NC0021474_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20220405

RECEIVED
APR 0 5 2022
NCDEQIDWRINPDES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY
EXPANSION
CITY OF MEBANE
ALAMANCE & ORANGE COUNTIES
NORTH CAROLINAmcgill 1
Shaping
Communities
Together

RECEIVED
APR 05 2022
DEQ/DWR/NPDES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY
EXPANSION
CITY OF MEBANE
ALAMANCE & ORANGE COUNTIES
NORTH CAROLINA J
Digitally signed by
Ma n ji,a ng1, Manjiang Chen
\ CARQ'''�� Date:2,022.03.3116:21:20
O � -04'00'
SEAL
MANJIANG CHEN, PhD, PE 0 039025 0
''!;L�/ANG G
'���r11111111��\
mcgill
55 Broad Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Firm License No.: C-0459
MARCH 2022
PROJECT NO. 21.01123

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 CURRENT SITUATION 1
2.0 FUTURE SITUATION 11
3.0 STREAM EVALUATION 23
4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 24
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 47
FIGURES
Figure 1: Mebane WRRF Vicinity Map 3
Figure 2: Mebane WRRF Existing Site Plan 4
Figure 3: Historical Wastewater Flow 8
Figure 4: Mebane WRRF Process Flow Diagram (4.0 MGD) 21
Figure 5: Mebane WRRF Process Flow Diagram (6.0 MGD) 22
Figure 6: Alternative 2 Process Flow Diagram 29
Figure 7: Land Application Alternative 30
Figure 8: Alternative 4 Process Flow Diagram 38
Figure 9: Connection to an Existing Public Sewer System & Land Application Alternative 39
Figure 10: Alternative 5 Process Flow Diagram 43
Figure 11: Surface Water Discharge to Moadams Creek Alternative 44
TABLES
Table 1: Mebane WRRF Expired / Current NPDES Permit Discharge Limitations 6
Table 2: Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association Facility Information 7
Table 3: Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association TN &TP Limitations 7
Table 4: Historical Wastewater Flow (MGD) 8
Table 5: 2020 WRRF Operating Data 10
Table 6: Mebane WRRF Compliance History 10
Table 7: Flow Projections 14
Table8: Phase 1 Speculative Effluent Limits (4.0 MGD) 15
p
Table 9: Phase 2 Speculative Effluent Limits (6.0 MGD) 16
Table 10: Proposed 2.0 MGD 5-Stage BNR Equipment 17
Table 11: Nearby Existing Municipal WWTPs 24
Table 12: City of Burlington Wastewater Interconnections 25
Table 13: Ratings of Soil within Alamance County 27
Table 14: Alternative 2 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost 31
Table 15: Alternative 2 Estimated Annual O&M Costs 32
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'"Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page i of ii

Table 16: Alamance County Golf Courses 33
Table 17: City of Mebane Parks and Properties 34
Table 18: Alternative 4 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost 40
Table 19: Alternative 4 Estimated Annual O&M Costs 41
Table 20: Alternative 5 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost 45
Table 21: Alternative 5 Estimated Annual O&M Costs 46
Table 22: Summary of Effluent Disposal Alternatives 47
APPENDICES
Appendix A—Mebane WRRF NPDES Permit NC0021474
Appendix B—Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association Group NPDES Permit NC000003
Appendix C—2020 U.S. Census Data
Appendix D—2017 City of Mebane Comprehensive Development Plan —Population Data
Appendix E—City of Mebane 2020 Local Water Supply Plan
Appendix F— Expanded Mebane WRRF Speculative Effluent Limits
Appendix G —United Stated Golf Association—Golf's Use of Water Report
Contact Information
APPLICANT
Name: City of Mebane, North Carolina
Mailing Address: 106 East Washington Street, Mebane, NC 27302
Phone Number: 919-304-9215
Contact Person: Dennis J. Hodge, Water Resources Director
FACILITY
Name: Mebane Wastewater Treatment Plant
Address: 635 Corregidor Street, Mebane, NC 27302
County: Alamance County
Phone Number: 919-304-9215
Contact Person: Dennis J. Hodge, Water Resources Director
EAA PREPARER
Name: McGill Associates, P.A.
Address: 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
Phone Number: 828-252-0575
Contact Person: Manjiang Chen, Ph.D., PE (Senior Project Manager)
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page ii of ii

1.0 CURRENT SITUATION
1.1 Background Information
The City of Mebane (City) is located in central North Carolina, approximately 10 miles east of the
City of Burlington and approximately 20 miles northwest of the City of Durham. The City is mostly
situated in eastern Alamance County,with portions stretching into Orange County. The City owns
and operates the Mebane Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) located at 635 Corregidor
Street. The Mebane WRRF is permitted to discharge up to 2.5 million gallons per day (MGD) to
Moadams Creek under individual NPDES permit NC0021474 (Appendix A). As explained in
Section 1.4, the Mebane WRRF is also bound by total phosphorus (TP) discharge limitations, as
permitted under the Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association Group NPDES permit NC000003
(Appendix B).
The Mebane WRRF serves most residents, businesses, and industries within city limits; however,
a small portion of the City's wastewater, up to 0.75 MGD, flows into the City of Graham's sanitary
sewer collection system. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City's population was 17,797
individuals in 2020 (Appendix C).
The Mebane WRRF currently utilizes a treatment process that includes influent screening, grit
removal, activated sludge biological treatment, secondary clarification, tertiary filtration,
chlorination, dechlorination, reaeration, and discharge to Moadams Creek. Sludge is thickened
and partially aerobically digested. A third party dewaters the sludge from the aerobic holding
tanks before transporting the biosolids to a compost production facility.
The original facility, permitted to treat up to 0.80 MGD, was constructed in 1970 with one (1) bar
screen, one (1) grit collector, one (1) aeration basin, one (1) clarifier, and sludge drying beds. In
1981, the WRRF was expanded to 1.2 MGD with the addition of a second aeration basin, two (2)
clarifiers, one (1) return sludge pump station, and the existing chlorine contact and reaeration
basins. Additionally, the original clarifier constructed in 1970 was repurposed as a digester. A
second expansion to 2.50 MGD occurred in 1991. This project included the addition of a third
larger clarifier, a second chlorine contact chamber, and tertiary sand filters. From 2013 to 2014,
two (2)Aqua MiniDisk filter units were installed to replace one of the tertiary sand filters. In 2019,
a mobile organic biofilm system (MOB) using Kenaf was piloted at full scale to improve the
nutrient removal. Recently, a rotary drum screen was installed to separate the Kenaf from the
wasted activated sludge (WAS) stream, recycle it to the return activated sludge (RAS) channel,
and recirculate it to the aeration basins by RAS pumps. A new 36" effluent line was installed in
2020 to reroute the discharge point to a new location. Currently, the WRRF is beginning another
major improvement project that includes the installation of new headworks, improvements to
the clarifiers, the addition of a secondary rotary drum thickener (RDT) with a polymer feed
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���,"Alamance &Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 1 of 47

system,the replacement of the aeration systems within the existing aerobic sludge holding tanks,
and improvements to all necessary piping and controls.
The Mebane WRRF currently faces several issues. First, the Mebane WRRF must be expanded to
accommodate wastewater flows anticipated in the 20-year and 40-year planning periods.
Second, approximately half of the WRRF is situated within the 100-year floodplain of Moadams
Creek. Third, the Mebane WRRF is subject to phosphorus and nitrogen limits due to total
maximum daily load (TMDL) restrictions related to the Jordan Lake Rules. The recent upgrades
provide consistent nutrient removal at the current design flow; however, the existing aeration
basins don't have the required volume needed for capacity expansions, and there are no
dedicated zones for further nutrient removal. Lastly, most of the existing equipment and
structures have exceeded their respective useful lives.
1.2 Existing Treatment System
It should be noted that this section details the existing treatment system at the Mebane WRRF.
Improvements to the WRRF, as a result of the proposed expansion phases, are discussed in
Section 2.4.
Approximately 120 miles of gravity sewer lines, 28 miles of pressurized sewer force mains, and
twenty-one pump stations transport wastewater to the Mebane WRRF.As mentioned previously,
the WRRF uses primary, secondary, and tertiarytreatment processes to treat wastewater. WAS
p Y. Y�
is thickened using a RDT and stored in aerobic sludge holding tanks until it is hauled away for
compost production. Treated effluent is discharged to Moadams Creek. Figure 1 shows a vicinity
map of the Mebane WRRF, while Figure 2 details the layout of the existing facility.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
mcgill
Alamance&Orange Counties, North CarolinaPage 2 of 47

Figure 1: Mebane WRRF Vicinity Map
N
' - ' i. / . . .
.. 24t. N . . \:'...- Wile,- .
. !,• 4, c,. - . , ..t. A
. _,. . ., ,, .,. _
_,,f,, .,,r•mb_:' .
r.•• -
• 1
.�... a C
® C o • _ _ yp • . .
11liCialtillt
• Mebane WRRF �
ig
v.i. ...----n..........
-, o
4 _.
"..0_,,-- „, .i-_,,,
._.. - c2, '
z' - �� 0 Mebane WRRF
O �. „. . —.4.
z. t..�r� iz © NPDES Discharge Permits
. P - Town Boundary
Burlington
— Graham
1'0.5 0 1. 2 4 ((p�cv Green Level
Miles Z ;, Haw River
Mebane wY
Colight.g Swepsonville
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'"Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 3 of 47

Figure 2: Mebane WRRF Existing Site Plan
NA . :•,•:.
REDUNDANT HEADWORK
AERATION BAST
SPLITTER BOX •
LAB
BUILDING
t
D
DIGESTER , DIGESTER
AERATION NO. 1 NO 2
BASIN NO. 1 \ 00
I
CLARIFIER SPLITTER BOX
It I
RETURN SLUDGE FLUME SLUDGE
CLARIFIER
\� THICKENER
N0. 2 / BUILDING
SI \� AERATION
BASIN NO. 2 /
CLARIFIER► 4 I
NO. 3
'()°
+ UMP PUMP
CLARIFIER STATION
N0. 1
TERTIARY _.-
CHEMICAL FEED IECHLEo:
FILTERS
BUILDING STORAit
•AS/WAS HLORINATION BASINS &
PUMP DECHLORINATION BASIN
STATION
OODWAY
MOADAMS CREEK
id 80momminamilmomm 0 40 80 160
FLOODPLAIN d.�I JJNLIA *"
`� I ..r
,� •I-YEAR --
GRAPHIC SCALE DIVISION VALUE = 80 FEET
FLOODPLAIN 1
41
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion 104 Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgull Page 4 of 47

1.3 Current Construction Project
Construction is currently in progress to complete a variety of improvements (designed by others)
to the Mebane WRRF. First, an additional headworks structure, consisting of one (1) new
cylindrical fine screen, one (1) new vortex grit removal system, and one (1) new influent magnetic
flow meter, is being installed. The existing headworks will remain as a redundant channel in the
event that the new channel needs bypassing. Second, clarifier energy dissipating inlets,
flocculating feed wells, and clarifier density current baffles are being installed in three (3)
clarifiers to improve solids/liquid separation in the secondary clarifiers and reduce any risk of
solids carryover. Third, a secondary 200 gallons per minute (gpm) RDT and polymer feed system
are being installed. The existing RDT will remain to provide redundant capacity. Lastly,
construction is in progress to install two (2) coarse bubble aeration systems to replace the
existing jet aeration systems, three (3) geared centrifugal blowers, and four (4) submersible
mixers in aerobic sludge digesters.
1.4 NPDES Permit Limitations
The Mebane WRRF currently discharges effluent to Moadams Creek under NPDES permit
NCOO21474. This permit was set to expire on May 31, 2019; however, a permit renewal
application was submitted on November 30, 2018. Since a new NPDES permit has not yet been
approved by the agency, the expired permit limits remain in effect. The expired permit was
modified on April 1, 2017 to include the effluent limitations and monitoring requirements
detailed in Table 1.
The Mebane WRRF is also bounded by the discharge limitations listed in the Haw River Nutrient
Compliance Association (HRNCA) Group NPDES permit NCC00O003 for the Haw River Nutrient
Compliance Association (HRNCA). The HRNCA is a non-profit corporation with five (5) municipal
members that own and operate six (6) wastewater treatment facilities that discharge to the Haw
River. The HRNCA consists of six co-permittees, as shown in Table 2 below.
The group NPDES permit includes the Jordan Lake Rules Total Phosphorus allocations for all co-
permittees. Such discharge allocations are detailed in Table 3. Currently, total Nitrogen
allocations are specified in individual permits. The group permit was set to expire on
December 31, 2021; however, a permit renewal application was submitted on June 30, 2021. A
new group NPDES permit has not yet been approved by the agency. The expired permit limits
remain in effect.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgiII Page 5 of 47

