta lorsville, North Carolina 28610
Facili Address '
1170 Hwy 16 North
Permitted Flow (MGD
0.780 (Outfall 001); Outfall 002 not limited
Type of Waste • '
Industrial process wastewater. Primary SIC Codes 2221; 4941
W W Code Prim. 55, 21, 02; Treatment Unit Code 02003
Facili /Permit Sta[us
Class II, Minor / Renewal
Drains a Basin / Coun
Catawba Basin / Alexander County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream 1,2,4Muddy
Fork Creek
Regional Office
Stream Classification
C
State Grid /
USGS Too Quad
Slorsville,NC
303(d Listed?
Not listed
Permit Writer
oron
Subbasin
03-08-32
Date:
Drains a Areas . Mi. 7
8.0
AAW
Lat. 350 56' 10" Long. 81° 11' 29"
Lat. 35° j 6' 1 _ - - - _ n 8 1 29"
Summer 7 10 (cfs '
1.4
Winter 7Q10 (cfs) '
2.2
30Q2 cfs) 3,7
3.0
Averse Flow cfs
8.8
IWC(%) '
46%
I uel sheet
Renewal -- NPDIiS Nermil NO
Pagc I
DIa 0 a U U
MAY - 2 2DUl
DENR - WATER P'JALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH

Schneider Mills has been in business in North Carolina since 1951. At this location Division records
date from 1972. The current permit expired on June 30, 2000 and the Division received
documentation to renew (Short Form C) on April 14, 2000. '14
Waste Load Allocation (WLA). The Division prepared the last WLA in April 1995 and developed
effluent limits and monitoring considering an in -stream waste concentration (IWC) of 46 % and an
average production level of 50,000 pounds of product per day.'
Verifying Existing Stream Conditions. This facility discharges to Muddy Fork Creek, a Class C
stream within the Catawba River Basins Muddy Fork Creek is not "impaired" [not 303(d) listed], and
is rated in "Good to Fair" condition.s,6
CORRESPONDENCE
Staff Report. Mooresville Regional Office (MRO) prepared a Staff Report dated November 2, 2000.
The MRO staff found the facility "...in good operational condition..." and noted that there are no
system modifications requested in the permit renewal, nor have any occurred since the permit was last
reissued. The MRO further stated that the WWTP appeared adequate to meet existing effluent limits.
They confirmed that Outfall 001 discharges treated, locally derived domestic wastewater and
industrial wastewater generated by water jet looms and sizing (fiber coating) operations. Non -contact
cooling water, boiler blow down, and WWTP filter backwash are discharged through Outfall 002.
Pending a final technical review, the MRO recommended that the NPDES Unit renew this permit.
COMPLIANCE REVIEW
Notices of Violation (NOVs). The Division has issued several NOVs within the last two years for
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) test failure beginning in December 1999 extending through March
2000.
Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Test. Quarterly monitoring results for chronic WET
testing indicate "pass" for 15 quarters beginning in 1996. However, failures occurred for four months
beginning in December 1999, recovering in April, then passing through December 2000:9110
Dec '99
Fail
Jan '00
Fail @28.2
Feb '00
NR/Fail @<23
Mar'00
Fail
Apr'00
Pass @56.34
May '00
Pass @>90
June '00
Pass
Sep '00
Pass
Dec '00
Pass
Pact Sheet
Renewal -- NPDP.S NC00348h0
Page 2

The Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC) conjectured that related cold weather disrupted the bio-
processes requiring a recovery period," but the reason for the temporary failures has not been
established. Considering the recent five passes in the last nine months and the previously clean record
for four years, the Division does not recommend altering chronic WET Test compliance and
reporting.
PERMITTING APPROACH
The Division judges previous permit limits and monitoring requirements to be appropriate for renewal
considering recent data supplied by the permittee indicating similar product use averaging about
52,000 pounds per day (lbs./day) over two years (1999 and 2000).118 Limits for parameters regulated
under 40CFR 410.30 and 410.40 have been verified. Although renewal calculations suggest less
stringent limits for some parameters, the permittee's compliance with existing limits is well
documented and the Division is bound under 40CFR 303(d); 402(c); and 122.44(1) not to "backslide"
permit limits.
Further consideration of required compliance under 40CFR 410.43(a), induced mandatory parameters
not previously permitted. These will be added to the permit for this cycle. New parameters include
sulfide, phenols, and total chromium (Table 2). Based on data provide by the permittee, limit
calculations assume 52,000 lbs./day as the average production rate with an anticipated daily
maximum of 85,000 lbs./day., Parameters required under 40CFR are summarized in Table 3.
Table 2. Parameter Limits Calculation
40CFR
410.42 a
Monthly
Average
40CFR
410.42 a
Daily
Maximum
per 1000 lbs.
Per 1000 lbs.
Sulfide
0.1
x 52
5.1 lbs./day
0.2
x 85
17.0 lbs./day
Phenols
0.05
x 52
2.5 lbs./day
0.1
x 85
8.51bs./day
Total Chromium
0.05
x 52
1 2.5 lbs./day
1 0.1
x 85
1 8.5 lbs./day
Table 3. Applicable 40CFR Permit Limits Summary
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
BOD, 5-day
230 lbs./day
35.4 m L
445 lbs./day
68.4 m
COD
685 lbs./day
1065 lbs./da
TSS
125 lbs./day
275 lbs./da
Sulfide
5.1 lbs./day
17.0 lbs./da
Phenols
2.5 lbs./day
8.5 lbs./da
Total Chromium
2.5 lbs./day
8.5 lbs./da
Fact Slicct
Renewal -- NPDI S NCO034860
Page 3

Further Consideration of Total Chromium. Technology -based calculations for chromium
(40CFR) were compared to the acute and chronic NC State Standards (Chronic = 50 µg/L; Acute =
1022 µg/L) to evaluate which are more stringent. Considering dilution (IWC 46 %):
Chronic Chromium -- Weekly Average
50 U 109 µg/L
0.46
compared to: 2.5 lbs/day = 0.780 MGD (permitted flow) x 8.34 x 1 mg/L
0.3 84 mg/L or 3 84 µg/L
Therefore: because 109 µg/L is less than 384 µg/L and therefore more environmentally
conservative, 109 µg/L will be implemented to protect acute affects as a Weekly
Average.
Acute Chromium -- Daily Maximum
1,022 gL = 2,221 µg/L
0.46
compared to: 8.5 lbs/day = 0.780 MGD (permitted flow) x 8.34 x 1 mg/L
1.307 mg/L or 1,307 µg/L
1,307 µg/L is less than 2,221 µg/L and therefore more environmentally conservative.
However, with a Weekly Average of 109 µg/L, a Daily Maximum of 1,307 µg/L is
redundant to protect against acute affects. Therefore the Division will not implement
a Daily Maximum.
In -stream and Effluent Data Review.
The Division reviewed 32 months (1998 through September 2000) of Discharge Monitoring Reports
(DMRs).11 Reports appear regular, thorough, and complete. Total discharge of treated wastewater
through Outfall 001 for this time period averaged about 0.340 MGD or 43% of permitted capacity.
Domestic waste (1,200 gallons per day) was determined to be <1% of the influent to the WWTP,
based on 250 employees each using an average of 50 gallons per day.
Effluent COD, TSR, and BODs, Effluent BOD5 monthly averages during the year 2000 ranged from
a minimum of 5.7 lbs./day to a maximum of about 45 lbs./day, with a daily maximum peak for the
year at 133 lbs./day occurring on May 3. All BOD5 values are in compliance with the permit (limit
230 lbs./day). Similarly, TSR and COD monthly average concentrations are half to one tenth of
permit limits. It appears therefore that this facility has little problem meeting permit limits, and there
does not appear to be a correlation between BOD5 and WET test failure.
Fact Sheet
Renewal -- NPDES NC0034860
Page 4

Instream Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature and BOD5. Instream dissolved oxygen (DO) and
temperature data appear reasonable and seasonally appropriate. All DO values are well above and
consistently compliant with the Stream Standard minimum of 5 mg/L.11 Year 1999 instream BOD5
monthly averages were reported regularly below detection (<2 mg/L). Monthly averages when
detected ranged about 3 mg/L with a maximum of b mg/L reported in August of 1999. Year 2000
BOD5 monthly averages fell below detection (<2 mg/L) with the exception of April when upstream
averaged 4.5 mg/L (max 9 mg/L), and downstream averaged 10.5 mg/L (max. 21 mg/L).11
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA).
The Division conducted EPA -recommended RPA analyses on 32 months of data to determine the
"reasonable potential" for identified toxicants to exceed Water Quality Stream Standards. The
Division compiled five parameters of concern listed in the previous permit: cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb),
mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), silver (Ag), and zinc (Zn) 4,11 Results suggest no "reasonable potential" for
cadmium, lead, mercury, nickel, or zinc to exceed Water Quality Stream Standards. Therefore, these
parameters will be deleted from the permit.
Lastly, data suggest "reasonable potential" for silver, based on two sample hits during February and
October of 1997. Considering that there are subsequently three years of non -detects (12 samples), the
Division will consider the permittee's request to discontinue quarterly sampling after one year from
the effective date, if silver is not detected during that time period. For now, silver will remain in the
permit.
SUMMARY OF PERMITTING APPROACH
For technology -based effluent Limits for BOD5, COD, and TSR (Outfall 001)
Recommended Changes: NONE
Recommended Additions: Sulfide, Phenols, and Total Chromium with limits [40CFR 410.42(a)
— Chromium limits modified considering NC State Standards];
2/month monitoring for toxicants per Class II facility.
Recommended Deletions: Cadmium, Lead, Mercury, Lead, and Zinc (based on NO reasonable
potential)
PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: May 2, 2001.
Permit Scheduled to Issue: June 25, 2001
NPDES UNIT CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Joe Corporon at [phone] ext. 597.
NAME: DATE:
Fact Sheet
Renewal -- NPDES NCO034860
l'a(—,,e 5

REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
(357. /2) .
Ott,
wj
NAME: DATE:
NPDES SUPERVISOR: 'D. /,'r, DATE:_-/g`//o/
Fact Shcet
Renew al -- WDES NC'0034960
I'age 7

Schneider Mills NCO034860
Subject: Schneider Mills NCO034860
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:31:47 -0400
From: Kristie Robeson <[e-mail]>
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
Joe,
I've reviewed this draft permit and the only error I saw was with the
receiving stream on first page of the permit. It says McLin Creek and
should be Muddy Fork Creek.
Thanks.
1 of 1 5/23/01 11:50 AM

Ja\jED ST�Tts t�(�• 1
A
m UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY �/'
a � REGION 4
i r ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
o= 61 FORSYTH STREET
aFtir�c =gozE°t\ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
June 14, 2001
. Coleen Sullins, Chief
ater Quality Section
orth Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
SUBJ: Draft NCDENR NPDES Permit Review - Notice of Potential Objections
Schneider Mills, Inc. - Taylorsville; NPDES Permit No. NCO034860
Dear Ms. Sullins:
This letter is in response to the draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit for the above referenced facility, which was received by EPA on May 14, 2001.
A subsequent draft was received via e-mail on June 5, 2001. EPA has completed its review of
the draft permit and, in accordance with the EPA / North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resource (NCDENR) Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and the federal
regulations, we provide the following comments, including recommended revisions and bases for
potential objections, on the draft permit (see enclosure).
EPA requests that NCDENR respond to these comments and provide copies of any
revised draft permits and fact sheets, or rationales, for EPA review before the final permit is
issued. In addition, EPA asks that you forward any significant public comments received during
the public notice period and the State's response to those comments.
EPA appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comment on the draft permit. If
you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me or call Ms. Caroline O.
Ejimofor, of my staff at [phone].
Sincerely,
ALA er 12 w�
Carol L. Kemker, Acting Chief
Surface Water Permits and Facilities Branch
Water Management Division
Enclosure n 05 d S
cc: Gary D. Elder, Schneider Mills, Inc. ,JUN L Q 2001
Office of Legal Support R4
Internet Address (URL). http://w .epa.gov WAI ER QUNI I hi
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed wtlh Vegetable Olt Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Mlnlmurn 30% Postconsup�OTlJ.. t � t\I

June 14, 2001
ATTACHMENT
U. S. EPA, Region 4. Draft NCDENR NPDES Permit Review:
Notice of Potential Objections
Schneider Mills, Inc. - Taylorsville; NPDES Permit No. Nc0034860
COMMENTS
1) EPA regulations require that all fact sheets include a brief summary of the basis for the
draft permit conditions, including references to applicable statutory or regulatory
provisions (see 40 C.F.R. § 124.8(b)(4)). The fact sheet does not include this information
for the change in BOD5 monitoring. BOD5 has been monitored in the effluent, upstream,
and downstream at least since the issuance of the 1993 permit. The deletion of the
conductivity monitoring requirement is unexplained.
2) The draft permit is not as stringent as the previous permits in terms of the monitoring
requirements for BOD5, and the deletion of the conductivity monitoring requirement is
unexplained. Pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(1), all reissued permits must be issued with
at least as stringent limits as the previous permit, unless certain conditions are met.
3) For continuous discharges, unless impracticable, parameters should include maximum
daily and average monthly limitations (see 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(1)). The current permit
does not include daily maximum limitations for seasonal NH3-N. An appropriate
oversight comment would be to include the daily maximum limits for NH3-N.
4) Even though some information about the public comment period is mentioned in the
draft permit cover letter, there is no section addressing the comment period in the fact
sheet. According to Section 40 C.F.R. § 124.8(b)(6), a description of the procedures for
reaching a final decision on the draft permit must include: the beginning and ending dates
for the comment period and the address where comments will be received, procedures for
requesting a hearing and the nature of that hearing, and any other procedures by which
the public may participate in the final decision.
In accordance with the Rule, Subsection I 5A NCAC 02H .0108 (5) Fact Sheets, the fact
sheet should contain a more detailed description of the procedures for the formulation of
final determination than that given in the public notice. Accordingly, EPA requests that
you revise the fact sheet to include the appropriate information regarding the public
comment procedures once that information is finalized.

J_
POTENTIAL OBJECTION
1) The permit application form provided with the draft permit was North Carolina Short
Form C. Sections 40 C.F.R. § 122.2 1 (a)(2)(iv) and 40 C.F.R. § 123.25(a) require that
State -issued NPDES permit application forms require at a minimum the information
required in the EPA application forms. North Carolina Short Form C does not require the
same information as that required under Standard Form 2C which should have the same
requirements as EPA's Form 2C.
In accordance with North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H - Procedures for
Permits: Approvals, Section .0100 - Point Source Discharges to the Surface Waters
( Rule), Subsection 15A NCAC 02H .0105 (e), applications for permit renewals shall be
accomplished by filing the appropriate application form listed in paragraph (a) of the
same subsection. Since Schneider Mills, Inc. is a textile operation and is classified as a
primary industry under 40 C.F.R. § 122.21, Appendix A, EPA Form 2 C is required.
2

Schneider Mills, Inc.
PO Box 519
Taylorsville, NC 28681
[phone] Phone
[phone] Fax
May 21, 2001
Joe R. Corporon
NPDES Unit
NC Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
i MAY 2 9 2001 JE
OENR - WATER OU,ALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Subject: Draft-NPDES Permit No. NCO034860
Schneider Mills, Inc.
NC Hwy 16 North
Alexander County
Dear Mr. Corporon:
The following is comments on our new draft permit:
1. On page 4 in the discription of our WWTP you indicated we use chlorination for disinfection.
This is incorrect, we do not use chlorine at our WWTP.
2. On page 4 it is indicated that we have a filter backwash at our WWTP. This is incorrect. We
have a filter backwash for the water plant. Outfall 002 is filtered backwash "only" from our
water plant.
On page 5 the downstream sampling point is incorrect. The downstream sampling point
should be just before the Muddy Creek goes under NC Highway 16.
4. On page 6 Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Reqirements for Outfall 001. We would like
to ask for influent BOD and total suspended residue to be taken off.
5. On page 6 Total Residual Chlorine has been added to our permit. We would like for this to
be taken off.

6. On page 6 under Table Footnotes: Downstream sample location is incorrect.
7. On Page 7 influent sampling for total suspended residue has been added to our permit. We
would like for this to be taken off for Outfall 002.
8. On page 7 turbidity has been added to Outfall 002. We would like for this to be taken off.
9. On page 7 for Outfall 002 under sample type for iron is composite. We would like for this to
be changed to grab if possible.
10. On page 7 under Table Footnotes: downstream sampling point is incorrect.
11. On page 7 Outfall 002 under total suspended residue sample type. We would like this to be
changed to grab sampling if possible.
If you have any questions or comments reguarding this letter please call Gary Elder or Darren
Webb.
Sincerely,
�u,e,'✓
Darren Webb

