NC0026441_Historical information_20071231

Michael F. Easley, Governor
September 7, 2007
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brower:
The following observations were made:
3. Curtis Brown is the ORC and David Hicks and Ann Clark are the back-up ORCs for the facility.
4. The Fisher Porter influent flow meter and the influent flume were calibrated June 5, 2007.
6. Meritech Laboratories is contracted to analyze metals, MBAS, TN/TP and chronic toxicity. The other
parameters are analyzed on-site in the certified lab.
2. There is currently not enough standby power to operate the entire facility. The generator can only
operate the influent pump station, bar screen and grit removal process. This office highly recommends
adding additional generators to the facility to avoid problems associated with power loss.
1. The Town of Siler City WWTP is permitted to discharge at a rate of 4 MGD and consists of: manual and
mechanical bar screen, grit collection unit, influent pump station, aerobic digester, filter backwash
holding station, DAF unit, 4 equalization basins, sludge transfer station, lime tower, alum feed station,
dual oxidation ditches, dual secondary clarifiers, four tertiary filters, chlorine contact chamber, sulfur
dioxide addition and a solids removal area. The facility discharges directly to Loves Creek, which is
classified as Class C waters.
Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail Service Center
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us
Surface Water Protection
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Town of Siler City WWTP
NPDES Permit Number NC0026441
Stormwater Permit Number NCG110085
Chatham County
5. Synagrow is responsible for pumping and hauling sludge, which is land applied under permit
WQ0016247.
qj 16';
On September 7, 2007, Ms. Stephanie Brixey of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance
evaluation inspection of the Town of Siler City wastewater treatment plant with the assistance of Mr. Curtis
Brown, ORC of the facility. His help was appreciated as it facilitated the inspection process.
Mr. Joel Brower
Town Manager
Town of Siler City
311 North Second Street
Siler City, NC 27344
oZ
> [L
NorthCarolina
_____ Naturally
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
ection
7.
Mr. Brown is keeping all of the files well organized, which eased the file review process.8.
9.
Cc:Mr. Curtis Brown, Town of Siler City
RRO-SWP files
Central Files
The facility currently uses chlorine gas for disinfection. Please consider for future upgrades the
feasibility of an ultraviolet (UV) system.
A review of the plant records indicated that all records are being kept as required. A comparison of the
DMRs indicated no discrepancies.
The overall conditions of the Town of Siler City WWTP are compliant with Division standards. If you have
questions regarding the attached report or any of my findings, please contact Stephanie Brixey at: (919) 791-
4260 (or email: [e-mail]).
10. A request for a No Exposure Certification by the Town was denied August 25, 2006. The Town
contracted Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates to write the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, which has
not been completed to date. The plan must be completed and implemented no later than January 1,
2008.
Siler City WWTP Compliance Evalu;
NPDES NC0026441
Chatham County
Sincerely,
Stephanie Brixey 0
Environmental Specialist
ERA
NPDESnNC0026441
74
Entry Time/Date Permit Effective Date
03/03/0107/09/0709:00 AMSiler City WWTP
Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration DateNCSR 1363 US Hwy 64
Siler City NC 27344 06/10/3107/09/0711:30 AM
Other Facility Data
Curtis R. Brown/ORC/919-742-4581/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Joel J Brower,311 N Second Ave Siler City NC 27344//919-742-2323/
Permit Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Storm Water
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s)Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Stephanie Brixey RR0 WQ///
Date
Page #1
12|
Self-Monitoring Program Sludge Handling Disposal
Laboratory
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D C. 20460
yr/mo/day
07/09/07
Contacted
No
QA72a
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating
70IJ
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
IRo M_____
Date
T/iopl
J11
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
■ Flow Measurement
Fac Type
20LIJ17
Inspection Type
18l£]
Inspector
19LU
73 LU
Inspection Work Days
671| 69
•—Reserved---------------------
75| | | | | | | | 80
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code
1 N 2 Ld
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Bl
71 u
________________________________________________Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Remarks
21| I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |66
NPDES 1yr/mo/day
07/09/07NC0026441
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
There is not enough standby power to operate the entire facility.
Synagrow pumps and hauls the sludge from the WWTP.
Meritech Laboratories is the contract lab.
Page #2
12lJ11
Inspection Type
18i i
l£jJ173l
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
■ OAre records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
■ Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
■ Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
■ Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
■ o Is the chain-of-custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
■ Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
■Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
o ■ (If the facility is - or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
■ o Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
■ Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
■ Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
■ Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
■Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Permit Yes No NA NE
O ■ (If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new application?
■ Is the facility as described in the permit?
■ # Are there any special conditions for the permit?
■ Is access to the plant site restr cted to the general public?
■ Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
Comment:The Town is waiting for the new permit to be issued.
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
■ 0 Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Page #3
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Comment: The facility is not required to have an operator on duty 24/7 but the Town
has chosen to do so.
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Sludge ■ D O O
Comment:
Pump Station - Influent Yes No NA NE
■Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
■Is the wet well free of excessive grease?
■ Are all pumps present?
■ oAre all pumps operable?
■Are float controls operable?
■ Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
■ Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?■
■ ODDIs the screen free of excessive debris?
■ Is disposal of screening in compliance?
Is the unit in good condition?■
Comment:
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
■ o Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
■ Is the grit free of excessive odor?
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?■
Comment: .
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Page #4
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable Solids, pH, DO,
Judge, and other that are applicable?
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
■ 0 Are the aerators operational?
■ Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
■ □00# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
■ O Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin’s surface?
■ ODDIs the DO level acceptable?
n ■Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
■ DOOIs the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/l)
n ■Are settelometer results acce3table?(400 to 800 ml/l in 30 minutes)
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
■ DOOIs the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
■ Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
■ Are weirs level?
■ oIs the site free of weir blockage?
■ Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
■ Is scum removal adequate?
■ Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
■ oIs the drive unit operational?
■ o Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
■ Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
■Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately 74 of the sidewall depth)
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS Yes No NA NE
■ Are pumps in place?
■ Are pumps operational?
■ Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
Comment:
Disinfection-Gas Yes No NA NE
■ Are cylinders secured adequately?
■ o Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight?
Page #5
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Disinfection-Gas Yes No NA NE
■ Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
■ Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
■ Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
■ Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination?
■Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 lbs of Chlorine (CAS No. 7782-50-5)?
If yes, then is there a Risk Management Plan on site?
If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000-..)
If yes, then when was the RMP last updated?
Comment:
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ?Gas
■ Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)?
■ Is storage appropriate for cylinders?
■ # Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers?
■ Are the tablets the proper size and type?
Comment:Mr. Brown said the ratio runs 1:2.
■ Are tablet de-chlorinators operational?
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Aerobic Digester Yes No NA NE
■ Is the capacity adequate?
Is the mixing adequate?■ o
Is the site free of excessive foaming in the tank?■
■ # Is the odor acceptable?
■ # Is tankage available for properly waste sludge?
Comment:
FlowMeasurement - Influent Yes No NA NE
■ O# Is flow meter used for reporting?
■ Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?■ o
Page #6
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Flow Measurement - Influent Yes No NA NE
■ (If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Effluent Yes No NA NE
■ # Is flow meter used for reporting?
■ Is flow meter calibrated annually?
■ Is the flow meter operational?
■ (If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Yes No NA NE
■ Is automatically activated standby power available?
■ Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
■ Is the generator tested under load?
o ■Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
■ Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
■ Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?
■ Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Yes No NA NE
■ Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
■ Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
■ ODO# Is the facility using a contract lab?
■ o o Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at 1.0 to 4.4 degrees Celsius)?
■ Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?
■ oIncubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
Comment:
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
■ O # Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■ o Is sample collected above side streams?
■ Is proper volume collected?
■ OIs the tubing clean?
Page #7
Comment: The generator can not operate the entire wastewater plant.
Laboratory
Comment: The influent flow meter is used for reporting.
Standby Power
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Yes No NA NEInfluent Sampling
■ Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at 1.0 to 4.4 degrees Celsius)?
■ 0 Is sampling performed according to the permit?
Comment:
Yes No NA NEEffluent Sampling
■ O Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■ o Is sample collected below all treatment units?
■ Is proper volume collected?
■ Is the tubing clean?
■ o Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at 1.0 to 4.4 degrees Celsius)?
■ 0 Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type representative)?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Page #8
Permit: NC0026441
Inspection Date: 09/07/2007
Owner - Facility: Siler City WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Upstream I Downstream Sampling
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, and sampling location)? D D ■ D
Comment: The Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association through a Memorandum of
Agreement with the permittee has assumed the responsibility of stream sampling.
Clarifier Maintenance
6/6/2007 11:23 AM1 of 1
Subject: Clarifier Maintenance
From: curtisandmindy <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2007 07:29:00 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
To: [e-mail]
Curtis Brown
Town Of Siler City
WWTP Superintendent
919-742-4581
Fax [phone]
Cell 919-542-7730
Hey Stephanie, I have taken #2 Clarifier off line. I don't anticipate any compliance
problems.
We are in the process of sandblasting and painting the clarifier. It may take up to
30 days to complete.
I will be out of my office most of the day (Industry Inspections).
Thanks, Curtis
September 12, 2007
27344
Subject:
HCE
Dear Mr. Brower:
>
>
>
>
>
>
Western NPDES Program
cc:
i
Mr. Joel J. Brower
Town Manager
P.O. Box 769
Siler City, North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
State of North Carolina
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Draft NPDES Permit
Permit NC0026441
Siler City WWTP
Chatham County
27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
27604 On the Internet at http://www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the draft permit for your facility. Please review the draft very carefully to
ensure thorough understanding of the conditions and requirements it contains.
Raleigh Regional Office, Surface Water Protection
NPDES Unit
Marshall Hyatt, EPA Region IV
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Sara Morrison, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina
If you have any questions or comments concerning this draft permit, please contact me at [phone] x 551 or
via email at [e-mail].
Please submit any comments to me no later than thirty days following your receipt of the draft. Comments
should be sent to the address listed at the bottom of this page. If no adverse comments are received from the
public or from you, this permit will likely be issued in two months.
This draft has the following significant changes from your current permit:
An annual pollutant scan has been added to your permit. By performing this scan concurrent with your
toxicity test (at different times of the year), you will be able to collect sufficient data for the renewal
application required by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Monitoring frequencies for copper, zinc, and chlorides have been adjusted to twice monthly to
correspond with frequencies required by 15 NCAC 2B .0500 regulations.
MBAS data did not show reasonable potential to cause an exceedance of water quality standards,
therefore the limit and monitoring requirement has been removed from the permit. You will not be
required to continue quarterly monitoring for this parameter through your LTMP.
Mercury and fluoride data did not show reasonable potential to cause an exceedance of water quality
standards, therefore monitoring for these parameters will be removed from the permit. They should
continue to be monitored through your LTMP.