Table 1: Mebane WRRF Expired /Current NPDES Permit Discharge Limitations
Effluent Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow _ 2.5 MGD Continuous Recording I or E
Total Monthly Flow Monitor&Report Monthly Rec.or I or E
(MG) Calc.
BOD,5-day,20°C 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L 2X per week Composite I &E
(Apr. 1—Oct.31)
BOD,5-day,20°C 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L 2X per week Composite I &E
(Nov. 1—Mar.31)
Total Suspended 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L 2X per week Composite I&E
Solids
NH3 as N(Apr. 1— 2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/L 2X per week Composite E
Oct.31)
NH3 as N(Nov. 1— 4.0 mg/L 12.0 mg/L 2X per week Composite E
Mar.31)
Dissolved Oxygen Daily Grab E
pH _ _ Daily Grab E
Temperature(°C) Daily Grab E
Fecal Coliform 200/100 400/100 2X per week Grab E
(geometric mean) mL mL
Total Residual 17 µg/L Daily Grab E
Chlorine _
Conductivity Daily Grab E
(µmhos/cm)
TKN Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite E
NO3-N+NO2-N Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite E
Total Nitrogen, Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite E
(TN) _ __
TN Load Monitor&Report(Ib./mo.) [QM600] Monthly Annually Calculated E
40,225(lb./yr.) [QY600]
Total Phosphorus Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite E
TP Load Monitor&Report(Ib./mo.) [QM665] Monthly Annually Calculated E
5,056(Ib./yr.) [QY665]
Total Zinc Quarterly Composite E
Chronic Toxicity Quarterly Composite E
Effluent Pollutant Monitor&Report Three scans during term of E
Scan permit
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ,R Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgiHH Page 6 of 47

Table 2: Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association Facility Information
Co-Permittee NPDES Individual Design Flow Receiving Water
Permit (MGD)
City of Burlington-East NC0023868 12 Haw River
City of Burlington-South NC0023876 12 Big Alamance Creek
City of Graham NC0021211 3.5 Haw River
City of Greensboro NC0047384 40 South Buffalo Creek
City of Mebane NC0021474 2.5 Moadams Creek
City of Reidsville NC0024881 7.5 Haw River
Current Total Design Flow 77.5 MGD
Table 3: Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association TN &TP Limitations
Permittee Facility Permit TN (lb./yr.) TP (lb./yr.)
Eastside WWTP NC0023868 193,078 24,270
City of Burlington Southside WWTP NC0023876 193,078 24,270
City of Graham Graham WWTP NC0021211 56,315 7,079
City of Greensboro T.Z. Osborne WRF NC0047384 891,272 112,044
City of Mebane Mebane WRRF NC0021474 40,225 5,056
City of Reidsville Reidsville WWTP NC0024881 120,674 15,169
1.5 Historical Wastewater Flows
The Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) from January 2016 through December 2021 were
compiled and reviewed. Wastewater flows to the WRRF for the past six years are summarized in
Table 4.
Figure 3 shows the average flow for the WRRF, along with the 30-day rolling average flow. The
average daily flow during the evaluation period was 1.52MGD, which is 68% of the plant's
permitted capacity. The 30-day rolling average flow also remained below the permit limit.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 7 of 47

D n
✓ o, Flow(MGD) g D 0 Z O tr' D ' C E D E n, y
p o o N N w A it rn v - m n O` e-+ -< 7 41 d N a 7
n cu K m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (� m °J
0, c0co
p D i rn
v D co
CM M =' �+ N N I, N I� I-, N I� N I, N N I--s D
ro `�
n O � � ...II Zn W N N in W N U.) N Lk) N W U1 A 0
On p tz .= , :-"I W W I-‘ W O U.) N O U'i cn 0o 00 Lk) N -n N
• rD < ,1 0 - 0
rt.• -n O `t Ol N I--' 1--, Ql W F-I F-I 1--, N F-� N N N 3 01
Nu� I A W O 01 00 00 p1 W In N V A p
Z n, 00 \ = N W 01 CO NJ NJ NJ 00 (0 O W O 0 W -n
D NJ
m co
F+ 1- I� I� F� F� F-s H+ (--� F-4 I� I--� I� I--'4. 01
CT
Oo▪ v I T 01 W N N N N N N A U1 01 N W A p N M
n a) m I-) 0O W A NJ W NJ A W In 01 O W ID I-+ (D 11 fD
o B. w a -.0 O A
3 7 0 ..1 CT N I-, I-, I-, I--, 1--, I-, U.) N Ol I-, I-+ N 3 V =
01 D NO W *CA W A Ul A A A V N 61 A GI in
NJ NJ
v -. _.-.. = 01 N CO V NJ U1 U.) N V U..) Cr) A NJ V T O
-n co - I -
1-1
O F+ N N N 1� 1-, 1-( 1--) N 1--( N N N D 0f1
.�.. _ -s (0 A (D 00 A U1 A N N W A (n U.) W p
No f1 0 00 CDV A NJ U1 00 (D Cr) A O U1 A T N C
0� O co
co -
- A -INT A •W A A W A NJ I--, F� NJ W NJ N NJ 00 rt
telt, OW- ----- cu
O VO 0 W (!1 V W .00 Cln V o I�-� iv in 0 N
N
_ O C
mai I to I:. I N _, F� F--� F� 1-4 F-‘ F-� F-� F� N F� N 1--� D
0J b en U1 A W W W W Q1 A O 00 O 00 p T
> -0 N >� I (p 0 V I--' . )--' V V.) 00 (.000 (J1 I--, NJ -n N
< m -' O
n - Z. 1•+
at)
N _ .._._ Vl N W N 1--s 1-, I--‘ N W I-I Vi W U1 W g 1.0
co (D 0 0 N A 00 A V I-- I- U1 I-a 00 00 O
0 a L I `Z coh Q�1 A W 00 V (n 01 U1 (.0 N NJ CO A -n G'
m < 0 0
D T N I N I-+ N I-‘ i--‘ i'-' I--' I--‘ I--‘ 1--‘ I—, I--, N I--s >
o f F� V U1 In A A V 00 A (), O 00 p
o - 41. I-. A ( i U1 00 0o 01 (D Co A (x A I-) 11 N
MID N Iv 0
-S O O
�, NJ
\ F.-� - _..- a, W A A N W N I--, W A N N 01 A g O
D NO N p b, N A (D in W 01 V A 01 A A N p
rr N _ - •O O O F-+ U.) 0l N LD O 00 W lD lD 00 -n(D O 00
OJ IN-, it N I-, I-, I-, I--, 1--, I--, 1--, I--, 1--, I' 1--, N I--, D
IN
1 V 01 A A A U1 U1 0l U1 . V 00 V (D p
w I I (n l0 A A 00 w N w o (0 rn CO U1 N m N
00 fl) to NJ
00 S p N A N I--s I s I� W N N N 1--� N N A W 3 I•I
O NJ L o 01 01 lD N O 00 F-I 01 U1 00 A O
A coN N Ul 1�+ A Cr) 01 W W W (D (D W 00 U1 (D
✓ NJ (71.

1.6 Treatment Performance
Table 5 includes a summary of WRRF operational data for Year 2020. This data shows that the
treatment efficiency of the WRRF, in terms of 5-day biological oxygen demand (BOD5) and total
suspended solids (TSS), was 98.6% and 98.7%, respectively. The monthly average effluent BOD5
for all twelve months was 3 mg/L, which is less than its monthly effluent limit of 5 mg/L. The
monthly average effluent TSS for all twelve months was 2.78 mg/L, which is less than its monthly
effluent limit of 30 mg/L. In addition, the yearly mass loadings of total nitrogen (TN) and total
phosphorus (TP) in 2020 were 28,474 lbs. and 3,019 lbs., respectively.
The Mebane WRRF has received three (3) notices of deficiency (NOD) since June of 2019. These
deficiencies are summarized in Table 6 below. These deficiencies have since been resolved.
Considering the statistics and circumstances detailed above, the WRRF has a great overall
treatment efficiency.
Water Resource RecoveryFacility P Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 9 of 47

Table 5: 2020 WRRF Operating Data
Flow(MGD) _ BOD5(mg/L) TSS(mg/L) TKN (mg/L) TN (mg/L) TP (mg/L)
Month Daily Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent Influent Effluent
Avg. Max. Avg. Max. Avg. Avg. Max. Avg Avg. Max. Avg. Avg. Max. Avg.
Jan 1.81 4.28 195 294 1.83 171 266 2.08 24 40 2.42 3.6 _ 5.9 0.11
Feb 2.04 6.49 233 340 2.43 212 246 2.52 43 46 5.54 6 6.2 0.13
Mar 1.55 2.49 237 338 2.69 215 249 2.88 44 48 9.07 6.36 7.2 0.22
Apr 1.44 2.63 214 308 3.39 230 425 2.53 36 49 6.59 4.52 _ 6.2 0.3
May 1.88 4.48 237 367 4.08 257 405 3 42 67 6.04 5.24 7.5 0.48
Jun 1.79 3.7 217 318 4.79 216 255 3.34 43 48 7.58 5.6 _ 6.2 _ 0.21
Jul 1.46 1.69 240 321 2.99 267 343 3.25 40 52 5.09 5.2 6.8 0.44
Aug 1.48 2.32 244 278 2.26 269 395 2.5 48 61 3.44 6.5 7.2 2.22
Sep 1.58 3.56 228 336 2.3 208 291 2.39 46 65 4.87 5.23 6.9 0.4
Oct 1.55 2.93 233 315 3.32 195 219 2.74 52 60 8.09 6 6.7 1.73
Nov 1.75 4.41 160 334 1.8 161 431 1.86 26 47 2.84 3.2 5.9 0.52
Dec 2.14 4.2 152 245 4.29 154 261 4.26 22 44 3.99 2.7 6.2 0.16
Annual Avg./Min/Max 1.71 6.49 216 367 3.01 213 431 2.78 39 67 5.47 5.01 7.5 0.58
Removal 98.6 98.7 85.9 88.5
Table 6: Mebane WRRF Compliance History
Date Parameter Limit Value Reported Value Type of Deficiency
4/13/2019 BOD, 5-Day 7.5 8.95 Weekly Average Exceeded
Concentration
2/6/2020 Dissolved Oxygen 6 5.8 Daily Minimum Not Reached
11/12/2020 Dissolved Oxygen 6 4.1 Daily Minimum Not Reached
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Cii.Mebane
m '" Marc 22
A ce&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 7

2.0 FUTURE SITUATION
2.1. Population Projections
The following statistics were calculated from data provided by the U.S. 2020 Census and the City's
2017 Comprehensive Development Plan (Appendix D):
• The City's population is estimated to have increased from 11,393 in 2010 to 17,797 in
2020 (compound annual growth rate of 4.56%)
• The State of North Carolina's population is estimated to have increased from 9,535,483
in 2010 to 10,587,440 in 2020 (compound annual growth rate of 0.91%)
• Alamance County's population is estimated to have increased from 151,131 in 2010 to
171,415 in 2020 (compound annual growth rate of 1.27%)
• Orange County's population is estimated to have increased from 133,801 in 2010 to
148,696 in 2020 (compound annual growth rate of 1.06%)
The state projection method is not considered to be accurate for municipalities that are
experiencing growth. The 2020 Census estimated the population of the City to be 17,797
individuals. According to the state projection method, the City's population will reach 17,669
individuals in 2043. Given this information, it is evident that the City is currently experiencing a
significantly higher growth rate than the State of North Carolina, Alamance County, and Orange
County. A linear extrapolation using the calculated compound average growth rate of 4.56%
projects the City's population to reach approximately 34,839 residents by 2041 and 51,070
residents by 2061. A linear increase is applied to the projected population from 2022 and 2061.
Table 7 includes a table of these population projections.
2.2. Flow Projections
The Mebane WRRF, currently permitted for 2.5 MGD, is proposed to be upgraded and expanded
in two phases. Phase 1 will expand the WRRF's capacity to 4.0 MGD, while Phase 2 will expand
the WRRF's capacity to 6.0 MGD. These expansions will provide the needed treatment capacity
to accommodate future flow increases.
Estimated Residential Flow
The estimated 2041 sewer service population of the City is 34,839 individuals. Assuming
70 gallons per day per person (gpcd), the 2041 estimated residential wastewater flow is 2.439
MGD. As mentioned previously, the estimated 2061 sewer service population of the City of
Mebane is 51,070 individuals. Assuming 70 gpcd,the 2061 estimated residential wastewater flow
is 3.575 MGD.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'�'
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 11 of 47