�S R�816V%5� 76
file:///Untitled
s
. Dee,
1170)Q&2
I just received supplemental info tables from Schneider Mills (see attached AD -INFO request letter). I am
faxing these tables to you today (see Response C below). The following responses to your's and Caroline's
draft comments should lay this renewal to rest. Please respond in writing for the file. I have also attached
Final permit does. Our issuance awaits your appproval.
Thanks for your input and help.
Joe
a) Response to BOD: To clarify, BOD5 was deleted from instream monitoring only. The Division's early
stream monitoring included BOD5 in the permit, but following subsequent data evaluation, BOD was
judged inadequately useful for monitoring stream conditions. Therefore, current NC permitting guidelines
instruct permit writers to remove BOD5 instream monitoring. Clarification of this permitting guidance has
been included in the Fact Sheet and final permit cover letter.
b) Response to Ammonia: Per NC/EPA agreement, I have added a paragraph to the final cover letter
infortning the permtttee to expect an additional ammonia limit (Daily Maximum) at next renewal.
c) Response to Renewal Application Supplements: The Division asked for and received supplemental
POC checklists from Schneider Mills (Outfall 001: Tables IV and V; Outfall 002: Tables II, III, IV, and V
-- see attached AD -INFO request letter). We also requested and received additional sampling and analyses
for data missing from Outfall 002.
[e-mail] wrote:
Joe,
Comments on Schneider Mills, NC0034860. I would be glad to talk to you
about any of the comments below, but wanted to provide our initial
reactions. Thank you for providing the requested information and any
clarifications as needed.
Dee Stewart
EPA R4
404/562-9334
1) A letter dated June 14, 2001, was sent to NC providing comments on
the Schneider Mills NPDES Permit. Please respond to the comments in
this letter. In summary:
a) Requested an explanation for the change in BOD5 monitoring in the
fact sheet (40 CFR 124.8(b)(4).
b) The draft permit does not include a daily maximum limitation for
seasonal N1­13-N. Continuous dischargers, unless impracticable, should
include both daily maximum and average monthly limitations (40 CFR
122.45(d)(1)).
I of 2 6/13/02 2:39 PM

file:///Untitled
c) The NC Std. Form C application lists ammonia, lead, zinc, cadmium,
mercury, and nickel as believed present, but provides no data. This
application and its data are insufficient. If this concern is not
addressed, it would be a basis for an EPA objection, per 40 CFR
122.21(e)(1). If NC does have analytical data for this facility for the
parameters/fractions specified below, EPA would accept that data. The
requirements of the EPA Form 2C, or a state form that is significantly
the same, apply because this facility is a textile facility and hence a
primary industry. At least one analysis should be conducted and
submitted for 1) the volatile, acid, and base/neutral GC/MS fractions,
per 40 CFR 122, Appendix D, last Table 1 and 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A);
2) all total metals, cyanide, and total phenols, per 40 CFR
122.21(g)(7)(v)(B); and 3) BOD5, COD, TOC, TSS, NH3, temp (both winter
and summer), and pH, per 40 CFR 122.2 1 (g)(7)(iii). Also, the permittee
must address the requirements of conventional and nonconventional
pollutants at 40 CFR 122.2 1 (g)(7)(vi)(A). EPA would accept a condition
in the draft permit to require this monitoring and submittal to NC
within the first 6 months of permit issuance. The permit should also
include a specific reopener if the results indicate the need for permit
modification.
2 of 2 6/13/02 2:39 PM

Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 12:50:59 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail]
Joe,
Comments on Schneider Mills, NC0034860. I would be glad to talk to you about any of the
comments below, but wanted to provide our initial reactions. Thank you for providing the requested
information and any clarifications as needed.
Dee Stewart
EPA R4
404/562-9334
A letter dated June 14, 2001, was sent to NC providing comments on the Schneider Mills NPDES
Permit. Please respond to the comments in this letter. In summary:
a) Requested an explanation for the change in BODS monitoring in the fact sheet (40 CFR
124.8(b)(4).
b) The draft permit does not include a daily maximum limitation for seasonal NH3-N. Continuous
dischargers, unless impracticable, should include both daily maximum and average monthly
limitations (40 CFR 122.45(d)(1)).
c) The NC Std. Form C application lists ammonia, lead, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and nickel as
believed present, but provides no data. This application and its data are insufficient. If this
concern is not addressed, it would be a basis for an EPA objection, per 40 CFR 122.21(e)(1). If
NC does have analytical data for this facility for the parameters/fractions specified below, EPA
would accept that data. The requirements of the EPA Form 2C, or a state form that is
significantly the same, apply because this facility is a textile facility and hence a primary
industry. At least one analysis should be conducted and submitted for:
1) the volatile, acid, and base/neutral GC/MS fractions, per 40 CFR 122,
Appendix D, last Table 1 and 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A);
2) all total metals, cyanide, and total phenols, per 40 CFR
122.21(g)(7)(v)(B); and
3) BODS, COD, TOC, TSS, NH3, temp (both winter and summer), and pH,
per 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(iii).
4) Also, the permittee must address the requirements of conventional and non -
conventional pollutants at 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(vi)(A).
EPA would accept a condition in the draft permit to require this monitoring and submittal to NC
within the first 6 months of permit issuance. The permit should also include a specific reopener if the
results indicate the need for permit modification.

Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 12:50:59 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]
Joe,
Comments on Schneider Mills, NC0034860. I would be glad to talk to you about any of the
comments below, but wanted to provide our initial reactions. Thank you for providing the
requested information and any clarifications as needed.
Dee Stewart
EPA R4
404/562-9334
1) A letter dated June 14, 2001, was sent to NC providing comments on the Schneider Mills
NPDES Permit. Please respond to the comments in this letter. In summary:
a) Requested an explanation for the change in BOD5 monitoring in the fact sheet (40 CFR
124.8(b)(4).
b) The draft permit does not include a daily maximum limitation for seasonal NH3-N.
Continuous dischargers, unless impracticable, should include both daily maxi m and
average monthly limitations (40 CFR 122.45(d)(1)).
c) The NC Std. Form C application lists ammonia, lead, zinc, cadmium, mercury, and nickel
as believed present, but provides no data. This application and its data are insufficient. If
this concern is not addressed, it would be a basis for an EPA objection, per 40 CFR
122.21(e)(1). If NC does have analytical data for this facility for the parameters/fractions
specified below, EPA would accept that data. The requirements of the EPA Form 2C, or a
state form that is significantly the same, apply because this facility is a textile facility and
hence a primary industry. At least one analysis should be conducted and submitted for 1) the
volatile, acid, and base/neutral GC/MS fractions, per 40 CFR 122, Appendix D, last Table 1
and 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(v)(A); 2) all total metals, cyanide, and total phenols, per 40 CFR
122.21(g)(7)(v)(B); and 3) BODS, COD, TOC, TSS, NH3, temp (both winter and summer),
and pH, per 40 CFR 122.21(g)(7)(iii). Also, the permittee must address the requirements of
conventional and non -conventional pollutants at 40 CFR 122.2 1 (g)(7)(vi)(A). EPA would
accept a condition in the draft permit to require this monitoring and submittal to NC within
the first 6 months of permit issuance. The permit should also include a specific reopener if
the results indicate the need for permit modification.

Subject: The Log Jam Begins to Break!
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 10:10:44 -0400
From: Dave Goodrich <dave.goodrich @ncmail.net>
To: "DENR.NPDES.DWQ" <[e-mail]>
CC: Bill Reid <[e-mail]>, Greg Thorpe <[e-mail]>,
Coleen Sullins <[e-mail]>
We have approval to move forward with those pending permits that are being held up
for ammonia [municipal and industrial]. Please insert the following language in the cover
letter and as a footnote to the limits page or alternatively, as a special condition:
The Division may re -open this permit to require daily maximum
(or weekly average) limits for ammonia. After calculating
allowable concentrations, the Division will perform an analysis of
past ammonia data to determine if there is reasonable potential for
this discharge to exceed these potential limits. If there is, this
permit will be re -opened. If there is not, the permit will not be re-
opened, but will contain daily maximum (or weekly average) limits
for ammonia upon renewal.
PLEASE NOTE. There is a choice above that you have to make:
a) For municipal systems, it should read "weekly average limits."
The words "daily maximum" and the parenthesis should be
eliminated.
b) For non -municipal systems, please delete the "(or weekly
average)" string.
Let me know if you have any questions, and remember that Charles and I would like
to have these. as soon as possible since he'll be leaving us for a couple of weeks in a couple of
weeks.
Thanks for your patience during this trying time,
Dave

Subject: Preliminary comments on the Schneider Mills,
Inc. NPDES permit number NC0034860
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:53:25 -0400
From: [e-mail] ('
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]
Review of Permit Conditions
Comparison of Current Permit Effluent Characteristics to Previous Permits
1) BODS - The monitoring for BODS has been decreased in the current permit from the
previous permit. The previous permit required weekly monitoring of BODS from the
effluent, upstream, and downstream of the facility. The waste load limitations, however, did
not change. The current permit does not justify this change in the fact sheet, but makes
mention of the deletion of instream sampling in the draft permit cover letter, but no
rationale is provided.
2) Zinc, Cadmium, Nickel, Lead, and Mercury - Monthly monitoring for these metals had
been in the previous two permits, but deleted from the current draft. A reasonable potential
analysis (RPA) based on 32 months of data indicated that there was no reasonable potential
to exceed Water Quality Stream Standards. This is stated in the fact sheet and in the draft
permit cover letter.
3) Conductivity - Weekly upstream and downstream monitoring was required in the previous
two permits, but deleted from the current draft. The monitoring deletion may have been
assumed following the above RPA for listed metals.. No justification for this change was in
the fact sheet, or cover letter, although it appears to be acceptable.
4) Sulfide - No limit or monitoring was in the previous permit. A pollutant of concern
required under 40 CFR 410.43(a), Subpart D for textile mills utilizing woven fabric finishing.
Limitation should have been in previous permits. The fact sheet and cover letter explain the
categorical mandated addition.
5) Phenols - No limit or monitoring was in the previous permit. A pollutant of concern
required under 40 CFR.410.43(a), Subpart D for textile mills utilizing woven fabric finishing.
Limitation should have been in previous permits. The fact sheet and cover letter explain the
categorical mandated addition.
6) Total Chromium - No limit or monitoring was in the previous permit. A pollutant of
concern required under 40 CFR.410.43(a), Subpart D for textile mills utilizing woven fabric
finishing. Limitation should have been in previous permits. The fact sheet and cover letter
explain the categorical mandated addition, and the utilization of the more stringent NC State
WQ Standards.

