NC0005363_Comments on Draft Permit_20030816

41
Progress Energy
gv
Progress Energy
Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
491 Power Plant Rd.
Lumberton, NC 28358
File No: WSPN - 12520B
AUG 12 20%
Mr. Sergei Chermkov, Ph.D
North Carolina Department Environment and Natural Resources
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Services Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Q L � � � U
AUG 16 1003
DENR - WATER QUALITY
i POINT SOURCE BRANCH
RE W H. Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit No NC0005363
Comments to Draft NPDES Permit
Dear Mr Chermkov.
Attached are our comments on the subject draft NPDES permit We appreciate the opportumty to comment If you
have any questions concerning flus matter, please contact Mr. Steve Cahoon at [phone]
I certify, under penalty of law, that flus document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best
of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc
Weatherspoon Steam Plant
491 Power Plant Road
Lumberton, NC 28358
Sincerely, 2 1
J Mark Fredenck
Manager - Weatherspoon Plant

Progress Energy
W. H. WEATHERSPOON STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT
DRAFT NPDES PERMIT COMMENTS
Cover PaLre of Permit
• The Company should be identified as. Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc, instead of Progress Energy
Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet
• The Supplement to Permit Cover sheet should read "Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc " is hereby authorized
to,
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc
Weatherspoon Steam Plant
491 Power Plant Road
Lumberton, NC 28358

nnap //seigei c1einikov%40dwq dem ncmatl netC@ems ncmatl net 143
Subject: Draft permit reviews (4)
From: John Gtorgtno <lohn gtorgtno@ncmarl net>
Date: Mon, 26 Jtll 2004 08 59 12 -0400
To: serget cherntkov <serget chernikov@ncmatl net>
Hi Sergei, I have reviewed the following draft NPDES permits
NC0004774 - Buck Steam Station
NC0005363 - Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
NC0003417 - H F Lee Steam Electric Plant
NCO086398 - Aberdeen Pesticide Dump Site
I have no comments on the drafts. Thanks for forwarding them to our unit
John
I of 1 7/26/2004 10 06 AM

imap //sergei chermkov%40dwq denr ncmad [e-mail] net 143
Subject: Re question
From: Teresa Rodriguez <teresa [e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2004 09 28:02 -0400
To: Sergei Chernikov <[e-mail]>
Yes, it is a minor.
Sergei Chernikov wrote:
Teresa,
Just would like to make sure that I did not make a mistake and that NC0005363 was
rerated and now it's a Minor.
Please confirm.
Thank you]
Sergei
Teresa -o,li -- q
N"?DES Unit
919-733-=C.',3
1 of 1 7/6/2004 9 46 AM