Due to the very low levels present in the WWTP effluent, the oil and grease limit and monitoring
requirement has been removed.
Due to concerns about impacts to Loves Creek and the Rocky River, the facility will be required to
develop a Nutrient Removal Optimization Plan. This plan should evaluate sources of nutrients
(particularly nitrates) to the wastewater plant, provide current removal rates, and discuss ways to
optimize nutrient removal using the current wastewater treatment process.
OneNorthCarolinaNaturally
DUO?
Ml T
422 (I
3fi££ ta g r
ya
Permit NC0026441
PERMIT
Town of Siler City
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
This permit shall become effective.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight October 31, 2011.
Signed this day.
DRAFT
Page 1 of 6
£
to receiving waters designated as Loves Creek within the Cape Fear River Basin, in accordance
with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II,
III and IV hereof.
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, the
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Town of Siler City WWTP
370 Wastewater Plant Road
Chatham County
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES)
Permit NC0026441
The Town of Siler City is hereby authorized to:
Page 2 of 6
2. Discharge from said wastewater treatment works through Outfall 001 into Loves Creek (see
attached map), a stream classified as C waters within the Cape Fear River Basin.
This facility is located at the Siler City WWTP on Wastewater Plant Road near Siler City in Chatham
County.
1. Continue discharging 4.0 MGD of treated process-contact and domestic wastewater from a
treatment facility consisting of
• Automatic and manual bar screens
• Grit collection unit
• Influent pump station
• Aerobic digester
• Filter backwash holding station
• DAF Unit
• Four (4) equalization basin
• Sludge transfer station
• Lime tower
• Alum feed station
• Dual oxidation ditches
• Dual secondary clarifiers
• Four (4) tertiary filters
• Chlorine contact chamber
• Sulfur dioxide addition
• Solids removal area (screened and separated; trucked offsite as byproduct)
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked. As of this permit
issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate
and discharge from this facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Bc'iy
Town of Siler City WWTP
Latitude:
. GD
North
Facility
Location
not to scale
NPDES Permit No. NC0026441
______Chatham County______
State Grid/Quad: E 21 NW / Siler City, NC
79° 25’ 42” W
Drainage Basin:
Suh-Basin:
rWF
Permitted Flow: 4.0
Cape Fear River Basin
03-06-12
35° 43’45” N
Longitude:
Loves Creek
C
M' li
Receiving Stream:
Stream Class:
fra?
Permit NC0026441
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
PARAMETERS
5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L Daily Composite I and E
10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L Daily Composite I and E
30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Daily Composite I and E
1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L Daily Composite E
2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/L Daily Composite E
200 / 100 ml 400 / 100 ml Daily Grab E
17.0 pg/L
Between 6.0 and 9.0 s.u.
Monthly Composite E
0.5 mg/L Weekly Composite E
Weekly Composite E
Weekly Grab U&D
1.
6.
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.
Page 3 of 6
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
2.
3.
4.
5.
During the period beginning with the effective date and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge through Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified
below:
Daily
Daily
Annual
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Sample
Type
Recording
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Sample
Location5
I or E
U&D
U&D
E
E
Ii
E_
E
E
E
E
E
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Measurement
Frequency
Continuous
2/Month
2/Month
2/Month
Quarterly
________EFFLUENT LIMITS
Monthly
Average
4.0 MGDFlow
BOD, 5 day, 20°C 1
(April 1 thru October 31)
BOD, 5 day, 20°C 1
(November 1 thru March 31)
Total Suspended Solids 1
NH3 as N
(April 1 thru October 31)
NH3 as N
(November 1 thru March 31)
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)____________
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Temperature (°C)
Dissolved Oxygen2
PH_________________________
Total Nitrogen
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus 3
(April 1 thru September 30)
Total Phosphorus
(October 1 thru March 31)
Total Copper
Total Zinc
Chloride
Chronic Toxicity4
Total Phosphorus
(April 1 thru September 30)
Dissolved Oxygen
Temperature (°C)
Effluent Pollutant Scan6
Footnotes:
The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective
influent value (i.e., 85% removal is required).
Daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not fall below 6.0 mg/L.
Compliance shall be based on a calendar-quarter average of weekly samples.
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) at 90 %; quarterly during March, June, September, December; See A. (2.).
I = Influent, E=Effluent, U = Upstream, D=Downstream. Responsibility to perform Instream Monitoring (U/D) has been
assumed by the Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the
permittee. Should membership in this association terminate for any reason, the permittee shall immediately notify the
Division's NPDES Unit in writing and immediately resume responsibility to monitor and report this parameter, as
specified in this permit.
See section A.(3.)
Permit NC0026441
A.(2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
a
Attention:
later than 30 days after
Page 4 of 6
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.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be
required during the following month.
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 Section at the address cited
above.
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
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.
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to
Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
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.
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:
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no
the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
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.
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.
Permit NC0026441
A. (3.)EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
Page 5 of 6
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chloronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1.2- d ichlorobenzene
1.3- dichlorobenzene
1.4- d ichlorobenzene
3.3- dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2.4- dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1.2.4- trichlorobenzene
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved oxygen
Nitrate/Nitrite
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Oil and grease
Total Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1.1- dichloroethane
1.2- dichloroethane
The permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the table below (in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). The annual effluent pollutant scan samples shall represent seasonal (summer,
winter, fall, spring) variations over the 5-year permit cycle. Unless otherwise indicated, metals shall be analyzed as
"total recoverable." Additionally, the method detection level and the minimum level shall be the most sensitive as
provided by the appropriate analytical procedure.
