vpdes permit program fact sheet - virginia...110-10387 acid blue brl 200% 108500 tectilon blue m-ar...
TRANSCRIPT
VPDES PERMIT PROGRAM FACT SHEET
This document gives the pertinent information concerning the reissuance of the VPDES permit listed
below. This permit is being processed as a Major, Industrial permit. Effluent limitations contained in
this permit will maintain the Water Quality Standards of §9 VAC 25-260-00 et seq. The industrial
discharge results from the dyeing of yarn and rugs. This permit action consists of reissuing the permit
for a period of five years for process wastewater outfalls and storm water outfalls. Water quality-based
limitations, federal effluent guideline limitations, and BPJ limitations have been applied to the
facility’s discharge. The process consists of establishing effluent limits for, Total Recoverable Copper
and Zinc, Whole Effluent Toxicity, pH, BOD5, Total Suspended Solids, Chemical Oxygen Demand,
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Total Chromium, Total Phenol, Sulfide, and Color.
1. Facility Name and Address: SIC Code: 2269, Textile Mills Products
Ronile, Inc. (Finishers of Textile)
P. O. Box 1059 4961, Steam and Air-Conditioning
Rocky Mount, VA 24151 Supply (suppliers of heat)
Location: 701 Orchard Avenue, Rocky Mount, Virginia
2. Permit No. VA0076015 Expiration Date: September 20, 2018
3. Owner Contact: Name: Wade Thompson
Title: Environmental Manager
Telephone No: (540) 484-4648
4. Application Complete Date: November 29, 2017
Permit Drafted By: Lewis Pillis Date: July 27, 2018
DEQ Regional Office: Blue Ridge Regional Office
Reviewed By: Becky France Date: August 10, 2018
Public Comment Period Dates: From: August 11, 2018 to: September 11, 2018
5. Receiving Stream Name: Pigg River River Mile: 57.24
Basin: Roanoke River Subbasin: Roanoke River Section: 6a Class: III Special Standards: None
A memorandum describing flow frequency determination is found in Appendix A.
7-Day, 10-Year Low Flow: 6.8 MGD 1-Day, 10-Year Low Flow: 6.1 MGD
30-Day, 5-Year Low Flow (30Q5): 12 MGD Harmonic Mean Flow: 27 MGD
30-Day, 10-Year Low Flow (30Q10): 9.5 MGD
Tidal? NO On 303(d) list? NO
6. Operator License Requirements: Class III
7. Reliability Class: N/A
APPENDIX A
FACILITY INFORMATION
NPDES Permit Rating WorksheetUSGS Map
Site/Flow DiagramSite Visit Memo
DMR Data
NPDES PERMIT RATING WORK SHEET Regular Addition DiscretionaryAddition
NPDES NO. VA0076015 Score change, but no status change Deletion
Facility Name: Ronile, Inc.____________________________________________________
City: _Rocky Mount_________________________________________________________________
Receiving Water: Pigg River__________________________________________________________
Reach Number: _____________________________________
Is this facility a steam electric power plant (SIC=4911) with one or more of the following characteristics? 1. Power output 500 MW or greater (not using a cooling pond/lake) 2. A nuclear power plant 3. Cooling water discharge greater than 25% of the receiving stream's 7Q10 flow rate YES; score is 600 (stop here) X NO (continue)
Is this permit for a municipal separate storm sewer serving a population greater than 100,000?
YES; score is 700 (stop here) X NO (continue)
FACTOR 1: Toxic Pollutant Potential PCS SIC Code: Primary SIC Code: 2269 Other SIC Codes: 4961 Industrial Subcategory Code: 002 (Code 000 if no subcategory)
Determine the Toxicity potential from Appendix A. Be sure to use the TOTAL toxicity potential column and check one)
Toxicity Group Code Points Toxicity Group Code Points Toxicity Group Code Points
No process waste streams 0 0 3. 3 15 7. 7 35
1. 1 5 4. 4 20 8. 8 40
2. 2 10 5. 5 25 X 9. 9 45
6. 6 30 10. 10 50
Code Number Checked: _9__
Total Points Factor 1: __45_
FACTOR 2: Flow/Stream Flow Volume (Complete either Section A or Section B; check only one)
Section A Wastewater Flow Only Considered Section B Wastewater and Stream Flow Considered
Wastewater Type Code Points Wastewater Type Percent of instream Wastewater Concentration (See Instructions) (See Instructions) at Receiving Stream Low Flow Type I: Flow < 5 MGD 11 0 Flow 5 to 10 MGD 12 10 Code Points Flow > 10 to 50 MGD 13 20 Flow > 50 MGD 14 30 Type I/III: < 10 % 41 0
Type II: Flow < 1 MGD 21 10 10 % to < 50 % 42 10 Flow 1 to 5 MGD 22 20 Flow > 5 to 10 MGD 23 30 > 50 % 43 20 Flow > 10 MGD 24 50
Type III: Flow < 1 MGD 31 0 Type II: < 10 % X 51 0 Flow 1 to 5 MGD 32 10 Flow > 5 to 10 MGD 33 20 10 % to <50 % 52 20 Flow > 10 MGD 34 30
> 50 % 53 30
Code Checked from Section A or B: _51__ Total Points Factor 2: __0__
FACTOR 3: Conventional Pollutants NPDES NO: VA0076015 (only when limited by the permit)
A. Oxygen Demanding Pollutant: (check one) BOD X COD Other: _______________________________
Code Points Permit Limits: (check one) < 100 lbs/day 1 0
100 to 1000 lbs/day 2 5 X > 1000 to 3000 lbs/day 3 15 > 3000 lbs/day 4 20
Code Checked: __3__
Points Scored: __15_ B. Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Code Points Permit Limits: (check one) < 100 lbs/day 1 0
X 100 to 1000 lbs/day 2 5 > 1000 to 5000 lbs/day 3 15 > 5000 lbs/day 4 20
Code Checked: __2_
Points Scored: __5__ C. Nitrogen Pollutant: (check one) Ammonia Other: ______________________________
Nitrogen Equivalent Code Points Permit Limits: (check one) < 300 lbs/day 1 0
300 to 1000 lbs/day 2 5 > 1000 to 3000 lbs/day 3 15 > 3000 lbs/day 4 20
Code Checked: __1___
Points Scored: _0____
Total Points Factor 3: _20__
FACTOR 4: Public Health Impact
Is there a public drinking water supply located within 50 miles downstream of the effluent discharge (this includes any body of water to which the receiving water is a tributary)? A public drinking water supply may include infiltration galleries, or other methods of conveyance that ultimately get water from the above referenced supply.
YES (If yes, check toxicity potential number below)
X NO (If no, go to Factor 5)
Determine the human health toxicity potential from Appendix A. Use the same SIC code and subcategory reference as in Factor 1. (Be sure to use the human health toxicity group column check one below)
Toxicity Group Code Points Toxicity Group Code Points Toxicity Group Code Points
No process waste streams 0 0 3. 3 0 7. 7 15
1. 1 0 4. 4 0 8. 8 20
2. 2 0 5. 5 5 9. 9 25
6. 6 10 10. 10 30
Code Number Checked: __0__NA
Total Points Factor 4:__0__
FACTOR 5: Water Quality Factors NPDES NO VA0076015
A. Is (or will) one or more of the effluent discharge limits based on water quality factors of the receiving stream (rather than technology-based federal effluent guidelines, or technology-based state effluent guidelines), or has a wasteload allocation been assigned to the discharge:
Code Points X Yes 1 10
No 2 0
B. Is the receiving water in compliance with applicable water quality standards for pollutants that are water quality limited in the permit?
Code Points X Yes 1 0
No 2 5
C. Does the effluent discharged from this facility exhibit the reasonable potential to violate water quality standards due to whole effluent toxicity?
Code Points X Yes 1 10
No 2 0
Code Number Checked: A 1 B 1 C 1
Points Factor 5: A 10 + B 0 + C 10 = 20 TOTAL
FACTOR 6: Proximity to Near Coastal Waters
A. Base Score: Enter flow code here (from Factor 2): ___ Enter the multiplication factor that corresponds to the flow code: _____
Check appropriate facility HPRI Code (from PCS):
HPRI# Code HPRI Score Flow Code Multiplication Factor
1 1 20 11, 31, or 41 0.00 2 2 0 12, 32, or 42 0.05 3 3 30 13, 33, or 43 0.10 X 4 4 0 14 or 34 0.15 5 5 20 21 or 51 0.10
22 or 52 0.30 23 or 53 0.60
HPRI code checked: 4 24 1.00
Base Score: (HPRI Score) 0 X (Multiplication Factor) = 0 (TOTAL POINTS)
B. Additional Points NEP ProgramFor a facility that has an HPRI code of 3, does the facility discharge to one of the estuaries enrolled in the National Estuary Protection (NEP) program (see instructions) or the Chesapeake Bay?
Code Points Yes 1 10 No 2 0
C. Additional Points Great Lakes Area of ConcernFor a facility that has an HPRI code of 5, does the facility discharge any of the pollutants of concern into one of the Great Lakes' 31 areas of concern (see Instructions)
Code Points Yes 1 10 No 2 0
Code Number Checked: A B C __
Points Factor 6: A + B + C = 0 TOTAL
SCORE SUMMARY NPDES NO. VA0076015
Factor Description Total Points
1 Toxic Pollutant Potential __45_
2 Flows/Streamflow Volume _____
3 Conventional Pollutants __20_
4 Public Health Impacts _____
5 Water Quality Factors _ 20
6 Proximity to Near Coastal Waters _____
TOTAL (Factors 1 through 6) __85___
S1. Is the total score equal to or greater than 80? X Yes (Facility is a major) No
S2. If the answer to the above questions is no, would you like this facility to be discretionary major?
No
Yes (Add 500 points to the above score and provide reason below:
Reason:
NEW SCORE: _85____
OLD SCORE: _85____
Lewis J. Pillis___________ Permit Reviewer's Name
( 540 ) _562-6789_____________ Phone Number
_____July 23, 2018____________ Date
Ronile Inc., MSDSs reviewed:
110-10003 ACID YELLOW 4NGL 200%
Monoazo
109092 ACID YELLOW 4NGL 200%
>50% CAS# 69762-08-9
Color sources, Inc.
10 lb
120-10018 LEVELER PPL 127670 LEVELER PPL Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 10
120-10506 VERSATINT SUPRA GREEN 123900 VERSATINT SUPRA GREEN Milliken & Company 15
110-10069 ACID RED 2G
Monoazo dye
109092 ACID RED 2G
12270-02-9
Color sources, Inc.
30
110-10034 ASTRAZON BRILL RED 4GN 200
(basic red 14, a methine dyestuff)
110085 DORACREL BRIL RED X4GS 200%
CAS# 72208-31-0
M Dohmen USA, Inc
35
120-10028 CARRIER NOC 127670 CARRIER NOC Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 50
120-10503 MUANOX CONC 127490 MUANOX CONC Peachstate Labs Inc 60
110-10386 ACID RED 2B 111840 DYE O NYL RED 2B
CAS# 61931-22-4
Dye-O-Chem, American Inc
65
110-10425
H400, H410*
ACRYLIC YELLOW X8G
Aquatic Acute1 & Chronic 1 Basic dye
110085 Doracryl yellow X8GLS 200%
25-50% CAS# 25717-55-9
M Dohmen USA, Inc 65
110-10026 ACID ORANGE 3G 200%
AKA Acid orange 156
113200
contains
FOURACID ORANGE 3G 200
Sodium tripolyphosphate
Fibro Chem Inc
80
110-10085 TELON BLACK BLD 100% 109092 ACID BLACK 2S-LD ColorSources, Inc. 100
110-10427 DORACRYL FAVINE X10G 600%
a methine dyestuff
110085 DORACRYL FAVINE X10G 600% M Dohmen USA, Inc
110
120-10389 SODIUM HYDROSULFITE WRM 128900 PRES CLEAR WRM Prescott Chemical Inc 125
110-10387 ACID BLUE BRL 200% 108500 TECTILON BLUE M-AR Huntsman International, LLC 160
110-10033 ASTRAZON BLUE BG 200%
Basic dye
110085 DORACRYL BLUEGREEN X5GS 200
CAS#33203-82-6
M Dohmen USA, Inc
175
110-10364 PREMET BORDEAUX R
CI acid red 182
120255 KEMALAN BORDEAUX K-RL
CAS# 5802-43-5
Jaychem LLC
190
110-10366
H412*
ACRYLIC RED GRL
Aquatic Chronic 3 Azo dyestuff
110085 DORACRYL RED XGRLS 200%
>25% CAS# 93804-07-0
M Dohmen USA, Inc
210
110-10035
H410*
ASTRAZON RED VLT 3RNO1
Basic dye
110085 DORACRYL BRILL RED XBG
60-70% CAS# 6359-45-1
M Dohmen USA, Inc
220
110-10363 PREMET YELLOW LNW 250%
Metal complex dye contains cobalt
113200 FOURACID YELLOW NW 250 Fibro Chem Inc
230
110-10032 ACRYLIC BLUE FGGL 300%
Monoazo dyestuff
110085 DORACRYL BLUE X3GLS 300
CAS# 12270-13-2
M Dohmen USA, Inc
Basic blue 41 (zinc free) 425
110-10054 PREMET BLACK BGL 200%
Acid black 1, CI acid black 107
111840 DYE-O-LAN BLACK BGL 200%
CAS# 12218-96-1
Dye-O-Chem, American Inc
450
120-10401 ASTRAGAL PAN-02 104255 ASTRAGAL PAN-02 StarChem LLC X 450
110-10021
H400, H410* ACRYLIC GOLDEN YEL GL 200
Aquatic Acute 1 &Chronic 1 – Basic
110085 DORACRYL GOLD YELLOW XGFLS
200 45-55% CAS# 38936-35-5
M Dohmen USA, Inc
530
120-10016 Buffer 5 Tote 127670 Buffer 5 Tote Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 495
120-10339 PRO GUM 493/Aqualon 49323 GUAR 113200 GALACTASOL 20H5FD GUAR Fibro Chem Inc 750
120-10036 WETTER D-90 127670 WETTER D-90 Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 950
120-10060 BUFFER R 127670 BUFFER R Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 950
120-10493 SYNTHASIL SW 216 127670 SYNTHASIL SW 216 Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 1,025
120-10051 NOVOC A-80 127490 NOVOC A-80 Peachstate Labs Inc 1,100
120-10005 POMOCO 1014T DRUM 127670 POMOCO 1014T Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 1,350
120-10047 FOAM PRESS 50 128900 FOAM PRESS 50 Prescott Chemical Inc 1,700
120-10019 FORMAC 50% BULK N/A #N/A 1,793
120-10080 POLYWET 750 DE N/A #N/A 3,227
120-10502 POMOLUBE TXJ-22 127670 POMOLUBE TXJ-22 Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 4,050
120-10048 ACETIC ACID 56% TOTE 105902 ACETIC ACID 56% Brenntag Southeast 4,780
120-10004 POMOSOFT 540 127670 POMOSOFT 540 Piedmont Chemical Ind Inc 5,250
120-10050 NICCA-RESIST SB-4 124636 NICCARESIST SB-4 Nicca USA Inc X 5,685
Environmental hazards from Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS);
not adopted by all dye manufacturers:
H400: Very toxic to aquatic life
H401: Toxic to aquatic life
H402: Harmful to aquatic life
H410: Very toxic to aquatic life with long-lasting effects (Aquatic Chronic)
H411: Toxic to aquatic life with long-lasting effects
H412: Harmful to aquatic life with long-lasting effects (Aquatic Chronic)
H413: May cause long-lasting harmful effects to aquatic life
Ronile IncVA0076015 Outfall 001
COD, mg/L Zn, ug/L Cu, ug/L Cr, mg/L Color, ADMI
Mo. Ave An. Ave. Max Min Max ave max ave max ave max ave maxlimit=> 6.0 9.0 NL NL NL NL NL 140 20 NL NL NL 0.97 1.9 499
2015 5 0.09 0.117 7.34 7.98 <QL <QL 80 6.1 8 70 <QL <QL 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.02 124
6 0.087 0.114 7 8.26 1.7 5 111 7.3 9 62 <QL <QL 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.01 243
7 0.076 0.107 7.1 7.77 <QL <QL 81 9 16 77 <QL <QL 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 274
8 0.085 0.119 7.14 8.12 1.8 5.5 118 9 15 42 <QL 0.1 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 290
9 0.105 0.128 6.72 7.95 <QL <QL 84 9 14 70 <QL <QL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 248
10 0.105 0.129 7.07 8.58 <QL <QL 55 11 13 45 <QL <QL 0.01 0.02 0 0.01 148
11 0.097 0.133 7.14 7.84 2.9 6.5 55 12 15 56 <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL 222
12 0.097 0.092 0.126 7.11 7.84 1.5 6 55 10 12 110 <QL <QL 0.012 0.014 0.01 0.01 182
2016 1 0.09 0.118 7.27 7.95 3.6 7.7 66 14 20 89 <QL <QL 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.02 138
2 0.148 0.189 7.28 8.26 <QL <QL 77 8 23 110 <QL <QL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 104
3 0.158 0.2 6.72 7.98 <QL <QL 63 11 20 89 <QL <QL 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.02 136
4 0.15 0.186 6.86 7.42 <QL <QL 62 6 7 81 <QL <QL 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 135
5 0.104 0.137 6.86 7.42 <QL <QL 54 6 8 50 <QL <QL 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 165
6 0.095 0.118 6.69 7.42 <QL <QL 56 10 18 57 <QL <QL 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 248
7 0.083 0.11 6.44 7.7 <QL <QL 73 11 19 44 <QL <QL 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.02 249
8 0.098 0.127 6.58 7.42 <QL <QL 72 9 13 48 <QL <QL 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.02 262
9 0.103 0.126 6.71 7.58 1.9 5.7 146 6 7 43 <QL <QL 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.02 189
10 0.105 0.125 6.83 7.33 <QL <QL 58 5 8 73 <QL <QL 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 163
11 0.115 0.132 7.23 7.56 <QL <QL 58 3 4 37 <QL <QL 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.02 150
12 0.12 0.114 0.153 7.08 7.84 3 6 78 4 5 61 <QL <QL 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.06 111
2017 1 0.106 0.144 7 7.7 1.7 5.2 119 5 7 95 <QL <QL 0.07 0.1 0.03 0.05 123
2 0.1 0.129 7 7.28 <QL <QL 84 5 7 41 <QL <QL 0.07 0.09 0.03 0.04 124
3 0.107 0.133 6.44 7.48 <QL <QL 75 3 8 47 <QL 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 131
4 0.108 0.14 6.77 7.42 <QL <QL 62 3 4 45 <QL <QL 0.025 0.026 0.012 0.013 138
5 0.101 0.135 6.8 7.56 <QL <QL 67 3 3 52 <QL 0.02 <QL <QL <QL <QL 151
6 0.097 0.135 6.86 7.56 <QL <QL 68 4 7 32 <QL <QL 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 175
7 0.102 0.128 6.86 7.32 <QL <QL 70 3 3 45 <QL <QL 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 218
8 0.103 0.14 6.72 7.42 <QL <QL 70 2 2 65 <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL 212
9 0.118 0.14 6.58 7.42 <QL <QL 62 6 13 51 <QL <QL 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 188
10 0.114 0.139 6.72 7.28 <QL <QL 59 3 3 52 <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL 176
11 0.118 0.152 6.72 7.56 <QL <QL 45 2 3 82 <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL 222
12 0.087 0.105 0.134 6.72 7.56 <QL <QL 70 4 8 74 <QL <QL 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 154
2018 1 0.095 0.147 6.78 7.6 5 25.1 131 4 12 47 <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL <QL 160
2 0.115 0.146 6.86 7.44 <QL <QL 113 3 5 42 <QL <QL 0.007 0.022 0.004 0.011 188
3 0.119 0.145 6.86 7.62 <QL <QL 64 2 3 68 <QL 0.01 <QL 0.01 <QL 0.01 134
4 0.111 0.143 6.86 7.47 <QL <QL 70 4 6 21 <QL <QL 0.022 0.032 0.011 0.017 170
0.106 0.2 6.44 8.58 results show toxicity in BOD test 60.4 290 max
LT ave max min max ave 179 ave
Note: O&G and total sulfides were <QL for all months
FLOW, MGD pH, SU BOD5, mg/L TSS, mg/L Phenolics, mg/L Phenolics, Kg/D
Ronile IncVA0076015 Outfall 001
Evaluation to see if tocxicity is evident in BOD tests.