ROBESON COUNTY
NO TH CARO INA
A&a-- 0
Associate Editor, of THE ROBESONIAN, a news
paper published in Robeson County, N. C., beinc
duly sworn, says that at the time the attachec
notice was published in THE ROBESONIAN, saic
newspaper met all of the requirements and quali'
fications prescribed by North Carolina 'General
Statute 1-597; that said newspaper had a general
circulation to actual paid subscribers; and, wa
admitted to the United States mail as second
class matter in Robeson County, N. C.; and fur-
ther, that the attached notice was published in
THE ROBESONIAN once a week for - - con-
secutive weeks on the following issue dates
-Associate Editor
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
s ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSIOWNPDES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO IS-
SUE A NPDES WASTEWATER PER-
MIT
On the basis of thorough staff review
and application of NC General Statute
143 21, Public law 92 500 and other
lawful standards and regulations, the
North Carolina Environmental Manage-
ment Commission proposes to issue a
National Pollutant Discharge Eltmina
hon System (NPDES) wastewater dis-
charge permit to the person(s) listed
below effective 45 days from the pub-
lish date of this notice
Written comments regarding the pro-
posed permit will be accepted until 30
days after the publish date of this no-
tice All comments received prior to
that date are considered in the final de-
terminations regarding the proposed
permit The Director of the NC Division
Sworn to and syebscribed fore me
�1
th' t e da Of 2 0� '
�
of Water Quality may decide to hold a
public meeting for the proposed permit
should the Division receive a significant
degree of public interest
Copies of the draft permit and other
supporting information on file used to
determine conditions present in the
draft= are available upon request
and payment of the costs of reproduc
tion Mall comments and/or requests
for information to the NC Division of
Water Quality the aboveeaddress or
call Ms Carolynyn Bryant at (919) 733-
5083, extension 520 Please include
( NOTARY 1
n
My commission expires: /
LOz
} t.� JUL 3 0 2004
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
the NPDES permit number (attached)
In any communication Interested per-
sons may also visit the Division of Wa-
ter Quality at 512 N Salisbury Street,
I Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 between the
hours of 8 00 a m and 5 00 p m tore -
view information on file
Progress Energy, 491 Power Plant
Road, Lumberton, NC 28358, Robeson
GCounty, has applied for renewal of its NPDES discharge permit for Weather-
woon Steam Electric Plant (number
COD05363) discharging to the Lum-
ber River in the Lumber River Basin
This facility operates two ouffalls, 001
(recirculated cooling water, coal pile
runoff, stormwater runoff, ash sluice
water, domestic wastewater, chemical
metal cleaning wastewater, and low
volume wastewater, discharge is per-
mitted only In cases of extreme rain -
'fall), 002 (once -through non -contact
cooling water) Currently total residual
chlorine Is water quality limited This
discharge may affect future allocations
in this portion of the Lumber River Ba-
sin
The Town of Red Springs, 217 South
Main Street, Red Springs, NC 28377
has applied for renewal of NPDES per-
mit NCO025577 for its Red Springs
WWTP in Robeson County This per-
mitted facility discharges treated
wastewater to Little Raft Swamp in the
Lumber River Basin Currently, BOD,
ammonia nitrogen, total residual chlor-
ine, copper, cyanide, mercury, and zinc
are water quality limited This dis-
charge may affect future allocations in
this portion of the watershed
July 13 NCDE 07130

Weatherspoon NC0005363 RO Trial
Subject: Weatherspoon NC0005363 RO Trial
From: Tom Belnick <tom.belnick @ ncmail. net>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2004 10:07:05 -0400
To: "Cahoon, Steve" <[e-mail]>
By this email the Division is authorizing the temporary discharge of RO reject
water, projected at approximately 3,600 gpd, to the cooling pond in
association with a trial RO operation that will conclude by March 1, 2005. As
per current NPDES permit conditions, discharges from the cooling pond are
allowed under very limited circumstances (e.g., extreme weather events), and
such discharges are subject to monitoring and toxicity testing. At the
conclusion of the RO trial, should the permittee decide to add a permanent RO
unit, then the permittee will need to submit a request for a major permit
modification to allow for the new wastestream.
1 of 1 4/8/2004 10 07 AM

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 26, 2004
MEMORANDUM
TO Charles Weaver, NPDES Permitting Unit
THROUGH: Paul Ra4ater Quality Regional Supervisor, FRO
FROM: Hughie White, Environmental Technician, FRO 4iv
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit Renewal
Progress Energy, Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0005363
Robeson County
Please find below comments for the subject NPDES permit renewal.
A rating sheet is not attached as no modifications were made to this facility during the
previous permit cycle.
A review of compliance data did not reveal any significant or repetitive violations.
Per my conversation with Mr Steve Cahoon of Progress Energy, there are no scheduled
plans to install wet scrubbers for compliance with the Clean Air Act at this facility, at
least during this permit cycle
No special conditions, limitations, or monitoring is suggested at this time.
Based on the above information, the Fayetteville Regional Office recommends reissuance
of said permit.
hw T�
cc: Central Files
MAR ®7.00