Trans-l,2-dichloroethylene
1.1- dichloroethylene
1.2- dichloropropane
1.3- dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1.1.1- trichloroethane
1.1.2- trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid-extractable compounds:
P-chloro-m-cresol
2-chlorophenol
2.4- dichlorophenol
2.4- dimethylphenol
4.6- dinitro-o-cresol
2.4- dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2.4.6- trichlorophenol
Base-neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- DMR-PPA1 or in a form approved by the Director,
within 90 days of sampling. A copy of the report shall be submitted to Central Files to the following address:
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.
Permit NC0026441
A. (4.) NUTRIENT REMOVAL OPTIMIZATION PLAN
Page 6 of 6
Due to concerns about nutrient loads to Loves Creek and the Rocky River, the Siler City WWTP is required to
develop a Nutrient Removal Optimization Plan. This plan should evaluate sources of nutrients (particularly
nitrates) to the wastewater plant, provide information on current removal rates, and discuss ways to optimize
nutrient removal using the current wastewater treatment process. This study shall be submitted within one year
from the effective date of this final permit.
Siler City WWTP
Proposed Changes Incorporated into Permit RenewalI.
SummaryII.
• Add yearly PPA requirement.
• Cu, Zn, and chloride data showed reasonable potential to exceed action level standards,
therefore monitoring will remain in the permit. The facility will be required to monitor
for these pollutants twice monthly, to correspond with frequencies required by 15 NCAC
2B .0500 regulations.
• The MBAS limit and monitoring requirement will be removed from this permit and
should not continue to be monitored through the facility's LTMP program.
• Mercury and fluoride data did not show reasonable potential to cause an exceedance of
water quality standards, therefore monitoring for these parameters will be removed from
the permit. They should continue to be monitored through the facility's LTMP.
• Due to concerns about impacts to Loves Creek and the Rocky River, the facility will be
required to develop a Nutrient Removal Optimization Plan. This plan should evaluate
sources of nutrients (particularly nitrates) to the wastewater plant, provide current removal
rates, and discuss ways to optimize nutrient removal using the current wastewater treatment
process.
• Remove oil and grease limit and monitoring requirement.
NCDENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
The 2005 Cape Fear River Basin Plan lists 2.9 miles of Loves Creek (from Chatham Avenue to the
Rocky River) as impaired for aquatic life because of "fair" benthic community ratings at three sites.
The 2006 303(d) list gives potential sources as stormwater (MS4 NPDES) and the WWTP. The basin
plan goes on to state "a stressor study completed in the Loves Creek watershed indicated toxic
chemicals in runoff from Siler City are the main stressors to the benthic community. Streambank
erosion, sedimentation, and excessive algal growth are also stressors. The WWTP was not the main
(6.)County:__________
(7.) Regional Office:
(8.) USGSTopo Quad:
(9.) USGS Quad Name:
7.9
0.25
0.4
8.7
96.1
Facility Information
(1.) Facility Name:
(2.) Permitted Flow MGD):
(3.) Facility Class:
(4.) Pretreatment Program:
(5.) Permit Status:
Stream Characteristics
(1.) Receiving Stream:
(2.) Sub-basin:
(3.) Stream Assessment Unit:
(4.) Stream Classification:
(5.) 303(d) Status:__________
(6.) 305(b) Status:
Siler City WWTP
4.0 MGD
IV ~~
FuliLTMP
Renewal
Loves Creek
03-06-12
17-43-lOc
c________
Listed___________
Aquatic life -
Impaired biological
integrity
(7.) Drainage Area (mi_2h
(8.) Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
(9.) Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
(100 30Q2 (cfs);
(11.) Average Flow (cfs):
aiJiwcW-
Chatham County
Raleigh______
E21NW
Siler City
y n/07
III.Compliance Summary
DMR Data Review
Table 1: Summary of Monthly Average DMR data - 1/05-6/07
Limit 4 17 30 200 >=6 0.5 (s)6-9 30
This facility currently has an oil and grease limit of 30 mg/L. This is not a standard requirement
for a municipal wastewater plant, and may have been added to the permit several permit cycles
ago based on DWQ concerns. At this time, oil and grease levels are very low, therefore the limit
and monitoring requirements will be removed from the permit.
The Siler City WWTP currently has total phosphorus and ammonia limits that are more stringent
than those of many similar facilities statewide. However due to concerns about impacts to Loves
Creek and the Rocky River, the facility will be required to develop a Nutrient Removal Optimization
Plan. This plan should evaluate sources of nutrients (particularly nitrates) to the wastewater plant,
provide current removal rates, and discuss ways to optimize nutrient removal using the current
wastewater treatment process.
Siler City WWTP
NC0026441
Flow
(MGD)
2.60
3.19
2.07
Temp.
(°C)
20.52
28.78
12.60
BOD
(mg/L)
1.99
6.41
0.00
5(s)
10 (w)
NH3-N
(mg/L)
0.06
0.46
0.00
l(s)
2 (w)
D.O.