BOD COD, mg/L COD/BODave COD/BODmax Zn, ug/L TUaave max <QL=2 ratio ratio
2015 5 <QL <QL 2 80 40 62
6 1.7 5 5 111 65 22 77 <1.0
7 <QL <QL 2 81 41 42
8 1.8 5.5 5.5 118 66 21 70
9 <QL <QL 2 84 42 45 <1.00
10 <QL <QL 2 55 28 56
11 2.9 6.5 6.5 55 19 8 110
12 1.5 6 6 55 37 9 89 <1.0
2016 1 3.6 7.7 7.7 66 18 9 110
2 <QL <QL 2 77 39 89
3 <QL <QL 2 63 32 81 <1.0
4 <QL <QL 2 62 31 50
5 <QL <QL 2 54 27 57
6 <QL <QL 2 56 28 44 <1.0
7 <QL <QL 2 73 37 48
8 <QL <QL 2 72 36 43
9 1.9 5.7 5.7 146 77 26 73 <1.0
10 <QL <QL 2 58 29 37
11 <QL <QL 2 58 29 61
12 3 6 6 78 26 13 95 <1.0
2017 1 1.7 5.2 5.2 119 70 23 41
2 <QL <QL 2 84 42 47
3 <QL <QL 2 75 38 45 1.23
4 <QL <QL 2 62 31 52
5 <QL <QL 2 67 34 32
6 <QL <QL 2 68 34 45 <1.0
7 <QL <QL 2 70 35 65
8 <QL <QL 2 70 35 51
9 <QL <QL 2 62 31 52 1.41
10 <QL <QL 2 59 30 82
11 <QL <QL 2 45 23 74
12 <QL <QL 2 70 35 47 1.42
2018 1 5 25.1 25.1 131 26 5 42
2 <QL <QL 2 113 57 68
3 <QL <QL 2 64 32 21 3.27
4 <QL <QL 2 70 35 42
26 to 77 5 to 57ave = 45 ave = 30
BOD5, mg/L
Annual Sulfate Trend - Ronile Lagoon Monitoring Wells
CO o> o T- CM CO IO <o h- CO O) o •4— CM CO m (£> r- CO o> O) o o O o o o o O o o 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 i 1 • • i • 1
u u o o o o o o o u u u o o U o o o O o o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Sampling Date
M E M O R A N D U M
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Blue Ridge Regional Office
3019 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, VA 24019
SUBJECT: Site Visit, Rōnile, Inc., VPDES Permit No. VA0076015
TO: Kip Foster
FROM: Lewis Pillis
DATE: July 3, 2018
COPIES: file
I visited the subject facility on Monday, July 2nd. Wade Thompson, Environmental Manager, accompanied me on a tour of the outside operations. The WWTP (AKA water plant) operates 5 days/week or less even though the manufacturing operates every day. The River at outfall 001 was viewed from the catwalk, but effluent was not visible. The aeration basin was nearly full and the curtain that separates the basin was torn and Wade stated that a quote for a replacement had been obtained and a new curtain would be replaced in future. A small amount of sludge was on a drying bed.
Outfall 004, stormwater from the paved area around the wastewater plant enters the River immediately downstream of outfall 001. Monitoring well 4 is just on the upstream side of the path to 001. The site map shows the relative locations, but not their proximity to each other.
Old equipment was being stored behind the warehouse. This area drains through outfall 003 to the vegetated utility easement.
A concrete unloading ramp for sawdust is under construction. Sawdust is used as fuel in the boiler. Previously, sawdust was used as a ramp to the unloading conveyor. Sawdust washes to a low place in the parking lot, and runs into the easement area via outfall 009. There is screening in place to catch some of the sawdust. Sawdust has passed through or around the screen and accumulated at the fence line, so that there is a spongy layer of sawdust at this point. Sawdust needs to be removed from in front of the screen and fence. It was reported that there is rip rap beyond the fence, but it could not be seen due to vegetation growing on the fence. Once the ramp is built, less sawdust will wash to the outfall.
Stormwater falling just southwest of the sawdust unloading area flows to outfall 007 via a half acre grassy area. A couple of spots could be seen where solids had settled in the grass. Concrete at the fence appeared to be breaking up and was in need of repair. Outfall 005 is in the southern corner of facility at the end of a ditch and is noted incorrectly on the site map at the upper end of the ditch.
Production at the facility was discussed and it was noted that production has gradually changed, in the past 4 to 5 years, from the use of acid dyes, which could be recycled, to acrylic or basic dyes, which cannot be recycled. There had also been an increase in the amount of chemicals used in dyeing. Wool is not being dyed currently and is not being considered. It was stated that the Technical Director researched toxicity of all chemicals prior to use, but that ecological information (i.e. aquatic toxicity) was not always available. The writer shared that some SDSs provided to DEQ contain GHS hazard
codes indicating they are chronically toxic to aquatic organisms, but that many SDSs had no information at all about ecological affects.
It was stated that there had been a large increase (10x) in the use of Pres Clear WRM over the same time period. The SDS indicates that this is stabilized sodium hydrosulfite, CAS #7775-14-6 (AKA sodium dithionite) and no ecological information is provided. It was hypothesized that this chemical along with Nicca Resist may have had the effect on the aeration basin of releasing dye and zinc from sludge.
APPENDIX B
RECEIVING WATERS INFORMATION
Flow Frequency MemoSTOReT Data
M E M O R A N D U M
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
West Central Regional Office
3019 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, VA 24019
SUBJECT: Flow Frequency Determination, Rōnile, Inc. WWTP VPDES Permit No. VA0076015
TO: File
FROM: Lewis Pillis
DATE: April 29, 2013
COPIES:
Critical flows for the gages used in preparing the referenced permit have changed since development ofthe last permit. In 2011, USGS calculated low flows from the gages previously used. These gage flowswere used to find resulting critical flows at the Ronile facility and then averaged. The two gages usedpreviously are:
Blackwater River gage # 02056900 at Rocky MountPigg River gage # 02058400 near Sandy Level
The Surface Water Investigations Office in Charlottesville performed 14 site specific flow measurementson the Pigg River, near Ronile at Latitude 36 59'02", Longitude 79 52'52", NAD 83, between 1993 and2005. Mean daily flows, on the same days, at the gages above were found in the USGS web-interface.The same correlation, using standard Agency regression analysis in 2008 was maintained and newcritical flows determined at Ronile were calculated by inserting each gage’s critical flows into therelationship [regression equation] and then averaged. Regression curves are shown on the followingpages.
Critical flows at the Ronile outfall 001 on the Pigg River are determined to be:cfs in 2008; cfs in 2011 MGD in 2008; MGD in 2011
1Q10 8.96 9.42 5.79 6.17Q10 10.0 10.5 6.49 6.830Q5 18.1 18.4 11.7 11.930Q10 14.2 14.8 9.2 9.5HF 1Q10 25.2 * 16.3 *HF 7Q10 28.1 * 18.1 *Harmonic Mean 41.9 * 27.1 *
High flow months are Jan – May* Flow not recalculated by USGS
Pigg River above Ronile STP, at Rocky Mount, VA #02057650
vs Blackwater River near Rocky Mount, VA #02056900
y = 2.4246x0.7062
1
10
100
1 10 100 1000
Pig
g R
ive
r R
oc
ky M
ou
nt
Blackwater River
Flow Data (cfs) Flow Frequencies (cfs) 2011 USGS flow frequencies (cfs)
Date Blackwatr Pigg RM SUMMARY OUTPUT Blackwatr Pigg RM Blackwatr Pigg RM
9/1/1993 39 39 8.4 1Q10 10.898 8.84 1Q10 11.299
6/22/1994 57 47.2 Regression Statistics 9.8 7Q10 12.152 10.3 7Q10 12.587
11/9/1994 50 42.2 Multiple R 0.985115 22 30Q5 21.511 22.1 30Q5 21.580
11/19/1996 128 86.3 R Square 0.970452 32 HF 1Q10 28.027 32 HF 1Q10 28.027
5/22/1997 94 74.4 Adjusted R Square 0.965527 38 HF 7Q10 31.643 38 HF 7Q10 31.643
6/24/1997 84 58.7 Standard Error 4.66325 61 HM 44.202 61 HM 44.202
9/17/1997 35 29.4 Observations 14 16 30Q10 17.179 17 30Q10 17.930
8/17/1999 5.9 7.06 115 mi2 DA 68.8 mi2 115 mi2 DA 68.8 mi2
7/8/2004 70 41.6 Jan-May Jan-May
7/29/2004 59 43.3
8/26/2004 42 38.8
9/21/2004 128 59.1 85 4/25/2008 55.872
11/1/2004 103 54.6
12/8/2004 182 78.2
Pigg River above Ronile STP, at Rocky Mount, VA #02057650
vs Pigg River near Sandy Level, VA #02058400
2008 FLOWS:
Flow Data (cfs) Flow Frequencies (cfs) Blackwater
Date Pigg SL Pigg RM SUMMARY OUTPUT Pigg SL Pigg RM Pigg RM Ave, cfs Ave, MGD
9/1/1993 143 39 42 1Q10 7.031 10.898 8.964798 5.79
6/22/1994 190 47.2 Regression Statistics 47 7Q10 7.937 12.152 10.04438 6.49
11/9/1994 182 42.2 Multiple R 0.977322 83 30Q5 14.646 21.511 18.07848 11.68
11/19/1996 383 86.3 R Square 0.955159 123 HF 1Q10 22.374 28.027 25.20074 16.29
5/22/1997 352 74.4 Adjusted R Square 0.947686 134 HF 7Q10 24.537 31.643 28.09038 18.15
6/24/1997 272 58.7 Standard Error 5.744595 209 HM 39.609 44.202 41.90528 27.08
9/17/1997 170 29.4 Observations 8 65 30Q10 11.255 17.179 14.21688 9.19
8/17/1999 57 7.06 350 mi2 DA 68.8 mi2
7/8/2004 236 41.6 Jan-May
7/29/2004 337 43.3 353 4/25/2008 69.665
y = 0.1254x1.0773
1
10
100
10 100 1000
Pig
g R
ive
r R
oc
ky M
ou
nt
Pigg River Sandy Level
7/29/2004 337 43.3 353 4/25/2008 69.665
8/26/2004 217 38.8 date cross section was measured
9/21/2004 318 59.1
11/1/2004 280 54.6
12/8/2004 462 78.2
River/Diffuser measurements made on 4/25/8 by Roger McBride of Ronile: 2011 USGS Flow Frequencies (cfs) Blackwater/
Pigg SL Pigg RM Pigg RM Ave, cfs Ave, MGD % change
flow at Pigg River gage was 353 cfs on 4/25/8 44.8 1Q10 7.537 11.2986 9.417981 6.09 5.06%
flow at Blackwater River gage was 85 cfs on 4/25/8 49.9 7Q10 8.466 12.58652 10.5261 6.80 4.80%
86.4 30Q5 15.293 21.57992 18.43666 11.92 1.98%
Average of calculated flows at Ronile = (86.659+64.559)/2 123 HF 1Q10 22.374 28.02703 25.20074 16.29 0.00%
75.609 cfs 134 HF 7Q10 24.537 31.64341 28.09038 18.15 0.00%
48.8661 MGD 209 HM 39.609 44.20181 41.90528 27.08 0.00%
66.7 30Q10 11.573 17.93012 14.75132 9.53 3.76%
350 mi2 DA 68.8 mi2
Jan-May
2011 USGS gage flows shown in italics
Pigg River Data Upstream of RonileStation ID 4APGG057.85
Collection Date Time Temp Celcius Field pH Date Temp C Date Field pH02/27/2007 11:30 6.1 7.4 1 08/14/2007 14:0023.5 04/05/2007 12:007.504/05/2007 12:00 12.5 7.5 2 08/07/2008 13:0022.7 02/27/2007 11:307.406/05/2007 12:00 19.2 5.9 3 06/02/2008 12:3021.6 02/05/2008 12:007.208/14/2007 14:00 23.5 6.1 4 06/05/2007 12:0019.2 10/09/2008 14:007.210/02/2007 12:00 15.2 6.1 5 10/09/2008 14:0016.8 08/07/2008 13:007.112/05/2007 12:00 3.4 6.6 6 10/02/2007 12:0015.2 12/16/2008 11:00702/05/2008 12:00 9.3 7.2 7 04/05/2007 12:0012.5 12/05/2007 12:006.604/07/2008 12:30 10.4 6.6 8 04/07/2008 12:3010.4 04/07/2008 12:306.606/02/2008 12:30 21.6 6.5 9 02/05/2008 12:009.3 06/02/2008 12:306.508/07/2008 13:00 22.7 7.1 10 12/16/2008 11:008.1 08/14/2007 14:006.110/09/2008 14:00 16.8 7.2 11 02/27/2007 11:306.1 10/02/2007 12:006.112/16/2008 11:00 8.1 7 12 12/05/2007 12:003.4 06/05/2007 12:005.9
STORET Stream dataStation 4APGG068.49
Date Time Depth Temp Celsius Field Ph Parm Name Value
7/26/2001 0.3 26.1 7.7 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 30.99/4/2001 0.3 21 8 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 23.411/29/2001 0.3 11.7 8 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 27.71/10/2002 0.3 7 7.4 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 17.53/14/2002 0.3 8.3 7.1 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 23.95/15/2002 0.3 17.5 7.93 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 317/16/2002 0.3 21.6 7.9 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 38.39/19/2002 0.3 20.5 8.03 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 36.711/18/2002 0.3 8.6 7.51 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 34.52/3/2003 0.3 4.7 7.8 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 29.13/11/2003 0.3 5.6 7.8 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 33.25/27/2003 0.3 14.8 7.42 HARDNESS, TOTAL (MG/L AS CACO3) 31.9
APPENDIX C
PERMIT LIMIT DEVELOPMENT
Waste Load Allocation SpreadsheetSTATS printouts
Ronile Inc. VA0076015
Federal Effluent Guidelines - 40 CFR Part 410, Subpart G, NSPS
Parameter
EffluentGuidelines
Average (kg/Kkg)
Effluent Guidelines Maximum (kg/Kkg)
Effluent LimitAverage(kg/day)
Effluent Limit'Maximum(kg/day)
Equivalentconcentrationat max 30 day
ave flow &average
loading limit(mg/L)
Equivalentconcentrationat max 30 day
ave flow &maximum
loading limit(mg/L)
BOD5 1.9 3.6 19.38 36.72
COD 21.9 33.9 223.38 345.78
TSS 4.4 9.8 44.88 99.96
Sulfide 0.12 0.24 1.22 2.45 2.0 4.1
Phenols 0.06 0.12 0.61 1.22 1.0 2.0
Total Chromium 0.06 0.12 0.61 1.22 1.0 2.0
pH
Notes:
Production rate from 2017 form 2C
Average Daily Production (kkg) = 10.2
6.0 - 9.0 at all times
Facility Name: Ronile Inc 001 CORMIX DILUTIONS Permit No.: VA0076015
Receiving Stream: Pigg River Version: OWP Guidance Memo 00-2011 (8/24/00)
3.98E-08 4E-08 1.122E-08
Stream Information 7.94E-07 Stream Flows Mixing Information Effluent Information 1.91E-07 1.905E-07
Mean Hardness (as CaCO3) = 30 mg/L 1Q10 (Annual) = 6 MGD Annual - 1Q10 Mix = 100 % Mean Hardness (as CaCO3) = 152 mg/L
90% Temperature (Annual) = 22.7 deg C 7Q10 (Annual) = 18.5 MGD - 7Q10 Mix = 100 % 90% Temp (Annual) = 29 deg C
90% Temperature (Wet season) = 22.7 deg C 30Q10 (Annual) = 25 MGD - 30Q10 Mix = 100 % 90% Temp (Wet season) = 17 deg C
90% Maximum pH = 7.4 SU 1Q10 (Wet season) = 6 MGD Wet Season - 1Q10 Mix = 100 % 90% Maximum pH = 7.95 SU
10% Maximum pH = 6.1 SU 30Q10 (Wet season) = 25 MGD - 30Q10 Mix = 100 % 10% Maximum pH = 6.72 SU