00
Schneider Mills, Inc. NPDES Permit NCO034860 Draft 5/02/01
Review of Permit Conditions
Regulatory Analysis of Current Permit - Basis for Comment
1) 40 CFR § 124.8(b)(4) - This cite requires that all fact sheets include a brief summary of the
basis for the draft permit conditions, including references to applicable statutory or
regulatory provisions. The fact sheet, or the letter transmitting the final permit does not
include this information for change in BOD5 monitoring. BOD5 has been monitored in the
effluent, upstream, and downstream at least since the issuance of the 1993 permit until the
current 2001 draft. The deletion of the conductivity monitoring requirement is unexplained.
2) 40 CFR § 124.8(b)(4) - The draft permit is not as stringent as the previous permits in terms
of the monitoring requirements for BOD5. The deletion of the conductivity monitoring
requirement is unexplained.
3) 40 CFR § 122.41 - This references standard conditions for all permits. The draft permit for
EPA review did not contain standard conditions. An appropriate EPA comment would be
that the permit must not be issued without the 122.41 requirements.
4) 40 CFR § 122.45(d)(1) - For continuous (?) discharges, unless practicable, parameters
should include maximum daily and average monthly limitations. The current permit does not
include daily maximum limitations for seasonal NH3-N. An appropriate oversight comment
would be to include the daily maximum limits for N113-N.
5) 40 CFR § 122.2 1 (a)(2)(iv), 40 CFR § 123.25(a) - Requires that State -issued permit
application forms require at a minimum the information required in the EPA application
forms. North Carolina Short Form C does require the same information as that required
under EPA Form 2C.
Caroline Ejimofor

EPA Request for App and PPA
Subject: Request for application on NPDES permit number NCO034860
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:56:18 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Joe:
Please send me a complete copy of the NPDES application form for Schne
ider
Mills, Inc. in Alexander County. The complete application was not
transmitted with the draft permit and fact sheet received by the EPA -
Region 4 office on May 14th. I will need the complete application to f
inish
my review of this draft permit. Specifically I need to see the expande
d
effluent testing data (eg. priority pollutant analysis) at this indust
ry.
Thanks.
Caroline Ejimofor
Environmental Engineer
Permits, Grants and Technical Assistance Branch
EPA Water Management Division
e-mail address: [e-mail]
phone number: 404-562-9309
fax number: 404-562-9318
Page 1

1. •w'
TELEPHONE RECORD
NCDENR Date: Project:
moa OF
��►�vaAxo Rrsauwoes Time:
❑ Return
Call to
❑ Call from
Subject:
Mr./ Mrs. ` \ Representing: SCH/INE( t& ( (L�
Address co
Telephone: $ 2- : e32- — V P FAX: g Z� — 6 �; Z — ` 1 /
NOTES/ SUMMARY
or ust LC- vP CI)V �-
-5 T 7 A) 6Z�- uS EFA- N F F= x5lse L
A 'b
NEEDED FOLLOW-UP ACTION(S)
EJ
El
El
BY WHOM/WHEN
cc: Signed

Mar, 2. 2301 7:55AM SGNNE:DER MILLS TAYLORSVILLE R
No, 9E30 P. 2i2
Pa Nq. 1 YEARS 1999 AND 2000 e
02r7/2'OOx >�
Schneider Mills, Inc.
P R o n U C T I 0 N S U M M A R Y
NPDRS Permit NCO034860
MOTH Highest Single -Day Production Production Averages
(in Thousands of Hounds) (in Thousands of Pounds)
**•'vianu -ta99
FBS199•'R
Ml•Y8.1999
A¢R1999
MFiY1999
JIM1999
JIiL1959 ,
-JOG1999
S@F199l9
o(IT1999
• Nb•V19,99
D@C1999
}* Subtotal **
46 YEAR 2000
3AN2000
FSB2000
MAR2000
APR2000
MAY'2000
JIt1.V'2000
JUI.L2000
At10<z000
S$�?2000
,0=000
N=000
Dxtf; 20D0
*+ Subtotal **
*** Total ***
1101 W)
47
lvos
36
861
41
1160
38
861,.
40
944
49
1138
52
1210
54
1264
62
1801
66
1555
69
1623
72
1526
� 15026 ,
35- kcDc 23S3�'
84
1944
85
1954
82
2353
79
1852
84
1941
71 -
1707
67
1640
74
1770
74
2061
71
1688
71
1653
70
1668
22230
37256
Y� W c, '
m 69,yF A�-NE bAI �kyS: S�k�
oR Z' 24a% ; 3- a c�'�r-ys = 5f • 63(4s14A

Om o ��Lfe� �c�6%' s7rL JrL �-
r•vAuP,�� w�7e6d434/ 6c)1.
-Ir
-4��)
��
h4a /
1�\ �zyF� 6l.d� � Jce
AU (55,Cr- PRAE- 2, )

Nam---
CnSvl l wue L )
mc� of -
62)� �f.3
--
sJ� per- c
>-(C-7 Z 5 �
-ko477117AVC, Y114IIJ-1
Z6
SJ2�
G
-Sc c
- W u.L 144-k
BUDS
-rss
c6Q

k�)
rss
Apo
W �C-J-e
g64(s
-�bA.� i air,.
..
0
( C S aP� 40
V:A�
4n
' .2
7"//�se �CAAJ
�� w� ��� Lae �P�'f c���-0
sc,cArVSc�
(d) �4) /C w GA
C F�2 1 Z2 , I �!) p-,e-lo t ire Vret ss U,e�e�
rD v� 4- a�, s- F/"� dv / c
7rP
�LIP-
/ f/
c6w Vie V`C..

.. z�6FS
Sc-4LU-S �_z�1G _- 66b S/ CA c C- 7'<c��_
ca . a— L
ke� 0-6 f s ©K I—
/ 2- (o
tia
�::7 6,3 7 V /,---

C
0 cures = I f) Zz rw&
?«c- j
5o = 0,4� lad ���"�,���
LLOwA lob Cw%-w.y 4vs)
Hwy A.\.-?
�L - o
Fx
� 2
uy
I

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Schneider Mills, Inc.
NCO034860
Time Period Jan 1997 thru Oct 2000
Ow(MGD) 0.78
7010S(cls) 1.4
3002 (c/s) 3
g. Stream Flow, CA Ws) 8.8
Rec'ving Stream Muddy Fork
Summary for 0.780 MGD
<< BLUE CELLS ONLY For Instructions, See RED TAB (cell A
WWFP Class 2
IWC (%) ® 7010S 46.3
® 3002 28.7
@ OA 12.1
Stream Class C
STANDARDS 6
REASONABLE
PRELIMINARY
PARAMETER
TYPE'
CRITERIA
Pot
POTENTIAL
RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NCWOS 14 FAV
RESULTS
n = 0
MaxPredCw << Allowable Cw
0
NC
50
Max PredCw NDIV/01
Allowable Cw (acute) WA
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chroql<108
NO DATA
n-12
(
MaxPredCw«Allowable Cw
��L"�-L -
Cadmium
NC
2 15
I
Max PredCw 0.091
N�imdl-ormonitoring necessary mNPDESpe 't.
Allowable Cw (awe) 15.0
MONITOR?
Monitmiaq may an,be required under LIMP.
Allowable Cw (chronic) 4.3
MONITOR?
('
n = 0
MaxPredCw << Allowable Cw
0
NC
56 1.0in
5
Max Prod Cw 4DIV/01
Allowable Cw (acute) 1.022
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chronic) /08
NO DATA
n = 0
MaxPredCW > Action Level
0
NC
7 73
2
Max PredCw MDIV/01
(a)
Allowable Cw (acute) 7
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chronic) 15
NO DATA
n = 0
MaxPredCw > 112 FAV
0
NC
5 22
MaxPled Cw NDIV/01
Allowable Cw (acute) 22
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chronig,= 11
NO DATA
n-12
MaxPredCw< Allowable Cw
Lead
NC
25 me
5
Max Prod Cw _ 0.348
ye4Nnkormon or 9V Gees-2iytn NPDES-pePmh
Allowable Cw (active) 34
Allowable Civ (chronict., 54
MONITOR?
MONITOR?
Moiftodagmay stiA bete
, quired-under LTMP
VI` 1p
n = 12
MaxPredCw <Allowable CW
T A (]�
Mercury
NC
0012
02
Max Pred Cw tom. 0.001
1
No li�tt at NjILuae- /�"1//��'j'�^
Nlowable Cw(acute) WA
MONITOR?
Re.eval new an w - .Rl 1!
Allowable Cw(chronic 0.026
MONITOR?
RepuuemanKering4kieek
=12
MaxPredDw Allowable CW
V-Lf, _
Nickel
NC
a 261
5
MaxPredCw qN/A
N
Allowable Cw (aces) 261
4 WA
Mo .
Allowable Cw (chronic) 190
aWA
• ' _I
14J6 �\
n = 0
laxPredCw> NCWOS (narrative)
0
A
1.0
Max PredCw MDIV101
Allowable Cw (acute) MIA
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chronic) 8
NO DATA
n=0
MaxPredCw=NCWOS
0
NC
50
Max Prod Cw 9DIV/01
Allowable Cw (acute) WA
NO DATA
Allowable Cw (chmni 11
NO DATA
_
In = 12
MaxPredCw > Action Level
�`
Silver
NC
0 W in
Max Prod Cw — , 3.4
Reg1-.KeNng3AreeR'
(a)
Allowable C.(acute) 1.23
DAILY LIMIT
MAX.AVG.
at anleexleetivs
Allowable Cw(chron' 0.129
K. LIMIT
Rctva
' n = 35
MaxP C I> Action Level
_ ! ty 'r`-fllkc
Zinc
NC
M 67
10
Max Prod Cw '�-� 2.8
Rtgu-Rodn�g?lweek GIt
(a)
Allowable Cw (acute) 67
ONITOR?
No..=..-�nce-lostanderAiaplara —
NlowableCw(chronic) 108
ONITOR?
Ra - - -
'Legend., " Freshwater Discharge -(i�""" L
C = Carcinogenic I< \" �(���
NC = Non -carcinogenic ,t r _
A=Aesthetic ��3,III
Schneider Mills -RPA,%-MGD
/ r Z2101
r,)4
p ^-- C