(mg/L)
8.68
10.78
6.96
TN
mg/L)
30.39
43.60
15.50
TP
(mg/L)
1.30
3.43
0.09
TSS
(mg/L)
0.90
5.88
0.00
Avg
Max
Min
TRC
(Pg/D
<10
<10
<10
Fecal
(#/100
mL)
19.38
81.60
1.70
Oil &
Grease
0.06
1.37
0.00
pH
7.33
7.79
6.91
The facility had one permit limit violation during the review period, which was a violation of the
pH minimum. The calculated value was 5.9 s.u.
stressor, and agricultural land uses are also a source. The survey noted runoff from animal
operations in the upper watershed might be contributing nutrients and bacteria to the creek." The
basin plan recommends that DWQ continue to monitor the Loves Creek watershed and work with
DSWC to evaluate if BMPs can be implemented to reduce nutrients from animal operations in the
watershed.
The basin plan also notes that the "Rocky River from the dam at Siler City water supply to Varnal
Creek (6.7 mi) is not rated for aquatic life because of numerous reports of nuisance periphyton
growth in the river. During summer months algal mats have been observed to cover areas down to
the confluence with the Deep River. No criteria were exceeded at site BA373; however nutrient levels
were elevated. The Siler WWTP, as well as agriculture and residential activities, are potential sources
of nutrients."
Monthly average DMR data was reviewed for the period of January 2005 through June 2007.
That data is summarized below in Table 1. Monthly average flows are at 65% capacity with
maximum monthly average flows at 79% capacity. In July 2006, DWQ sent the City a Guidance
Document for WWTP Expansions based on an average flow for the 2005 calendar year of 67%
capacity. Facilities approaching 80% of their design hydraulic load are encouraged to begin the
planning process to address their increasing flows.
NPDES Permit Fact^^et
Page 2
y n/07
107.34 261.00 77.00 375.86 1005.00 113.00
182.94 1100.00 7.00 238.22 2800.00 8.00
Cu, Zn, and chloride data showed reasonable potential to exceed action level standards, therefore
monitoring will remain in the permit. The facility will be required to monitor for these pollutants
twice monthly, to correspond with frequencies required by 15 NCAC 2B .0500 regulations.
Siler City WWTP
NC0026441
<10
<0.2
<10
<0.2
<10
<0.2
Average
8.15
7.17
Table 2: Summary of UCFRBA Data from 2004-2006
___________Upstream
Max
13.10
8.06
DO (mg/L)_________
pH (su)
Conductance
(umhos/cm)_______
Fecal Coliform
(colonies/100 mL)
TSS (mg/L)_________
Turbidity (NTU)
NH3_ N (mg/L)
TKN_N (mg/L)
NO2/NO3_N (mg/L)
TP (mg/L)__________
Cd (ug/L)__________
Cr (ug/L)___________
Cu (ug/L)__________
Ni (ug/L)___________
Pb (ug/L)___________
Zn (ug/L)__________
Al (ug/L)___________
Fe (ug/L)___________
Mn (ug/L)__________
As (ug/L)___________
Hg (ug/L)
Average
6.96
7.01
4.89
7.65
0.06
0.65
0.48
0.09
<2
<10
3.73
<10
<10
15.50
267.67
1082.94
321.50
<10
<0.2
14.00
37.20
0.45
1.40
4.02
0.26
<2
<10
6.00
<10
<10
21.00
926.00
1730.00
474.00
<10
<0.2
1.00
I. 00
0.01
0.20
0.02
0.01
<2
<10
2.00
<10
<10
II. 00
93.00
574.00
169.00
<10
<0.2
Downstream
Max
15.20
7.91
1.00
0.40
0.02
0.40
0.24
0.03
<2
<5
2.10
<10
<10
10.00
56.00
56.00
Min
3.00
6.39
5.98
6.85
0.05
0.72
7.83
0.27
<2
<5
4.10
<10
<10
17.11
261.09
731.13
38.00
25.80
0.19
1.20
36.40
1.59
<2
<5
6.00
<10
21.00
30.00
774.00
2000.00
Min
4.10
6.50
RPA Analysis
The facility is required to monitor for copper, fluoride, MBAS, mercury, zinc, and chlorides as
part of the NPDES permit. RPAs were performed for all of these parameters.
There is no MBAS standard for class C waters. It is unclear why the facility has historically been
required to monitor for this parameter. It may have been a carryover from concerns or policies
that were in effect prior to 1990. An RPA was performed for this parameter using the water
Instream Data Review
Siler City WWTP is a member of the Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association (UCFRBA). The
UCFRBA performs instream monitoring on the Rocky River at a station 900 feet upstream of the
confluence with Loves Creek, and another station 4 miles downstream. Instream data was
reviewed for the 3 yr period of January 2004 through December 2006. A data summary is
provided in table 2. Based on this data, it does appear that the Rocky River is experiencing
elevated nitrate/nitrite levels, however since this station is over 4 miles downstream of the
WWTP, its impact is unclear. The river is also experiencing high Zn, Al, Fe, and Mn levels,
however there is little difference between values recorded at upstream and downstream stations.
NPDES Permit Fact^^et
Page 3
r/n/07
Correspondence File Review/Compliance History
IV.Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
V.State Contact Information
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
As previously stated, there have been no violations of the facility's permit limits (with the
exception of the above mentioned WET test failures) from January 2004 through June 2007.
Inspection reports indicate that the facility is properly maintained and has made efforts over the
years to better organize their filing systems. Several inspections did note, however, that there is
not enough standby power to operate the entire facility. The generator can only operate the
influent pump station, bar screen, and grit removal processes. The inspector recommends that
the town consider adding generator capacity to avoid a potential discharge of partially treated
wastewater to Loves Creek in the event of a power outage.