Estimated Commercial Flow
The estimated commercial sewer flows were determined by multiplying the estimated
wastewater service population by 15 gpcd. The 2041 estimated commercial wastewater flow is
0.523 MGD, while the 2061 estimated commercial sewer flow is 0.766 MGD.
Existing Industrial Flow
According to the City's Local Water Supply Plan (LWSP), there were a total of 5,420 sewer
accounts in 2020; however, these accounts were not separated by usage category (Appendix E).
For this reason, the number of Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) could not be determined for
non-residential usage, and the equivalent average sewer usage by user type could not be reliably
determined based on sewer flow records. In order to arrive at an estimate of industrial sewer
flow it was necessary to refer to water sales. It was assumed that the number of industrial sewer
customers was the same for water and sewer; therefore, there were 85 industrial sewer users in
2020. The water usage for these users was 0.269 MGD. Assuming 90% of water enters the sewer
system,the estimated existing industrial wastewater flow is 0.242 MGD. It was assumed that the
industrial flow would remain constant through 2061.
Existing Institutional Flow
As described above, the equivalent average sewer usage by user type could not be reliably
determined based on sewer flow records. In order to arrive at an estimate of institutional sewer
flow it was necessary to refer to water sales. It was assumed that the number of institutional
sewer customers was the same for water and sewer;therefore,there were 77 institutional sewer
users in 2020. The water usage for these users was 0.084 MGD. Assuming 90% of water enters
the sewer system, the estimated existing institutional wastewater flow is 0.076 MGD. It was
assumed that the institutional flow would remain constant through 2061.
Estimated Inflow and Infiltration
20-year and 40-year wastewater flow projections would be incomplete without a discussion of
inflow and infiltration (I/I). Infiltration is groundwater that enters a sewer system through defects
in pipes, joints, manhole walls, or improper connections. Inflow is usually rainfall-related water
that enters the sewer system through public (on-street)or private (off-street)sources. I/I can add
significant flow to a WRRF during maximum day and peak hour flow conditions. I/I generally does
not contribute significantly to organic and solids loadings.
An estimation of I/I first requires an estimation of sanitary sewer flow, which includes all
residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional sewer flows. The Water Environment
Federation's Design of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants — Manual of Practice 8, 6th
Edition (MOP-8) states that 60% to 90% of water consumption reaches the sanitary sewer. For
this reason, the sanitary sewer flow for the City was calculated by multiplying the average water
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���''I
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 12 of 47

usage for all residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional sewer flows by 90%. Using
information from the 2018—2020 LWSPs,the sanitary sewer flow was estimated to be 1.20 MGD.
The City's average annual inflow was estimated to be the difference between the average day
flow minus the average dry day flow. Dry days are defined as days that experience 0.00 to 0.09
inches of precipitation, with no precipitation 48 hours prior. Daily precipitation data is recorded
at the WRRF.
The dry day flow includes sanitary flow plus infiltration and should exclude events that contribute
to inflow and storm flow. The average dry day flow over the three-year period of 2018 — 2020
was determined to be 1.37 MGD, as compared to the overall average day flow of 1.59 MGD.
Therefore, the average annual inflow was estimated to be 0.22 MGD.
To estimate infiltration entering the system, the sanitary flow component (1.2 MGD) and the
inflow flow component (0.22 MGD) were subtracted from the average daily flow to obtain a value
of 0.17 MGD.
Based on this flow analysis, combined I/I is estimated to average 0.390 MGD during the three-
year period analyzed, representing approximately 25 percent of the total flow at the facility on
an average annual basis.
Reserved Capacity
There will be reserve capacity for new businesses and industries due to new residential growth.
As mentioned previously, the estimated 2020 industrial wastewater flow was 0.242 MGD. Since
the residential population of the Cityis projected to double by2041 and triple by2061, the 2041
p p p
reserved capacity was estimated to be twice the estimated 2020 industrial wastewater flow, or
0.484 MGD. The 2061 reserve capacity was estimated to be thrice the estimated 2020 industrial
flow, or 0.726 MGD.
The 2041 projected sewer flow to the Mebane WRRF is approximately 4.153 MGD, while the
2061 projected sewer flow is approximately 5.775 MGD. Table 7 summarizes these projections.
Based on projected wastewater flows,the City of Mebane will need to begin expanding the WRRF
beyond 2.50 within the next few years.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
��
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina dill
Page 13 of 47

Table 7: Flow Projections
Unspecified
Projected Residential Industrial
Commercial Institutional I&I Reserved Total
Year Population Flow Flow(MGD) Flow Flow(MGD) (MGD) Capacity (MGD)
(persons) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
2020 17797 1.246 0.267 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.242 2.463
2021 18609 1.303 0.279 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.253 2.543
2022 19420 1.359 0.291 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.264 2.623
2023 20232 1.416 0.303 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.275 2.703
2024 21043 1.473 0.316 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.286 2.783
2025 21855 1.530 0.328 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.297 2.863
2026 22666 1.587 0.340 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.308 2.943
2027 23478 1.643 0.352 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.319 3.023
2028 24289 1.700 0.364 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.330 3.103
2029 25101 1.757 0.377 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.341 3.183
2030 25912 1.814 0.389 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.352 3.263
2031 26724 1.871 0.401 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.363_ 3.343
2032 27536 1.927 0.413 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.374 3.423
2033 28347 1.984 0.425 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.385 3.503
2034 29159 2.041 0.437 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.396 3.583
2035 29970 2.098 0.450 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.408 3.663
2036 30782 2.155 0.462 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.419 3.743
2037 31593 2.212 0.474 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.430 3.823
2038 32405 2.268 0.486 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.441 3.903
2039 33216 2.325 0.498 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.452 3.983
2040 34028 2.382 0.510 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.463 4.063
2041 34839 2.439 0.523 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.484 4.153
2042 35651 2.496 0.535 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.485 4.223
2043 36462 2.552 0.547 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.496 4.303
2044 37274 2.609 0.559 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.507 4.383
2045 38086 2.666 0.571 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.518 4.463
2046 38897 2.723 0.583 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.529 4.543
2047 39709 2.780 0.596 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.540 4.623
2048 40520 2.836 0.608 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.551 4.703
2049 41332 2.893 0.620 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.562 4.783
2050 42143 2.950 0.632 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.573 4.863
2051 42955 3.007 0.644 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.584 4.943
2052 43766 3.064 0.656 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.595 5.023
2053 44578 3.120 0.669 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.606 5.103
2054 45389 3.177 0.681 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.617 5.183
2055 46201 3.234 0.693 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.628 5.263
2056 47013 3.291 0.705 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.639 5.343
2057 47824 3.348 0.717 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.650 5.423
2058 48636 3.404 0.730 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.661 5.503
2059 49447 3.461 0.742 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.672 5.583
2060 50259 3.518 0.754 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.683 5.663
2061 51070 3.575 0.766 0.242 0.076 0.390 0.726 5.775
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ® ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgi11 Page 14 of 47

2.3 Speculative Effluent Limits
In February 2022, based on a Division review of the receiving stream conditions and water quality
modeling results, the NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit of NCDEQ provided speculative effluent
limits for the proposed expansions to 4.0 MGD and 6.0 MGD (Appendix F). These speculative
effluent limits are detailed in Table 8 and Table 9. It should be noted that a complete evaluation
of these limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants, as well as potential
instream monitoring requirements, will be addressed upon receipt of a formal NPDES permit
application.
Table 8: Phase 1 Speculative Effluent Limits (4.0 MGD)
Effluent Limitations
Effluent Characteristic
Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum
Flow 4.0 MGD
BOD5 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L
NH3 as N (Nov.-Mar.) 1.8 mg/L 5.4 mg/L
TSS 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen Minimum Daily Average >_ 6.0 mg/L
TRC (if used for disinfection) 17 Ng/L
TN 40,225 lbs./year
TP 5,056 lbs./year
Fecal coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
Chronic Toxicity, Pass/Fail o
90/0
(Quarterly test)
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mCgIlI Page 15 of 47

Table 9: Phase 2 Speculative Effluent Limits (6.0 MGD)
Effluent Limitations
Effluent Characteristic
Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum
Flow 6.0 MGD
BOD5 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L
NH3 as N (Nov.-Mar.) 1.8 mg/L 5.4 mg/L
TSS 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen Minimum Daily Average > 6.0 mg/L
TRC (if used for disinfection) 17 pg/L
TN 40,225 lbs./year
TP 5,056 lbs./year
Fecal coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
Chronic Toxicity, Pass/Fail
(Quarterly test) 90%
2.4. Proposed Improvements
The proposed expansion of the Mebane WRRF will occur in two phases. The proposed
improvements will enable the Mebane WRRF to meet all respective NPDES permit limitations.
2.4.1. Phase 1 Proposed Improvements
Phase 1 will expand the treatment capacity from 2.5 MGD to 4.0 MGD. All Phase 1 improvements
will enable the expanded WRRF to meet the peak daily flow of 10.6 MGD and the peak hourly
flow of 14.6 MGD.
2.4.1.1. Headworks
One (1) influent cylindrical fine screen with %-inch openings and a washer compactor is currently
being installed in the ongoing WRRF improvements project designed by others. This screen can
handle a peak flow of 9.4 MGD. As part of the proposed project, an identical screen, fitted with
heat tracing and insultation, will be provided in a parallel influent channel. Screenings discharged
from the washer compactor will discharge into a dumpster. A bypass influent channel equipped
with a manual bar rack will be installed to circumvent the proposed screen.
One (1) 12-foot diameter vortex grit removal system is currently being installed in the ongoing
WRRF improvements project designed by others. As part of the proposed project, an additional
vortex grit removal system with the same capacity will be installed. Each grit system will be rated
for a peak flow of 9.4 MGD; however, both systems will be capable of handling up to 12 MGD
before removal efficiencies begin to decrease. Each grit unit will include a 36-inch-wide approach
channel and flooded-suction grit pumps. The grit pumps will send the grit slurry to the grit
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���tII
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 16 of 47

concentrators and grit classifiers. A bypass channel will be installed should a grit chamber
become inoperable when high peak flows are expected. A flow splitter box will be installed to
divert flow from the grit chambers to the proposed equalization (EQ) basin or influent pump
station.
2.4.1.2. Equalization Basin and Influent Pump Station
One (1) of the two existing aeration basins (1.064 MG each) will be converted into an off-line
equalization (EQ) basin. The flow into the proposed EQ basin will be screened and de-gritted raw
influent that gravity flows from the headworks. Two (2) existing 25 hp surface aerators will be
installed within the EQ basin to maintain a minimum of 1.0 mg/L of dissolved oxygen. Two (2)
submersible pumps will also be installed within the proposed EQ basin to transfer screened and
de-gritted raw wastewater to the proposed influent pump station during periods of normal
influent flow.
One (1) influent pump station, situated on the northern side of the WRRF near the existing solar
panels, will pump screened and de-gritted raw influent into a proposed splitter box upstream of
the proposed 5-stage BNR treatment trains. The wet well of the proposed influent pump station
will be sized to accommodate the Phase 2 peak hourly flow of 18.8 MGD. Four (4) submersible
solids-handling pumps will be sized to meet the peak hourly flow of 16.6 MGD with the largest
pump out of service (i.e., firm capacity).
2.4.1.3. Biological Treatment
One (1) splitter box will equally divide flow into one of two (2) proposed 2.0 MGD 5-Stage
Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) treatment trains. The 5-Stage BNR process is designed to
produce effluent total nitrogen of 3.0 mg/L and total phosphorus of 1.0 mg/L. Each treatment
train will include the equipment detailed in
Table 10.
Table 10: Proposed 2.0 MGD 5-Stage BNR Equipment
Description
Anaerobic Anoxic Oxidation Second Reaeration
Basins Basins Ditches Anoxic Basins Basins
Quantity per 3 2 1 1 1
Treatment Train
Inside Basin 16.5 x 19 55.5 x 59 59 x 194 30 x 59 9.5 x 59
Dimensions, ft
SWD, ft 18 18 18 18 16
Basin Volume, MG 0.042 0.216 1.334 0.235 0.042
each
Mixing System Submersible Submersible Surface Submersible Diffuser
Type Aerator Grid
Number per Basin 1 1 2 1 1
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 17 of 47

2.4.1.4. Secondary Clarification
Two (2) 95-ft diameter clarifiers will be constructed for sludge settling. The clarifiers will have
spiral blade sludge collection equipment. RAS/WAS will accumulate in the proposed sludge pump
station. RAS will be pumped to the anaerobic basins of the 5-Stage BNR treatment trains. WAS
will be pumped to existing clarifier no. 3, which will be converted to an aerated pre-thickening
sludge holding tank as detailed in Section 2.4.1.8.
2.4.1.5. Tertiary Filtration
Deep bed filters will be installed for TSS and TP removal. An external carbon storage and system
is provided with filters to provide additional nitrate removal. With tertiary filtration, the
speculative effluent concentrations of 3.3 mg/L for TN and 0.42 mg/L for TP will be achieved at
4.0 MGD of design capacity.
2.4.1.6. Disinfection, Dechlorination and Post-Aeration
One (1) new cast-in-place concrete chlorine contact basin with an approximate volume of
200,000 gallons, plus chambers for dechlorination and post-aeration, will be installed. The
proposed basin will have an approximate footprint of 50 ft. by 50 ft. with a SWD of 12 ft. The
proposed chlorine contact basin will provide the required contact time of 15 minutes at the Phase
2 peak hourly flow of 18.8 MGD. The dechlorination chamber will provide the required contact
time of 30 seconds at the Phase 2 peak hourly flow of 18.8 MGD.
Reaeration of the wastewater is essential to maintain adequate dissolved oxygen concentrations
in the plant effluent. A diffused air system will be installed to achieve the minimum dissolved
oxygen requirement in the effluent.
2.4.1.7. Effluent Discharge
Approximately 275 LF of 16-inch DIP pipe will connect the proposed chlorine contact basin to one
of the existing effluent manholes along Moadams Creek.
2.4.1.8. Sludge Handling &Treatment
Existing Clarifier No. 3 (70-ft. diameter) will be converted to an aerated pre-thickening sludge
holding tank. Blowers will be installed to supply 1,500 cfm of air with the largest blower out of
service. The existing RDTs and aerobic holding tanks will remain in operation.
2.4.2. Phase 2 Proposed Improvements
Phase 2 will expand the treatment capacity from 4.0 MGD to 6.0 MGD. All Phase 2 improvements
will enable the expanded WRRF to meet the peak daily flow of 13.7 MGD and the peak hourly
flow of 18.8 MGD. It should be noted that the final design of the Phase 2 improvements will
largely depend on influent wastewater characteristics and observed performance of the Phase 1
improvements.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane , March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgIII Page 18 of 47