4
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter = lCadmium
n Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
n
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
I Jan-98 <
Sid Dev.
#DIV/01
1
Feb-97 <
0.001
2 Jan-98 <
Mean
#DIV/01
2
May-97 <
0.001
3 Jan-98 <
C.V.
#DIV/01
3
Oct-97 <
0.001
4 Jan-98 <
n
0
4
Mar-98 <
0.001
5 Feb-98 <
5
Jun-98 <
0.001
6 Feb-98 <
Mull Factor =
#DIV/0!
6
Mar-98
7 Feb-98 <
Max. Value
0.0 #0
7
Apr-98 <
8 Feb-98 <
Max. Prod Cw
#DIV/01
8
Apr-98 <
9 Mar-98 <
9
May-98 <
10 Mar-98 <
10
Maym% <
11 Mar-98 <
11
Jun-98 <
12 Mar-98 <
12
Jun-98 <
13 Apr-98
13
Jul-98 <
14 Apr-98 <
14
Jul-98 <
15 Apr-98 <
is
Aug-98 <
0.001
0.001
16 Apr-98 <
16
Aug-98 <
17 May-98 <
17
Sep-98 <
18 MayaW <
18
Sep-98
19 May498 <
19
Oct-98
0.01
0.01
20 May498 <
20
Oct-98 <
21 Jun-98
21
Nov-98 <
22 Jun-98 <
22
Nov-98 <
23 Jun-98 <
23
Dec-98 <
24 Jun-98 <
24
Dec-98 <
25 Jul-98 <
25
Jan-99 <
0.001
0.001
26 Jul-98 <
26
Jan-99 <
27 Jul-98
27
Feb-99 <
28 Jul-98 <
28
Feb-99 <
29 Aug-98 <
29
Mar-99 <
30 Aug-98 <
30
Mar-99 <
31 Aug-98 <
31
Apr-99 <
0.001
0.001
32 Aug-98 <
32
Apr-99 <
33 Sep-98 <
33
May-99 <
34 Sep-98 <
34
May-99 <
35 Sep-98 <
35
Jun-99 <
36 Sep-98 <
36
Jun-99 <
37 Oct-98 <
37
Jul-99 <
0.001
0.001
38 Oct-98 <
38
Jul-99
39 Oct -go
39
Aug-99
40 Oct-98
40
Aug-99
41 NOV-98
41
Sep-99
42 Nov-98
42
Sep-99
43 Nov-98
43
Oct-99 <
44 Nov-98
44
Oct-99
45 Dec-98
45
Nov-99
46 Dec-98
46
Nov-99
47 Dec-98
47
Dec-99
48 Dec-98
48
Dec-99
49 Jan-99 <
49
Jan-00 <
so Jan-99 <
50
Jan-00
51 Jan-99 <
51
Feb-00
52 Jan-99 <
52
Feb-00
53 Feb-99 <
63
Mar-00
54 Feb-99 <
64
Mar-00
55 Feb-99 <
55
Apr-00
56 Feb-99 <
56
Apr-00
57 Mar-99
57
May-00 <
58 Mar-99 <
58
May-00
59 Mar-99
59
Jun-00
60 Mar-99 <
60
Jun-00
61 Apr-99 <
61
Jul-00
62 Apr-99 <
62
Jul-00 <
63 Apr-99 <
63
Aug-00
64 Apr-99 <
64
Aug-00
65 May-99 <
65
Sep-00 <
0.002
0.001
66 May-99 <
66
Sep-00
67 May-99 <
67
Oct-00
68 May-99 <
68
Oct-00
69 Jun-99 <
69
Nov-00
70 Jun-99 <
70
Nov-00
Results
Std Dev.
0.00
Mean
0.0
C.V.
1.768
n
12
Mull Factor = 9.10
Max. Value 0.01
Max. Pred Cw 0.091
tip
Schneider Mills -- RPA, Data Sheet
2/2/01

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter=
Parameter
ILead
n
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
n Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
1
<
Std Dev.
#DIV/01
1 Feb-97 < 0.002
0.001
2
Mean
UDIV/01
2 May-97 < 0.002
0.001
3
<
C.V.
#DIV/01
3 Oct-97 < 0.002
0.001
4
<
n
0
4 Mar-98 < 0.002
0.001
5
<
5 Jun-98 0.029
0.029
6
Mutt Factor =
#DIV/0!
6 Mar-98 <
7
Max. Value
0.0 jo
7 Apr-98
8
Max. Pred Cw
#DIV/01 pgA
8 Apr-98 <
9
9 May-98 <
10
10 May-98 <
11
11 Jun-98 <
12
<
12 Jun-98 <
13
<
13 Jul-98 <
14
<
14 Jul-98 <
15
<
Is Aug-98 < 0.002
0.001
16
<
16 Aug-98 <
17
<
17 Sep-98 <
18
<
18 Sep-98 <
19
<
19 Oct-98 < 0.002
0.001
20
<
20 Oct-98 <
21
<
21 Nov-98 <
22
<
22 Nov-98 <
23
<
23 Dec-98 <
24
<
24 Doc-98 <
25
<
25 Jan-99 < 0.002
0.001
26
<
26 Jan-99 <
27
<
27 Feb-99 <
28
<
28 Feb-99 <
29
29 Mar-99 <
30
30 Mar-99 <
31
31 Apr-99 < 0.002
0.001
32
32 Apr-99 <
33
<
33 May-99
34
34 May-99 <
35
<
35 Jun-99 <
36
<
36 Jun-99 <
37
37 Jul-99 < 0.002
0.001
38
38 Jul-99
39
39 Aug-99
40
40 Aug-99
41
41 Sep-99
42
42 Sep-99
43
43 Oct-99 <
44
44 Oct-99
45
45 Nov-99
46
46 Nov-99
47
47 Dec-99
48
48 Dec-99
49
49 Jan-00 <
so
50 Jan-00
51
51 Feb-00
52
52 Feb-00
53
53 Mar-00
54
54 Mar-00
55
55 Apr-00
56
56 Apr-00
57
57 May-00 <
58
58 May-00
59
59 Jun-00 <
60
60 Jun-00
61
61 Jum
62
62 Jul-00
63
63 Aug-00
64
64 Aug-00
65
65 Sep-00 < 0.005
0.003
66
66 Sep-00
67
67 Oct-00 <
68
68 Oct-00
69
69 Nov-00
70
70 Nov-00
Results
Sid Dev.
0.01
Mean
0.0
C.V.
2.240
n
12
Mutt Factor = 12.00
Max. Value 0.029
Max. Pred Cw 0.348
Schneider Mills -- RPA, Data Sheet
-5- 2001