As a requirement of the permit application package, the facility submitted three priority pollutant
analyses. Values of chlorodibromomethane, chloroform, dichlorobromomethane, bis(2-
ethlyhexyl)phthalate, and methylene chloride were detected, however there are no relevant NC
water quality standards or EPA criteria for these parameters.
Mercury and fluoride data did not show reasonable potential to cause an exceedance of water
quality standards, therefore monitoring for these parameters will be removed from the permit.
They should continue to be monitored through the facility's LTMP.
September 12, 2007
December 1, 2007
Siler City WWTP
NC0026441
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Toya Fields at [phone], extension 551.
WET Test Results
Siler City WWTP has a chronic whole effluent toxicity testing requirement at 90% effluent
concentration. Since March 2003 they have passed 18/20 WET tests. In March 2004 there was a
failure. The facility was required to test in the following two consecutive months and failed one
of those tests. Those failures triggered the Division's Copper and Zinc Action Level Policy and
Siler City was required to definitively rule out copper and zinc as causes of effluent toxicity.
Their submittal indicated no correlation between copper and zinc concentrations and toxicity test
results. Since that time there have been no WET failures.
supply standard (which is not applicable and was only used for the sake of comparison) of 500
pg/L, and the effluent showed no reasonable potential to exceed this value. The MBAS limit and
monitoring requirement will be removed from this permit and should not continue to be
monitored through the facilities LTMP program.
The facility is also required to monitor for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, molybdenum,
nickel, and selenium, as part of its pretreatment program. Only molybdenum was detected
during the 2-yr data review period. The reported values were 6, 7, and 18 pg/L. There is no class
C WQ standard for molybdenum, and the reported values are far below the 160 pg/L water
supply standard (mentioned for the sake of comparison).
NPDES Permit Fact ^^et
Page 4
F/11/07
NPDES Recommendation by:
Signature Date
Regional Office Comments:
Regional Recommendation by:
Signature Date
Regional Supervisor:
Signature Date
Siler City WWTP
NC0026441
NPDES Permit Fact ^^et -
Page 5
4 MGD
PARAMETER POL Units REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
MlmnblfCwn
Acute:7
NC 7 AL 7.3 ug/L 130 130 47.6!opper
Chronic:7
Acute:N/A
mg/L 130FluorideNC1.8 130
Chronic:2
Acute:N/A
Mercury NC 12 2 ng/L 130 95 7.9
Chronic:12
Acute:67
ug/L 130NC50AL67 130 207.4
Chronic:52
N/AAcute:
Chloride NC 230 AL mg/L 484.4
Chronic:239
Acute:N/A
500 130 38 310.5MBASNCN
Chronic:520
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
Chronic: -rror ©Type
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
Chronic: -rror @ Type
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
N/AAcute:
0 0 N/A
Chronic: irror © Type
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
Acute:N/A
0 0 N/A
N/AAcute:
0 0 N/A
Acute:N/A
N/A00
" Freshwater Discharge
Chronic: error © Type
_________I
' Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC - Non-carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Max predicted > allowable.
AL parameter, retain monitoring
Max predicted < allowable
Remove limit. Continue monitoring through LTMP
Max predicted < allowable
Remove limit. Continue moniloring through LTMP
Max predicted > allowable.
AL parameter, retain monitoring
Max predicted > allowable.
AL parameter, retain monitoring
Siler City WWTP
NC0026441
TYPE
(1)
4
0.25
0.4
0
8.7
WWTP Class IV
IWC(%)@7Q10S 96.124
@ 7Q10W 93.939
! @ 30Q2 N/A
@ QA 41.611
Stream Class C
26441_rpa.xls. rpa
9/10/2007
Max predicted « allowable. Remove limit/monitoring
THIS IS A WATER SUPPLY STANDARD (N/A)
Outfall 001
Qw
p/g/L
u
Chronic: irror © Type
Chronic: irror © Type
Chronic: irror © Type
Chronic: irror © Type
Chronic: irror © Type
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
NCWOS/ hFAV/
Chronic Acutt
ASONABLE POTENTIAL AN^SI
Time Period 2005-2007
Qw (MGD)
7Q1 OS (cfs)
7Q10W (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs)
Rec'ving Stream Loves Creek
^Zinc
10 10
Note: n<12
Limited data set
A Dot UnxProdCw
c^^)l
9/5/2007 x
X
STMP time frame:
X
x
7 7
x
7
-V
Flow, MGD
Industrial
Uncontrollable
Q = Quarterly
M = Monthly
PIRF_SilerCity_2007.xls
Revised: July 24, 2007
PERCS PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
3) facility has SIUs and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV" if program still under development)
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
POC in
LTMP/
STMP
Required
by EPA*
Required
by 503
Sludge**
POTW POC
(Explain
below)****
POC due
to SIU***
NPDES/Aquifer Protection
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART:
X.
X
7
7
7
Date of Request
______Requestor Toya Fields
Facility Name Siler City WWTP
Permit Number NC0026441
_________Region Raleigh_________
Basin Cape Fear
7
7
7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Most recent:
Next Cycle:Actual
1.9003
0.7885
__________data in spreadsheet?
YES (email to writer)lx
NO|
monthly date from 1/2004
to 3/2005
check applicable PERCS staff:________
CPF - TBA (to Dana in mean time)
CTB, CHO, LUM, NEU, ROA - Dana Folley (523)
BRD, FRB, NEU - Monit Hassan (371)_________
HIW, LTN, TAR, YAP - Tom Ascenzo (526)
Time period for Actual
2005
2005
all data on DMRs?