Tier Designation (1 or 2) = 2 30Q5 = 25 MGD Discharge Flow = 1 MGD
Public Water Supply (PWS) Y/N? = N Harmonic Mean = 25 MGD
Trout Present Y/N? = n
Early Life Stages Present Y/N? = y
Parameter Background Method
(ug/l unless noted) Conc. Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Target Value
Acenapthene 0 -- -- na 9.9E+02 -- -- na 2.6E+04 -- -- na 9.9E+01 -- -- na 2.6E+03 -- -- na 2.6E+03 2.6E+03
Acrolein 0 3.0E+00 3.0E+00 na 9.3E+00 2.1E+01 5.9E+01 na 2.4E+02 7.5E-01 7.5E-01 na 9.3E-01 5.3E+00 1.5E+01 na 2.4E+01 5.3E+00 1.5E+01 na 2.4E+01 2.1E+00
AcrylonitrileC0 -- -- na 2.5E+00 -- -- na 6.5E+01 -- -- na 2.5E-01 -- -- na 6.5E+00 -- -- na 6.5E+00 6.5E+00
Aldrin C 0 3.0E+00 -- na 5.0E-04 2.1E+01 -- na 1.3E-02 7.5E-01 -- na 5.0E-05 5.3E+00 -- na 1.3E-03 5.3E+00 -- na 1.3E-03 1.3E-03
Ammonia-N (mg/l)
(Yearly) 0 2.15E+01 2.72E+00 na -- 1.50E+02 7.08E+01 na -- 5.37E+00 6.81E-01 na -- 3.76E+01 1.77E+01 na -- 3.76E+01 1.77E+01 na -- 1.1E+01Ammonia-N (mg/l)
(High Flow) 0 2.15E+01 2.81E+00 na -- 1.50E+02 7.30E+01 na -- 5.37E+00 7.02E-01 na -- 3.76E+01 1.82E+01 na -- 3.76E+01 1.82E+01 na -- 1.1E+01
Anthracene 0 -- -- na 4.0E+04 -- -- na 1.0E+06 -- -- na 4.0E+03 -- -- na 1.0E+05 -- -- na 1.0E+05 1.0E+05
Antimony 0 -- -- na 6.4E+02 -- -- na 1.7E+04 -- -- na 6.4E+01 -- -- na 1.7E+03 -- -- na 1.7E+03 1.7E+03
Arsenic 0.28 3.4E+02 1.5E+02 na -- 2.4E+03 2.9E+03 na -- 8.5E+01 3.8E+01 na -- 5.9E+02 7.3E+02 na -- 5.9E+02 7.3E+02 na -- 2.4E+02
Barium 19 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Benzene C 0 -- -- na 5.1E+02 -- -- na 1.3E+04 -- -- na 5.1E+01 -- -- na 1.3E+03 -- -- na 1.3E+03 1.3E+03
BenzidineC0 -- -- na 2.0E-03 -- -- na 5.2E-02 -- -- na 2.0E-04 -- -- na 5.2E-03 -- -- na 5.2E-03 5.2E-03
Benzo (a) anthracene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
Benzo (b) fluoranthene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
Benzo (k) fluoranthene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
Benzo (a) pyrene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
Bis2-Chloroethyl Ether C0 -- -- na 5.3E+00 -- -- na 1.4E+02 -- -- na 5.3E-01 -- -- na 1.4E+01 -- -- na 1.4E+01 1.4E+01
Bis2-Chloroisopropyl Ether 0 -- -- na 6.5E+04 -- -- na 1.7E+06 -- -- na 6.5E+03 -- -- na 1.7E+05 -- -- na 1.7E+05 1.7E+05
Bis 2-Ethylhexyl Phthalate C0 -- -- na 2.2E+01 -- -- na 5.7E+02 -- -- na 2.2E+00 -- -- na 5.7E+01 -- -- na 5.7E+01 5.7E+01
Bromoform C 0 -- -- na 1.4E+03 -- -- na 3.6E+04 -- -- na 1.4E+02 -- -- na 3.6E+03 -- -- na 3.6E+03 3.6E+03
Butylbenzylphthalate 0 -- -- na 1.9E+03 -- -- na 4.9E+04 -- -- na 1.9E+02 -- -- na 4.9E+03 -- -- na 4.9E+03 4.9E+03
Cadmium 0 1.7E+00 5.1E-01 na -- 1.2E+01 1.0E+01 na -- 4.2E-01 1.3E-01 na -- 3.0E+00 2.5E+00 na -- 3.0E+00 2.5E+00 na -- 1.2E+00
Carbon Tetrachloride C 0 -- -- na 1.6E+01 -- -- na 4.2E+02 -- -- na 1.6E+00 -- -- na 4.2E+01 -- -- na 4.2E+01 4.2E+01
Carbaryl 2.1E+00 2.1E+00 na -- 1.5E+01 4.1E+01 na -- 5.3E-01 5.3E-01 na -- 3.7E+00 1.0E+01 na -- 3.7E+00 1.0E+01 na -- 1.5E+00
Chlordane C 0 2.4E+00 4.3E-03 na 8.1E-03 1.7E+01 8.4E-02 na 2.1E-01 6.0E-01 1.1E-03 na 8.1E-04 4.2E+00 2.1E-02 na 2.1E-02 4.2E+00 2.1E-02 na 2.1E-02 1.3E-02
Chloride 0 8.6E+05 2.3E+05 na -- 6.0E+06 4.5E+06 na -- 2.2E+05 5.8E+04 na -- 1.5E+06 1.1E+06 na -- 1.5E+06 1.1E+06 na -- 6.0E+05
TRC 0 1.9E+01 1.1E+01 na -- 1.3E+02 2.1E+02 na -- 4.8E+00 2.8E+00 na -- 3.3E+01 5.4E+01 na -- 3.3E+01 5.4E+01 na -- 1.3E+01
Chlorobenzene 0 -- -- na 1.6E+03 -- -- na 4.2E+04 -- -- na 1.6E+02 -- -- na 4.2E+03 -- -- na 4.2E+03 4.2E+03
FRESHWATER
Most Limiting Allocations
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA / WASTELOAD ALLOCATION ANALYSIS
Water Quality Criteria Wasteload Allocations Antidegradation Baseline Antidegradation Allocations
page 1 of 12 MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Freshwater WLAs 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
Parameter Background Method
(ug/l unless noted) Conc. Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Target Value
Most Limiting AllocationsWater Quality Criteria Wasteload Allocations Antidegradation Baseline Antidegradation Allocations
ChlorodibromomethaneC0 -- -- na 1.3E+02 -- -- na 3.4E+03 -- -- na 1.3E+01 -- -- na 3.4E+02 -- -- na 3.4E+02 3.4E+02
Chloroform 0 -- -- na 1.1E+04 -- -- na 2.9E+05 -- -- na 1.1E+03 -- -- na 2.9E+04 -- -- na 2.9E+04 2.9E+04
2-Chloronaphthalene 0 -- -- na 1.6E+03 -- -- na 4.2E+04 -- -- na 1.6E+02 -- -- na 4.2E+03 -- -- na 4.2E+03 4.2E+03
2-Chlorophenol 0 -- -- na 1.5E+02 -- -- na 3.9E+03 -- -- na 1.5E+01 -- -- na 3.9E+02 -- -- na 3.9E+02 3.9E+02
Chlorpyrifos 0 8.3E-02 4.1E-02 na -- 5.8E-01 8.0E-01 na -- 2.1E-02 1.0E-02 na -- 1.5E-01 2.0E-01 na -- 1.5E-01 2.0E-01 na -- 5.8E-02
Chromium III 0.12 3.1E+02 3.2E+01 na -- 2.2E+03 6.3E+02 na -- 7.7E+01 8.2E+00 na -- 5.4E+02 1.6E+02 na -- 5.4E+02 1.6E+02 na -- 9.4E+01
Chromium VI 0 1.6E+01 1.1E+01 na -- 1.1E+02 2.1E+02 na -- 4.0E+00 2.8E+00 na -- 2.8E+01 5.4E+01 na -- 2.8E+01 5.4E+01 na -- 1.1E+01
Chromium, Total 0.12 -- -- 1.0E+02 -- -- -- na -- -- -- 1.0E+01 -- -- -- 2.6E+02 -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Chrysene C 0 -- -- 3.8E-02 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- 3.8E-03 1.8E-03 -- -- 9.9E-02 4.7E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-02 4.7E-02
Copper 0.68 6.7E+00 3.8E+00 na -- 4.3E+01 6.1E+01 na -- 2.2E+00 1.5E+00 na -- 1.1E+01 1.6E+01 na -- 1.1E+01 1.6E+01 na -- 4.5E+00
Cyanide, Free 0 2.2E+01 5.2E+00 na 1.6E+04 1.5E+02 1.0E+02 na 4.2E+05 5.5E+00 1.3E+00 na 1.6E+03 3.9E+01 2.5E+01 na 4.2E+04 3.9E+01 2.5E+01 na 4.2E+04 1.5E+01
DDD C 0 -- -- na 3.1E-03 -- -- na 8.1E-02 -- -- na 3.1E-04 -- -- na 8.1E-03 -- -- na 8.1E-03 8.1E-03
DDE C 0 -- -- na 2.2E-03 -- -- na 5.7E-02 -- -- na 2.2E-04 -- -- na 5.7E-03 -- -- na 5.7E-03 5.7E-03
DDT C 0 1.1E+00 1.0E-03 na 2.2E-03 7.7E+00 2.0E-02 na 5.7E-02 2.8E-01 2.5E-04 na 2.2E-04 1.9E+00 4.9E-03 na 5.7E-03 1.9E+00 4.9E-03 na 5.7E-03 2.9E-03
Demeton 0 -- 1.0E-01 na -- -- 2.0E+00 na -- -- 2.5E-02 na -- -- 4.9E-01 na -- -- 4.9E-01 na -- 4.9E-01
Diazinon 0 1.7E-01 1.7E-01 na -- 1.2E+00 3.3E+00 na -- 4.3E-02 4.3E-02 na -- 3.0E-01 8.3E-01 na -- 3.0E-01 8.3E-01 na -- 1.2E-01
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0 -- -- na 1.3E+03 -- -- na 3.4E+04 -- -- na 1.3E+02 -- -- na 3.4E+03 -- -- na 3.4E+03 3.4E+03
1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0 -- -- na 9.6E+02 -- -- na 2.5E+04 -- -- na 9.6E+01 -- -- na 2.5E+03 -- -- na 2.5E+03 2.5E+03
1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0 -- -- na 1.9E+02 -- -- na 4.9E+03 -- -- na 1.9E+01 -- -- na 4.9E+02 -- -- na 4.9E+02 4.9E+02
3,3-DichlorobenzidineC0 -- -- na 2.8E-01 -- -- na 7.3E+00 -- -- na 2.8E-02 -- -- na 7.3E-01 -- -- na 7.3E-01 7.3E-01
Dichlorobromomethane C 0 -- -- na 1.7E+02 -- -- na 4.4E+03 -- -- na 1.7E+01 -- -- na 4.4E+02 -- -- na 4.4E+02 4.4E+02
1,2-Dichloroethane C 0 -- -- na 3.7E+02 -- -- na 9.6E+03 -- -- na 3.7E+01 -- -- na 9.6E+02 -- -- na 9.6E+02 9.6E+02
1,1-Dichloroethylene 0 -- -- na 7.1E+03 -- -- na 1.8E+05 -- -- na 7.1E+02 -- -- na 1.8E+04 -- -- na 1.8E+04 1.8E+04
1,2-trans-dichloroethylene 0 -- -- na 1.0E+04 -- -- na 2.6E+05 -- -- na 1.0E+03 -- -- na 2.6E+04 -- -- na 2.6E+04 2.6E+04
2,4-Dichlorophenol 0 -- -- na 2.9E+02 -- -- na 7.5E+03 -- -- na 2.9E+01 -- -- na 7.5E+02 -- -- na 7.5E+02 7.5E+02
2,4-Dichlorophenoxy
acetic acid (2,4-D) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
1,2-DichloropropaneC0 -- -- na 1.5E+02 -- -- na 3.9E+03 -- -- na 1.5E+01 -- -- na 3.9E+02 -- -- na 3.9E+02 3.9E+02
1,3-Dichloropropene C 0 -- -- na 2.1E+02 -- -- na 5.5E+03 -- -- na 2.1E+01 -- -- na 5.5E+02 -- -- na 5.5E+02 5.5E+02
Dieldrin C 0 2.4E-01 5.6E-02 na 5.4E-04 1.7E+00 1.1E+00 na 1.4E-02 6.0E-02 1.4E-02 na 5.4E-05 4.2E-01 2.7E-01 na 1.4E-03 4.2E-01 2.7E-01 na 1.4E-03 1.4E-03
Diethyl Phthalate 0 -- -- na 4.4E+04 -- -- na 1.1E+06 -- -- na 4.4E+03 -- -- na 1.1E+05 -- -- na 1.1E+05 1.1E+05
2,4-Dimethylphenol 0 -- -- na 8.5E+02 -- -- na 2.2E+04 -- -- na 8.5E+01 -- -- na 2.2E+03 -- -- na 2.2E+03 2.2E+03
Dimethyl Phthalate 0 -- -- na 1.1E+06 -- -- na 2.9E+07 -- -- na 1.1E+05 -- -- na 2.9E+06 -- -- na 2.9E+06 2.9E+06
Di-n-Butyl Phthalate 0 -- -- na 4.5E+03 -- -- na 1.2E+05 -- -- na 4.5E+02 -- -- na 1.2E+04 -- -- na 1.2E+04 1.2E+04
2,4 Dinitrophenol 0 -- -- na 5.3E+03 -- -- na 1.4E+05 -- -- na 5.3E+02 -- -- na 1.4E+04 -- -- na 1.4E+04 1.4E+04
2-Methyl-4,6-Dinitrophenol 0 -- -- na 2.8E+02 -- -- na 7.3E+03 -- -- na 2.8E+01 -- -- na 7.3E+02 -- -- na 7.3E+02 7.3E+02
2,4-Dinitrotoluene C 0 -- -- na 3.4E+01 -- -- na 8.8E+02 -- -- na 3.4E+00 -- -- na 8.8E+01 -- -- na 8.8E+01 8.8E+01
Dioxin 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 0 -- -- na 5.1E-08 -- -- na 1.3E-06 -- -- na 5.1E-09 -- -- na 1.3E-07 -- -- na 1.3E-07 1.3E-07
1,2-DiphenylhydrazineC0 -- -- na 2.0E+00 -- -- na 5.2E+01 -- -- na 2.0E-01 -- -- na 5.2E+00 -- -- na 5.2E+00 5.2E+00
Alpha-Endosulfan 0 2.2E-01 5.6E-02 na 8.9E+01 1.5E+00 1.1E+00 na 2.3E+03 5.5E-02 1.4E-02 na 8.9E+00 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 na 2.3E+02 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 na 2.3E+02 1.5E-01
Beta-Endosulfan 0 2.2E-01 5.6E-02 na 8.9E+01 1.5E+00 1.1E+00 na 2.3E+03 5.5E-02 1.4E-02 na 8.9E+00 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 na 2.3E+02 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 na 2.3E+02 1.5E-01
Alpha + Beta Endosulfan 0 2.2E-01 5.6E-02 -- -- 1.5E+00 1.1E+00 -- -- 5.5E-02 1.4E-02 -- -- 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 -- -- 3.9E-01 2.7E-01 -- -- 1.5E-01
Endosulfan Sulfate 0 -- -- na 8.9E+01 -- -- na 2.3E+03 -- -- na 8.9E+00 -- -- na 2.3E+02 -- -- na 2.3E+02 2.3E+02
Endrin 0 8.6E-02 3.6E-02 na 6.0E-02 6.0E-01 7.0E-01 na 1.6E+00 2.2E-02 9.0E-03 na 6.0E-03 1.5E-01 1.8E-01 na 1.6E-01 1.5E-01 1.8E-01 na 1.6E-01 6.0E-02
Endrin Aldehyde 0 -- -- na 3.0E-01 -- -- na 7.8E+00 -- -- na 3.0E-02 -- -- na 7.8E-01 -- -- na 7.8E-01 7.8E-01
page 2 of 12 MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Freshwater WLAs 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
Parameter Background Method
(ug/l unless noted) Conc. Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Target Value
Most Limiting AllocationsWater Quality Criteria Wasteload Allocations Antidegradation Baseline Antidegradation Allocations
Ethylbenzene 0 -- -- na 2.1E+03 -- -- na 5.5E+04 -- -- na 2.1E+02 -- -- na 5.5E+03 -- -- na 5.5E+03 5.5E+03
Fluoranthene 0 -- -- na 1.4E+02 -- -- na 3.6E+03 -- -- na 1.4E+01 -- -- na 3.6E+02 -- -- na 3.6E+02 3.6E+02
Fluorene 0 -- -- na 5.3E+03 -- -- na 1.4E+05 -- -- na 5.3E+02 -- -- na 1.4E+04 -- -- na 1.4E+04 1.4E+04
Foaming Agents 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Guthion 0 -- 1.0E-02 na -- -- 2.0E-01 na -- -- 2.5E-03 na -- -- 4.9E-02 na -- -- 4.9E-02 na -- 4.9E-02
Heptachlor C 0 5.2E-01 3.8E-03 na 7.9E-04 3.6E+00 7.4E-02 na 2.1E-02 1.3E-01 9.5E-04 na 7.9E-05 9.1E-01 1.9E-02 na 2.1E-03 9.1E-01 1.9E-02 na 2.1E-03 2.1E-03
Heptachlor EpoxideC0 5.2E-01 3.8E-03 na 3.9E-04 3.6E+00 7.4E-02 na 1.0E-02 1.3E-01 9.5E-04 na 3.9E-05 9.1E-01 1.9E-02 na 1.0E-03 9.1E-01 1.9E-02 na 1.0E-03 1.0E-03
HexachlorobenzeneC0 -- -- na 2.9E-03 -- -- na 7.5E-02 -- -- na 2.9E-04 -- -- na 7.5E-03 -- -- na 7.5E-03 7.5E-03
HexachlorobutadieneC0 -- -- na 1.8E+02 -- -- na 4.7E+03 -- -- na 1.8E+01 -- -- na 4.7E+02 -- -- na 4.7E+02 4.7E+02
Hexachlorocyclohexane
Alpha-BHCC0 -- -- na 4.9E-02 -- -- na 1.3E+00 -- -- na 4.9E-03 -- -- na 1.3E-01 -- -- na 1.3E-01 1.3E-01
Hexachlorocyclohexane
Beta-BHCC0 -- -- na 1.7E-01 -- -- na 4.4E+00 -- -- na 1.7E-02 -- -- na 4.4E-01 -- -- na 4.4E-01 4.4E-01
Hexachlorocyclohexane
Gamma-BHCC (Lindane) 0 9.5E-01 na na 1.8E+00 6.7E+00 -- na 4.7E+01 2.4E-01 -- na 1.8E-01 1.7E+00 -- na 4.7E+00 1.7E+00 -- na 4.7E+00 6.7E-01
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 0 -- -- na 1.1E+03 -- -- na 2.9E+04 -- -- na 1.1E+02 -- -- na 2.9E+03 -- -- na 2.9E+03 2.9E+03
HexachloroethaneC0 -- -- na 3.3E+01 -- -- na 8.6E+02 -- -- na 3.3E+00 -- -- na 8.6E+01 -- -- na 8.6E+01 8.6E+01
Hydrogen Sulfide 0 -- 2.0E+00 na -- -- 3.9E+01 na -- -- 5.0E-01 na -- -- 9.8E+00 na -- -- 9.8E+00 na -- 9.8E+00
Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene C 0 -- -- na 1.8E-01 -- -- na 4.7E+00 -- -- na 1.8E-02 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 4.7E-01 4.7E-01
Iron 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
IsophoroneC0 -- -- na 9.6E+03 -- -- na 2.5E+05 -- -- na 9.6E+02 -- -- na 2.5E+04 -- -- na 2.5E+04 2.5E+04
Kepone 0 -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- 0.0E+00
Lead 0 4.1E+01 3.5E+00 na -- 2.9E+02 6.8E+01 na -- 1.0E+01 8.7E-01 na -- 7.2E+01 1.7E+01 na -- 7.2E+01 1.7E+01 na -- 1.0E+01
Malathion 0 -- 1.0E-01 na -- -- 2.0E+00 na -- -- 2.5E-02 na -- -- 4.9E-01 na -- -- 4.9E-01 na -- 4.9E-01
Mercury 0 1.4E+00 7.7E-01 - - - - 9.8E+00 1.5E+01 - - - - 3.5E-01 1.9E-01 - - -- 2.5E+00 3.8E+00 - - -- 2.5E+00 3.8E+00 - - - - 9.8E-01
Methyl Bromide 0 -- -- na 1.5E+03 -- -- na 3.9E+04 -- -- na 1.5E+02 -- -- na 3.9E+03 -- -- na 3.9E+03 3.9E+03
Methylene Chloride C 0 -- -- na 5.9E+03 -- -- na 1.5E+05 -- -- na 5.9E+02 -- -- na 1.5E+04 -- -- na 1.5E+04 1.5E+04