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter= Mercury Parameter= Nickel
n
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
n
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
I
Feb-97 < 0.0002
0.0001
Std Dev.
0.000
1
Feb-97 <
0.01
0.005
Std Dev.
0.00
2
May-97 < 0.0002
0.0001
Mean
0.000
2
May-97 <
0.01
0.005
Mean
0.0
3
Oct-97 < 0.0002
0.0001
C.V.
0.495
3
Oct-97 <
0.01
0.005
C.V.
0.000
4
Feb-98
n
12
4
Feb-98 <
n
12
5
Mar-98 < 0.0002
0.0001
5
Mar-98 <
0.01
0.005
6
Mar-98
Mult Factor =
2.38
6
Mar-98
Mult Factor =
#N/A
7
Apr-98
Max. Value
0.0003 yWl
7
Apr-98
Max. Value
0.005
8
Apr-98
Max. Pred Cw
0.0007 yWl
8
Apr-98
Max. Prod Cw
#WA
9
May-98 <
9
May-98 <
10
May-98 <
10
May-98
11
Jun-98 < 0.0002
0.0001
11
Jun-98 <
0.01
0.005
12
Jun-98 <
12
Jun-98
13
Jul-98 <
13
Jul-98
14
Jul-98 <
14
Jul-98
15
Aug-98 < 0.0002
0.0001
15
Aug-98 <
0.01
0.005
16
Aug-98 <
16
Aug-98
17
Sep-98 <
17
Sep-98 <
18
Sep-98 <
18
Sep-98
19
Oct-98 <
19
Oct-98 <
20
Oct-98 <
20
Oct-98 <
0.01
0.005
21
Nov-98 <
21
Nov-98 <
22
Nov-98 <
22
Nov-98 <
23
Dec-98 < 0.0002
0.0001
23
Dec-98 <
24
Dec-98
24
Dec-98 <
25
Jan-99 < 0.0002
0.0001
25
Jan-99
26
Jan-99
26
Jan-99 <
0.01
0.005
27
Feb-99
27
Feb-99 <
28
Feb-99 <
28
Feb-99 <
29
Mar-99
29
Mar-99 <
30
Mar-99
30
Mar-99 <
31
Apr-99 < 0.0002
0.0001
31
Apr-99 <
0.01
0.005
32
Apr-99
32
ApF99 <
33
May-99
33
May-99 <
34
May-99
34
May-99 <
35
Jun-99
35
Jun-99 <
36
Jun-99
36
Jun-99 <
37
Jul-99 < 0.0002
0.0001
37
Jul-99 <
0.01
0.005
38
Jul-99
38
Jul-99
39
Aug-99
39
Aug-99
40
Aug-99
40
Aug-99
41
SOP-99
41
Sep-99
42
SOP-99
42
SOP-99
43
Oct-99
43
Oat-99
44
Oct-99
44
Oct-99
45
Nov-99
45
Nov-99
46
Nov-99
46
Nov-99
47
Dec-99
47
Dec-99
48
Dec-99
48
Dec-99
49
Jan-00
49
Jan-00
so
Jan-00
50
Jan-00
51
Feb-00
51
Feb-00
52
Feb-00
52
Feb-00
53
Mar-00
53
Mar-00
54
Mar-00
54
Mar-00
55
Apr-00
55
Apr-00
58
Apr-00
56
Apr-00
57
May-00
57
May-00
68
May-00
so
May-00
59
Jun-00
59
Jun-00
60
Jun-00
60
Jun-00
61
Jul-00
61
Jul-00
62
Jul-00
62
Jul-00
63
Aug-00 < 0.0002
0.0001
63
Aug-00
64
Aug-00
64
Aug-00
65
Sep-00
65
Sep-00 <
0.01
0.005
66
Sep-00
66
Sep-00
67
Oct-00
67
Oct-00
68
Oct-00
68
Oct-00
69
Nov-00
69
Nov-00
70
Nov-00
70
Nov-00
Schneider Mills - RPA, Data Shoot
.7- 2/2/01

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Parameter= Silver Parameter= Zinc
n Date Data BDL=1/20L Results n Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Feb-97 0.21 0.21 Sid Dev. 0.06 1 Jul-97 0.095 0.0950 Std Dev. 0.13
2 May-97 < OAO 0.0015 Mean 0.02 2 Aug-97 0.053 0.0530 Mean 0.1
3 Oct-97 0.013 0.013 C.V. 2,929 3 Sep-97 < 0,025 0.0125 C.V. 1.466
4 Oct-97 < n 12 4 Oct-97 0.055 0.0550 n 35
5 Nov-97 < 5 Nov-97 0.083 0.0830
6 Dea97 Mull Factor = 16.25 6 Deo97 Mull Factor = 349
7 Jan-98 Max. Value 0.21 y9/I :: 7 Jan-98 0.066 0.0660 Max. Value 0.79
B Feb-98 Max. Fred Cw 3.41 p9A 8 Feb-98 0.072 0.0720 Max. Fred Cw 2.76
9 Mar-98 < 0.003 0.0015 9 Mar-98 0.092 0.0920
10 Apr-98 < 10 Apr-98 0.057 0.0570
71 May-98 < 11 May-98 0.054 0.0540
12 Jun-98 < 0.003 0.0015 12 Jun-98 0.048 0.0480
13 Jul-98 < 13 Jul-98 0.087 0.0870
14 Aug-98 < 0.003 0.0015 14 Aug-98 0.089 0.089D
15 Sep-98 < 15 Sep-98 0.069 0.0690
16 Oct-98 16 Oct-98
17 Nov-98 17 Nov-98 < 0.050 O.0250
18 Dec98 < 0.003 0.0015 18 Dec-98 0.058 0.0580
19 Jan-99 < 0.003 0.0015 19 Jan-99 < 0.050 0-0250
20 Feb-99 20 Feb-99 0.054 0.0540
21 Mar-99 21 Mar-99 0.066 0.0660
22 Apr-99 < O.00 0.0015 22 Apr-99
23 May-99 23 May-99
24 Jun-99 24 Jun-99 0,040 0.0400
25 Jub99 < 0.003 0.0015 25 Jul-99 0.049 0.0490
26 Aug-99 < 26 Aug-99 0.284 02840
27 Sep-99 < 27 Sep-99 0.036 0.0360
28 Oct-99 < 28 Oct-99 0.060 0.0600
29 Nov-99 29 Nov-99
30 Dec-99 30 Dec-99
31 Jen-00 31 Jan-00 0.790 0.7900
32 Fab-00 32 Feb-00 0.056 0.0560
33 Mar -GO 33 Mar-00 0.100 0.1000
34 Apr-00 34 Apr-00 0.110 0.1100
35 May -DO 35 May-00 0.090 0.0900
36 Jun-00 36 Jun-00 0.020 0.0200
37 Jul -DO 37 Jul-00 0.090 0.090
38 Aug-00 38 Aug-00
39 Sep-00 < 0.01 0,005 39 Sep-00 0,034 0.034
40 Oct-00 40 Oct-00 0.032 0.032
41 Nov -DO 41 Nov-00 0.036 O.036
42 Dec-00 < 0.01 0.005 42 De 00 0.126 0.126
43 43
44 44
45 /� 45
48 Il 46
47 L 47
48 1 48
49 49
51
550
l (, ! 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
61 61
62 62
63 63
64 64
65 65
66 66
67 67
68 68
fig 69
70 70
Schneider Mills - RPA, Data Sheet
11 - 2001