Weatherspoon- RO Tnal- NC0005363
3/31101- V-etl hJ. "W
Subject: Weatherspoon- RO Trial- NC0005363 Ney� ,� rr, "
From: Tom B elnick <tom.belnick @ ncmail.net>
Date Wed, 31 Mar 2004 11:34:31 -0500--—
To: Cahoon, Steve <[e-mail]> i- )ey
CC: Paul Rawls <Paul.Rawls @ ncmail. net>, Belinda Henson <[e-mail]>,
Dale Lopez <[e-mail]>
Hi Steve- per our phone discussion today, Progress Energy will conduct a trial
run of an RO unit at their Weatherspoon facility, with that trial period ending
March 1, 2005. If Progress decides to install the RO unit on a permanent basis
following the trial, they will need to submit a supplement to their NPDES
application (if the pending NPDES permit has not been renewed by that time),
detailing the new RO wastestream that will be added. Alternatively, if the
permit has already been renewed at that point, Progress will need to submit a
request for a major permit modification to include the new RO wastestream. Let
me know if you have any further NPDES permitting questions, or feel free to
contact the Training and Certification Unit regarding Grade II
Chemical/Physical ORC Certification requirements.
1 of 1 3/31/2004 11.34 AM

Re Reverse Osmosis Trial Period for Progress Energy's 3 / 3-0 —
Subject: Re- Reverse Osmosis Trial Period for Progress Energy's Weatherspoon P lant
From: Tom Belmck <tom [e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15.23:28 -0500
To: "Cahoon, Steve" <[e-mail]>
r,?PA4 VVIrl- l� tls 1,14,
,q,n p, J
OA, fill k-/ 4
It K � 0 , 4
4 ,
Hi Steve- Sorry for the delay, but I was out of the office for most of last week. I'm still not sure why a 1 -year trial would
be needed. It seems the main determination would be to evaluate how well the unit performs during peak plant
operations (June, July, August) and therefore a 6 -month trial might be more appropriate I don't see why winter season
would be as critical to study, since winter operation is not at peak, the water temperature should be fairly constant (you
mentioned this is from a groundwater source), and the RO treatment unit should not be as affected by winter ambient
temperatures (unlike a biological WWTP). Plus, I can't recall any other facilities that requested a 1 -year trial prior to
installation of an RO unit. As I mentioned previously, if you decide to go ahead with a permenant installation, you will
need to amend the permit application to include this new wastestream.
Cahoon, Steve wrote -
Tom,
As you are aware our Weatherspoon Plant located in Lumberton, NC, is interested in installing Reverse Osmosis
Treatment system (RO) for the process water used in its boilers Before a permanent installation of the system the plant
would like to request a trial period for 1 year to evaluate the performance of the RO under a variety of running
conditions The plant would like to evaluate the RO's performance under their peak running times of June, July and
August, as well as the winter months when the plant runs very sporadically. Also, a 1 year trial period would also give
the plant a chance to evaluate the RO's performance under extreme weather conditions and fluctuations water
temperatures
As always thank you for your prompt attention to Progress Energy's permitting needs. If you have any questions, please
contact me
Steve Cahoon
Progress Energy - Permitting and Compliance Unit
Vnet 772-3568
Bell [phone]
Mail Code HEEC
steve cahoon@oanmail com
1 of 1 3/30/2004 3 23 PM