2.4.2.1. Headworks
Phase 2 will not upgrade the headworks equipment.
2.4.2.2. Equalization Basin and Influent Pump Station
Phase 2 will not upgrade the EQ basin. The submersible solids-handling pumps of the influent
pump station will be upgraded to meet the peak hourly flow of 18.8 MGD with the largest pump
out of service.
2.4.2.3. Biological Treatment
A third 2.0 MGD 5-Stage BNR treatment train, with the equipment detailed in Table 10, will be
installed.
2.4.2.4. Secondary Clarification
A third 95-ft diameter clarifier will be installed. The RAS/WAS pumps will be upgraded and/or
additional pumps will be installed.
2.4.2.5. Tertiary Treatment and Advanced Treatment
Additional deep bed filters will be installed to meet the design capacity of 6.0 MGD.
Effluent TN and TP concentrations are expected to consistently meet the speculative limits at
4.0 MGD of design flow with a 5-stage BNR and tertiary filters. However, when the plant influent
flow increases and the 6.0 MGD expansion is required, the effluent TN concentration below
2.2 mg/L on an annual basis will be a challenge with a 5-stage BNR process and tertiary filters.
There are wastewater treatment facilities, including the nearby Town of Hillsborough,which have
been able to consistently achieve effluent TN concentrations below 2 mg/L using conventional
BNR technology. However, in all such cases these treatment facilities appear to be taking
advantage of some combination of influent flows far below capacity and favorable influent
wastewater characteristics. Equipment manufacturers will generally not guarantee effluent TN
concentrations below 3.0 or in some cases 2.5 mg/L.
As previously noted, deep bed filters are recommended for Phase 1 of this project due to the
nitrate removal capability. The TN removal performance of the proposed 5-stage BNR and
denitrification filters should be documented after Phase 1 is complete. Operators can make
necessary operational adjustments to improve or stabilize the TN removal efficiency. These
operational and maintenance data would be used to determine if advanced technologies are
needed for the phase 2 expansion.
If necessary for the 6.0 MGD facility in Phase 2, advanced technologies are available such as
reverse osmosis (RO) membrane, ion exchange, or granular activated carbon adsorption that can
reliably achieve effluent TN concentrations below 2 mg/L. However, the implementation of these
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ® , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
�� '"
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 19 of 47

advanced technologies requires high capital and operating costs compared to conventional
nutrient removal technologies.
During the planning phase, it has been assumed that all 6.0 MGD can be treated to an effluent
TN concentration of 2.5 mg/L by 5-stage BNR followed by denitrifying filters. The denitrifying
filter effluent will then be divided, with 4.75 MGD flowing directly to disinfection and 1.25 MGD
being pumped through granular activated carbon columns prior to disinfection. The portion of
wastewater treated by carbon adsorption will be able to achieve an effluent TN concentration of
1.0 mg/L or better, giving the 6.0 MGD blended effluent a TN concentration of 2.2 mg/L, thereby
allowing the facility to achieve the annual TN mass loadings. Evaluation of the necessity of this
treatment step and final alternative selection is best deferred to the 6.0 MGD expansion design
process, when the operational and maintenance data described above will be available.
2.4.2.6. Disinfection
Phase 2 will install additional chemical feed and storage systems.
2.4.2.7. Effluent Discharge
There is no additional upgrade in Phase 2 for the effluent discharge pipe.
2.4.2.8. Sludge Handling &Treatment
Phase 2 will convert the second existing aeration basin to an aerated sludge holding tank to
provide 30-day residual storage in addition to existing aerated digesters. For minimum mixing
and oxygen requirements, an air supply of 4,010 cfm air in the aeration basin shall be provided
with the largest blower out of service.
Figure 4 and Figure 5 show a schematic diagram of the major components for each phase
expansion.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgi11 Page 20 of 47

Figure 4: Mebane WRRF Process Flow Diagram (4.0 MGD)
INFLUENT
WASTEWATER
T
INFLUENT
SPIRAL BAR SCREENINGS
I SCREEN (2)
1
VORTEX GRIT
REMOVAL P. GRIT
SYSTEM (2)
V
FILTRATE I.-INFLUENT
W im SPUTTER r
I- BOX
a
U,
IN
W
a x MOADAMS
EQUALIZATION INFLUENT < CREEK
LAND BASIN PUMP Y
APPLICATION 1 MG STATION a
m
Ice
SLUDGE LLJ
EQ BASIN E
PUMP
PRESS STATION RE—AERATION
i BASIN
(ANAEROBIC j
�JI BASIN
AEROBIC (3)[6] DECHLOR—
DIGESTER I (NATION ' SODIUM
[2] 1ST ANOXIC BASIN BISULFITE
f- BASIN (2)[4] j
P12
ZW 1 �Z CHLORINE
ROTARYDRUM E o OXIDATION DITCH`�D CONTACT HYPOODI`ORITE
THICKENER �_, (1)$..e-__-METHANOL
[2] BASIN
[2] A
A 2ND ANOXIC — DEEP BED ALUM
oN BASIN (1)[2] FILTERS [5]
mm 1
RAS/WAS 1
REAERATION
PUMP BASIN (t)[z] '.-CLARIFIER [2] - —ALUM
STATION
1
/ SLUDGE
HOLDING -
\ TANK (NUMBER OF UNITS PER TREATMENT TRAIN)
[NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL]
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
�� 'I'
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 21 of 47

Figure 5: Mebane WRRF Process Flow Diagram (6.0 MGD)
INFLUENT
WASTEWATER
INFLUENT
SPIRAL BAR--ow-SCREENINGS
SCREEN (2)
I
VORTEX GRIT
REMOVAL —IN-'GRIT
,.......„....f....„,...„SYSTEM (2)
FILTRATE INFLUENT GAC BACKWASH
SPLITTER-4i—
BOX
i—
(s)cn
it =
a o
EQUALIZATION INFLUENT
LAND BASIN PUMP Y MOADAMS
APPLICATION 1 MG STATION < CREEK
l t m
W 1
SLUDGE EC/ BASIN
PUMP RE-AERATION
BASIN
PRESS STATION
-1--- I
(ANAER BASIOBICN DECHLOR-
(3)[9] INATION SODIUM
AEROBIC BASIN BISULFITE
DIGESTER i
[2] 1ST ANOXIC A
BASIN (2)[6]+-
mZ CHLORINE
<':; CONTACT SODIUM
0 z HYPOCHLORITE
ROTARY Z r a BASIN
DRUM �2 OXIDATION DITCH
'
THICKENER `a! (1)[3]
[2] I
METHANOL v
2ND ANOXIC DEEP BED GRANULAR
BASIN (1)[3] ALUM FILTERS [8] 1.25 MMD ACTIVATED CARBON
Fi LA
RAS WAS t
REAERATION ALUM iik
PUMP CLARIFIER
STATION \ 3 BASIN (1)[3, [ ]
A v/
SL/ UDGE
HOLDING 1-+
TANK / (NUMBER OF UNITS PER TREATMENT TRAIN)
/ [NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL]
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ® ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgiHH Page 22 of 47

3.0 STREAM EVALUATION
3.1 Water Quality
The discharge stream for the Mebane WRRF's NPDES permit is Moadams Creek (NC DEQ Stream
Index 16-18-7). Located within the Cape Fear River Basin (subbasin 03-06-02), Moadams Creek
has a stream classification of Water Supply V(WS-V) and Nutrient Sensitive Water (NSW). Waters
with a WS-V classification are generally used for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of
biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation, agriculture, and as a water supply source for
drinking, culinary, and food-processing purposes. The stream has a supplemental classification of
NSW because of downstream chlorophyll impairment in Jordan Lake. Moadams Creek, at the
existing discharge point, is not listed on the 303(d) list of impaired waters. According to the
NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit of NCDEQ, the proposed wastewater discharge to Moadams
Creek will be allowed. The proposed discharge point will be the existing discharge point.
3.2 Flow Information
Moadams Creek stretches approximately 4.6 miles in length, from its source to Back Creek.
Moadams Creek has a summer 7Q10 flow of 0 cfs, a winter 7Q10 flow of 0 cfs, and an annual
average flow of 0.9 cfs.
3.3 Endangered Species
According to the speculative effluent limit letter from NCDEQ, there are not any Federally Listed
threatened or endangered aquatic species identified within a 5-mile radius of the proposed
discharge location. If there are any identified threatened or endangered species, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service will be contacted to determine whether the proposed discharge location
might impact the species.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgIIl Page 23 of 47

4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
McGill Associates evaluated five alternatives for the ultimate disposal of wastewater generated
at the Mebane WRRF. These included connection to an existing public sewer system, land
application, public access reuse, connection to an existing public sewer system and land
application,and surface water discharge to Moadams Creek. Each alternative is discussed in more
detail within this section.
4.1 Alternative No. 1—Connection to an Existing Public Sewer System
Alternative 1 does not include an expansion of the Mebane WRRF. Under this alternative,
2.5 MGD of treated wastewater would continue to be discharged to Moadams Creek, as
permitted under the existing Mebane WRRF individual NPDES permit. The remaining 3.5 MGD of
raw wastewater would flow to a nearby existing public sewer system.
There are three existing municipal WWTPs within a five-mile radius of the Mebane WWTP: the
Graham WWTP, the Burlington Eastside WWTP, and the Burlington Southside WWTP. Table 11
details 2020 LWSP data related to these facilities.
Table 11: Nearby Existing Municipal WWTPs
Permitted 2020 Average 2020 Maximum
WWTP Name NPDES Permit Capacity Annual Discharge Daily Discharge
(MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
Graham WWTP NC0021211 3.5 1.903 6.320
Burlington NC0023868 12.0 4.523 16.500
Eastside WWTP
Burlington NC0023876 12.0 8.091 26.335
Southside WWTP
The Graham WWTP currently operates at approximately 54% capacity. With the addition of
3.5 MGD from the City, the Graham WWTP would exceed its permitted hydraulic capacity of
3.5 MGD. For this reason, connecting the City's sewer collection system to solely the City of
Graham's sewer collection system was deemed infeasible.
The Burlington Eastside WWTP and Burlington Southside WWTP currently operate at
approximately 38% and 67% capacity, respectively. As shown in Table 12, the City of Burlington
is under contract to accept a maximum of 5.844 MGD from seven regional municipalities and
discharge a maximum of 0.9 MGD to the City of Greensboro. In 2020, the City of Burlington
accepted an average of 2.3605 MGD from the seven municipalities and discharged an average of
0.1709 MGD to the City of Greensboro. It is not clear how much flow was accepted and
discharged by each WWTP owned by the City of Burlington.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion I I/ Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
mcg�ll
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 24 of 47

Table 12: City of Burlington Wastewater Interconnections
Average Daily Contract
System Type Amount (MGD) Maximum (MGD)
City of Greensboro Discharging 0.1709 0.900
City of Graham Receiving 0.1800 0.500
Green Level Receiving 0.1536 0.250
Town of Elon Receiving 0.7420 1.600
Town of Gibsonville Receiving 0.7041 1.550
Town of Haw River Receiving 0.2884 1.000
Town of Swepsonville Receiving 0.2402 0.800
Village of Alamance Receiving 0.0522 0.144
According to 2020 LWSP data, between the Burlington Eastside WWTP and the Burlington
Southside WWTP, the City of Burlington discharged a total average of 12.614 MGD to the Haw
River. As mentioned previously, in 2020, the Burlington WWTPs accepted an average of
2.3605 MGD from seven municipalities and discharged an average of 0.1709 MGD to the City of
Greensboro. This indicates that an average of 10.4244 MGD of wastewater was produced by the
City of Burlington itself in 2020. Assuming that the City of Burlington accepts the maximum
from theseven municipalities, discharges the maximum 0.9 MGD to the Cityof
5.844 MGD g
p
no growth, an increase in 3.5 MGD from the Citywould leave the
Greensboro, and experiences
City of Burlington's WWTPs operating at approximately 79%. As a result, the City of Burlington
would soon be forced to consider expansion plans for at least one of their WWTPs. Since
expansion of a WWTP would require significant capital investment and modification to an
existing NPDES permit, connecting the City's sewer collection system to solely the City of
Burlington's sewer collection system was deemed infeasible.
2020 Burlington ADF
= (Average Annual Discharge) — (Flow Accepted from Muncipalities)
+ (Flow Discharged to Greensboro)
2020 Burlington ADF = 12.614 MGD — 2.3605 MGD + 0.1709 MGD = 10.4244 MGD
Proposed Burlington ADF
= (2020 Burlington ADF) + (Max.Flow Accepted from Muncipalities)
+ (Max.Flow Accepted from Mebane)
— (Max.Flow Discharged to Greensboro)
Proposed Burlington ADF = 10.4244 MGD + 5.844 MGD + 3.5 MGD — 0.9 MGD
= 18.8684 MGD
18.8684 MGD
Proposed Burlington % Capacity = 24 MGD * 100 = 78.62%
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 25 of 47