YESl
NO (attach data)]
If all data is not on DMRs
let me know and I will contact
the City to get data.
Permitted
1.613
n/a
Parameter of
Concern (POC)
Check List
BOD__________
TSS___________
NH3___________
Arsenic________
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper________
Cyanide_______
Lead__________
Mercury_______
Molybdenum
Nickel_________
Silver_________
Selenium______
Zinc___________
Total Nitrogen
Phosphorus
MBAS ~
Fluoride_______
oil & grease
POC due to
NPDES/ Non­
Disch Permit
Limit
X
X
X
STMP
Effluent
Freq
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
LTMP
Effluent
Freq
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
^^rnitting Unit Pretreatment Request Form
PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER you get this form
back from PERCS:
- Notify PERCS if LTMP/STMP data we said should
be on DMRs is not really there, so we can get it for
you (or NOV POTW).
- Notify PERCS if you want us to keep a specific
POC in LTMP/STMP so you will have data for next
permit renewal.
- Email PERCS draft permit, fact sheet, RPA.
- Send PERCS paper copy of permit (w/o NPDES
boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet. Email RPA
if changes.
X
x
x - NPDES monitoring requirement
not sure why included
’Always in the LTMP/STMP ” Only in LTMP/STMP if sludge land app or composte (dif POCs for incinerators)
Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW ”” Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
Comments to Permit Writer (ex., explanation of any POCs; info you have on IU related investigations into NPDES problems):
Frequency increases to once per month the year before the HWA due. Next HWA due 9/2008.
Check all that apply
municipal renewal
new industries
WWTP expansion
Speculative limits
stream reclass.
stream relocation
7Q10 change
____________other
____________other
lother Comments to PERCS:
AUG SEP OCTMARMAYJUN
790 790 61 343 4
78.2
IWC(%)7I
Pass
<45 Laie
IWC(%) 100
H
H
H
IWC(%) 100.0
>264(p)
IWC(%) 5.3
47.8 47.8 47.8 47.8(s)
IWC(%) 39
>100 >100
IWC(%) 100 0
IWC(%) 46
>100 >100 >100 >100>100
77.9 >100.>100
PassIWC(%) 100
IWC(%) 10
Pass
>50 >50IWC(%) 17.0
822,>100
IWC(%) 96.1
¥ Pre 2003 Data Available
LET = Administrative Letter - TargetReq t
>nlh i
Ceri7dPF
+ NonComp:Single
Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self-Monitoring Summary
FACILITY REQUIREMENT
Cen7dPF
+ NonComp Single
¥ 2003 —
2004 >26.4(p)
2005 —
2006
2007 —
Pass
Passf
Pass
Pass
Passj
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fall
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail
79.0
78.2
Fail
Pass
Pass,>78(P)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass —
Pass —
Pass,>100(P) —
Pass —
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass,>78(P)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass,>100(P)
Pass
Cen7dPF
+ NonComp Single
Ceri7dPF
+ NonCompSingle
Ceri7dPF
+ NonCompSingle
Ceri7dPF
* NonCompiSingle
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Late
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
50.2
>100
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
H
H
Pass
Fall
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
NR/Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Fail
Fall
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass>100(P)
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fall
Fall
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Passj
Pass
Pass
Pass
Facility Activity Status: 1 - Inactive, N - Newly lssued(To construct); H - Active but not discharging; t-More data available for month in question;
39
Ceri7dPF
+ NonCompSingle
Ceri7dPF
+ NonCompSingle
Ceri7dPF
NonComp: Single
Flhd24Ac
NonComp:
Pass —
Fall 94.9
Pass,>100(P) —
Pass —
Pass —
Pass
Pass
Pass,>78(P)
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Pass,>78(P)
Pass
Pass
Fall
Fan
78.2
Lata
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
>100,Pass
Pass
2003 —
2004 —
2005 —
2006 —
2007 —
2003 —
2004 —
2005 —
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 -
2005 —
2006
2007 --
2003 —
2004 —
2005 —
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 -
2005 —
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 -
2005 —
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 >100
2005 —
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 —
2005 -
2006
2007 —
2003 —
2004 —
2005 —
2006
2007 —
FEB
50.2
93.8
APR
>100
Fail
790
782
Pass
JUL
Pass
Fail
<22.5
78.2
August 15, 2007
NOV DEC
rging; D- Discontinued monitoring requirement
NonComp = Current Compliance Requirement
S.S. Mobile Home Park chr lim: 90%
NC0038300/OOI Begin 12/1/2006 Frequency: Q Feb May Aug Nov
County. Chatham Region: RRO Subbasin: CPF09
PF: 0.01 Special
7Q10:0.0 fWC(%) 100 Order:
LEGEND:
PERM = Permit Requirement LET = Administrative Letter - Target Frequency - Monitoring frequency: Q- Quarterly; M- Monthly; BM- Bimonthly; SA- Semiannually; A- Annually; OWD- Only when dischargii
Begin = First month required 7QI0 = Receiving stream low flow criterion (cfs) + = quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months that testing must occur - ex. Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct I.'v
PF = Permitted flow (MOD) IWC% - Instream waste concentration P/F - Pass/Fail test AC = Acute CHR = Chronic
Data Notation: f - Fathead Minnow; • - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my - Mysid shrimp; ChV - Chronic value; P - Mortality of staled percentage at highest concentration; al - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tox Unit; bl - Bad test
Reporting Notation: — = Data not required; NR - Not reported Facility Activity Status: 1 - Inactive, N - Newly IssuedfTo construct); H - Active but not discharging; t'More data available for month in question; = ORC signature needed
YEAR JAN
2003 Fail
2004 Fail
2005 43.4
2006 78.2
2007 78.2
Schneider Mills. Inc.- 001 chr lim: 46%
NC0034860/00I Begin 11/1/2005 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
County: Alexander Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB32
PF: 0.78 Special
7QI0: 1.40 IWC(%) 46 Order:
Rutherfordton WWTP chr lim: 71%
NC0025909/001 Begin 4/14/2004 Frequency: Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
County: Rutherford Region: ARO Subbasin: BRD02
PF: 3.0 Special Cer7dChV. Q Monit, JAJO, AD I, Ach. Comp, date 3/31/07
7Q10: 1.7 IWC(%)7I Order:
Sanford-Big Buffalo WWTP chr lim: 39%
NC0024147/001 Begin 11/1/2006 Frequency Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
kc-tuniy: Lee Region: RRO Subbasin: CPFII
6.8 Special
^QIO: 16.8 IWC(%) 39 Order:
SGL Carbon. LLC chr lim: 13%
^^^^1005258/001 Begin 12/1/2005 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
^H^^ity: Burke Region: ARO Subbasin: CTB31
PF: 1.5 Special
7QI0: 20.9 IWC(%) 10 Order:
Scotland Neck WWTP chr lim: 90%
NC0O23337/O0I Begin 11/1/2004 Frequency Q Feb May Aug Nov
County: Halifax Region: RRO Subbasin: TAR04
PF: 0.675 Special
7Q10:0.0 IWC(%) 100 Order:
Salisbury-Rowan Regional WWTP chr lim: 5.3%; exp 20 MGD chr lim 4.0% Ceri7dPF
NC0023884/001 Begin 10/1/2006 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec + NonComp:Singlc
County: Rowan Region: MRO Subbasin: YAD04
Specut
263.5 IWC(%) 5.3 Order:
Salnt-Gobain Containers (Ball Foster) 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd
NC0083038/00I Begin 1/1/2005 Frequency: A
County: Vance Region: RRO Subbasin: TAR02
PF: 0.50 Special
7Q10: 0 1WC(%) 100.0 Order:
Rclby WWTP chr lim: 17%
JkoO24538/OOI Begin 7/1/2004 Frequency: Q Feb May Aug Nov
County: Cleveland Region: MRO Subbasin: BRD04
PF: 6.0 Special
7Q10:44.3 IWC(%) 17.0 Order:
Siler City WWTP chr lim: 90%
NC0026441 /001 Begin 6/1 /2OO2 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
County: Chatham Region: RRO Subbasin: CPF12
PF: 4.0 Special
7Q10: Q.25 IWC(%)96.I Order:
Scarlett Acres chr lim: 90%
NC006I204/00! Begin 8/1/1999 Frequency: Q P/F + Feb May Aug Nov
County: Forsyth Region: WSRO Subbasin: YAD04
PF: 0.02 Special
7QI0: 0.0 IWC(%) 100.0 Order:
1 of 1Report Date: 08/29/07 Page:MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Violation Category: %1-2004 Region: %Program Category: %Permit: nc0026441 MRs Between:and 12-2007
Subbasin: %Violation Action: %County: %Facility Name: %Param Name: %
Major Minor: %
REGION: RaleighCOUNTY: ChathamPERMIT: NC0026441 FACILITY: Town of Siler City - Siler City WWTP
Limit Violation
VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTIONPARAMETERFREQUENCYLIMIT
5.9 Daily Minimum Not Reached No Action, BPJ04-2006 001 Effluent pH 04/25/06 5 X week 6su
Monitoring Violation
PPI VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTIONLOCATIONPARAMETERFREQUENCYLIMIT
Frequency Violation No Action, BPJ03-2007 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 03/17/07 5 X week ug/l
Effluent Copper, Total (as Cu)Frequency Violation None04-2006 001 04/29/06 Weekly ug/l
Effluent Fluoride, Total (as F)Frequency Violation None04 -2006 001 04/29/06 Weekly mg/l
09-2004 001 Effluent Mercury, Total (as Hg)09/18/04 Weekly ug/l Frequency Violation None
04 -2006 001 Effluent Mercury, Total (as Hg)04/29/06 Weekly ug/l Frequency Violation None
Effluent04 -2006 001 Phosphorus, Total (as P)04/29/06 Weekly mg/l Frequency Violation None
001 Effluent Surfactants (MBAS)Frequency Violation None04-2006 04/29/06 Weekly mg/l
04-2006 001 Effluent Zinc, Total (as Zn)04/29/06 Weekly ug/l Frequency Violation None
VIOLATION
DATE
VIOLATION
DATE
UNIT OF
MEASURE
UNIT OF
MEASURE
CALCULATED
VALUE
CALCULATED
VALUE
MONITORING OUTFALL/
REPORT
MONITORING OUTFALL/
REPORT PPI LOCATION