Methoxychlor 0 -- 3.0E-02 na -- -- 5.9E-01 na -- -- 7.5E-03 na -- -- 1.5E-01 na -- -- 1.5E-01 na -- 8.8E-02
Mirex 0 -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- -- 0.0E+00 na -- 0.0E+00
Nickel 0.38 9.7E+01 8.6E+00 na 4.6E+03 6.8E+02 1.6E+02 na 1.2E+05 2.5E+01 2.4E+00 na 4.6E+02 1.7E+02 4.0E+01 na 1.2E+04 1.7E+02 4.0E+01 na 1.2E+04 2.4E+01
Nitrate (as N) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Nitrobenzene 0 -- -- na 6.9E+02 -- -- na 1.8E+04 -- -- na 6.9E+01 -- -- na 1.8E+03 -- -- na 1.8E+03 1.8E+03
N-NitrosodimethylamineC0 -- -- na 3.0E+01 -- -- na 7.8E+02 -- -- na 3.0E+00 -- -- na 7.8E+01 -- -- na 7.8E+01 7.8E+01
N-NitrosodiphenylamineC0 -- -- na 6.0E+01 -- -- na 1.6E+03 -- -- na 6.0E+00 -- -- na 1.6E+02 -- -- na 1.6E+02 1.6E+02
N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamineC0 -- -- na 5.1E+00 -- -- na 1.3E+02 -- -- na 5.1E-01 -- -- na 1.3E+01 -- -- na 1.3E+01 1.3E+01
Nonylphenol 0 2.8E+01 6.6E+00 -- -- 2.0E+02 1.3E+02 na -- 7.0E+00 1.7E+00 -- -- 4.9E+01 3.2E+01 -- -- 4.9E+01 3.2E+01 na -- 1.9E+01
Parathion 0 6.5E-02 1.3E-02 na -- 4.6E-01 2.5E-01 na -- 1.6E-02 3.3E-03 na -- 1.1E-01 6.3E-02 na -- 1.1E-01 6.3E-02 na -- 3.8E-02
PCB TotalC 0 -- 1.4E-02 na 6.4E-04 -- 2.7E-01 na 1.7E-02 -- 3.5E-03 na 6.4E-05 -- 6.8E-02 na 1.7E-03 -- 6.8E-02 na 1.7E-03 1.7E-03
Pentachlorophenol C 0 3.7E+00 2.8E+00 na 3.0E+01 2.6E+01 5.4E+01 na 7.8E+02 9.3E-01 6.9E-01 na 3.0E+00 6.5E+00 1.3E+01 na 7.8E+01 6.5E+00 1.3E+01 na 7.8E+01 2.6E+00
Phenol 0 -- -- na 8.6E+05 -- -- na 2.2E+07 -- -- na 8.6E+04 -- -- na 2.2E+06 -- -- na 2.2E+06 2.2E+06
Pyrene 0 -- -- na 4.0E+03 -- -- na 1.0E+05 -- -- na 4.0E+02 -- -- na 1.0E+04 -- -- na 1.0E+04 1.0E+04
Radionuclides 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- Gross Alpha Activity
(pCi/L) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00 Beta and Photon Activity
(mrem/yr) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Radium 226 + 228 (pCi/L) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Uranium (ug/l) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
page 3 of 12 MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Freshwater WLAs 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
Parameter Background Method
(ug/l unless noted) Conc. Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Acute Chronic HH (PWS) HH Target Value
Most Limiting AllocationsWater Quality Criteria Wasteload Allocations Antidegradation Baseline Antidegradation Allocations
Selenium, Total Recoverable 0 2.0E+01 5.0E+00 na 4.2E+03 1.4E+02 9.8E+01 na 1.1E+05 5.0E+00 1.3E+00 na 4.2E+02 3.5E+01 2.4E+01 na 1.1E+04 3.5E+01 2.4E+01 na 1.1E+04 1.4E+01
Silver 0 9.6E-01 -- na -- 6.7E+00 -- na -- 2.4E-01 -- na -- 1.7E+00 -- na -- 1.7E+00 -- na -- 6.7E-01
Sulfate 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
1,1,2,2-TetrachloroethaneC0 -- -- na 4.0E+01 -- -- na 1.0E+03 -- -- na 4.0E+00 -- -- na 1.0E+02 -- -- na 1.0E+02 1.0E+02
TetrachloroethyleneC0 -- -- na 3.3E+01 -- -- na 8.6E+02 -- -- na 3.3E+00 -- -- na 8.6E+01 -- -- na 8.6E+01 8.6E+01
Thallium 0 -- -- na 4.7E-01 -- -- na 1.2E+01 -- -- na 4.7E-02 -- -- na 1.2E+00 -- -- na 1.2E+00 1.2E+00
Toluene 0 -- -- na 6.0E+03 -- -- na 1.6E+05 -- -- na 6.0E+02 -- -- na 1.6E+04 -- -- na 1.6E+04 1.6E+04
Total dissolved solids 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Toxaphene C 0 7.3E-01 2.0E-04 na 2.8E-03 5.1E+00 3.9E-03 na 7.3E-02 1.8E-01 5.0E-05 na 2.8E-04 1.3E+00 9.8E-04 na 7.3E-03 1.3E+00 9.8E-04 na 7.3E-03 5.9E-04
Tributyltin 0 4.6E-01 7.2E-02 na -- 3.2E+00 1.4E+00 na -- 1.2E-01 1.8E-02 na -- 8.1E-01 3.5E-01 na -- 8.1E-01 3.5E-01 na -- 2.1E-01
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0 -- -- na 7.0E+01 -- -- na 1.8E+03 -- -- na 7.0E+00 -- -- na 1.8E+02 -- -- na 1.8E+02 1.8E+02
1,1,2-TrichloroethaneC0 -- -- na 1.6E+02 -- -- na 4.2E+03 -- -- na 1.6E+01 -- -- na 4.2E+02 -- -- na 4.2E+02 4.2E+02
Trichloroethylene C 0 -- -- na 3.0E+02 -- -- na 7.8E+03 -- -- na 3.0E+01 -- -- na 7.8E+02 -- -- na 7.8E+02 7.8E+02
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol C 0 -- -- na 2.4E+01 -- -- na 6.2E+02 -- -- na 2.4E+00 -- -- na 6.2E+01 -- -- na 6.2E+01 6.2E+01
2-(2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy)
propionic acid (Silvex) 0 -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- -- -- na -- 0.0E+00
Vinyl ChlorideC0 -- -- na 2.4E+01 -- -- na 6.2E+02 -- -- na 2.4E+00 -- -- na 6.2E+01 -- -- na 6.2E+01 6.2E+01
Zinc 2.55 6.2E+01 5.0E+01 na 2.6E+04 4.2E+02 9.3E+02 na 6.8E+05 1.7E+01 1.4E+01 na 2.6E+03 1.1E+02 2.3E+02 na 6.8E+04 1.1E+02 2.3E+02 na 6.8E+04 4.3E+01
Notes:
1. All concentrations expressed as micrograms/liter (ug/l), unless noted otherwise
2. Discharge flow is highest monthly average or Form 2C maximum for Industries and design flow for Municipals
3. Metals measured as Dissolved, unless specified otherwise
4. "C" indicates a carcinogenic parameter
5. Regular WLAs are mass balances (minus background concentration) using the % of stream flow entered above under Mixing Information.
Antidegradation WLAs are based upon a complete mix.
6. Antideg. Baseline = (0.25(WQC - background conc.) + background conc.) for acute and chronic
= (0.1(WQC - background conc.) + background conc.) for human health
7. WLAs established at the following stream flows: 1Q10 for Acute, 30Q10 for Chronic Ammonia, 7Q10 for Other Chronic, 30Q5 for Non-carcinogens and
Harmonic Mean for Carcinogens. To apply mixing ratios from a model set the stream flow equal to (mixing ratio - 1), effluent flow equal to 1 and 100% mix.
page 4 of 12 MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Freshwater WLAs 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
1.000 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.447 90th Percentile Temp. (deg C) 22.942 (7.204 - pH) -0.243 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.412 (pH - 7.204) 0.243 MIN 1.656
Dry Season Wet Season Dry Season Wet Season MAX 22.9421Q10 6.000 6.000 7.000 7.000 Trout Present Criterion (mg N/L) 14.357 (7.688 - pH) 0.2767Q10 18.500 N/A 19.500 N/A Trout Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 (pH - 7.688) -0.27630Q10 25.000 25.000 26.000 26.000 Trout Present? n30Q5 25.000 N/A 26.000 N/A Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 Early LS Present Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725Harm. Mean 25.000 N/A 26.000 N/A Early LS Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725Annual Avg. 0.000 N/A 1.000 N/A Early Life Stages Present? y
Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725
Dry Season Wet Season1Q10 90th% Temp. Mix (deg C) 23.600 21.88630Q10 90th% Temp. Mix (deg C) 22.942 22.481 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.447 90th Percentile Temp. (deg C) 22.4811Q10 90th% pH Mix (SU) 7.447 7.447 (7.204 - pH) -0.243 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.41230Q10 90th% pH Mix (SU) 7.412 7.412 (pH - 7.204) 0.243 MIN 1.7061Q10 10th% pH Mix (SU) 6.150 N/A MAX 22.4817Q10 10th% pH Mix (SU) 6.117 N/A Trout Present Criterion (mg N/L) 14.357 (7.688 - pH) 0.276
Trout Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 (pH - 7.688) -0.276Calculated Formula Inputs Trout Present? n
1Q10 Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 47.4 47.4 Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 Early LS Present Criterion (mg N/L) 2.8077Q10 Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 36.3 36.3 Early LS Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 2.807
Early Life Stages Present? y Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 2.807
MGD DISCHARGE FLOW - COMPLETE STREAM MIX
1.000 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.447 90th Percentile Temp. (deg C) 22.942 (7.204 - pH) -0.243 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.412 (pH - 7.204) 0.243 MIN 1.656
Dry Season Wet Season Dry Season Wet Season MAX 22.9421Q10 6.000 6.000 7.000 7.000 Trout Present Criterion (mg N/L) 14.357 (7.688 - pH) 0.2767Q10 18.500 N/A 19.500 N/A Trout Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 (pH - 7.688) -0.27630Q10 25.000 25.000 26.000 26.000 Trout Present? n30Q5 25.000 N/A 26.000 N/A Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 Early LS Present Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725Harm. Mean 25.000 N/A 26.000 N/A Early LS Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725Annual Avg. 0.000 N/A 1.000 N/A Early Life Stages Present? y
Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 2.725
Dry Season Wet Season1Q10 90th% Temp. Mix (deg C) 23.600 21.88630Q10 90th% Temp. Mix (deg C) 22.942 22.481 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.447 90th Percentile Temp. (deg C) 22.4811Q10 90th% pH Mix (SU) 7.447 7.447 (7.204 - pH) -0.243 90th Percentile pH (SU) 7.41230Q10 90th% pH Mix (SU) 7.412 7.412 (pH - 7.204) 0.243 MIN 1.7061Q10 10th% pH Mix (SU) 6.150 N/A MAX 22.4817Q10 10th% pH Mix (SU) 6.117 N/A Trout Present Criterion (mg N/L) 14.357 (7.688 - pH) 0.276
Trout Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 (pH - 7.688) -0.276Calculated Formula Inputs Trout Present? n
1Q10 Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) = 47.429 47.429 Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 21.499 Early LS Present Criterion (mg N/L) 2.8077Q10 Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) = 36.256 36.256 Early LS Absent Criterion (mg N/L) 2.807
Early Life Stages Present? y Effective Criterion (mg N/L) 2.807
Ammonia - Wet Season - Acute Ammonia - Wet Season - Chronic
Stream/Discharge Mix Values
Allocated to Mix (MGD) Stream + Discharge (MGD)
1.000 MGD DISCHARGE FLOW - STREAM MIX PER "Mix.exe"
Ammonia - Dry Season - Acute Ammonia - Dry Season - ChronicDischarge Flow Used for WQS-WLA Calculations (MGD):
Stream Flows Total Mix Flows
100% Stream Flows
Ammonia - Wet Season - Chronic
Allocated to Mix (MGD) Stream + Discharge (MGD)
Stream/Discharge Mix Values
Ammonia - Wet Season - Acute
Total Mix Flows
1.000
Ammonia - Dry Season - Acute Ammonia - Dry Season - ChronicDischarge Flow Used for WQS-WLA Calculations (MGD):
MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Freshwater Ammonia 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
Acute Chronic
Hardness 100.00 100.00 NH3-N NH3-N
Hardness used 100.00 100.00 36.09 42.45
90th % pH 7.00 7.00 3.41 3.41 6.49
10th % pH 0.78 1.16 3.41
90th % Temp (Annual) 23.17 23.07
90th % Temp (Winter) 10.00 10.00
Salinity 14.08 15.72 NH3-N NH3-N
` 36.09 113.04
5.91 5.91 17.16
7.91
Saltwater Ammonia Criteria - Annual
Freshwater Ammonia Criteria - Winter
Duration
Acute
Chronic
Duration
Acute
Saltwater Ammon. Criteria - Winter
Chronic - ELS present
Chronic - ELS absent
Stream/Discharge Mix Values Ammonia Criteria Determinations
Chronic - ELS absent
Freshwater Ammonia Criteria - Annual
Chronic - ELS present
Saltwater Ammon. Criteria - Annual
DurationDuration
Acute
Chronic
Acute
MSTRANTI (Version 3b) (9-5-17 DRAFT) Ronile - Saltwater Ammonia 7/25/2018 - 11:22 AM
FACILITY INFORMATION
FACILITY: Ronile, Inc.
LOCATION: Rocky Mount, Franklin County
VPDES PERMIT NUMBER: VA0076015 Expiration Date: 09/20/18
SIC CODE/DESCRIPTION: 2269/Finishers of textiles, not elsewhere classified
OUTFALLS/FLOWS (MGD): Outfall 001 = 0.158 MGD (Maximum 30-day flow). Wastewater sources are process wastewater from the dyeing and finishing of nylon, polyester and wool yarn and storm water from a fuel oil tank berm. Treatment includes an aerated lagoon, polymer addition, flocculation, sedimentation, and a plate and frame filter press.
RECEIVING STREAM/CRITICAL FLOWS/IWC:
Receiving Stream: Pigg River River Basin: Roanoke River Subbasin: Roanoke River Section: 6a Class: III Special Standards: None
1Q10 = 6.1 MGD IWCa = 2.56% (Dilution calculated by CORMIX = 7) 7Q10 = 6.8 MGD IWCc = 2.29%( Dilution calculated by CORMIX = 19.5) 30Q5 = 12 MGD Harmonic mean = 27 MGD
FACILITY PROCESS AND TREATMENT:
This facility has six main dye lines at this plant and one smaller scale sample dye line. The yarn is creeled and run through a heat setter to bulk-up the yarn and set the width. From the heat setter, yarn is run through the dye machines, which contain a mixture of dye and dye setting chemicals. A steam box sets the dye and finish that was present on the yarn before dyeing is removed by washing, which gives the rinse water a milky appearance. A two-stage counter-current washing method is used. Supposedly, no dye is removed in this step. To dry the yarn, it passes through padded rollers and a dryer. Once dried, the yarn is temporarily stored in J-boxes at the end of the production line, prior to being routed to the mill, where it is spun onto cones and prepared for shipping. Batch dyeing of small cotton blend rugs, that were believed to be the major source of zinc and DDT, was discontinued in April 2013. Small lots of scoured wool dyeing began in August 2013. According to the facility, large amounts of wool were dyed in 2001-2003. The company does not have plans to dye wool in the foreseeable future.