Re: RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363
24?,} &�
Subject: Re RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363 n V R✓1 { 't' } �i� #� p r�
From: Tom Belmck <tom belmck@ncmail net> ® l�
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14 01 19 -0500 �{� ! 0 1)
To: "England, Louise" <louise england@pgnmail com>, "Cahoon, Steve" <Steve Cahoon@pgnmail com> /
CC: Paul Rawls <Paul Rawls@ncmail net>, Belinda Henson <Belinda Henson@ncmail net>, Dale Lopez <Dale Lopez@ncmail net>
Hello folks- I discussed the proposed pilot study with the Fayetteville Regional office, and DWQ is comfortable with the proposal The
pilot study will discharge approx 3,600 gpd of RO refect water to the cooling pond, which only discharges (via Outfall 001) during
extreme weather events, and also has a toxicity test requirement If you decide to pursue a permanent RO discharge, you will need to
modify your permit application to reflect a new wastestream, and include analytical data collected of the RO reject wastestream from the
pilot study
England, Louise wrote
Weatherspoon Plant is interested in using a RO on a trial basis fo cleaning up well Ovate prior sending it to their demin system for
further purification before use in their boder A coagulant, Solisep MPT150, and an anti-scalent, Hypersperse MDC120, will be fed when
the RO is operating Both the Solisep MPT150 and Hypersperse MDC120 will be fed at a rate of 3 ppm (0 025 pounds per 1000 gallons
of water) The reject water from the RO will be discharged to the cooling pond (Outfall 001) at a flowrate of 15 gpm and will be
discharged for approximately 4 hours per day, seven days a week The cooling pond discharges to the Lumber River only rarely, usually
in anticipation or as a result of heavy rains associated with hurricanes The RO will be cleaned on a quarterly basis utilizing both acidic
(Kleen MCT403) and caustic (Kleen MCT411) cleaners which will also be discharged to the cooling pond During the cleaning process
approximately 48 pounds of the low pH cleaner (Kleen MCT403) will be used while 24 pounds of the high pH cleaner (Kleen 411) will be
used Attached are the MSDSs for the chemicals and an analysis of the well water and the estimated reject water concentrations Will
the use of this RO and associated chemicals be allowed? If so, if we decide to use a RO permanently we will amend our permit
application to reflect the use of these chemicals
Thanks,
Louise England
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc
362-3522
<<SOLISEPMPT150 htm>> <<HYPERSPERSEMDC120 htm>> <<KLEENMCT403 htm>> <<KLEENMCT411.htm>> <<weatherspoon
reject water xls>>
PoPAJ eyie" 7131/10014
-No� qNi(Yd OJ
1 of 1 2/25/2004 2.01 PM

Re: [Fwd: RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC00. .
Subject: Re [Fwd RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363]
From: Paul Rawls <Paul Rawls@ncmail net>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 16 12 28 -0500
To: Tom Belmck <tom belmck@ncmail net>
CC: Belinda Henson <Belinda Henson@ncmail net>, Dale Lopez <Dale Lopez@ncmail net>
Tom, thanks, things are going greats
As for the RO discharge, if you feel this will be ok it is fine with the region
I do have one thought, if there is an extended period of dry weather will there be a problem of concentration spikes of the waste
constituents
My only thought
Thanks
Paul R
Tom Belmck wrote
Hi Paul- Hope things are going well at FRO Progress Energy is requesting perrrussion to conduct a pilot study which would include an
RO discharge (approx 3,600 gpd) to their cooling pond If they find the results satisfactory, they would amend their renewal
application to include a new RO wastestream I don't have a problem with this, since there would be large dilution, and the current
permit does not allow a discharge from the coolomg pond (Outfall 001) except under extreme weather conditions Their predicted RO
reject wastewater concentrations do not look that high for chlorides, even without dilution. Let me know if you are o k with their
request for the pilot RO study
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10 11 12 -0500
From: England, Louise <louise.engIand@pcnmail com>
To: 'Tom Belmck (Tom Belmck@ncmail net)' <Tom Belmck@ncmail net>
CC: Cahoon, Steve <Steve Cahoon@pgnmail corn>
Weatherspoon Plant is interested in using a RO on a trial basis for cleaning up well water prior sending it to their demin system for
further purification before use in their boder A coagulant, Solisep MPT150, and an anti-scalent, Hypersperse MDC120, will be fed when
the RO is operating Both the Solisep MPT150 and Hypersperse MDC120 will be fed ata rate of 3 ppm (0 025 pounds per 1000 gallons
of water) The reject water from the RO will be discharged to the cooling pond (Outfall 001) at a flowrate of 15 gpm and will be
discharged for approximately 4 hours per day, seven days a week The cooling pond discharges to the Lumber River only rarely, usually
in anticipation or as a result of heavy rains associated with hurricanes The RO will be cleaned on a quarterly basis utilizing both acidic
(Kleen MCT403) and caustic (Kleen MCT411) cleaners which will also be discharged to the cooling pond During the cleaning process
approximately 48 pounds of the low pH cleaner (Kleen MCT403) will be used while 24 pounds of the high pH cleaner (Kleen 411) will be
used Attached are the MSDSs for the chemicals and an analysis of the well water and the estimated reject water concentrations Will
the use of this RO and associated chemicals be allowed? If so, if we decide to use a RO permanently we will amend our permit
application to reflect the use of these chemicals
Thanks,
Louise England
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc
362-3522
j <<SOLISEPMPT150 htm>> <<HYPERSPERSEMDC120 htm>> <<KLEENMCT403 htm>> <<KLEENMCT411 htm>> <<weatherspoon
reject water xls>>
1 of 1 2/25/2004 1.25 PM