Connecting the City's sewer collection system to all three nearby WWTPs was also considered.
Assuming that the City of Burlington accepts the maximum 5.844 MGD from the seven
municipalities, that the City of Burlington discharges the maximum 0.9 MGD to the City of
Greensboro, and that the City of Burlington and the City of Graham experience no growth, an
increase in 3.5 MGD from the City would leave the three nearby WWTPs operating at
approximately 76%. As a result, the three WWTPs would soon be forced to consider expansion
plans. Since expansion of one WWTP would require significant capital investment and
modification to an existing NPDES permit, connecting the City's sewer collection system to all
three nearby municipal treatment facilities was also deemed infeasible.
Flow to Graham &Burlington WWTPs
= (2020 Burlington ADF) + (2020 Graham ADF)
+ (Max.Flow Accepted by Burlington from Municipalities)
— (Max.Flow Discharged by Burlington to Greensboro)
+ (Max.Flow from Mebane)
Flow to Graham &Burlington WWTPs
= 10.4244 MGD + 1.903 MGD + 5.844 MGD — 0.9 MGD + 3.5 MGD
= 20.7714 MGD
Flow to Graham &Burlington WWTPs
Total Operating Capacity = * 100
(Burlington Capacity) + (Graham Capacity)
20.7714 MGD
Total Operating Capacity = (24 MGD) + (3.5 MGD) * 100 = 75.53%
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgiHH Page 26 of 47

4.2 Alternative No. 2— Land Application
As shown in Figure 6, the expansion of the Mebane WRRF under Alternative 2 includes the
installation of a 5-stage BNR process and denitrification filters (without advanced treatment) to
treat 6.0 MGD of raw wastewater. Under this alternative, 2.5 MGD of treated effluent would
continue to be discharged to Moadams Creek, as permitted under the existing Mebane WRRF
individual NPDES permit. The remaining 3.5 MGD would be land applied to adequate farmland in
Alamance County with a spray irrigation system. Assuming that the Mebane WRRF operates at
maximum capacity, 24.5 MG of reuse water would be land applied on a weekly basis. For this
analysis, it was assumed that land application could only occur 70% of the year, due to a variety
of factors including excessively wet soils, crop harvesting, poor weather, etc. To account for this
period where land application cannot occur, 35 MG of reuse water were assumed to be handled
in an average week.
max.weekly flow 24,500,000
Weekly Reuse Water Flow = _ = 35,000,000 gallons
usage ratio 0.7
According to the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the
majority of soils within Alamance County are unsuitable for the disposal of wastewater by
irrigation, as shown below in Table 13. This is primarily due to steep slopes, low adsorption rates,
high groundwater tables, and flooding issues. Several areas exist with some capacity for
irrigation. Although the NRCS refers to these areas as "somewhat limited", the limitations can be
overcome or minimized by special planning, design, or installation. For the purpose of this
analysis, it was assumed that these limitations could be overcome.
Table 13: Ratings of Soil within Alamance County
Rating Acres Percent
Very Limited 210,446.4 75.8%
Somewhat Limited 57,176.5 20.6%
Null or Not Rated 10,078.8 3.6%
A conservative estimate of the hydraulic loading rate is 1-inch per acre per week, which also
corresponds to the irrigation rate required for fescue hay (the preferred crop for the proposed
irrigation operation). With this loading rate, approximately 1,289 acres would be required for
disposal by land application.
1 acre — inch = 27,156 gallons
35,000,000 gallons Land Required = gallons = 1,289 acres
27,156 acre
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
�� '"
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 27 of 47

Finding suitable land application sites with sufficient acreage within city limits proved difficult.
For this reason, clusters of designated farmlands located outside of city limits were considered.
Due to required setbacks stated in 15A NCAC 02U .0700, it is recommended that excess land be
purchased by the City. Areas not used for land application could be utilized for reuse water
storage, set aside for future development of irrigation fields, or marked as reserve areas.
A review of the Alamance County GIS database revealed four parcels of general farmland in the
northeastern region of the county with a cumulative area of approximately 1,486 acres. Other
areas of general farmland were considered; however, these farmlands were situated further
apart than the cluster of parcels mentioned above.
The expansion of the Mebane WRRF to 6.0 MGD would include expanding the headworks;
repurposing one existing aeration basin as an EQ tank; repurposing one existing aeration basin
for sludge storage; and installing an influent pump station, 5-stage BNR oxidation ditches,
secondary clarifiers, a RAS/WAS pump station, tertiary filters, a chlorine contact basin with
dechlorination and post-aeration chambers, chemical feed equipment, 16-inch diameter gravity
discharge piping, 5-ft. diameter effluent manholes, yard piping, and all associated electrical
equipment.
Also,Alternative 2 would require the installation of a 17.5 MG side-stream detention pond at the
WRRF (for periods when the reuse water does not meet land application requirements), an
effluent pump station that transfers the reuse water from the WRRF to the proposed land
application sites, approximately 79,500 LF of 16-inch diameter reuse water piping, four (4)
booster pump stations, four (4) reuse water storage tanks, and four (4) spray irrigation systems
with irrigation pumps. Storage requirements for each land application site would be based on a
water balance analysis. For the purpose of this EAA, three (3) 3 MG reuse water storage tanks
and one (1) 0.75 MG reuse water storage tank were assumed to be required. Additionally, this
alternative would require the purchase of all 1,486 acres of general farmland previously
discussed.
A preliminary estimate of cost, shown in Table 14, was prepared utilizing the preliminary layout
presented in Figure 7. Land assessment values for Alamance County were utilized to determine
an approximate cost of each parcel. An estimate of the annual operation and maintenance
(O&M)costs is included in Table 15.These annual costs were converted into 2022 costs, assuming
a 20-year design life and a discount rate of 2.3% (the approximate discount rate prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic). No salvage value is anticipated and was therefore not taken into
consideration. The total present value of Alternative 2 is $182,629,000 in terms of 2022 dollars.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
mcgill&Orange Counties, North Carolina d'" Page 28 of 47

Figure 6: Alternative 2 Process Flow Diagram
INFLUENT
WASTEWATER
INFLUENT
SPIRAL BAR SCREENINGS
SCREEN (2)
I
VORTEX GRIT
REMOVAL —GRIT
,________T________SYSTEM (2)
FILTRATE INFLUENT
►-SPLITTER-
H BOX
N
N
`cr`' ' ' x MDADAMS
a EQUALIZATION INFLUENT < CREEK
LAND BASIN PUMP Y '
APPLICATION 1 MG STATION
1 m 0
I W
",.,13.5 MGD LAND
il
SLUDGE EQ PUMPIN N APPLICATION
PRESS STATION RE—AERATION
1 1 BASIN
ANAEROBIC
BASIN
AEROBIC (3)[6] DECHLOR—
DIGESTER INATION ,� SODIUM
T BISULF1TE
[2] 1ST ANOXIC BASIN
BASIN (2)[4] 1 xz
Ci
ROTARY z L., 1 c{-,z CHLORINE
co OXIDATION DITCH`T'r CONTACT —HYPO DIILORITE
DRUM LU0 (1)[2] — BASIN
THICKENER
[2] vl METHANOL
2ND NOXIC`� — DEEP BED
c> BASIN (1)[2] FILTERS [5]F.
ALUM
RAS/WAS REAERATION
PUMP BASIN (1)[21—► CLARIFIER [2]!—ALUM
STATION \ /
SLUDGE
HOLDING
TANK (NUMBER OF UNITS PER TREATMENT TRAIN)
[NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL]
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion IN Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'"Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 29 of 47

Figure 7: Land Application Alternative
,: s "�"'�' r —r -74 - n ,
LAND APPUCATICI SITE " "4 4 ��ht, i.•y •ROPC E_
APPROX. 446 ACRES .i,, . ,M '4" ' ' ,- LAND X. 35Cl SITE
OWNER: ETREE, LLC. . e �". c, APPROX. 35U ACRES
A r ,. 1 t 440 OWNER: ONE HUNDRED NINETEE'.I A E'.,: LL. -
,. ....:
.410*. . air. v.... , I
•Likk&-Ailk- „ ,,,, t .1 11.r .---1 1 file ,
4 AI
4,
- ,. L '� `�" a fry y ac i r
a
44-e. 4,401, • r 1 , 1. yF5 %. ` : Y2 ROPOSED r
/�"�'' •'`` 4 LAND APPLICATION SITE
ill,� • ! . , J �• " v l' ; APPROX. 308 ACRES
PRC' ''E- 1 ��'" .OWNER: JO ANNE HUNTER do JEANETTE ARMOUR
,, L LI. ATION :ITE ,� a Ile 4 r '� �
i82 ACRES t . Y. +tt, .L, `a4^ : T` 6.
IF E ,I FAIRY, LLC.
w. L
r .
��,Etr
.• � Ij��,= 'ROPOSED
Y
A ,'' # y a' * M`r A ,, Q 16—INCH REUSE WATER
r.. t. .i'* •1 . - , 41-, j "-,...Atli + . ' DISTRIBUTION MAIN ;
'•
''‘'.:4. ''i ' ' lar: ‘, ' ' ,.,'"' "cr 4 . ili. " . 4,1*-7' !,1/17: • j"—; : .,.. ,,.15„..-- . 17-,-""'"'"r.' t
1'1
.� y �. ':7:
,% :#iY. r Rii'� 4+;1y .'4► ' . _!y' r l•y.
:44
i`;C '. 4 t...;t� v.t ..4 4Y� 4 '-i ,� T . C f 1=' l -
r 1 114-
LEGEND
•T ES w.ww E r saif iJ it,, i,1'� a .. * 'v a
EFFU�EhT s. +� t . y
dl �!Ek:AnE WWTP 4 ,:
w+o,,,,e)srootc:e Tao* , aj .d' : ` 4 rt ate '
Ah 1 i :'TEM YI\., •i7ATNx+ ...,
4. Y ' ' ,� 7 500 ..+ 3,250 7 500 t5.0
Ili som ,•
:11
. no sin ion imiiiimemet
• ETE 11:./ f... +„' tree,.._. ♦ ' i _
a tv rr NW I N 111111111111111
£ e r• t°� ,,' ' , " GRAPHIC SCALE DIVISION VALUE =7,500 FEET °,
4
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Me A March 2022
Alamance nge Counties, North Carolina MC II ;e 30 of 47

Table 14: Alternative 2 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost
PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 2
CITY OF MEBANE
MARCH 2022
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Mobilization 1 LS 3% $3,726,000
Headworks Expansion (includes Influent
2 Channel,Fine Screening,Grit Removal,and 1 LS $2,502,000 $2,502,000
Bypass Channel)
3 Influent Pump Station 1 LS $2,250,000 $2,250,000
4 Flow Equalization (Existing Aeration Basin 1 LS $1,575,000 $1,575,000
repurposed)
5 5 Stage Bardenpho Oxidation Ditches 1 LS $17,943,000 $17,943,000
6 Secondary Clarifiers 1 LS $3,766,500 $3,766,500
7 RAS/WAS Pump Station 1 LS $1,125,000 $1,125,000
8 Tertiary Filters 1 LS $6,844,800 $6,844,800
9 Chlorine Contact Basin(includes chambers for 1 LS $1,972,500 $1,972,500
Dechlorination and Post-Aeration)
Chemical Feed(includes Chemical Feed
10 Building,Carbon Supplement,pH Adjustment, 1 LS $2,145,000 $2,145,000
&Coagulant)
11 Sludge Processing(Existing Basin 1 LS $1,125,000 $1,125,000
repurposed for Sludge Storage)
12 16-inch DIP Gravity Discharge Pipe 275 LF $160 $44,000
13 5-ft. Diameter Effluent Manhole 3 EA $7,750 $23,250
14 Yard Piping 1 LS $5,175,000 $5,175,000
15 Site Civil 1 LS $2,490,000 $2,490,000
16 Site Electrical 1 LS $7,800,000 $7,800,000
17 SCADA Work 1 LS $787,500 $787,500
18 17.5 MG Side-Stream Detention Pond 1 LS $1,155,000 $1,155,000
19 Effluent Pump Station 1 LS $3,400,000 $3,400,000
20 16-inch Reuse Water Distribution Line 79,500 LF $160 $12,720,000
21 Booster Pump Stations 4 EA $750,000 $3,000,000
22 3 MG Reuse Water Storage Tank 3 EA $10,000,000 $30,000,000
23 0.75 MG Reuse Water Storage Tank 1 EA $3,000,000 $3,000,000
24 Spray Irrigation System with Irrigation 1,486 ACRE $3,000 $4,458,000
Pumps
25 Land Purchase(Jo Anne Hunter) 1 LS $1,190,000 $1,190,000
26 Land Purchase(Etree LLC) 1 LS $1,180,000 $1,180,000
27 Land Purchase(E&B Farm LLC) 1 LS $1,590,000 $1,590,000
28 Land Purchase(One Hundred Nineteen 1 LS $1,210,000 $1,210,000
Access LLC)
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $124,197,550
CONTINGENCY $12,420,000
ENGINEERING FEES $9,564,000
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION $6,831,000 1
LEGAL&ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS $1,367,000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT $2,733,000
PROJECT TOTAL $157,112,550
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion „/ Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane �� '" March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 31 of 47

Table 15: Alternative 2 Estimated Annual O&M Costs
ITEM O&M DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 Maintenance & Repairs 1 LS $1,129,000 $1,129,000
2 Electricity 1 LS $53,000 $53,000
3 Labor 1 LS $399,000 $399,000
4 Chemicals 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
Total Annual O&M Cost $1,606,000
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion IN Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'"Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 32 of 47