If dyed, finished wool may be treated with Evercide (25% strength of permetherin) and would be applied at 0.014% of dry wool yarn weight, yielding an overall application of permetherin of 1/4th that (or 0.0035%). Ronile has designed and built a special Evercide applicator that would
Ronile, Inc., WET Test Data, Page 2
hold 20 gallons of Evercide and that would only be used when running this wool product. This new applicator does not need to be cleaned out since it is only being used for this wool product. As an added precaution Ronile built a catch basin underneath this new applicator which is sufficient in size to catch the entire contents of the applicator should it leak or spill. The system is engineered so that no permetherin will go to the waste water treatment lagoon/plant.
The wastewater treatment plant receives flow from the production area, as well as on-site storm water and roof drainage from the Therminol boiler room. In 2001, the wastewater treatment plant was upgraded to provide more effective treatment. The 5 MG aerated lagoon was partitioned into two separate areas, 4 MG for aeration and 1 MG for activated sludge. Wastewater flows from the plant into the head of the lagoon, which serves as an equalization (EQ) basin. A baffle curtain in the lagoon separates the EQ basin from the aerator. Daily jar tests are conducted to determine the polymer dose to achieve of a color of 250-350 ADMI.
The supplier of polymers has changed every few years as the facility tries to comply with permit limits for WET and metals. Zetag polymers were used prior to about 2012. Polymer dose varies with the temperature of the aeration basin, which mirrors the seasonal temperature. Floc is settled in a small settling basin.
2012 – 3/17 Southeastern Laboratories polymers used, one failed acute test 3/2015, one failed chronic test 2014 SELfloc 1638 replaced Zetag 7197 a dose of 150 to 350 ppm SELfloc 1840B replaced Zetag 8680, a dry polymer, used at a dose of 3 to 7 ppm Polymer, Zetag 7867, and a debulking agent, perlite, are added to the sludge prior to pressing in a plate and frame filter press. SELfloc 2012, containing sodium dimethyl dithiocarbamate, for zinc precipitation, was discontinued in fall 2012, after its use was shown to result in failed WET tests.
3/17 – 10/17 Bond Water Technologies polymers used, failed chronic tests August and September 2017 BondClear 1330-S, CAS# 25988-97-0, cationic copolymer of epichlorhydrin and dimethyl amine, dose 94.8 ppm, LC50 D magna 10 ppm, LD50 Zebra fish 10 ppm, stopped use 10/10/2017, and resumed use on 4/25/2018 BondClear 400S, CAS# 12042-91-0, 50% Al chlorohydrate, dose 80 ppm, EC50 FHM 804 ppm, EC50 C dubia 33 ppm BondClear 2431-90S, CAS# 124-04-9, cationic polymer, <2% adipic acid, dose 0.4 ppm, LC50 fish 10-100 ppm, EC50 (daphnia) 10-100 ppm. Use stopped on 6/19/18.
Ronile, Inc., WET Test Data, Page 3
10/17 - 4/18 One failed acute test 3/2018.BondClear 1330-B started on 10/10/17 and stopped use on 4/25/18. EC50 D magna >10 ppm (w/10% humic acid) CAS# 42751-79-1 25-50% 1,2-Ethanediamine polymer with (chloromethyl)oxirane and N-methylmethanamine. BondClear 400S, CAS# 12042-91-0, 50% Al chlorohydrate, dose 80 ppm, EC50 FHM 804 ppm, EC50 C dubia 33 ppm BondClear 2431-90S, CAS# 124-04-9, cationic polymer, <2% adipic acid, dose 0.4 ppm, LC50 fish 10-100 ppm, EC50 (daphnia) 10-100 ppm. Use stopped on 6/19/18.
4/18- 6/18 no WET samples BondClear 1330-S, CAS# 25988-97-0, cationic copolymer of epichlorhydrin and dimethyl amine, dose 94.8 ppm, LC50 D magna 10 ppm, LD50 Zebra fish 10 ppm, stopped use 10/10/2017, and resumed use on 4/25/2018 BondClear 400S, CAS# 12042-91-0, 50% Al chlorohydrate, dose 80 ppm, EC50 FHM 804 ppm, EC50 C dubia 33 ppm BondClear 2431-90S, CAS# 124-04-9, cationic polymer, <2% adipic acid, dose 0.4 ppm, LC50 fish 10-100 ppm, EC50 (daphnia) 10-100 ppm. Use stopped on 6/19/18.
6/19/18 6/25 acute sample BondClear 1330-S, CAS# 25988-97-0, cationic copolymer of epichlorhydrin and dimethyl amine, dose 94.8 ppm, LC50 D magna 10 ppm, LD50 Zebra fish 10 ppm, stopped use 10/10/2017, and resumed use on 4/25/2018 BondClear 400S, CAS# 12042-91-0, 50% Al chlorohydrate, dose 80 ppm, EC50 FHM 804 ppm, EC50 C dubia 33 ppm BondClear 3211-50S (anionic polymer emulsion) started on 6/19/18, replaced 2431-90S, no CAS# listed on SDS, 48H EC50 >100 ppm (daphnia), 96h LC50 >100 ppm (fish)
Sludge from the settling basin is either returned to the aerated lagoon as activated sludge or is pumped to the sludge holding tank. Perlite dust, sodium potassium aluminum silicate, is used a filter aid agent in sludge pressing. Sludge cake is disposed of at the local Franklin County Sanitary Landfill. Supernatant decant from the sludge holding tank and filtrate from the plate filter press are returned to the aeration basin.
Outfall 001 is a six-inch single pipe diffuser that has slots cut into the pipe, with a blind flange at the end. Ports of two different sizes. The Pigg River, at the outfall location, has a sandy bottom, is approximately 35-feet in width. It has a riffle and pool character, with a long pool at the discharge area. The next riffle area is about 0.25 miles downstream. Although the discharge enters the river near the end of a sharp bend, the next half a mile of the river has a slight curve. CORMIX estimates dilution of 7:1 for acute mixing (1Q10) and 19.5:1 for chronic mixing (7Q10).
A WET limit of 3.1 TUa was effective on September 30, 2004, and on September 21, 2012, was reduced to 2.1 TUa. An effluent limit for zinc also became effective in 2012. Zinc was present in
Ronile, Inc., WET Test Data, Page 4
the latex backing of cotton rugs that were batch dyed at the facility. A low pH in part of the dyeing process may have leached zinc from the backing. Cotton rug dyeing was stopped around the end of April 2013. Wool has not been dyed at the facility since August 2015.
Effluent from outfall 001 exhibited chronic toxicity from 2001-3, which was the period of time that large amounts of wool was dyed. If there are major changes in the type or level of production, such as if wool dyeing becomes a bigger portion of the total production at the facility, then the effluent should be recharacterized through quarterly testing should begin. Since a timetable of type of material dyed when each chronic WET test was performed, has not been documented, the type and level of production preceding each WET test should be documented and submitted with each WET report. At current flow rates, the WWTP has about 50 days of storage. Based on 5 day work weeks would be about 10 weeks.
WET limit calculation using GM 00-2012, Appendix D:
From CORMIX Acute dilution = 7; chronic dilution = 19.5
WLAs Acute = 0.3 x 7 = 2.1 TUa; Chronic 1 x 19.5 = 19.5 TUc
Acute to chronic ratio (ACR) from data since 12/2013: C. dubia 7/2014 chronic test, ACR = 100/2.5 = 40 C. dubia 9/2017 chronic test, ACR = 47/0.6 = 74.5 Using the geometric mean of 2 actual ACRs = 53.9, WLAa,c = 2.1 x 53.9 = 113.2
WET limit from WETLIM10 spreadsheet is an NOAEC = 100%
WET Requirements:
Outfall 001 – NOAEC WET limit of 100% using C. dubia. The report submittal should include an estimate of type and amount of material dyed during the preceding quarter.
Prior to adding a new process, new fabric or dye or WWTP polymers, acute and chronic WETs test on effluent from jar test of proposed material must pass WET tests using both species.
Ronile, Inc., WET Test Data, Page 5
Table 1 Acute Test Results, Ronile, Inc.; VA0076015, Outfall 001 WET = 2.1 TUa final on 9/21/2012
Test Date Test Organism
LC50
(%) % Survival
in 100% effluent Testing Laboratory
10/29/13 Q1 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
02/12/14 Q2 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
05/14/14 Q3 C. dubia 52 (1.9 TUa) 30 CBI
7/23/149,10 Q4 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
12/12/14 Q5 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
03/19/1511 Q6 C. dubia 25 (4.0 TUa) zero CBI
06/11/15 Q7 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
09/23/15 Q8 C. dubia > 100 90 CBI
10/22/15 Q9 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
01/07/16 Q10 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
06/09/16 Q11 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
09/14/16 Q12 C. dubia > 100 55 CBI
10/27/16 Q13 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
01/06/17 Q14 C. dubia 81 (1.2 TUa) 20 CBI
New polymer use begins
06/08/17 Q15 C. dubia > 100 100 CBI
08/23/17 Q16 C. dubia 71 (1.4 TUa) 10 CBI
12/14/17 Q17 C. dubia 70 (1.4 TUa) 0 CBI
3/23/18 Q18 C. dubia 30 (3.3 TUa) 0 in 100% & 69% CBI
Polymer changed to 3211-50S (6/19/18).
6/29/18 Q19 C. dubia 61.6 (1.6 TUa) 0 CBI
Ronile, Inc., WET Test Data, Page 6
Table 2. Chronic Toxicity Test Results for Ronile, Inc.; VA0076015, Outfall 001 – IWC = 2.1%, Endpoint is an NOEC of 5 % (TUc = 20)
Test Date
Test Organism
%NOEC Surv’l
%NOEC Rpro-Grth
TUc % Survival in 100% Eff
48h LC50 Lab
12/13 Q1 C. dubia 100 10 10 100 >100 CBI 12/13 Q1 P. promelas 100 100 1 90 >100 CBI 02/14 Q2 C. dubia 100 5 20 90 >100 CBI 02/14 Q2 P. promelas 100 100 1 100 >100 CBI
05/14 Q3 C. dubia 20 10 10 0 >100 CBI 05/14 Q3 P. promelas 20 20 5 30 >100 CBI
07/149,10 Q4 C. dubiaACR =
20 100/2.5
2.5 = 40
40 Ln =
3.68887
0 100 CBI
07/14 Q4 P. promelas 20 20 5 72.5 >100 CBI
09/22/15 A1 C. dubia 100 20 5 100 >100 CBI 09/22/15 A1 P. promelas 100 20 5 92.5 >100 CBI
09/22/16 A2 C. dubia 20 20 5 40 >100 CBI 09/22/16 A2 P. promelas 20 20 5 82.5 >100 CBI
08/22/17 A3 C. dubia 20 <2.5 >40 10 >100 CBI 08/22/17 A3 P. promelas 100 20 5 80 >100 CBI 09/26/17 A3 C. dubia
ACR =20 44.7/.6
0.6 =74.5
166 Ln =
5.11199
0 44.7 CBI
1. The TRE plan involved the replacement of the Space Dye Injection Machines with the #7 Dye Line Machines. The Space Dye Injection Machines were removed from the facility in February 2002. Due to the long retention time in the WWTP lagoon (~40 days), the August 2002 test may not be representative of effluent after these machines were removed.
2. Latex-backed [containing zinc] rug dyeing started between February and May of 2005. The 4/2005 passing chronic test may or may not be representative of this operation.
3. Per Ronile fewer latex-backed rugs being dyed in 2010. 4. Time proportional samples, flows varied by 12.5%. 5. Flow composite sampler functional September 13, 2011. 6. Polymer Selfloc XP2012, containing sodium dimethyl dithiocarbamate, for precipitation of zinc, begun August
2012, was believed to be cause of toxicity in September 2012 samples. XP2012 use in the WWTP was stopped around November 2012. Latex-backed rug dyeing was discontinued in April 2013.
7. Wool dyeing, in small quantities, began mid 8/2013, making up about 2.2% of wastewater flow. 8. Feb 2014, wool dyed < 0.01% of total 9. Started flocculation at higher pH in June 2014, after zinc exceeded limit in May 2014. 10. Caustic change to MgOH planned as a result of 7/14 high TUc, per 8/5/14 letter. 11. WET failed 3/2018. Lagoon froze. Sample was brown, which is not typical of effluent (usually pink). COD, ppm;
Feb=339, Mar= 295. Ave over past18 months = 146, 4 highest mos. 12/2014 – 3/2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
Spreadsheet for determination of WET test endpoints or WET limits
Excel 97 Acute Endpoint/Permit Limit Use as LC50 in Special Condition, as TUa on DMR
Revision Date: 12/13/13
File: WETLIM10.xls ACUTE 100% = NOAEC LC50 = NA % Use as NA TUa
(MIX.EXE required also)
ACUTE WLAa 2.1 Note: Inform the permittee that if the mean of the data exceedsthis TUa: 1.0 a limit may result using STATS.EXE
Chronic Endpoint/Permit Limit Use as NOEC in Special Condition, as TUc on DMR
CHRONIC 28.52020634 TUc NOEC = 4 % Use as 25.00 TUc
BOTH* 113.2582774 TUc NOEC = 1 % Use as 100.00 TUc
Enter data in the cells with blue type: AML 28.52020634 TUc NOEC = 4 % Use as 25.00 TUc
Entry Date: 07/25/18 ACUTE WLAa,c 113.258275 Note: Inform the permittee that if the mean
Facility Name: RONILE INC CHRONIC WLAc 19.5 of the data exceeds this TUc: 11.7202268
VPDES Number: VA0076015 * Both means acute expressed as chronic a limit may result using STATS.EXE
Outfall Number: 001
% Flow to be used from MIX.EXE Diffuser /modeling study?
Plant Flow: 0.158 MGD Enter Y/N y
Acute 1Q10: 6.1 MGD 100 % Acute 7 :1
Chronic 7Q10: 6.8 MGD 100 % Chronic 19.5 :1
Are data available to calculate CV? (Y/N) N (Minimum of 10 data points, same species, needed) Go to Page 2
Are data available to calculate ACR? (Y/N) y (NOEC<LC50, do not use greater/less than data) Go to Page 3
IWCa 14.28571429 % Plant flow/plant flow + 1Q10 NOTE: If the IWCa is >33%, specify the
IWCc 5.128205128 % Plant flow/plant flow + 7Q10 NOAEC = 100% test/endpoint for use
Dilution, acute 7 100/IWCa
Dilution, chronic 19.5 100/IWCc
WLAa 2.1 Instream criterion (0.3 TUa) X's Dilution, acute
WLAc 19.5 Instream criterion (1.0 TUc) X's Dilution, chronic
WLAa,c 113.2582746 ACR X's WLAa - converts acute WLA to chronic units
ACR -acute/chronic ratio 53.93251173 LC50/NOEC (Default is 10 - if data are available, use tables Page 3)
CV-Coefficient of variation 0.6 Default of 0.6 - if data are available, use tables Page 2)
Constants eA 0.4109447 Default = 0.41
eB 0.6010373 Default = 0.60
eC 2.4334175 Default = 2.43
eD 2.4334175 Default = 2.43 (1 samp) No. of samples = 1 **The Maximum Daily Limit is calculated from the lowest
LTA, X's eC. The LTAa,c and MDL using it are driven by the ACR.
LTAa,c 46.54288769 WLAa,c X's eA
LTAc 11.72022735 WLAc X's eB Rounded NOEC's %
MDL** with LTAa,c 113.2582774 TUc NOEC = 0.882938 (Protects from acute/chronic toxicity) NOEC = 1 %
MDL** with LTAc 28.52020634 TUc NOEC = 3.506286 (Protects from chronic toxicity) NOEC = 4 %
AML with lowest LTA 28.52020634 TUc NOEC = 3.506286 Lowest LTA X's eD NOEC = 4
IF ONLY ACUTE ENDPOINT/LIMIT IS NEEDED, CONVERT MDL FROM TUc to TUa
Rounded LC50's %
MDL with LTAa,c 2.100000051 TUa LC50 = 47.619046 % LC50 = 48 %
MDL with LTAc 0.52881287 TUa LC50 = 189.102810 % Use NOAEC=100% LC50 = NA
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
Page 2 - Follow the directions to develop a site specific CV (coefficient of variation)
IF YOU HAVE AT LEAST 10 DATA POINTS THAT Vertebrate Invertebrate
ARE QUANTIFIABLE (NOT "<" OR ">") IC25 Data IC25 Data
FOR A SPECIES, ENTER THE DATA IN EITHER or or
COLUMN "G" (VERTEBRATE) OR COLUMN LC50 Data LN of data LC50 Data LN of data
"J" (INVERTEBRATE). THE 'CV' WILL BE *********** ************
PICKED UP FOR THE CALCULATIONS 1 1
BELOW. THE DEFAULT VALUES FOR eA, 2 2
eB, AND eC WILL CHANGE IF THE 'CV' IS 3 3
ANYTHING OTHER THAN 0.6. 4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
Coefficient of Variation for effluent tests 8 8
9 9
CV = 0.6 (Default 0.6) 10 10
11 11
ð2 = 0.3074847 12 12
ð = 0.554513029 13 13
14 14
Using the log variance to develop eA 15 15
(P. 100, step 2a of TSD) 16 16
Z = 1.881 (97% probability stat from table 17 17
A = -0.88929666 18 18
eA = 0.410944686 19 19
20 20
Using the log variance to develop eB
(P. 100, step 2b of TSD) St Dev NEED DATA NEED DATA St Dev NEED DATANEED DATA
ð42 = 0.086177696 Mean 0 0 Mean 0 0
ð4 = 0.293560379 Variance 0 0.000000 Variance 0 0.000000
B = -0.50909823 CV 0 CV 0
eB = 0.601037335
Using the log variance to develop eC
(P. 100, step 4a of TSD)
ð2 = 0.3074847
ð = 0.554513029
C = 0.889296658
eC = 2.433417525
Using the log variance to develop eD
(P. 100, step 4b of TSD)
n = 1 This number will most likely stay as "1", for 1 sample/month.