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary December 18, 2000'
FACILITY REQUIREMENT YEAR JAN PER MAR APR MAY JIIN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Rutherfordlan WWTP Penn chr rim: 71%
1996 Paw
-
-
Pass
--
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
--
-
NW0259091001 Begi ll/1999 Frequency: Q PT + but Apr Jd0e,
+ NonCuttry:Smglc
199] Pass
-
-
Paw
--
_
Faces
-
-
Fail
Pass
_.
Co.,,: Rutherford Region: ADD Subbain: RRD02
1999 Paw
--
-
Paw
--
-
Inge
pass
--
Paw
-
-
PF: 3.0 Stec l
1999 Pass
-
-
Pas
-
-
NR/Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
7QIo:1.7 IWG(%):71 Ordw:
2000 Pass
-
-
Fail
Let.
35A
"Allele
BI
-
Pass
S.S. Mabile Home Park Perot chr rim: 90%
1906 -
-
-
NC0038300/001 Begin: i 1/19/1996 Fregwnry:QP/F + Feb May Aug Nov
NonComp:Single
1997 -
NRPmI
Fail
Fail
NWPaw
--
-
NR
Bt
-
NR/Fail
Not
Counry: Chourn Region: RRO Sabbath: CPF09
190 Fail
Late
Fell
Fail
Ian
Far
Fail
Paw
-
--
Pas
-
PF: 0.01 S1v1N
19% -
Late
NRPas
-
Feit
Ne l
NR
Paw
-
-
Paw
--
7QIO:0.0 IWCPyq:IOO Oder;
NOW -
Fail
Fell
Paw
Felt
Pass
-
Late
Pas
Pas
Swkner Product; Perot chr rim: 90%hmeb)
19%-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
._
NR
NC00817791001 Begite2/1/2000 Framency:Q Jan Apr Jul Get
+ NonComp:Singlc
199] -
-
-
rILO,>1WI
59.28
Country: Install Region: MOST, Subbain: YAD06
199a >bOO
-
-
-
-
PF: OIIOI6 spasiil
1999 48,99
-
-
--
7Q10:0.0 IWC(°6):IOO.O (a.:
2" -
Fall
NO
NR
Fail
NR
NR
H
-
H
Rvlhbury- rants Creek WWTP Penn ehr rim: Y6; a, 20MOD chr rim 6%
v 19% -
-
Paw
-
-
Pas
-
-
Pass
-
-
Paw
NCO023SH41001 Bcgin:5/1/1996 Florucncy: Q PT + MmJun Scp Doc
NonComp:Singic
1997 -
-
Paa
-
-
FaiLFall
Fail
Fan
Fell
.N l
--
Fall
County : Rmvau Region: MRO Subbain: YAD04
1998 Paw
-
Paw
--
-
Pas
-
-
Fail
Pas
-
Few
PF: U15 srynial
ION _
_.
Paw
-
--
Paw
-
-
Paa
--
-
Paw
7QIO: 2639 IWC(%):7.0 Order'.
20N -
--
Paw
Paa
-
--
Pas
-
Snlbbury•TownCreekWWFP PERM CHR LIM: 95%
Y 1999 -
-
Pass
Paw
-
--
Fail
Pas
--
pass
NC002302/001 0cmil/l/1994 Frequency: QP/F + Mar Jun Sap Dec
NoaCorrrp:SINGLE
1997 -
-
Paw
-
-
Felt
F.I.P.
-
Pas
-
-
Pass
Carl. Rowan Region: MRO SUIIDaIo; YADU4
1998 -
-
Pass
-
-
Fat
FaiLFal
Paw
Pass
-
-
Felfalt
PF: 5.0 Sp¢ial
1999 _
_
Pa.
-
-
Paw
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
7QIO: 1.4 IWC(%)84.7 one[
2000 -
-
Passe
Fait
Pas.94A
me
-
Sonlord-Big BuReIa WWTP Penn cla rim: 39%
1996 -
- Paw -
- Paw -
- Pass -- -
Pass
NCOO241471001 Begin:611/1996 Frequency: Q P/F + Mat Jun Sep Dec Norcamp:Single
1997 -
Paw -
- Paw -
- Pas - -
Pas
County; Lee Region: RRO Subbain: CPFI I
19M -
- Paw -
-- Paw -
- Pas - -
Pass
PF: 6.8 Srysial
1999 _ _.
Paw -
- Pass -
- Pas
NRPaw
7QIO: 16.8 IWC(%)89 aster'.
2" -
Pas
Paw
- Fail
>]5
Scarletl Acres Penn chr rim: We.(gnb)
19W -
Pass
-
-- Pas
-
- Paw
-
Pass
_.
NCO0612041001 Begrn:811/1999 Fryuenry: QP/F + Feb May Aug Nov + NonComP:Singk
1997 -
Pass
-
-- Paw
-
- Pew
- -
Fall
Pass
Counry: Fal lh Region: WSRO Subbain. YADM
1998 -
Paw
-
- Fail
Fail
Pass Pass
-
Pas
--
PF: 0.02 S,ex.M
1999 -
Fail
Paw
-- Pass
-
- Paw
- -
Fail
Pass
7Q I 0,0 IWC(%):1011.0 Aden
Jose -
Pass
-
-- Pass
-
- Pass
- -
Pas
Schneider Miller, Iric: 001 Perm chr her 46%
19% -
-
Paw
Pass
Pass
Pass
NC003496O/00l Begin:8/1/1995 Frequency: Q P/F + Melhm Sep DCc NonComp:Single
1997 -
--
Pass
-- -
Paw
-- -
Pass -
_
Paw
Counry: Alexander Region: MRO Subbaire M32
1998 --
-
Paw
-- -
Paa
- -
Paw --
_
Pa.
PF: 078 Sp¢ial
1999 _
_.
Paw
-_ _.
Paw
- -
Paz --
-
Fail
7QlO 1 of IWC(%)2a: 16 0rJ
2000 28.2
NW<23
Fail
5634 090
Paw
- -
Pas -
Stallard Nech WWTP PERM CHR LIM: 90%
19% -
Fen
Paw --
Paw - -
Fail,lale Pas -
Pass
-
NC002333711101 Begin3/i/1995 Frequency: Q P/F + Feb May Aug Nov
NanCNgn SINGLE
1997 -
Paw
- -
Pass - -
Pass -- -
Pas
County: Holi(s Region: RRO Subbain: TAR04
1998 --
Pas
- --
Paw ._ -
Paw - -
Pas
-
PF: 0.675 Sleeial
1999 _
Late
Paw -
Paw - -
Paw - -
Pas
-
7QI0:0,0 IWC(°.rIO0 fader'.
2" -
Fell
>10 Late
Pa55
Pass
Pas
Sears Leeratie Serview, Ire. Perm ehr rim: 90%
INS
/saA CL�G0
p,f
NC00868601WI Begin:l2/1/2000 Frcqueocy:Q Feb May Aug Nov
+ NonCrmp:Single,
1997
,
Counry: Guilfond Region: WSRO Subbain CPF02
PF:0ASP'tial
1998
J l
n [,
7Q10.0.0 .0 IWC(°.g1011 Pdee
21999
2W9
"
j{��jr'
Shelby WV07P Pert chr lim: 17%
1996--
Pass
- -
Pass - -
Paw - -
Pas
{•/��� ��
- (z1 GW�1
NCO0245381001 Begin2/I/1999 Frequency: Q P/F + Fab May Aug Nov
+ NmeComp:Se,le
1997 -
Fail
Pass --
Pass ... _.
Paw -_ -
Pass
-
Caunty: Cleveland Region: MRO Subbasin: BRD04
1990 --
Pass
- -
Late Paw --
Pwimil ail - -
Pass
-
PF: 6.0 Sraeisl
1999 ._
Pas
-
Pass - -
Pass -- -
Pass
_.
7Q 10;44.3 IWC(ygLI7.0 ()vJen
2W0 -
Pass
- -
Pass - --
Paw - -
Pass
LEGEND:
PERM= Perent Requiremant LET= Administrative Lifter Target Frequency = Monitoring frequrncy:Q- Quarterly; M-Monthly; BM-BimonNly, SA. Semiannually;A- Annually Orl Only when discharging: D- Discontinued monitoring requirement
Begin=Flmlmonthissia est 7QIO- Renciving seems law Row cmemer Fe) += quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months lhattwling must occur-cx. Jere. Apr, JuI, QCI NmeCotrtp= Conan Compliance Sequence,
FT=Permitted flow MGD) IWC%=lmorcamwas¢eanammtion P/F- PaNFal tat AC=Action CHR=Chronic
Dam Nmouon: f. Fathead Minnow;' - Cenoda lima OF: my - Ml shrimp; COY - Chronic sells; P - Mortality of stated perccnmge at highest construction; at - Perkmted by DWQ Aquatic Tax Unit: bn Bad test
Rcponing Noisome:--= Data real required: NR - Net reportN Facility Activity Stains:I- Inactive,N - Newly leasilc.c,);H- Active but riot dathargin&il damaailable for month in queal•= DOC signature needed
40

Mar, 2. 2901 4 7:55AM SCNNE:DER MILLS T'AYLORSVILLE E _J SP PjC. No, 9E30 P, _%2
P.D. 8OX 819 - iAYLOFiMUE. N.C. 28881
NE--J - - TH_ERCM 704-W-M81
Pez 3). 8n -W-qM
mac r�
RUL.
r;,x:t ti
UNIT

Mar, 2.2)01 7:55AM SCHNE:DER MILLS TAYLORSVILLE NC
RAM P, 2/2
'Page No. 1 YEARS 1999 AND 2000
02/27/'2001
Schneider Mills, Inc.
P R O D U C T I O N S U M M A R Y
NPDSS Permit N00034660
'MONTH Highest Single -Day Production Production Averages
(in Thousands of Pounds) (in Thousands of Pounds)
**:',YM 1999
JAN1999
FHB1999
Ml kl999
A#R199,9
MFI,Y1999
JTW1999
Ji1u9#9 ,
kUG3.999
SEP13R9
0�T1999
NbV19,99
DSC1'$99
}+ Subtotal **
*+"YEAR 2000
IJAN2000
F2B2000
W2000
APA2000
MAY'2000
JW2000
JOL2000
Att2000
S ,2000
0MG00
NOV2000
DSC2000
** subtotal +*
*** Total ***
47
36
41
38
40
49
52
54
62
66
69
72
84
85
82
79
84
71
67
74
74
71
71
70
1083
861
1160
961
944
1138
1210
1264
1801
1555
1623
1526
15026
1944
1954
2353
1852
1941
1707
1640
1770
2061
1688
1653
1668
22230
37256

M. A 20:1' !!E5?M "CALDH WILS TAYETSVILLi 11
- , AILS, INC.1--l.'Itl
RAJ PqWXMff-IWWRMLLF- N.C. 2EM
TMER40M 76t-safmm
Aft MUMIM=, a= CUZ (828) 6=-aft.
.. ...... .. - -----

Feb,:9. 27011 '.:56PM SGNNE:DER MILLS TAYLORSVILLE HJU S, INC. No, 9150 P. :%2 ,
P.Q. Box B18 - 7WWFISNII 19 N-C. 2W
.1
TB.H+[Q074�181
W NO- 828 a-=-q.M
,r, 1
*r4'
Ron s
a -
Y7