4.3 Alternative No. 3— Public Access Reuse
The expansion of the Mebane WRRF under Alternative 2 includes the installation of a 5-stage
BNR process and denitrification filters (without advanced treatment) to treat 6.0 MGD of raw
wastewater. Alternative 3 proposes to reuse the effluent in publicly accessible areas. Reuse by a
select group of customers, including industries and golf courses, was first investigated. A
preliminary review of online information revealed no industries with sufficient space or need to
utilize the reuse water; however, Alamance County is home to several golf courses, as detailed
in Table 16.
Table 16:Alamance County Golf Courses
Golf Course Name Parcel Area (Acres)
Mill Creek Golf Course 192.3
Quaker Creek Golf Course 247.0
Challenge Golf Course 186.8
Southwick Golf Course 104.6
Assuming that 75%of each golf course's land requires irrigation,and that the golf courses already
have ponds capable of storing the reuse water during periods unsuitable for irrigation,
approximately 548 acres of turfgrass could be available for public access reuse. According to a
report published by the United States Golf Association (Appendix G), golf courses in the
southeastern United States use an average of 2.4 acre-feet of water per irrigated turf acre per
year. As shown in the below calculations, these three golf courses would be capable of utilizing
an estimated 1,174,285 gallons of reuse water each day.
E(Golf Course Area) * 0.75 = 548 irrigated turf grass acres
acre — water ft ofgallons 1 r
548 acres * 2.4 i * 325,851 - * y = 1,174,285 gpd
irrigated turf grass acre *yr acre —ft 365 days
A preliminary review of online GIS parcel data showed various parks and city-owned properties
situated within city limits. These properties are detailed in Table 17.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgIll Page 33 of 47

Table 17: City of Mebane Parks and Properties
Property Type Street Address Parcel Area (Acres)
Baseball Field Lee St 4.5
Mebane Community Park 627 W Center St 39.8
Cemetery E Forest St 8.1
Lake Michael Park 906 Lake Michael Way 130.3
Mebane Memorial Garden 6914 E WASHINGTON ST EXT 19.5
Vacant Land N. First St 147.5
WRRF 635 Corregidor St 67.1
Industrial Park 1018 Corporate Park Dr 91.0
Assuming that 75% of each park and city-owned property requires irrigation, approximately
381 acres of land could be available for public access reuse. Assuming an average of 2.4 acre-feet
of water per irrigated turf acre per year,these parks and city-owned properties would be capable
of utilizing an estimated 815,928 gallons of reuse water each day.
E(Parcel Area) * 0.75 = 381 acres
acre —ft of water gallons 1 yr
381 acres * 2.4 * 325,851 * = 815,928 gpd
irrigated turf grass acre *yr acre —ft 365 days
From these calculations, the golf courses, parks, and city-owned properties could use
approximately 1,990,213 gallons of reuse water each day. This alternative fails to utilize all
3.5 MGD of the reuse water;therefore, a supplemental public access reuse option was explored.
An alternative to reuse by a select group of customers is reuse by residential customers. If the
three aforementioned golf courses and larger users use all 1,990,213 gallons of reuse water each
day, a maximum of 1,509,787 gallons of reuse water could be utilized by residential customers.
Assuming that the reuse water is used for home irrigation, a conservative estimate of summer
water usage is 0.75 inches of water per acre per week. With an average irrigation frequency of
70%, and an average lawn size of 0.25 acres, approximately 2,965 residential customers would
be needed to utilize the remaining 1,509,787 gallons of reuse water.
gallons 1 acre — in 7 days acre — in
1,509,787 * * = 389.18
day 27,156 gallons 1 week week
acre — in 1 1 week 1 customer
389.18 *— * * = 2,965 customers
week 0.7 0.75 acre — in 0.25 acres
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ,®® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'I'
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 34 of 47

According to the population projections tabulated in Table 7,the population of the City will reach
19,420 individuals by the end of 2022. Assuming that there are 2.48 individuals contributing to
each sewer connection, there will be an estimated 7,830 residential sewer customers by the end
of 2022. With the residential population projected to continually increase,there will be plenty of
residential sewer customers available to utilize the reuse water for residential irrigation.
Alternative 3 would require the construction of a distribution system on the scale of a potable
water distribution system and would depend on a successful public outreach program. Due to
the enormity of such a reuse distribution system, and the subsequent significant capital
investment required for construction, Alternative 3 was considered cost prohibitive to
implement, relative to a direct discharge alternative. For this reason, a preliminary estimate of
cost was not prepared for Alternative 3.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion 110 Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgIll Page 35 of 47

4.4 Alternative No. 4—Connection to an Existing Public Sewer System & Land Application
As shown in Figure 8, the expansion of the Mebane WRRF under Alternative 4 includes the
installation of a 5-stage BNR process and denitrification filters to treat 4.0 MGD of raw
wastewater. Under this alternative, 2.0 MGD of raw wastewater would flow to the Burlington
Eastside WWTP, 1.5 MGD of reuse water would be land applied to farmland within Alamance
County, and 2.5 MGD of treated effluent would be discharged to Moadams Creek.
As previously discussed in Alternative 1, in 2020, the Burlington WWTPs discharged a combined
average of 10.4244 MGD to the Haw River. Additionally, the City of Burlington is contracted to
accept a maximum of 5.844 MGD from seven regional municipalities and discharge a maximum
of 0.9 MGD to the City of Greensboro. Assuming no growth within the City of Burlington and
maximum contract limits are met, the Burlington WWTPs would operate at 15.3684 MGD, or
approximately 64% capacity. With the addition of 2 MGD from the City, the Burlington WWTPs
would operate at 17.3684 MGD, or approximately 72% capacity. This indicates that the City of
Burlington could have the capacity to accept 2.0 MGD from the City. Due to its relatively low
current operating capacity (38%), it was assumed that the Burlington Eastside WWTP would be
capable of accepting all 2 MGD from the City.
Approximately 31,000 LF of 12-inch raw wastewater piping would be required to convey
wastewater from the Mebane WRRF to the Burlington Eastside WWTP. Additionally, there would
need to be an administrative effort to develop an interlocal agreement between the City of
Mebane and the City of Burlington. Such negotiation for a wholesale rate for raw sewer would
likely be a lengthy process. For the purpose of this analysis, a capacity allowance of$8,290,000
was assumed based on the existing Graham/Mebane Wastewater Treatment Plant
Intergovernmental Agreement. Additionally, the City of Mebane will pay its usage based on the
formula as follows: total MGD sent by the City to the Burlington Eastside WWTP divided by the
total MGD treated at the WWTP times the cost for treatment by MGD.
As previously mentioned, this alternative also includes the land application of 1.5 MGD of reuse
water to farmland within Alamance County. Assuming that the Mebane WRRF continues to
discharge 2.5 MGD of treated effluent to Moadams Creek, that the Mebane WRRF operates at
maximum capacity, and that the City of Burlington accepts the 2 MGD previously discussed,
10.5 MG of reuse water would require disposal on a weekly basis. Following the same calculation
described in Alternative 2, it was assumed that land application can only occur 70% of the year.
Thus, 15 MG of reuse water were assumed to be handled in an average week.
max.weekly flow 10,500,000
Weekly Reuse Water Flow = _ = 15,000,000 gallons
usage ratio 0.7
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgi1I Page 36 of 47

With an estimated 1-inch per acre per week hydraulic loading rate, approximately 552 acres
would be required for disposal by land application.
15,000,000 gallons
Land Required = = 552 acres
27,156 gallons
acre
A review of the Alamance CountyGIS database revealed twoparcels of general farmland with a
cumulative area of approximately 585 acres north of the Mebane WRRF.
The expansion of the Mebane WRRF to 4.0 MGD would include expanding the headworks;
repurposing one existing aeration basin as an EQ tank; repurposing one existing aeration basin
for sludge storage; and installing an influent pump station, 5-stage BNR oxidation ditches,
secondary clarifiers, a RAS/WAS pump station, tertiary filters, a chlorine contact basin with
dechlorination and post-aeration chambers, chemical feed equipment, 16-inch diameter gravity
discharge piping, 5-ft. diameter effluent manholes, yard piping, and all associated electrical
equipment.
Also, Alternative 4 would require the installation of a 7.5 MG side-stream detention pond at the
WRRF, an effluent pump station with multiple sets of pumps, approximately 40,300 LF of 16-inch
reuse water distribution piping,two (2) booster pump stations,two (2) reuse water storage tanks, 1
and two (2) spray irrigation systems with irrigation pumps. Storage requirements for each land
application site would be based on a water balance analysis. For the purpose of this EAA, two (2)
0.75 MG reuse water storage tanks were assumed to be required. Additionally, this alternative
would require the purchase of all 585 acres of general farmland previously discussed.
A preliminary estimate of cost, shown in Table 18, was prepared utilizing the preliminary layout
presented in Figure 9. Land assessment values for Alamance County were utilized to determine
an approximate cost of each parcel. An estimate of the annual O&M costs is included in Table 19.
pp
These annual costs were converted into 2022 costs, assuming a 20-year design life and a discount
rate of 2.3%. No salvage value is anticipated and was therefore not taken into consideration. The
total present value of Alternative 4 is $112,636,000 in terms of 2022 dollars.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion / Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 37 of 47

Figure 8: Alternative 4 Process Flow Diagram
INFLUENT
WASTEWATER
0
g 2.0 MOD BURUNGTON
o EASTSIDE WWTP
r
INFLUENT
SPIRAL BAR ! SCREENINGS
SCREEN (2)
T
VORTEX GRIT
REMOVAL GRIT
SYSTEM
�
1
FILTRATE i INFLUENT
SPUTTER el
a BOX
tn
re V J__
tn
MOADAMS
EQUALIZATION INFLUENT < CREEK
LAND BASIN PUMP Y I
APPLICATION 1 MG STATION <
' I ' P $• t.s MGD LAND
SLUDGE E PUMP Q IN N - APPLICATION
PRESS STATION RE—AERATION
I BASIN
ANAEROBIC r
��
I im BASIN
AE/ RpBC\ (3)[el
DECHLOR—
DIGESTER T INATION SODIUM
2 �f31SULFITE
[ 1ST ANOXIC BASIN
BASIN (2)[4r. 00t M It
1 81 CHLORINE
ROTARY ci)� � CONTACT �� SODIUM
DRUM �� OXIDATION DITCH— HYPOCHLORITE
—THICKENER �,o1 (1)[2] BASIN
[2] METHANOL
2ND ANOXIC — DEEP BED HALum
vN BASIN (1)[2] FILTERS [5]
A
RAS WAS REAERATION
PUMP BASIN (1)[2 �CLARIFIER [2]--si--AuJM
STATION
•
SLUDGE
HOLDING I+
TANK,// (NUMBER OF UNITS PER TREATMENT TRAIN)
[NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL]
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion IR Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina rmcgiHH Page 38 of 47

Figure 9: Connection to an Existing Public ____er System & Land Application Alternative
6 000 0 3,000 6,000 12,000 -r �`L r.st it `�. tom:
t
GRAPHIC SCALE DIVISION VALUE =6,000 FEET k +'9 ° `.. r ; ry` .. {.g,J -+ ' - '1->�'$'' ' 4,-
�. -4,ri ., v R ` .
5
"Sri «, , {;4 �', ''. . A PROPOSED
• .. .•. . .par,...,,A Y,i
{ , A/ l'> I �.'i g b*r iik , • LAND APPLICATION SITE
'a "' • # 4 .APPROX. 303 ACRES
r a Y��, i . - .,, � - OWNER: .:`) ANNE HUNTER & JEANETTE ARMOUR
1
- - 4 - 4 iiii . 4r . .
7
� r
Alip, ' _ ) ..b,.. ,,,. A114 la at P-
f <. w .,•, v PROPOSED R ;
i ! ' . r ' ;' LAND APPUCATION SITE -
41, ., •
- . `� -' - ,� 0 � APPROX. 282 ACRES
it
N ".h# *l • t K., OWNER: JOSEPH & .ETTr . H )CKLE
li!t*. ;lit?
r • • -r
.
.
a
*- i" -,''. PROPOSED °` aim. - '�..,r. PROPOSED
' �• 12—INCH RAW WASTEWATER PIPING +� '�>` 16—INCH REUSE WATER 1,A ,fir
- x y
"�'+. , II r� ," e , �0 Algal
`: T �iy� r,� DISTRIBUTION MAIN ��
5
r x
r
Iftivy W J kr 'a v�.,#° * _;. ,
Z ,4 V EXISTING `; } ., It ,,r• Ys • ' � r "a 11. ' `{
;> BURUNGTON EASTSIDE WWTr � !• ' 7 . ,„ � . K �,,
r R y,. �
tts
itt,s,
�, , {: t
, . , . , „ , . re . Ara.l ,..i. ,5.c.-4..,;,.. , .-, ., , sunon
,;t+.,. � EXISTING s. +r anD DM srea POOP sTAnc.
**---. r 114 MEBANE WWTP ■• ,.., f.
t
.i i } �y'. a . C:.� Y'es,
7 # e • RP'OSEO SIDE-STREAM
y{ •-
. `b•, -` �- "" ' 1'•_ - 3 4 -.r. ''' d DEn:nnON PJI D
i. . �
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 39 of 47