ðn2 = 0.3074847
ðn = 0.554513029
D = 0.889296658
eD = 2.433417525
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
Page 3 - Follow directions to develop a site specific ACR (Acute to Chronic Ratio)
To determine Acute/Chronic Ratio (ACR), insert usable data below. Usable data is defined as valid paired test results,
acute and chronic, tested at the same temperature, same species. The chronic NOEC must be less than the acute
LC50, since the ACR divides the LC50 by the NOEC. LC50's >100% should not be used.
Table 1. ACR using Vertebrate data Convert LC50's and NOEC's to Chronic TU's
for use in WLA.EXE
Table 3. ACR used: 53.932512
Set # LC50 NOEC Test ACR Logarithm Geomean Antilog ACR to Use
1 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA Enter LC50 TUc Enter NOEC TUc
2 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 1 100 53.932512 NO DATA
3 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 2 100 53.932512 NO DATA
4 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 3 52 103.716369 NO DATA
5 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 4 100 53.932512 NO DATA
6 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 5 100 53.932512 NO DATA
7 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 6 25 215.730047 NO DATA
8 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 7 100 53.932512 NO DATA
9 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 8 100 53.932512 NO DATA
10 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA 9 100 53.932512 NO DATA
10 100 53.932512 NO DATAACR for vertebrate data: 0 11 100 53.932512 NO DATA
12 100 53.932512 NO DATA
Table 1. Result: Vertebrate ACR 0 13 100 53.932512 NO DATA
Table 2. Result: Invertebrate ACR 53.93251173 14 81 66.583348 NO DATA
Lowest ACR 53.93251173 15 100 53.932512 NO DATA
16 71 75.961284 NO DATA
Table 2. ACR using Invertebrate data 17 70 77.046445 NO DATA
18 30 179.775039 NO DATA
19 61.6 87.552779 NO DATA
Set # LC50 NOEC Test ACR Logarithm Geomean Antilog ACR to Use 20 NO DATA NO DATA
1 100 2.5 40 3.6888795 3.688879454 40 0
2 44.7 0.6 74.5 4.3107991 3.987733482 53.9325117 53.93251173 If WLA.EXE determines that an acute limit is needed, you need to
3 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA convert the TUc answer you get to TUa and then an LC50,
4 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA enter it here: NO DATA %LC50
5 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA NO DATA TUa6 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA
7 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA
8 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA
9 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA
10 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NO DATA
ACR for vertebrate data: 53.93251173
DILUTION SERIES TO RECOMMEND
Table 4. Monitoring Limit
% Effluent TUc % Effluent TUcDilution series based on data mean 8.5 11.72023Dilution series to use for limit 4 25Dilution factor to recommend: 0.2921003 0.2
Dilution series to recommend: 100.0 1.00 100.0 1.0029.2 3.42 20.0 5.008.5 11.72 4.0 25.002.5 40.12 0.8 125.000.73 137.36 0.2 625.00
Extra dilutions if needed 0.21 470.26 0.0 3125.000.06 1609.93 0.0 15625.00
APPENDIX D
Documentation from previous permits
stat zinc 2013
7/9/2013 4:10:57 PM
Facility = Ronile incChemical = zincChronic averaging period = 4WLAa = 141WLAc = 544Q.L. = 10# samples/mo. = 1# samples/wk. = 1
Summary of Statistics:
# observations = 7Expected Value = 182.857Variance = 12037.2C.V. = 0.697th percentile daily values = 444.96797th percentile 4 day average = 304.23597th percentile 30 day average= 220.535# < Q.L. = 0Model used = BPJ Assumptions, type 2 data
A limit is needed based on Acute ToxicityMaximum Daily Limit = 141Average Weekly limit = 141Average Monthly LImit = 141
The data are:
110230210150160240180
Page 1
APPENDIX E
TMDL documentation
B. Non-TMDL waste load allocations.
Development
27. Falling River Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Appomattox, Campbell
L32R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
28. Childrey Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Halifax L30R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
29. Catawba Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Halifax L36R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
30. Turnip Creek Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Charlotte L36R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
31. Hunting Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Halifax L38R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
32. Cub Creek Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Appomattox, Charlotte
L37R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
33. Black Walnut Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Halifax L38R tPCB 0.8 MG/YR
34. Roanoke Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Charlotte L39R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
35. Difficult Creek
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Halifax L41R tPCB 0.0 MG/YR
36. Roanoke River
Roanoke River PCB TMDL Development
Appomattox, Campbell, Charlotte, Pittsylvania, Halifax
L19R tPCB 1,931.8 MG/YR
Water Body
Permit No. Facility Name Outfall
No. Receiving
Stream River Mile
Parameter Description
WLA Units WLA
VAW-L04R
VA0072389 Oak Ridge Mobile Home Park
001 Falling Creek UT
0.32 BOD5 0.85 KG/D
VAW-L04R
VA0025020
Roanoke City Regional Water Pollution Control Plant
001 Roanoke River
201.81
BOD5 1173 KG/D
TKN, APR-SEP
318 KG/D
TKN, OCT-MAR
636 KG/D
001 Roanoke River
201.81
BOD5 1173 KG/D
TKN, APR-SEP
416 KG/D
TKN, OCT-MAR
832 KG/D
Page 3 of 6LIS > Administrative Code > 9VAC25-720-80
5/6/2013http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+reg+9VAC25-720-80
001 Roanoke River
201.81
BOD5 1173 KG/D
TKN, APR-SEP
469 KG/D
TKN, OCT-MAR
939 KG/D
VAW-L04R
VA0077895 Roanoke Moose Lodge
001 Mason Creek
7.79
BOD5, JUN-
SEP 0.24 KG/D
TKN, JUN-SEP
0.09 KG/D
VAW-L07R
VA0020842
Bedford County School Board- Stewartsville Elementary School
001 Nat Branch, UT
0.59 BOD5 0.5 KG/D
VAW-L14R
VA0029254
Ferrum Water and Sewage Auth. - Ferrum Sewage Treatment Plant
001 Storey Creek
9.78 BOD5 14.2 KG/D
VAW-L14R
VA0085952
Rocky Mount Town Sewage Treatment Plant
001 Pigg River 52 BOD5 133 KG/D
VAW-L14R
VA0076015 Ronile Incorporated
001 Pigg River 57.24 BOD5 14.8 KG/D
VAW-L21R
VA0063738
Bedford County School Board - Staunton River High School
001 Shoulder Run, UT
0.95 BOD5 1.8 KG/D
VAW-L21R
VA0020869
Bedford County School Board - Thaxton Elementary School
001 Wolf Creek, UT
0.35 BOD5 0.31 KG/D
VAW-L22R
VA0023515
Blue Ridge Regional Jail Auth. - Moneta Adult Detention Facility STP
001 Mattox Creek, UT
3.76 BOD5 1.66 KG/D
VAW-L25R
VA0020851
Bedford County School Board - Otter River
001 Big Otter River, UT
1.15 BOD5 0.4 KG/D
Page 4 of 6LIS > Administrative Code > 9VAC25-720-80
5/6/2013http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+reg+9VAC25-720-80
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 2
8. Permit Characterization:
(X) Private ( ) Possible Interstate Effect
( ) Federal ( ) Interim Limits in Other Document
( ) State
( ) POTW
9. Facility Description:
Ronile was founded in 1984 as a yarn spinning company. In 1987, Ronile moved to Rocky Mount
to acquire the warp dyeing operations of Martin Processing and in 1988, acquired Colorstrand
Corp., a supplier of knit-deknit ("KDK") space-dyed yarns. The Company provides a variety of
products, including space-dyed nylon, polyester, acrylic, and other fibers to the carpet, rug, home
furnishing, craft, and automotive markets.
This facility has eight main dye lines at this plant and one smaller scale sample dye line. Yarn to
be dyed is either supplied by the customer or obtained by Ronile. The yarn is creeled and run
through a heat setter to bulk-up the yarn and set the width. From the heat setter, the yarn is run
through the dye machines, which contain a mixture of dye and dye setting chemicals. Yarn is then
run through a steam box to set the dye and washed to ensure the yarn is clean. Finishing chemicals
that were present on the yarn are removed in this step, giving the rinse water a milky color. A two-
stage counter-current washing method is used. Dye is not removed in this step. To dry the yarn, it
is run through padded rollers and a dryer. Once dried, the yarn is temporarily stored in J-boxes at
the end of the production line, prior to being routed to the mill, where it is spun onto cones and
prepared for shipping.
Four different types of dyes are used at this facility: basic dyes, acid dyes, dispersed dyes, and
premet (premetallicized) dyes. Production at the facility has gradually changed, in the past 4 to 5
years, since 2014-5, from the use of acid dyes, which could be recycled, to acrylic or basic dyes,
which cannot be recycled. Wool is not being dyed currently and is not being considered. There has
also been an increase in the amount of chemicals used in dyeing, including the use of sodium
hydrosulfite for equipment cleaning.
Wastewater from the production area, compressor room, on-site storm water and roof drainage
from the boiler room, are discharged to the wastewater treatment plant. The lagoon is unlined and
about 150 feet from the Pigg River. A baffle curtain partitions it into two separate areas.
Wastewater flows from the plant into the head of the lagoon, which serves as an equalization (EQ)
basin. The curtain in the lagoon separates the EQ basin from the aerator. From the lagoon,
wastewater is pumped into a rapid mix tank, where polymer is added. Daily jar tests are conducted
to determine the polymer dose to achieve an effluent color of 250-350 ADMI. For the period of
about 2014-18 Zetag 7197 was used at a dose of 150 to 350 ppm. A second polymer is added to
the flocculators to coagulate pin floc. Zetag 8680, a dry polymer, is used at a dose of 3 to 7 ppm.
Currently, three polymers manufactured by Bond Water Technologies are used in the WWTP.
Bondclear 1330s, a cationic polymer, Bondpoly 2431-90S, a cationic polymer, and Bondclear
400S, an aluminum chlorohydrate formulation, is used to precipitate metals. Polymer dose varies
with the temperature of the aeration basin, which mirrors seasonal temperature change.
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 3
Wastewater then flows into the settling basin and the overflow is discharged into the Pigg River.
Sludge from the settling basin is either returned to the aerated lagoon as activated sludge or is
pumped to the sludge holding tank. Polymer, Southeastern 1051, and a debulking agent, perlite,
are added to the sludge prior to pressing in a plate and frame filter press. Sludge cake is disposed
of at the Franklin County Sanitary Landfill. Supernatant from the sludge holding tank and filtrate
from the plate filter press are returned to the EQ basin. A flow diagram for Outfall 001 is included
in Appendix A.
Outfall 001 is an eight-inch single pipe diffuser with 5 slots cut into the pipe and a blind flange at
the end. A drawing of the diffuser is in Appendix A. At the outfall location, the Pigg River has a
silty bottom, is approximately 40 feet in width (35 feet during drought conditions) and meanders
slightly. Discharge from the outfall is relatively clear, but usually is a pink color.
Areas around the building are asphalt. Finished product loading and chemical unloading areas are
located around the outside of the production building. A trough drain will catch spills and storm
water from pipe stems in the chemical tanker unloading area and route to the wastewater treatment
plant. Leaks or spills at the tanker would run to the employee parking lot.
Former Outfall 002, a storm water outfall from the diked tank storage area, was routed to outfall
001 prior to 2013. The diked tank storage area has a clay liner and a 12-inch crushed stone
protective layer and the tank that once held fuel oil has been emptied. Storm water within this area
flows to a grated inlet, which is located in the sump housing the sewer pump.
Outfall 003 is a storm water outfall that receives runoff from the area of the loading ramp and
paved surfaces in the area hold used equipment and empty drums. Storm water is discharged
through a concrete channel over a bank into the grassy sewer easement. This area is in a flood
plain. Since stormwater flows overland to the Pigg River, periodic erosion control is needed.
Storm water from the northeast portion of the site flows to outfall 004. This is the area around the
WWTP and the adjacent vegetated hillside. Storm water from the main plant access road and the
northwestern part of the site flows to outfall 005.
Nonpoint source stormwater from the boiler area and roof drains also flow onto the fairly flat
sewer easement. BMPs are needed at outfall 009 to prevent sawdust used as boiler fuel from being
carried into the River. Runoff from roof drains, yard drains and concrete channels flow to the
easement. Several of these have created small eroded areas. These areas have not been previously
monitored as storm water outfalls. The easement is not mowed frequently, but storm water has
created point sources to the River.
The permit was modified on May 27, 1999, due to the addition of Space Dye Injection Machines
(new cotton and polyester lines) with a subsequent increase in production from 22.4 kkg (1998 2C
data) to 27 kkg. Due to toxicity issues, a TRE plan was submitted on February 4, 2002. The TRE
plan involved the replacement of the Space Dye Injection Machines with the #7 Dye Line
Machines. Subsequently, the Space Dye Injection Machines were removed from the facility in
February 2002. In 2008, the permit application listed 22.8 kkg/d of fiber dyeing, and 4.6 kkg/d of
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 4
rug dyeing. Production dropped to 16.3 kkg/d in the 2013 permit application. Batch dying of latex
backed rugs was believed to have been linked to zinc in the treatment plant effluent. On April 29,
2013, Ronile reported that this rug dying had been discontinued. The permit application currently
lists 10.2 kkg/d of fiber dyeing as the actual level of production.
A closure plan for the small lagoon, between the WWTP and the River, was approved August 22,
1994. The facility has stated that this lagoon has never been used and may be used as in case of an
emergency. Rainwater that enters this lagoon is pumped to the WWTP for treatment. The
groundwater assessment for the land applications sites was deemed acceptable by letter dated
November 28, 1994. Land application activity ceased prior to 1988, when the VPDES permit was
issued.
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 5
Table I
NUMBER AND DESCRIPTION OF OUTFALLS
Outfall
Source of Discharge
(List operations
contributing flow)
Treatment
Description
Unit by Unit
Flow, MGD
Long
term
ave
Max 30
day ave
001 Dyeing and
finishing of fibers
Stormwater from tank
farm (0.7 acres)
Roof from therminol
boiler
4 MG equalization
1 MG activated
sludge, coagulation
flocculation
sedimentation basin
J filter press
multimedia filtration
(optional)
drying beds
solids landfilling
0.106 0.158
003 storm water (0.6
acres)
tracked sawdust
None
004 storm water WWTP
area
None
005 storm water
west side of plant,
main entrance road
loading bays
Pine needles in ditch
006 roof drains warehouse Grass in easement
007 roof drains
manufacturing area
Grass in easement
008 roof drains
manufacturing area
and southern half of
dye house
Grass in easement
009 Sawdust unloading
area
Rip rap and grass in
easement
010 roof drains biomass
steam boiler and N
half of dye house
Grass in easement
011 Yard drain adjacent to
dye house
Grass in easement
012 Yard drain adjacent to
Eastern part of
warehouse
Grass in easement
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 6
013 SW E of warehouse Grass in easement
014 SW yard drain E of
warehouse
Grass in easement
015 Equipment stored in
employee parking lot
Grass in easement
10. Sewage Sludge Use or Disposal: NA
11. Discharge(s) Location Description:
Name of Topo: Rocky Mount, Virginia (See Appendix A)
Topo Number: 049B
Outfall 001: Latitude = 36.98723 degrees; Longitude = -79.88306 degrees
Outfall 003: Latitude = 36.98484 degrees; Longitude = -79.88160 degrees
Outfall 004: Latitude = 36.98732 degrees; Longitude = -79.88310 degrees
Outfall 005: Latitude = 36.98373 degrees; Longitude = -79.88511 degrees
12. Material Storage:
Therminol 55 heat transfer fluid, C14-30-alkylaromatic derivatives - 12,500 gal overflow tank
No. 2 fuel oil - 40,000 gallons (4 tanks), berm drains to WWTP
Used oil - 30,000 gallons (3 tanks)
Sawdust, several cu. ft. in unloading area, biomass fuel, storm water drains to SW outfall 009
Salt, 100 - 40 pound bags
Perlite dust, Crystal Flow, in 40 lb. bags, in shed near WWTP
13. Ambient Water Quality Information:
This facility is within the Pigg River and Staunton River Bacteria TMDLs, but it does not have
a WLA because it does not discharge the pollutant of concern.
Roanoke logperch, Percina rex, a Federal and State endangered species, may be present in the
Pigg River in the vicinity of the discharge. The VA Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
(DGIF) database shows it to be present within 2 miles of the discharge. Based on the
description of the logperch habitat on the DGIF web site, the cloudy pool at the outfall would
not be desirable habitat for the logperch. The database also identifies two State Threatened
species within the same area, although their existence does not appear to be confirmed. These
are the Orangefin Madtom, Noturus gilberti and the Atlantic pigtoe, Fusonaia masoni.
The regression curves developed for the previous permit, used to calculate site specific critical
flows at the facility, are still valid. Updated gage flow statistics have not been published by the
USGS since 2011 when a small increase in flow at the outfall was projected. The flow
frequency determination memo is included in Appendix A.
In August 2016, partial demolition of the power dam in Rocky Mount began. Work was
completed by the end of 2016. This is not expected to affect the low flow frequency at Ronile.
Another dam on the Pigg River located next to Rocky Mount’s Veterans’ Memorial Park, just
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 7
upstream of Ronile, was removed in 2013.
DEQ Monitoring Stations on the Pigg River are shown below. The station name indicates the
location, in river miles, on the River.
Downstream of Ronile:
The Town of Altavista surface water intake is over 20 miles downstream from the Pigg River
Staunton River confluence.
4APGG052.01 Pigg River Above Rocky Mt. New STP, no data
4APGG052.73 Pigg River Rt. 713 Bridge Upstream of Rocky Mt STP, 6 data sets/yr from
2008-2013, ninetieth percentile pH and T is 7.8 SU and 23C
River mile 52.80, Power dam (partially demolished in 2016)
4APGG055.72 Pigg River Route 220 Bypass Below Rocky Mount, 8 data sets in 2008,
River mile 57.24 Rōnile discharge
Upstream of Ronile:
4APGG057.84 Pigg River Below Bus. Rt. 220 Bridge Above Ronile data from 2002-06-25 to
2002-06-25. One River sample was collected for dissolved metals on
6/25/2002. Dissolved aluminum, arsenic, barium, calcium, chromium, copper,
iron, manganese, magnesium, nickel and zinc were present
4APGG057.85 Pigg River Rt 220 Bridge At Rocky Mount Above STP data from 1970-03-16
to 2008-12-16. Most of the data from this station is from the 1970s and no data
was collected after 2008. Using only data after 2007, the ninetieth percentile
temperature is 22.7C and pH is 7.4 SU.