' = Feb,'C,2301 ::56PM SCHNE*.DER MILLS TAYLORSVILLE NC
Aj
a '
�ru�►t
No, 9150 P. 2i2
Y
1 ,
\
I
I
♦
J \
1
I
,
N • .1Y I t
.015.
5r.)
l
r I 7�
- w w .•-r. rr \♦.\r •• Sri. r.��� j t
I f •
.� • I 1 •. •.r • ... w..1/YWM .AII M...d..r .7 N•w�
j
lam.
i ;; '
ti
10
1
102 to Jo I
'r 1 I
• r ` `
• •
•\r
�
1 rA .aL
\
r I
'
1
546 E
r
r.
Vic,
hlOr AOJ� AVS4 7:3 �r 71
''
•'
Lp 4+ .ems .. . .
�
o
\
,
\ � �+ r•
I
•
• I iJ `, 1
� 1 f
I

, A
�lDEr2 /V45
Fi.//«,� CCgr�C+1 s �k r✓rav�: f, 2 �t ras w\K . C a
l�K.iwLGY 7i1 t% .irl�n�n td lS � 3 �5'%i1 �7ii5 O�.✓ctiW . G .U,,.t�rrxt�C) /� . �87
071
- 4{,-k, j �eN da c
Ld ✓lsf3_
a4l b
�f 11cl
--
4 wEAUA
rm
V a °u 1yv-
C.) ewe {7', A ;vf o
!k: rf pia%

i✓coo 3Y86v
ti/
C
�S
S�ti�C�c y,a.riJ �o�
4 �
S/rrkdw
i lr Y+ WEAr1h1G /fuvwi YotJ cv GawC Fa�3�lGJ -1f*4r tow rRE Jey, U/�JeB,
/1�G v,yi, f,. 4 ww iw S"k*wwFw xo--

s NaTES
----- �- S�� Dom(
�qC��ppii�z SE S t �jCF X—X pvi ' (5 c F< nlG = 47C NCB
S C S `'�,C 5t Lz-r/vim`F14�3
( kc Ir-tIWS

TELEPHONE RECORD
w
/�N
Date:
Time:
❑ Return
Call to
❑ Call from
Mr✓Mrs. C_AP-__(
Address
Project:
Atv`EhtsOF72
Representing:
MA I— Ee�2
Telephone: t �7J Z— �(� ( FAX: 9 r 6'32 / eS (
Subject: 5/7)T VC sc T 47t;6 g - '-!;p
NOTES/
SUMMARY
Et
PLqATL
Imsop,
o
C;V'*Z-
LJ G 5
NEEDED
1.
FOLLOW-UP
loz +
ACTION(S)
BY WHOM/WHEN
1.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
5.
cc:
Signed

FA
NOTES/ SUMMARY (cont.)
1, �1 Lw s haw
2)
M FAA ry (�(G
1139
-2. Ott (,Cc 1U c
sY nf.�czr,
r��ti1�— 6ri �c f3 BLS
illoo

SOC Priority Project: Yes_ No X
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Charles Weaver
Date: November 2, 2000
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Alexander
MRO No.: 00-58
Permit No. NCO034860
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility and address: Schneider Mills, Inc.
Post Office Box 518
Taylorsville, North Carolina 28681
2. Date of investigation: October 6, 2000
3. Report prepared by: Michael L. Parker, Environmental Engineer H
4. Persons contacted and telephone number: Gary Elder, [phone].
5. Directions to site: From the intersection of NC Hwy 16 and NC Hwy 90 in the Town of
Taylorsville, travel north on NC Hwy 16 approximately 1.2 miles. Schneider Mills is
located on the right side of NC Hwy 16.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Outfall 001:
Latitude: 35' 56' 10" Longitude: 810 11' 29"
Outfall 002:
Latitude: 35' 56' 11" Longitude: 8V 11' 29"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge point on
map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No.: D14NW
U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Taylorsville, NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application? There is limited area available
for expansion and upgrading.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Flat to moderate slopes; the WWT
facilities appear to be above the 100 year flood plain.

Page Two
9. Location of nearest dwelling: The nearest dwelling is located approximately 400 feet
from the WWT facilities.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Muddy Fork Creek (for both outfalls)
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 030832
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Moderate size
creek with sandy bottom and flat to moderate stream gradient. General "C"
classification uses downstream.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted: 0.780 MGD (ultimate design capacity of
outfall 001, no flow limit for outfall 002)
b. Current permitted capacity of the wastewater treatment facility: 0.780 MGD
(outfall 001)
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design capacity): 0.780
MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to
Construct issued in the previous two years: N/A
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater
treatment facilities: The industrial and domestic WWT facilities at outfall 001
consists of a manual bar screen, instrumented influent flow measurement, an
aeration basin with 2 mechanical aerators, a final clarifier, an aerated sludge
digestion tank, four (4) sludge drying beds, and cascade post aeration. The water
treatment plant WWT facilities at outfall 002 consists of two (2) settling ponds in
series.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: There are
no proposed WVVT facilities.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: The facility has experienced two (2)
toxicity test failures during the past twelve (12) months, however, recent testing
has shown compliance with the toxicity limit.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Residuals are stabilized in the
aerobic digester and dewatered on the drying beds. The dried residuals are then
transported to Kernersville where they are landfilled.

Page Three
3. Treatment plant classification: Class H (no change from previous rating)
4. SIC Code(s): 2221, 4941 Wastewater Code(s) 55, 21, 02
Main Treatment Unit Code: 02003
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved (municipals only)? N/A
Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None at this time.
Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates (Please indicate): N/A
Alternative Analysis Evaluation:
Spray Irrigation: Inadequate area available.
Connection to Regional Sewer System: Sewer is not available in this area.
Subsurface: Inadequate area available.
Other disposal options: None that we are aware.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The permittee, Schneider Mills, Inc., has applied for permit renewal. Schneider Mills is
primarily engaged in the weaving of man-made fibers into cloth. There are no modifications
requested in the permit renewal nor have any occurred since the permit was last reissued.
The WWT facilities appear to be adequate to treat the wastewater to meet existing
effluent limits. Outfall 001 is the discharge from the industrial and domestic wastewater
treatment facilities. Industrial wastewater is generated by water jet looms and sizing operations.
Cooling water and boiler blow down are also discharged through these WWT facilities.
Wastewater from the filter backwash serving Schneider Mill 0 s water treatment plant is
discharged through outfall 002.
Pending a final technical review by the NPDES Unit, it is recommended that the permit
be renewed.
hAdsr\dsr00\schneidr.dsr
Signature of report preparer
Date
Water Quality Regional Supervisor Date

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
May 2, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: Charles Weaver
FROM: Roberto Schelle>KR.
SUBJECT: Comments on Schneider Mills NPDES Permit # NCO034860
I'm responding to your E-mail received on May 1, 2000, concerning the subject permit.
Attached to this memo should be copies of the subject permits for outfall #001 and #002. Please
note that there were no comments for outfall #002.
The main question with the permit for outfall #001 is the Upstream and Downstream
monitoring for BOD? Is this correct ? If you look at the permit it reads that the Upstream and
Downstream sampling for BOD must be done by composite sample type? Other than the
Upstream and Downstream monitoring for BOD there are no other questions.
If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact me @ MRO
[phone].
r �JMAY - 5 2000
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
> 0.0-S0 z- CZ iUpm( -
'�OT Aks_ (N_S;—*A4A - GCS%

�-
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL Permit NCO034860
,Duilng the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall
001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFPLI,IENTCHAMtNRISi`IC$
„ < LIMITS
MONITORING ItEQbfREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
a
Sample
Location'
Flow
0.780 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 200C
35.4 mg/I
230.0 lbs/day
68.4 mg/i
445.0 Ibs da
Weekly
Composite2
E D
NH3 as N (April 1- October 31)
1.9 mg/I
Weekly
Com osite2
E
NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31)
4.7 mg/I
Weekly
Com osite2
E
Total Suspended Solids
125.0 Ibs/day
275.0 Ibs/day
Weekly
Com osite2
E
COD
685.0lbs/day
1065.0lbs/day
Weekly
Composite2
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
Weekly
Grab
E, U, D
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Zinc
Monthly
Com osite2
E
Cadmium
Qua er y
Com osite2
E
Nickel
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Lead
Quarterly
Cornposlte2
E
Mercury
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Silver
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Chronic Tox1cltV4
Quarterly
Com osite2
E
Conductivity
Weekly
Grab
U D
Temperature
Weekly
Grab
U D
Footnotes:
1. Sample locations: E - Effluent; I - Influent; U - Upstream at least 50 feet above the outfall; D - Downstream at NCSR 1313.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples.
2. Composite samples at this facility are auto -sampled on an hourly basis and are not flow -weighted.
3. The daily dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/l.
4. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 46%; March, June, September & December (see Part III, Condition E.).
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored weekly at the effluent by grab
sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.