Table 18: Alternative 4 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost
PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 4
CITY OF MEBANE
MARCH 2022
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Mobilization 1 LS 3% $2,102,600
Headworks Expansion(includes Influent
2 Channel, Fine Screening,Grit Removal,and 1 LS $1,668,000 $1,668,000
Bypass Channel)
3 Influent Pump Station 1 LS $1,500,000 $1,500,000
4 Flow Equalization(Existing Aeration Basin 1 LS $1,050,000 $1,050,000
repurposed)
5 5 Stage Bardenpho Oxidation Ditches 1 LS $11,962,000 $11,962,000
6 Secondary Clarifiers 1 LS $2,511,000 $2,511,000
7 RAS/WAS Pump Station 1 LS $750,000 $750,000
8 Tertiary Filters 1 LS $4,563,200 $4,563,200
Chlorine Contact Basin (includes chambers
9 for Dechlorination and Post-Aeration) 1 LS $1,315,000 $1,315,000
Chemical Feed(includes Chemical Feed
10 Building,Carbon Supplement, pH 1 LS $1,430,000 $1,430,000
Adjustment, &Coagulant)
11 Sludge Processing(Existing Basin 1 LS $750,000 $750,000
repurposed for Sludge Storage)
12 16-inch DIP Gravity Discharge Pipe 275 LF $160 $44,000
13 5-ft. Diameter Effluent Manhole 3 EA $7,750 $23,250
14 Yard Piping 1 LS $3,450,000 $3,45-0,000
15 Site Civil 1 LS $1,660,000 $1,660,000
16 Site Electrical 1 LS $5,200,000 $5,200,000
17 SCADA Work 1 LS $525,000 $525,000
18 12-inch Raw Wastewater Piping 31,000 LF $120 $3,720,000
19 7.5 MG Side-Stream Detention Pond 1 LS $580,000 $580,000
20 Effluent Pump Station with Multiple Pump 1 LS $7,500,000 $7,500,000
Sets
21 16-inch Reuse Water Distribution Line 40,300 LF $160 $6,448,000
22 Booster Pump Stations 2 LS $750,000 $1,500,000
23 0.75 MG Reuse Water Storage Tank 2 LS $3,000,000 $6,000,000
24 Irrigation System with Pumping Stations 585 ACRE $3,000 $1,755,000
25 Land Purchase(Joseph Chockley) 1 LS $890,000 $890,000
26 Land Purchase(Jo Anne Hunter) 1 LS $1,190,000 $1,190,000
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $70,087,050
CONTINGENCY $7,009,000
ENGINEERING FEES $5,397,000
DESIGN_ AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION $3,855,000
LEGAL&ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS $771,000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT $1,542,000
PROJECT TOTAL $88,661,050
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
mcgill
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 40 of 47

Table 19: Alternative 4 Estimated Annual O&M Costs
ITEM O&M DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 Maintenance & Repairs 1 LS $643,000 $643,000
2 Electricity 1 LS $35,000 $35,000
3 Labor 1 LS $399,000 $399,000
4 Chemicals 1 LS $17,000 $17,000
Annual Installment for
5 1 LS $415,000 $415,000
Capacity Allowance
Total Annual O&M Cost* $1,509,000
*Note: This annual O&M cost does not include the treatment cost that the City of Mebane will
pay the City of Burlington for the treatment of 2.0 MGD of raw wastewater.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill
Page 41 of 47

4.5 Alternative No. 5—Surface Water Discharge to Moadams Creek
As shown in Figure 10, the expansion of the Mebane WRRF under Alternative 5 includes the
installation of a 5-stage BNR process, denitrification filters, and a granular activated carbon
treatment train to treat 6.0 MGD of raw wastewater. Under this alternative, 6.0 MGD of treated
effluent would be discharged to Moadams Creek, as stated in the proposed improvements of
Section 2.
As previously discussed, the Mebane WRRF currently operates under NPDES permit NCOO21474
for the discharge of up to 2.5 MGD of treated effluent to Moadams Creek. This permit was
scheduled to expire on May 31, 2019; however, a permit renewal application was submitted on
November 30, 2018. A new NPDES permit has not yet been approved. Speculative effluent limits
for the proposed WRRF expansion project have been provided by NCDEQ.
The expansion of the Mebane WRRF to 6.0 MGD would include expanding the headworks;
repurposing one existing aeration basin as an EQ tank; repurposing one existing aeration basin
for sludge storage; and installing an influent pump station, 5-stage BNR oxidation ditches,
secondary clarifiers, a RAS/WAS pump station, tertiary filters, a chlorine contact basin with
dechlorination and post-aeration chambers, a granular activated carbon treatment train,
chemical feed equipment, yard piping, and all associated electrical equipment.
Alternative 5 would require the construction of approximately 275 LF of 16-inch diameter gravity
discharge piping and three (3) 5-ft. diameter effluent manholes. The proposed gravity discharge
pipeline would transport the treated effluent from the proposed re-aeration chamber to an
existing effluent manhole along Moadams Creek. From the existing manhole,the treated effluent
would gravity flow through approximately 200 LF of existing 36-inch effluent discharge piping,
one (1) additional existing effluent manhole, and one (1) existing Parshall flume before flowing
into Moadams Creek. The proposed gravity discharge pipeline and effluent manholes would be
situated on land owned by the City. Alternative 5 assumes that the expanded WRRF would be
capable of meeting its approved NPDES permits and would comply with the reliability
requirements specified in 15A NCAC 2H.O124.
Figure 11 shows a preliminary site plan of the proposed expanded treatment facility with surface
water discharge to Moadams Creek.
A preliminary estimate of cost, shown in Table 20, was prepared utilizing the preliminary layout
presented in Figure 11.An estimate of the annual O&M costs is included in Table 21.These annual
costs were converted into 2022 costs, assuming a 20-year design life and a discount rate of 2.3%.
No salvage value is anticipated and was therefore not taken into consideration. The total present
value of Alternative 5 is $97,755,000 in terms of 2022 dollars.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 42 of 47

Figure 10: Alternative 5 Process Flow Diagram
INFLUENT
WASTEWATER
INFLUENT
SPIRAL BAR SCREENINGS
SCREEN (2)
V
VORTEX GRIT
REMOVAL ' GRIT
SYSTEM
�
1
FILTRATE N.-INFLUENTft GAC BACKWASH
Lar -�SPLITTER
Q BOX
rn
o
cc a V I N
EQUALIZATION INFLUENT g MOADAMS
LAND BASIN PUMP x
APPLICATION 1 MG STATION a CREEK
j i co
1 W
SLUDGE EQ BASIN E RE-AERATION
PUMP BASIN
PRESS STATION
f ANAEROBIC
�Jll BASIN DECHLOR-
(3)[9] INATION r SODIUM
AEROBIC BASIN BISULFITE
DIGESTER
[2] 1ST ANOXIC
BASIN (2)[6] '~ _
z CHLORINE
<z CONTACT SODIUM
z HYPOCHLORITE
ROTARY z W i-D BASIN
DRUM pQ OXIDATION DITCH mr
THICKENER �im (1)[3] P1' 1
[2] HMETHANOL a
2ND ANOXIC DEEP BED GRANULAR
c> BASIN (1)[3] ALUM NI FILTERS [8] 1.25 MGD ACTIVATED CARBON
m
RAS/WAS REAERATION ALUM
PUMP BASIN (1)[3] CLARIFIER [3]
STATION
A
/ SLUDGE
HOLDING
\ TANK / (NUMBER OF UNITS PER TREATMENT TRAIN)
\ / [NUMBER OF UNITS TOTAL]
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'I'
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 43 of 47

Figure 11: Surface Water Discharge to Moadams Creek Alternative
\\`HEADWORKS z '1-ISp \�����0 \\`\/ , \ 300
�� IMPROVEMENTS- If'� I � A
` - 1y 3c itrn FA\
\'i4/ 4!0`,i':1 ::f s - i •4•.,. `, ,s \\\ SIO ALUJ \150 FEET
%
- � -� �V ,
e ! � %" � � � \\ \
VI i � ���� , � � -\#\ir ' ,11,.. \
I \\,4\31-C-\.e.A\\lif--:-t\.\\\ '' 1-\\\N\\\\
' \I 1 \ I% Or ..tiiiiift:,')% \ --'\\\\
\ \ • '` ‘ ;,:::,:L:NI,s;:://:::i::::.::, /%C--.):N\N. ' .
\ \\ N 1114—,1 �4"
k 1 \'.‘ 1:::iii:i::.. ..:::::-VS, \V.,Z," $ ..-t-\ .)\'s\ \ ''%::r.iiii:;i::'7. ...-td4 ,. ' 7:00;,, i , , /ii\ I ( i;
i
1 s / � \\\o ` ; � m � ,�, , I
,r \
INFLUENT PUMP �'y ,7` .
STATION . �I "`�' 1"�\ =— ". ` 1,��\\/I I I I I
t \ t \ 0.
1V\• r,. 1--�• \�k\ �i 1 ,• . // / \\ '\ \ I
iLii ' \ T
w„i I \ \ �� '-k;b 4\ CF SINE CONTACT.
� ` x \ ^ -_ DE HLORiNATION AND POST
\ x ;. \ '4 AERATION BASIN
11 , , 1 , E jai ,
FLOW
II , PI! ►
SPLITTER iN III /
BOX >i:*::;I:•>: • i
//F ii%///. tea,
/-- \ •• • f / DENITRIFlCATION OUTFALL
J aar,� ! ( /iFlLTERS
o .:KOKi* I I . 4 \.�
6umacl -
PUMP �, �� � ..
STATION ' - __
.......::.
��
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion I ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 44 of 47

Table 20: Alternative 5 Preliminary Estimate of Probable Cost
PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 1
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS-ALTERNATIVE 5
CITY OF MEBANE
MARCH 2022
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 Mobilization 1 LS 3% $1,857,800
Headworks Expansion (includes Influent Channel, Fine
2 1 LS $2,502,000 $2,502,000
Screening,Grit Removal, and Bypass Channel)
3 Influent Pump Station 1 LS $2,250,000 $2,250,000
4 Flow Equalization (Existing Aeration Basin repurposed) 1 LS $1,575,000 $1,575,000
5 5 Stage Bardenpho Oxidation Ditches 1 LS $17,943,000 $17,943,000
6 Secondary Clarifiers 1 LS $3,766,500 $3,766,500
7 RAS/WAS Pump Station 1 LS $1,125,000 $1,125,000
8 Tertiary Filters 1 LS $6,844,800 $6,844,800
Chlorine Contact Basin (includes chambers for
9 $1,972,500
Dechlorination and Post-Aeration) 1 LS $1,972,500
10 Chemical Feed (includes Chemical Feed Building, 1 LS $2,145,000 $2,145,000
Carbon Supplement, pH Adjustment, &Coagulant)
11 Sludge Processing(Existing Basin repurposed for 1 LS $1,125,000 $1,125,000
Sludge Storage)
12 Granular Activated Carbon Treatment Train 1 LS $2,500,000 $2,500,000
13 16-inch DIP Gravity Discharge Pipe 275 LF $160 $44,000
14 5-ft. Diameter Effluent Manhole 3 EA $7,750 $23,250
15 Yard Piping 1 LS $5,175,000 $5,175,000
16 Site Civil 1 LS $2,490,000 $2,490,000
17 Site Electrical 1 LS $7,800,000 $7,800,000
18 SCADA Work 1 LS $787,500 $787,500
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $61,926,350
CONTINGENCY $6,193,000
ENGINEERING FEES $4,769,000
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION $3,406,000
LEGAL&ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS $682,000
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT $1,363,000
PROJECT TOTAL $78,339,350
1
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 45 of 47

Table 21:Alternative 5 Estimated Annual O&M Costs
ITEM O&M DESCRIPTION QUAN. UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
1 Maintenance & Repairs 1 LS $551,000 $551,000
2 Electricity 1 LS $51,000 $51,000
3 Labor 1 LS $399,000 $399,000
4 Chemicals 1 LS $25,000 $25,000
5 Granular Activated Carbon Treatment Train 1 LS $196,000 $196,000
Total Annual O&M Cost $1,222,000
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion ® ® Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
���'"Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina Page 46 of 47

5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Table 22 contains a summary of the alternatives evaluated for the disposal of treated wastewater
from the Mebane WRRF.
Table 22: Summary of Effluent Disposal Alternatives
Alternative Description Project Total Annual O&M Cost Present Worth
Connection to Public
1 N/A N/A N/A
Sewer System
2 Land Application $157,112,550 $1,606,000 $182,629,000
3 Public Access Reuse N/A N/A N/A
Connection to Public
4 Sewer System & Land $88,661,050 $1,509,000 $112,636,000
Application*
Surface Water
5 Discharge to Moadams $78,339,350 $1,222,000 $97,755,000
Creek
*Note:This annual O&M cost does not include the treatment cost that the City of Mebane will pay the
City of Burlington for the treatment of 2.0 MGD of raw wastewater.
Based on the results of the alternatives analysis, it is recommended that the City pursue
Alternative 5, direct discharge to surface water, for disposal of treated effluent from the WRRF.
Water Resource Recovery Facility Expansion , Engineering Alternatives Analysis
City of Mebane March 2022
Alamance&Orange Counties, North Carolina mcgill Page 47 of 47