River mile old dam at Veterans Memorial Park (demolished in 2013) is adjacent to Bus. Rt 220.
4APGG068.49 Pigg River Rt. 756 Bridge data from 2001-07-26 to 2005-06-28, 67 sets of
data, 13 data points for hardness that average 30 mg/L.
4APGG073.68 Pigg River Upstream of ford on Sloan Road (Rt. 602) no data
4APGG074.87 Pigg River Sta #18 Rt. 908 Ford (Franklin County) data from 1992-08-18 to
2007-11-13
4APGG076.93 Pigg River near Five Mile Mountain Road (Rt. 748). Aquatic Life Use is
impaired for 4.4 miles downstream to the confluence of Turners Creek.
14. Antidegradation Review & Comments:
Tier: 1. 2 X 3
The State Water Control Board’s Water Quality Standards regulations include an
Antidegradation Policy (9 VAC 25-260-30). All state surface waters are provided one of three
levels of antidegradation protection. For Tier I, existing use protection, existing uses of the
water body and the water quality to protect these uses must be maintained. Tier II water bodies
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 8
have water quality that is better than the water quality standards. Significant lowering of the
water quality of Tier II waters is not allowed without an evaluation of the economic and social
impacts. Tier III water bodies are exceptional waters and are so designated by regulatory
amendment. The Antidegradation Policy prohibits new or expanded discharges into exceptional
waters.
The antidegradation review begins with Tier determination. This segment of the Pigg River
(VAW-L14) is listed on Part I of the 303(d) list for non-attainment of fecal coliform. This does
impact aquatic life and the wastewater plant does not receive sanitary wastewater. There are no
aquatic life TMDLs, and as such, the receiving stream is determined to be Tier II.
For purposes of aquatic life protection, “significant degradation (or significant lowering of the
water quality)” means that no more than 25% of the difference between the acute and chronic
aquatic criteria values and the existing quality (unused assimilative capacity) may be allocated.
For purposes of human health protection, “significant degradation” means that no more than
10% of the difference between the human health criteria and the existing quality (unused
assimilative capacity) may be allocated. The significant degradation baseline (antidegradation
baseline) for aquatic life protection is calculated for each pollutant as follows:
0.25 (WQS - existing quality) + existing quality = Antidegradation baseline
The antidegradation baseline for human health protection is calculated for each pollutant as
follows:
0.10 (WQS - existing quality) + existing quality = Antidegradation baseline
The “antidegradation baselines” become the new water quality criteria in Tier II waters and
effluent limits for future expansions or new facilities must be written to maintain the
antidegradation baselines for each pollutant. Antidegradation baselines (baselines) were
developed with the May 27, 1999, modification to address the facility expansion of new cotton
and polyester dye lines. Antidegradation baselines calculated previously are included in
Appendix D.
New wasteload allocations are calculated using 90th percentile pH and temperature for the
receiving stream from Station 4APGG057.85, which is located on the Pigg River at the Route
220 bridge in Rocky Mount. This station did not have total hardness data. The upstream
average hardness value of 30 mg/L was from Station 4APGG068.49. When setting permit
limits, the 1999 baselines and new WLAs are compared. The lower is used to establish permit
limits.
As the facility is not proposing any increase in the loading of any pollutants over historical
levels, permit limits are in compliance with antidegradation requirements set forth in the Water
Quality Standards Regulation, §9 VAC 25-260-30. The antidegradation review and associated
effluent limits analyses were conducted as described in Guidance Memorandum 00-2011, dated
August 24, 2000, and comply with the antidegradation policy contained in Virginia’s Water
Quality Standards. In accordance with Guidance Memorandum 00-2011 and 9 VAC 25-260-30,
the Agency’s antidegradation requirements have been complied with, and no further review is
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 9
necessary.
15. Site Visit: Date: July 2, 2018 Performed by: Lewis Pillis
(See Appendix A for a copy of the site visit memorandum.)
16. Effluent Screening & Limitation Development:
The permit application lists the maximum temperature as 29C in the summer and 17C in the
winter. A review of DMR data from the past three years reveals a pH range of 6.44 to 8.58,
with ninety percent of daily maximum pHs reported below 7.95 SU. Effluent hardness, from
whole effluent toxicity testing, has averaged 152 mg/L. Effluent hardness appears to have
increased after 2008.
There have been changes in the treatment process over the years, so only data since the
beginning of 2017, is used in the WQS WLA spreadsheet.
The following have been reported in detectable amounts in the discharge from outfall 001:
Chemical Analyte concentration, ug/L
Aluminum < 100
Bromide 670
Chlorides 5,800
Chromium total 100, 36 on application
Cobalt 146
Color, ADMI, max 290 max, 179 LT ave.
Hardness, average from WET tests 152,000
Magnesium 30,100
Manganese 112
Molybdenum 30
Nitrate-nitrite 1200
Nitrogen, Total Organic 7000
Phenol 62
Phosphorus, total 3100
Sulfate 114,000
Zinc 110 max, 60.4 LT ave.
Dyes and chemicals with potential affects, based on MSDS sheets:
MSDSs for most dyes do not report chemical formula, ingredients or ecological information.
Doracryl yellow X8GLS 200, basic dye, reported acute toxicity to fish 0.1 – 1 mg/l
Doracryl golden yellow XGFLS 200%, acute toxicity to fish 10 – 100 mg/l
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 10
(biodegradable)
Doracryl Bluegreen X5GS 200, acute toxicity to fish 1 – 10 mg/l
Doracryl Brilliant Red XBG, acute toxicity to fish 10 – 100 mg/l
Doracryl Red XGRLS 200%, toxicity to fish LC50 >10 mg/l (biodegradable)
Niccaresist SB-4, anionic condensation polymer containing 0.07% phenol and 0.37%
methanol, no ecological information reported
DEQ Guidance Memorandum 00-2011 was used in developing all water quality based limits
pursuant to water quality standards (9 VAC 25-260-5 et seq). Appendix B contains data from
STORET Station 4APGG057.85, water quality standards monitoring data, TMP data,
temperature and pH data, and data from submitted Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs).
Recent data were used to calculate the 90th percentile values for pH and temperature.
Since a diffuser is present at Outfall 001, the CORMIX model was run to determine dilution to
be used when developing wasteload allocations. The 1993 CORMIX run was at a River flow of
3.88 MGD or 1Q10, lower than the current 1Q10. The 2008 fact sheet assumed complete mix
with the receiving stream at 7Q10 and a dilution of 10.4:1under acute conditions. The diffuser
was broken off during a flood in 2006. The replacement diffuser has a different port
arrangement. In 1993, dilution, under chronic conditions was performed at 1Q10 and not at
7Q10. Since several inputs had changed, the CORMIX model was rerun in 2013, at 7Q10 flow,
to determine the chronic dilution. Endpoints detailed in the Technical Support Document for
Water Quality-based Toxics Control, EPA/505/2-90-001, March 1991, [TSD] should be used to
determine dilutions.
Decision criteria from page 72 of the TSD was used to determine dilution in the zone of initial
dilution [ZID], or acute mixing zone. The TSD states that the ZID should not exceed the most
restrictive of the following:
1. Horizontal distance of the ZID must be less than 5x local water depth. The local water
depth given as 4 feet x 5 = 20 feet (6.1 meters).
2. In any direction, the ZID must be less than 10% of the regulatory mixing zone [RMZ].
Pursuant to 9 VAC 25-260-20 the RMZ, cannot exceed a) half the river width, b) one third
of the cross sectional area or c) extend downstream more than five times the river width.
a). width = 10% x (35 feet / 2) = 1.75 ft. (0.53 m)
b). area is not addressed by the TSD, so it is not applicable in this situation
c). length = 10% x (35 ft x 5) = 17.5 ft. (5.3 m)
3. In any direction, the ZID must be less than 50x the discharge length scale – The TSD
defines discharge length scale as the square root of the cross sectional area of the outlet.
Ports are two different sizes:
There are two 1” x 6” rectangular ports and three 2” x 9” rectangular ports
50 x discharge length scale of 1 outlet:
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 11
1” x 6” = 122.5 inches = 10.2 ft. (3.1m)
2” x 9” = 212.1 inches = 17.7 ft (5.4m)
total discharge length scale = 2 x 3.1m + 3 x 5.4m = 22.4m [or 22.4/5 = 4.5m for one port]
Under chronic conditions, the critical factor is the maximum width of the plume which should
not exceed half of the River’s width. Dilution was evaluated when the plume “half-width” is
equal to 35/2 or 17.5 feet (5.33 meters).
Ronile personnel measured diffuser and river depth on April 25, 2008, to enable a CORMIX
model. Starting about 15 feet from the River bank, there are 5 slots in a 6 foot span of the 8”
pipe. Gage flows on this date were obtained and the corresponding flow of the Pigg River at the
outfall was determined to be 75.61 cfs [48.9 MGD]. According to the USGS web site this is
about average flow for April. The permittee should measure the river dimensions during low
flow in August or September. CORMIX modeling should be repeated if River dimensions are
different from that used in the model. Using critical flows and dimensions, and at a discharge
flow of 0.15 MGD, CORMIX estimated dilution ratios of 7:1 for acute mixing (1Q10) and 19.5:1
for chronic mixing (7Q10). These dilution ratios were used to determine new wasteload
allocations (WLAs). A copy of the CORMIX model results is included in Appendix D.
OUTFALL 001
Federal Effluent Guidelines (40 CFR Part 410 Subpart G, Stock and Yarn Finishing
Subcategory) apply to this facility. See Table II for a summary of outfall limitations
BOD5
The monthly average BOD5 limit (14.8 kg/d) in the current permit was established in the Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the Roanoke River Basin. This is now included as a
non-TMDL Waste Load Allocation in 9VAC25-720-80 B. Copies of relative pages from the
planning document are included in Appendix E.
Federal Effluent Guideline (FEG) for BOD5 also apply to the process water from Outfall 001.
Based on the level of production listed in the permit application (10.2 kkg/day), the monthly
average BOD5 limit would be 19.4 kg/d (See Appendix D for applicable guidelines and
calculations). The more stringent BOD5 limit (14.8 kg/d) allocated by 9VAC25-720-80 B the
will be maintained for the monthly average limit in this reissued permit to protect water quality
in this segment of the Pigg River. The maximum limit is an operational limit, which, according
to Federal and State policy is two times the monthly average limit. By applying this
methodology, the appropriate maximum limit will become 29.6 kg/d.
COD, TSS, Sulfide, Phenols, Total Chromium, and pH
Federal Effluent Guidelines for COD, TSS, Sulfide, Phenols, Total Chromium, and pH apply to
the process wastewater for Outfall 001. The NSPS limits were applied to this facility when the
permit was initially issued in 1988. As previously stated, the applicable guidelines and
calculations are included in Appendix C. Based on the average daily production provided in the
Form 2C application (10.2 kkg/day), the monthly average and daily maximum limits, as
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 12
calculated, are listed in Table II.
The current permit contains BPJ/BPT-based TSS limitations based on the requirements for
other discharges and the assertion that the limitations are reasonably achievable with the
treatment system. The current loading limitations were derived from secondary treatment
guidelines, 30 mg/L monthly average and 45 mg/L daily maximum and a design flow of 0.3
MGD. These are more stringent than the FEGs and are retained in the permit.
For a Class III receiving stream, the Water Quality Standards, 9VAC25-260-50, limitations for
pH are equivalent to the Federal Effluent Guidelines.
OIL & GREASE
The effluent limit in the current permit is a maximum daily limit of 15 mg/L and is based on
BPJ. The maximum daily limit in the reissued permit will remain 15 mg/L.
COLOR
The color limit in the current permit (499 ADMI) was based on color limits in similar permits.
A desirable maximum instream color has been established previously as 24 ADMI, assuming
that the background color value is zero. With this reissuance, the color limit will remain the
same.
COPPER
The current permit contains a total recoverable copper limitation of 22 g/l (monthly average
and maximum) which was the result of a previous reasonable potential analysis. This limit was
added in 1999, when the permit was modified for a facility change to add cotton and polyester
dyeing. The antidegradation baseline for copper was used to establish this limit. Documentation
from the 1999 permit modification is found in Appendix D.
ZINC
Zinc was believed to leach from the latex backing on rugs that are batch dyed. Latex-backed
cotton rug dyeing started between February and May of 2005, and was discontinued around the
end of April 2013. Zinc remains to be present in the 5 million gallon WWTP.
Background data from a clean metals sample collected 6/25/2002, showed 2.55 ug/L of
dissolved zinc in the water column upstream of Ronile. Antidegradation baselines calculated in
1999 are 140.97 ug/L, acute, and 544 ug/L, chronic. The current permit limit of 140 ug/L was
based on these antidegradation baselines. Current WLAs, based on upstream and effluent
hardness, are 1100 ug/L, acute, and 2300 ug/L, chronic. Output from the STATS program is
included in Appendix C.
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 13
Other Toxics:
4, 4’-DDT
It is believed that DDT was on overseas cotton fibers that were previously dyed by Ronile and
DDT was previously detected in effluent from the WWTP. Latex backed rugs were the only
cotton fibers that were dyed at the facility and this has been discontinued. Wool is the only
other natural fiber used at the facility and wool is not expected to be exposed to DDT. In the
2017 permit application, DDT, DDE and DDD were reported as less than 0.05 ug/L.
Since antidegradation baselines were determined in 1999, the lower of this baseline and new
WLAs are input into the agency STATS program together with analytical results. A limit
would be needed for aquatic life WLAs if the STATS program shows that a reasonable
potential to exceed the WLA exists.
Phenol has an antidegradation WLA, for the protection of human health, of 2,200,000 ug/L.
Phenol was reported at 62 ug/L, as total phenols. DMR data has a maximum total phenols of
120 ug/L. Assuming that all total phenols is phenol, a phenol limit not a needed to protect the
WQS.
Chromium (Cr) has been reported only as total chromium, at a maximum of 100 ug/L; whereas
there are WQSs for hexavalent and trivalent chromium. In the past 36 months of sampling, only
4 samples contained Cr concentrations over 10 ug/L. Using actual data and the antidegradation
WLAs for trivalent and hexavalent Cr, a limit was not needed to protect the WQS.
Chloride was reported at a concentration of 5.8 mg/L. Since the lowest WLA is 1100 mg/L, this
is not high enough to trigger a permit limit. Chemicals that contained chloride were mainly
used in cotton rug dyeing, which was stopped in April 2013.
Cobalt is a component of dyestuffs used at the facility. There is not a Virginia WQS for cobalt
and EPA has not published a criteria. The concentration reported in the effluent (146 ug/L) is
higher than a tentative cobalt acute criteria of 120 ug/L, in a 2001 publication from Indiana, and
higher than that proposed in a 2004 publication from British Columbia, Canada of 110 μg/L.
Tentative chronic criteria in these publications was 19 and 4 ug/L respectively. This publication
states that cobalt is not thought to be a function of hardness. Assuming no cobalt in the River
upstream, if the diffuser dilutions of 7 and 18.5 are used with acute criteria of 110 ug/L and
chronic criteria of 4 ug/L respectively, the resulting acute and chronic WLAs would be 770 and
74, and antidegradation WLAs would be 190 and 20 ug/L. Stats predicts that a chronic
antidegradation based permit limit, of 29 ug/L, would be needed if these were actual criteria.
Since an actual criteria has not been established, a limit is not added to the permit, but this does
imply that there may be chronic affects from cobalt.
Permethrin, a moth pesticide, will be used on finished wool fibers in the facility. Procedures
have been established to make sure that cleaning water from rollers, baths and other equipment
that has contacted with permethrin are not disposed of in the WWTP.
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 14
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
In accordance with Agency guidance, WET data from the current permit term are used in the
WETLIM 10 spreadsheet, to re-evaluate the WET limit. The CORMIX dilution ratios are used,
with the default coefficient of variation. Three of eight chronic tests, using C. dubia, had a TUc
that was higher than the endpoint in the permit. A 48h LC50 was able to be calculated from two
of the chronic tests, and were used to develop a site specific Acute to Chronic ratio (ACR).
The spreadsheet calculates that an NOAEC of 100% is needed to protect the narrative WQS.
This is more stringent than the 2.1 TUa limit currently in the permit and will replace it.
Toxicity and specific polymers used has been sporadic. A preserved sample for metals testing
should be held and tested for metals (zinc, cobalt and aluminum) if a WET test fails. Prior to
adding a new process, new fabric or dye or WWTP polymers, acute and chronic WETs test on
effluent from jar test of proposed material must pass WET tests using both species.
Appendix C contains a compilation of the toxicity testing data and the WETLIM10 output.
OUTFALL 003
This outfall receives drainage from the rear parking lot area, which contains used equipment
and drums. Trucks delivering sawdust use this area for ingress and egress, so that sawdust
could be tracked into the area. Sector V of the VPDES General Permit (GP) covers textile
mills.
Concentrations of COD and nitrogen reported in the application are higher than the benchmarks
in General Permit Regulation. Grab sample concentrations were reported as 176 mg/L COD,
and 4.1 mg/L of total nitrogen. The GP benchmark for COD is 120 mg/L and for total nitrogen
the benchmark is 2.2 mg/L.
The facility Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan should be reevaluated to determine and
remove activities in this area that contribute to COD and total nitrogen. If activities cannot be
modified, then treatment should be provided to remove the pollutants. The quality of storm
water will be evaluated quarterly via visual examination and by other storm water special
conditions of the permit. Since the same controls, i.e. housekeeping, should reduce both COD
and TN, only COD will be routinely monitored to determine the effectiveness of the SWPPP.
OUTFALL 004
This outfall drains some of the WWTP roads and runoff from an adjacent hillside north of the
plant. There are no limitations on this outfall, but the areas draining to this outfall need to be
included in the facility Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
OUTFALL 005
This outfall receives stormwater runoff from the facility main entrance road and the south
western portion of the facility. There are no limitations on this outfall, but the areas draining to
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 15
this outfall need to be included in the facility Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.