Re: RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363
Subject: Re: RO wastewater at Weatherspoon Plant - NC0005363
From: Tom Belnick <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 14:53:43 -0500
To: "England, Louise" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Cahoon, Steve" <[e-mail]>, Paul Rawls <[e-mail]>
Hi Louise- it sounds like this would be a small discharge (3,600 gpd) to the large cooling pond,
thus there should be a lot of dilution available. I think it would be allowed since Outfall 001 is
permitted to discharge on a very infrequent basis; however, the effluent sheet for Outfall 001
might need to include more monitoring and/or limited parameters, in accordance with our
permitting strategy for RO treatment units. I couldn't find any reject water concentrations in
your attached excel spreadsheet? I'll put a copy of this email in the NPDES permit file, for the
next permit writer to evaluate as the upcoming renewal is processed.
England, Louise wrote:
Weatherspoon Plant is interested in using a RO on a trial basis for cleaning up well water prior
sending it to their demin system for further purification before use in their boiler. A coagulant,
Solisep MPT150, and an anti-scalent, Hypersperse MDC120, will be fed when the RO is
operating. Both the Solisep MPT150 and Hypersperse MDC120 will be fed at a rate of 3 ppm
(0.025 pounds per 1000 gallons of water). The reject water from the RO will be discharged to
the cooling pond (Outfall 001) at a flowrate of 15 gpm and will be discharged for approximately
4 hours per day, seven days a week. The cooling pond discharges to the Lumber River only
rarely, usually in anticipation or as a result of heavy rains associated with hurricanes. The RO
will be cleaned on a quarterly basis utilizing both acidic (Kleen MCT403) and caustic (Kleen
MCT411) cleaners which will also be discharged to the cooling pond. During the cleaning
process approximately 48 pounds of the low pH cleaner (Kleen MCT403) will be used while
24 pounds of the high pH cleaner (Kleen 411) will be used. Attached are the MSDSs for the
chemicals and an analysis of the well water and the estimated reject water concentrations.
Will the use of this RO and associated chemicals be allowed? If so, if we decide to use a RO
permanently we will amend our permit application to reflect the use of these chemicals.
Thanks,
Louise England
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc.
362-3522
2/17/2004 2:54 PM

` Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
Well Water and Estimated Refect Water Constituents
Well Water Refect water
(estimated)
pH 7.2
Specific Conductance at 25°C, umhos 256
Alkalinity, "P", as CaCO3, ppm 0
Alkalinity, "M", as CaCO3, ppm 117 -
Sulfur, Total, as SO4, ppm <5
Chloride, ppm 33 132
Hardness, Total, as CaCO3, ppm 95
Calcium Hardness, Total,
as CaCO3, ppm
83
Magnesium Hardness, Total,
as CaCO3, ppm
12
Barium, Total, ppm
0.11
044
Strontium, Total, ppm
0.19
0.76
Copper, Total, ppm
<0 05
Iron, Total, ppm
0.5
2
Sodium, ppm
135
54
Potassium, ppm
27
10.8
Aluminum, ppm
<0 1
-
Manganese, Total, ppm
0.02
008
Nitrate, as NO3,ppm
<10
--
Phosphate, Total, as PO4, ppm
06
24
Phosphate, Total Inorganic,
as PO4, ppm
06
24
Phosphate, Ortho, as PO4, ppm
04
1 6
Silica, Total, as S1O2, ppm
21
84
Solids, Total Suspended, mg//
<10
--
Fluoride, ppm
<0 4
Carbon, Total Organic, as C, ppm
<1
Turbidity, NTU
21
NA
IV V —
230