OUTFALLS 006, 007, 008
These pipes discharge roof storm water runoff that is not believed to be areas of industrial
activity.
OUTFALLS 009 - 015
These pipes should be visually monitored as it leaves the plant area before entering the sewer
easement. Discharge of floating materials, such as sawdust, is prohibited. Measures should be
taken to prevent these discharges from forming a point source discharge from the easement
area.
REDUCED MONITORING
All permit applications received after May 4, 1998, are to be considered for reduction in the
frequency of effluent monitoring. Only facilities having exemplary operations that consistently
meet permit requirements should be considered for reduced monitoring. To qualify for
consideration, the facility should not have been issued any letter of noncompliance (LON),
notice of violation (NOV), or unsatisfactory laboratory determinations, or be under any
Consent Orders, Consent decrees, Executive Compliance Agreements, or related enforcement
documents during the past three years. This facility has received warning letters within the past
three years, listed below. As such, the facility does not meet the criteria discussed above and
therefore is not eligible for reduced monitoring.
Warning Letter W2018-05-W-1007, WET limit excursion, Jan – Mar Quarter 2018
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 16 Table II BASIS FOR LIMITATIONS
Table II BASIS FOR LIMITATIONS
( ) Interim Limitations OUTFALL 001 Effective Dates - From: Effective Date
(x) Final Limitations SIC CODE: 2269 To: Expiration Date
PARAMETER
Basis for
Limits
DISCHARGE LIMITS
MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Minimum
Maximum
Frequency
Sample
Type
Flow (MGD) NA NL NA NA NL Continuous TIRE
pH (Standard Units) 1, 2 NA NA 6.0 9.0 Continuous Recorded
pH excursion time, indiv (S.U.) 1 NA NA NA 60 minutes Continuous Recorded
pH excursion time, total (S.U.) 1 NA NA NA 446 minutes Continuous Recorded
BOD5 2 NL mg/L 14.8 kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 29.6 kg/d 1/week 24 HC
Total Suspended Solids 3 NL mg/L 34 kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 51 kg/d 1/week 24 HC
Chemical Oxygen Demand 1
NL mg/L 223 kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 345
kg/d 1/month 24 HC
Sulfide 1 NL mg/L 1.2 kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 2.4 kg/d 1/month Grab
Phenols 1 NL mg/L 0.61
kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 1.2 kg/d 1/month 1/8H
Total Chromium 1 NL mg/L 0.61
kg/d NA NA NL mg/L 1.2 kg/d 1/month 24 HC
Total Recoverable Copper 2 22 g/L NA NA 22 g/L 1/month 24 HC
Total Recoverable Zinc 2 140 g/L NA NA 140 g/L 1/month 24 HC
Oil & Grease 3 NA NA NA 15 mg/L 1/month Grab
Color 3 NA NA NA 499 ADMI 1/week 24 HC
Whole Effluent Toxicity interim
2 NA NA NA 2.1 TUa 1/quarter 24 HC
Whole Effluent Toxicity final 2 NA NA NA 26 TUc 1/quarter 24 HC
NA = Not Applicable; NL = No Limitations; monitoring only
1/8H = one sample taken every 8 hours over a 24-hour period. The samples may be composited in the lab with one result reported.
The basis for the limitations codes are:
1. Technology –based limits (40 CFR 410, Textile Mills Point Source Category; Subpart G, Stock and Yard Finishing Subcategory)
(40 CFR, Part 401.17 for pH excursion times)
2. Water Quality-based limits
3. Best Professional Judgment (BPJ)-based limits – see discussion in section 16, p 12
Ronile, Inc., VA0076015
Fact Sheet Page 17
TABLE IIb
(x) Final Limitations
() Interim Limitations
OUTFALL 003 STORMWATER MONITORING
Dates: From eff date
To exp date
SIC CODES 2269, 4961
BASIS FOR LIMITS EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly Sample
Parameter Average Minimum Maximum Frequency Type
Flow, precipitation event, MG 3 NA NA NL 1/ 6M Estimate
Chemical Oxygen Demand, COD mg/L 3 NA NA NL 1/ 6M Grab
Codes for “Basis for Limits” are:
1. Federal Effluent Guidelines, 40 CFR 423
2. Water Quality Standards
3. Best Professional Judgment, ISWGP 9VAC25-151. Benchmarks are COD = 120 mg/L, TN = 2.2 mg/L
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 18
17. Antibacksliding Statement:
All limits are at least as stringent as in the previous permit.
18. Compliance Schedules: A two year compliance schedule is added to meet the more restrictive
100% NOAEC limit, as Part I.B.
19. Special Conditions:
a. Quantification Levels and Compliance Reporting under Part I.A (Part I.C.1)
Rationale: In accordance with VPDES Permit Regulation, 9 VAC 25-31-190 J4 and 220 I,
DEQ is authorized to establish monitoring methods and procedures to compile and analyze data
on water quality, as per 40 CFR Part 130, Water Quality Planning and Management, Subpart
130.4. This condition is necessary when pollutants are monitored by the permittee and a
maximum level of quantification and/or specific analytical method is required in order to assess
compliance with a permit limit or to compare effluent quality with a numeric criterion. This
condition also establishes protocols for calculation of reported values.
b. Notification Levels (Special Condition I.C.2)
Rationale: Required by VPDES Permit Regulation, 9 VAC 25-31-200.A. for all
manufacturing, commercial, mining, and silvicultural discharges.
c. Materials Handling/Storage (Special Condition I.C.3)
Rationale: 9 VAC 25-31-50.A.1. prohibits the discharge of any wastes into the State waters
unless authorized by the permit. Code of Virginia §62.1-44.16 and §62.1-44.17 authorizes the
Board to regulate the discharge of industrial waste or other waste.
d. O&M Manual Requirement (Special Condition I.C.4)
Rationale: Required by Code of Virginia §62.1-44.16; VPDES Permit Regulation
9 VAC 25-31-190.E, and §40 CFR 122.41(e). These require proper operation and maintenance
of the permitted facility. Compliance with an approved O & M Manual ensures this. In
addition to the basic requirements, the following should be addressed in the manual:
Inspection and maintenance of the diffuser to make sure that all ports are open.
Increased COD monitoring on the WWTP in winter months as an operational check on
biological activity.
e. Licensed Operator Requirement (Special Condition I.C.5)
Rationale: Required by VPDES Permit Regulation 9 VAC 25-31-200.C and The Code of
Virginia §54.1-2300 et seq., Rules and Regulations for Waterworks and Wastewater Works
Operators (§18 VAC 160-20-10 et seq.), requires licensure of operators. The Wastewater
Works Operators Regulation would require a Class II operator, if the hydraulic design capacity
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 19
is over 0.1 MGD, since the facility uses a combination of biological and coagulation systems to
meet permit limits. Operator classifications are related to the hydraulic design capacity of the
treatment system. The Ronile WWTP has a stated hydraulic design capacity of 0.3 MGD;
however; the long term average flow reported to DEQ has been just over 0.1 MGD over the
past few years. Typical of textile wastewater, the organic load to the WWTP is low, so that
most of the pollutants are removed via a coagulation/filtration system. Due to this, the WWTP
is classified as a Class III wastewater works and a Class III operator is required.
f. Water Quality Reopener (Special Condition I.C.6)
Rationale: VPDES Permit Regulation, 9VAC25-31-220 D requires effluent limitations to be
established which will contribute to the attainment or maintenance of the water quality
standards. New effluent monitoring results may become available during the permit term.
g. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Reopener (Special Condition I.C.7)
Rationale: Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires that Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs) be developed for streams listed as impaired. This special condition is to allow the
permit to be reopened if necessary to bring it into compliance with any applicable TMDL
approved for the receiving stream. The re-opener recognizes that, according to Section
402(o)(1) of the Clean Water Act, limits and/or conditions may be either more or less stringent
than those contained in this permit. Specifically, they can be relaxed if they are the result of a
TMDL, basin plan, or other wasteload allocation prepared under section 303 of the Act.
i. pH Excursions (Special Condition I.C.8)
Rationale: For continuous discharges, excursion times can be allowed for continuous
monitoring of technology based pH limitations, pursuant to 40 CFR 401.17(b). Limitations for
pH is based on federal effluent guidelines to account for those times when continuous pH
monitoring equipment may malfunction.
j. Cooling Water and Boiler Additives (Special Condition I.C.9)
Rationale: Chemical additives may be toxic or otherwise violate the receiving stream water
quality standards. Upon notification, the Regional Office can determine if this activity will
warrant a modification to the permit.
k. Groundwater Monitoring Requirements (Special Condition I.C.10)
Rationale: A groundwater assessment plan for the active industrial wastewater treatment
(IWT) lagoon, was approved November 28, 1994. The permittee has been required to monitor
groundwater for the active lagoon at MWs 3, 4, and 5 on an annual basis during the month of
September or October since 1998. Static water level, pH, and sulfate shall be monitored at each
well during each sampling event.
Until 2012, data indicated that sulfate concentrations in monitoring wells 3 and 4 was
declining, but above the groundwater criteria. Well 5 is topographically upgradient of the IWT
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 20
lagoon and wells 3 and 4 are about at the same ground surface elevation. Well 3 is about 300
feet from the lagoon and well 4 is about 170 feet away.
A survey of the well elevations and the past few years of monitoring, shows that ground water
flow direction is almost perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the lagoon. It appears that
ground water from only the North and NW corners of the lagoon flows toward MW4. Sulfate
concentration in MW4 continues to be about 20 mg/L higher than the other wells, indicating
that leakage from the lagoon is impacting ground water.
Blasting for road construction, in 2012, at the nearby intersection of Orchard and Business 220
may have also temporarily affected ground water quality at Ronile. Annual monitoring will be
carried forward with this permit. The well heads should be surveyed and ground water
potentiometric contours developed with each sampling. Since wastewater is highly colored,
color should also be added as a monitored parameter. A graph of ground water data is included
in Appendix A.
l. Closure Plan (Part I.C.11) Rationale: This condition establishes the requirement to submit a closure plan for the
treatment works if the treatment facility is being replaced or is expected to close. This is
necessary to ensure treatment works are properly closed so that the risk of untreated waste
water discharge, spills, leaks and exposure to raw materials is eliminated and water quality
maintained. Section 62.1-44.21 requires every owner to furnish when requested plans,
specification, and other pertinent information as may be necessary to determine the effect of the
wastes from his discharge on the quality of state waters, or such other information as may be
necessary to accomplish the purpose of the State Water Control Law.
m. Whole Effluent Toxicity (Special Condition I.D.)
Rationale: VPDES Permit Regulation, 9 VAC 25-31-210 and 220 I, requires monitoring in the
permit to provide for and assure compliance with all applicable requirements of the State Water
Control Law and the Clean Water Act. Should there be significant changes in products or
chemicals used, the Agency may require the effluent to be recharacterized for chronic toxicity.
Please see Appendix C for the TMP justification memo.
n. Whole Effluent Toxicity Limitation (Special Condition I.E.)
Rationale: Required by 9 VAC 25-31-220 D 1 d. The Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) limit
for Outfall 001 has been revised using the results of testing from the current permit cycle. The
memo, included in Appendix C, provides the specific rationale. The chronic limit of 26 TUc is
more stringent than the WET limit of 2.1 TUa in the current permit.
o. Storm Water Management (Special Conditions I.F, G and H.)
Rationale: VPDES Permit Regulation, 9 VAC 25-31-10 defines discharges of storm water from
industrial activity in 9 industrial categories. 9 VAC 25-31-120 requires a permit for these
discharges. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan requirements of the permit are derived
from the VPDES general permit for discharges of storm water associated with industrial activity,
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 21
9 VAC 25-151-10 et seq. VPDES Permit Regulation, 9 VAC 25-31-220 K, requires use of best
management practices where applicable to control or abate the discharge of pollutants when
numeric effluent limits are infeasible or the practices are necessary to achieve effluent limit or to
carry out the purpose and intent of the Clean Water Act and State Water Control Law.
Sector specific requirements from Sector V – Textile Mills have been incorporated into the
special condition. Wording specific to sawdust use is added to I.H., since the facility uses
sawdust as boiler fuel.
p. Part II, Condition Applicable to All Permits
Rationale: VPDES Permit Regulation, §9 VAC 25-31-190 requires all VPDES permit to
contain or specifically cite the conditions listed.
20. NPDES Permit Rating Worksheet: Total Score 85
See Appendix A for a copy of the Rating Worksheet.
21. Changes to Permit:
NC= not changed
Changes to special conditions:
1. Special Condition I.C.7, Water Quality Criteria Monitoring removed
2. Special Condition I.C.11, Closure Plan added
3. Special Condition I.D. (Whole Effluent Toxicity Monitoring) was updated. Upon DEQ
notification, quarterly chronic WET testing.
4. Special Condition I.E., Whole Effluent Toxicity Limit revised
5. Special Conditions I.F, I.G. and I.H. (Storm Water Management) was updated.
6. Part II.I wording is added, to note that emergency reporting is to be sent to an email
address.
Outfall
No.
Parameter
Changed
Monitoring
Requirement
Changed
Effluent Limits
Changed Reason for Change
Date
From To From To
001 COD mg/kg NC 355/549 223/346 Production decrease 7/24/18
001 Phenols
mg/kg NC 0.97/1.9 0.6/1.2
Production decrease 7/24/18
001 Total Cr
mg/kg NC 0.97/1.9 0.6/1.2
Production decrease 7/24/18
001 Sulfide
mg/kg NC 1.9/3.9 1.2/2.5
Production decrease 7/24/18
001 WET NC 2.1 TUa 26 TUc WETLIM10 & STATS using
actual ACR
8/20/18
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 22
22. Variances/Alternate Limits or Conditions:
This permit varies from Agency guidance in that load limits are decimal fractions (not
restricted to whole numbers). There are no other variances/alternate limits in this permit.
23. Public Notice Information:
All pertinent information is on file and may be inspected, and arrangements made for copying
by contacting Lewis Pillis at:
Virginia DEQ
Blue Ridge Regional Office
3019 Peters Creek Road
Roanoke, VA 24019
540-562-6789
Persons may comment in writing or by email to the DEQ on the proposed permit action, and
may request a public hearing, during the comment period. Comments shall include the name,
address, and telephone number of the writer and of all persons represented by the
commenter/requester, and shall contain a complete, concise statement of the factual basis for
comments. Only those comments received within this period will be considered. The DEQ may
decide to hold a public hearing, including another comment period, if public response is
significant and there are substantial, disputed issues relevant to the permit. Requests for public
hearings shall state 1) the reason why a hearing is requested; 2) a brief, informal statement
regarding the nature and extent of the interest of the requester or of those represented by the
requester, including how and to what extent such interest would be directly and adversely
affected by the permit; and 3) specific references, where possible, to terms and conditions of
the permit with suggested revisions. Following the comment period, the Board will make a
determination regarding the proposed permit action. This determination will become effective,
unless the DEQ grants a public hearing. Due notice of any public hearing will be given. The
public may review the draft permit and application at the DEQ Blue Ridge Regional Office, in
Roanoke, by appointment.
24. 303(d) Listed Segments (TMDL):
According to the WCRO 2010 Water Quality Assessment 305(b) and Impaired Waters 303(d)
Reports, this segment of the Pigg River (VAW-L14) is listed for non-attainment of the
Recreational Use due to monitoring data exceeding the WQS value of fecal coliform, originally
and presently Escherichia coli. The EPA approved (9/11/2006) Pigg River Bacteria TMDL
prepared for this segment does not have a wasteload allocation for this discharge for fecal
coliform.
No limit for fecal coliform is included in this permit. This permit does not authorize the
discharge of sanitary wastewater. All sources of sanitary wastewater are believed to be
connected to the sanitary sewer.
Special Permit considerations:
TMDL re-opener special condition included.
Fact Sheet
Permit No. VA0076015
Page 23
25. Additional Comments:
Previous Board Action: none
Staff Comments: The discharge is not controversial. The discharge is in conformance with the
existing TMDL documents for the area.
Other Agency Comments: The VDH commented that there are no public water supply intakes
in Virginia downstream of this facility and asked for a copy of the final permit. DGIF
commented that “Provided the applicant adheres to the effluent characteristics identified in the
permit application, we do not anticipate the issuance of this permit to result in adverse impact
to T&E species waters or their associated species”.
The US FWS provided comments in a letter dated December 20, 2017. They requested
quarterly chronic WET testing, further evaluation of the new polymer, reporting of specific dye
compounds used, and archiving samples for analysis of metals concentrations, to allow the
facility to account for variability in WET testing results and address the potential causes of
intermittent toxicity.
Safety data sheets on all dyes used by Ronile have been evaluated, and discussed with the
Company. Ronile reviews each new chemical for toxicity before it is used and is investigating
whether the yellow dye containing cobalt can be replaced. A detailed evaluation of existing
WET data has led to a more stringent limit being placed in the permit with a portion of each
WET sample to be retained for possible metals testing. Both C. dubia and P. promelas will be
used for the first year to confirm the most sensitive species. WET testing will be required prior
to new products being dyed or new treatment chemicals being used.
DCR did not provide comments on this permit action.
Public Comment: The discharge is not controversial. Ronile submitted two comments; 1) that
noted a pair of acute and chronic WET test results that were not used to calculate the acute to
chronic ratio (ACR) and 2) a request to use only the historic most sensitive species in the
chronic WET tests.
Use of the revised ACR resulted in a change in the WET limit from 100% NOAEC to 26 TUc.
DEQ declined the request to use only one species at the onset of chronic testing, since in the
past year there have been significant changes in the facility’s effluent WET test results. Ronile
is in agreement with this change.
Appendix A – NPDES Permit Rating worksheet, USGS Map, SWPPP site map, Flow Diagram, Site
Visit Memo, DMR data
Appendix B – Receiving Stream Data, Flow Frequency Memorandum
Appendix C – Effluent Limit Development
Appendix D – Antidegradation waste load allocations and permit limit development from previous
permits
Appendix E – VAC25-720-80. B. Roanoke River Basin, Non-TMDL waste load allocations, Water
Quality Assessment