APPENDIX A
Mebane WRRF
NPDES Permit NC0021474

Ara
NCDENTI
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Secretary
June 6, 2014
Mr. Dennis J. Hodge, Wastewater Director
City of Mebane
106 E. Washington St.
Mebane,NC 27302
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit Renew al
NC0021474
Mebane WWTP
Alamance County
Facility Class IV
Dear Mr. Hodge:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject
permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit
is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
We received the City of Mebane's comment letter dated May 13, 2014. The components list
was revised and the sand filters were replaced with cloth media filtration. The City's
request to reduce influent monitoring of BOD5 was reviewed. The Monitoring Frequency
Reduction for Exceptionally Performing Facilities applies to both the influent and effluent
monitoring requirements. When the City's BOD5 effluent sampling data meets the criteria
outlined in the Guidance regarding the reduction of monitoring frequencies the City can
request a reduction and permit modification for BOD5 sampling. At this time, BOD5 influent
and effluent monitoring will remain as a daily requirement.
As identified previously, the renewal permit contains the following significant changes from
your current permit:
• The City of Mebane's request for reduced sampling for NH3-N and TSS, from daily to twice per
week, in accordance with the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Exceptionally Performing Facilities(Oct. 22, 2012)was approved and the draft permit revised
accordingly. These reduced frequencies will remain in effect so long as the City's facility
continues to demonstrate exceptional treatment performance.
• No later than March 30, 2015, the City of Mebane shall begin reporting discharge monitoring
data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report(eDMR)
internet application. [See Special Condition A. (11.)]
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699 1617
Phone [phone]'3001 Internet:www.ncwsterquity.org
An Fqu.i^ppocumty 1 Afirn„eve Polio Employer-Af rte.. part by ivy led p'ner

Mr. Dennis J. Hodge, Wastewater Director
June 6,2014
Page 2 of 3
For information on eDMR, registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account, please
visit the following web page: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wg/admin/bog/ipu/edmr.
For information on EPA's proposed NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, please visit the
following website: http://www2.epa.gov/compliance/proposed-npdes-electronic-reporting-rule.
• The permit expiration date was changed to May 31, 2019 to allow five years before permit
renewal.
• An annual discharge load limit of 40,225 pounds per year(Ib/yr) for total nitrogen has been
added to the permit in accordance with the Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy rules.
Footnote#10 in Special Condition A.(1.) specifies an effective date of calendar year 2019 for
the total nitrogen limit, consistent with Session Law 2013-395(Senate Bill 515).
• Effluent limitations and monitoring for Fluoride and Chloride were removed from the permit
because no reasonable potential to violate surface Water Quality Standard's(WQS) for these
parameters was found.
• Effluent monitoring for Total Copper was removed from the permit because no reasonable
potential to violate WQS's was found.
• An evaluation of Total Zinc effluent data showed a reasonable potential to violate WQS. Since
the WQS for Total Zinc is an action level standard, monitoring for Zinc was maintained in the
permit,at a reduced frequency of quarterly to coincide with toxicity testing.
• In accordance with the NPDES Implementation of the Statewide Mercury TMDL, five years of
mercury data was evaluated. The annual averages were less than both the calculated Water
Quality Based Effluent Limit and the Technology Based Effluent Limit. As a result,the Total
Mercury limit was removed and monitoring was reduced to the three annual Effluent Pollutant
Scans.
• In accordance with the 2012 Statewide Mercury TMDL,the requirement to perform a Mercury
Minimization Plan (MMP) was added to the permit. See MMP Special Condition A.(12.). Please
note that the MMP shall be developed by December 29, 2014(within 180 days of the NPDES
Permit effective date). A sample MMP was developed through a stakeholder review process and
has been placed on the Division website for guidance at:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/npdes.
• In accordance with Federal Regulations 40 CFR Part 122 a Total Nitrogen Reduction Schedule
containing annual milestones outlining the steps the City of Mebane will take to comply with
the Jordan Lake Wastewater Discharge Rule was added under Special Condition A.(4.).
• Special Condition A. (5.) Nitrogen Optimization has been updated to note the submission of the
plan by the City of Mebane.
• Some of the wording has changed in Special Condition A. (7.),Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit,
please review each paragraph carefully.
• Special Condition A. (8.)on the Effluent Pollutant Scan now designates the three years in which
the scans are to be performed (2015, 2016, and 2017)and that mercury must be sampled using
EPA Method 1631 E.

Mr. Dennis J. Hodge, Wastewater Director
June 6, 2014
Page 3 of 3
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty
(30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150E of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless
such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the
legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Resources or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management
Act or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Julie Grzyb by email
([e-mail])or phone at [phone].
Sin erely,
Thomas A. Reeder, Director
gave
Division of Water Resources,NCDENR
Enclosure: NPDES Permit NC0021474
cc: NPDES Unit
Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/ Surface Water Protection Section
e-copy:
EPA Region 4
PERCS Unit/Sarah Bass
Winston-Salem Regional Office/ Surface Water Protection Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office/DWR/Regional Engineer, Eric Hudson
ESS/Aquatic Toxicity Unit, Susan Meadows
ESS/Ecosystems Unit Carrie Ruhlman and Steve Kroger
Wastewater Operator Certification Group, Steve Reid

1 Cl Mil l 1 V V. 1 V V V V L 1Z,Z
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission,and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,as amended,the
City of Mebane
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Mebane Wastewater Treatment Plant
635 Corrigidor Road (SR 1997)
southwest of Mebane
Alamance County
to receiving waters designated as Moadams Creek in the Cape Fear River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations,monitoring requirements,and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II,III,and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective .July 1,2014.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31,2019.
Signed this day.. June 6,2014.
çvk
mas A. Reeder, Director
0141 '`(A/‘ItI(`—
fi' Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked. As of
this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore, the
exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facilihj arises under the permit conditions, requirements,
terms,and provisions included herein.
The City of Mebane
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 2.5 MGD wastewater treatment facility located at the Mebane
Wastewater Treatment Plant,on 635 Corrigidor Road (NCSR 1997), southwest of Mebane,
Alamance County,and consisting of:
• influent bar screen
• grit chamber
• dual aeration basins
• three final clarifiers
• cloth media filtration
• chlorine contact chamber
• dechlorination
• aerobic sludge digestors
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into the
Moadams Creek,which are classified WS-V;NSW waters in the Cape Fear River Basin.
Page 2 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
PART I
A. 1. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(a.) During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored)by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement 2
Average Average Maximum Frequency Sample Type Sample Location
Flow 2.5 MGD Continuous Recording Influent or Effluent
Total Monthly Flow(MG) Monitor&Report Monthly Rec. or Calc. Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5 day, 20°C
(April 1 October 31) 3 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L Daily Composite Influent&Effluent
BOD, 5 day, 20°C(November 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L Daily Composite Influent&Effluent
1 - March 31)
Total Suspended Solids 3 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Twice per week Composite Influent&Effluent
NH3 as N 2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/L Twice per week Composite Effluent
(April 1 -October 31)
NH3 as N 4.0 mg/L 12.0 mg/L Twice per week Composite Effluent
(November 1 - March 31)
Dissolved Oxygen' Daily Grab Effluent
pH 5 Daily Grab Effluent
Temperature(°C) Daily Grab Effluent
Fecal Coliform 200/100mL 400/100mL Daily Grab Effluent
(geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine 6 17 pg/L Daily Grab Effluent
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) —1___ _ Daily I Grab I Effluent
TKN Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
NO3-N + NO2-N Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
Total Nitrogen, (TN) ' Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
89 Monitor&Report(lb/mo) [QM600] Monthly
TN Load Calculated Effluent
40,225(Ib/yr)io [QY600] Annually
Total Phosphorus, (TP) Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
TP Load s,e Monitor&Report(lb/mo) [QM665] Monthly Calculated Effluent
5,056Ib/yr [QY665] Annually
Total Zinc " Quarterly Composite Effluent
Chronic Toxicity 12 Quarterly Composite Effluent
Effluent Pollutant Scan 13 Monitor&Report Footnote 13 Footnote 13 Effluent
All footnotes are listed on the following page.
Page 3 of 12

Permit No.NC0021474
Footnotes:
1. No later than March 30,2015,begin submitting discharge monitoring reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. See Special Condition A. (11.).
2. See Special Condition A.(2.)for instream sampintg locations and requirements. Instream monitoring
requirements may be provisionally waived per Condition A.(2.).
3. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value(85%removal).
4. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L.
5. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
6. The Division shall consider all effluent total residual chlorine values reported below 50 µg/L to be in
compliance with the permit. However,the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported
by a North Carolina certified laboratory(including field certified),even if these values fall below 50 µg/L.
7. TN=TKN+NO3-N+NO2-N,where TN is total nitrogen,TKN is Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen,and NO3-N and
NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen,respectively.
8. TN or TP Load is the mass quantity of Total Nitrogen or Phosphorus discharged in a given period of time.
See Special Condition A.(10.),Calculation of Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus Loads.
9. Compliance with mass limits shall be determined in accordance with Special Condition A. (9.),Annual Limits
for Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus.
10. Per the Jordan Lake Wastewater Discharge Rule(15A NCAC 02B.0270)as modified by North Carolina
Session Laws 2011-394(HB119)and 2013-395(SB515),the annual mass Total Nitrogen limit shall be effective
beginning with calendar year 2019,unless the permittee has received by December 31,2019,an authorization-
to-construct permit for construction,installation,or alteration of the treatment works for purposes of
complying with this limit,in which case the limit shall be effective beginning with calendar year 2021.See
special condition A.(4.)on the TN Compliance Schedule.
11. Total Zinc shall be sampled in conjunction with Chronic Toxicity testing
12. Chronic Toxicity(Ceriodaphnia)P/F at 90% with testing in January,April,July and October(see Special
Condition A. (7.)).
13. The permittee shall perform three Effluent Pollutant Scans during the term of this permit. (See Special
Condition A. (8.)).
(b.)There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
•
A.(2.) INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(a.)
Parameter Sample Frequency Sampling
Type _ Locationl
Dissolved Oxygen Grab 3/Week(June-Sept) 1/Week(October-May) U,D1,D2,D3
Temperature Grab 3/Week(June-Sept) 1/Week(October-May) U,D1,D2,D3
Fecal Coliform Grab 3/Week(June-Sept) 1/Week(October-May) U,D1,D2,D3
Conductivity Grab 3/Week(June-Sept) 1/Week(October-May) U,D1,D2,D3
SAMPLE LOCATIONS
U-Upstream 100 feet of discharge,D1-Downstream at NCSR 1940,Moadams Creek,
D2-Downstream at Back Creek at NCSR 1940 (June-Sept only)
D3-Downstream at Back Creek at NC Highway 54.
Page 4 of 12

Permit No.NC0021474
(Continued A. (2.) INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(b.) Instream monitoring requirements in this NPDES permit shall be provisionally waived so long as
the Permittee remains a member of the Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association and the
Association continues to function as approved by the Division and Environmental Management
Commission. If the Permittee does not participate in the Association or if the Association ceases to
function, the instream monitoring requirements in this permit become effective immediately;and
the Division may reopen this permit by administrative letter to establish additional instream
monitoring requirements,it deems necessary to adequately characterize the effects of the
discharges on water quality in the receiving stream.
A.(3.) NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS
(a.) The following table lists the Total Nitrogen(TN)and Total Phosphorus(TP) allocations assigned
to,acquired by,or transferred to the Permittee in accordance with the Jordan Lake nutrient
management rule(T15A NCAC 02B .0270) and the status of each as of permit issuance. For
compliance purposes, this table does not supersede any TN or TP limit established elsewhere in
this permit or in the NPDES permit of a compliance association of which the Permittee is a Co-
Permittee Member.
Total Nitrogen Allocation
ALLOCATION ALLOCATION AMOUNT(1)
TYPE SOURCE DATE STATUS
Delivered(Ib/yr) Discharge(lb/yr)
Base Assigned by Rule 8/11/09 22,526 40,225 Active
(T15A NCAC 02B.0270)
TOTAL 22,526 40,225 Active
Footnote:
(1) Nitrogen Transport Factor=56%
Total Phosphorus Allocation
ALLOCATION AMOUNT(1)
ALLOCATION SOURCE DATE STATUS
TYPE Delivered(Ib/yr) Discharge(Ib/yr)
Base Assigned by Rule 8/11/09 2,781 5,056 Active
(T15A NCAC 02B.0270)
TOTAL 2,781 5,056 Active
Footnote:
(1) Phosphorus Transport Factor=55%
(b.) Any addition,deletion,or modification of the listed allocation(s) (other than to correct
typographical errors) or any change from Reserved to Active status of any of the listed allocations
shall be considered a major modification of this permit and shall be subject to the public review
process afforded such modifications under state and federal rules.
Page 5 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
A.(4.) TOTAL NITROGEN REDUCTION SCHEDULE
(a.) The permittee shall comply with the TN Load limit specified in Condition A.(1.)in accordance
with the following schedule:
April 30,2015: Evaluate and submit a report to DWR on the need and interest in establishing
a compliance trading association for Jordan Lake.
April 30, 2016: Submit a nutrient removal optimization report to DWR for the Mebane
WWTP
April 30,2017: Submit a nutrient reduction plan to DWR for review and approval. The plan
should project and accommodate anticipated loadings through 2027.
April 30,2018: Submit a nutrient removal optimization report to DWR for the Mebane
WWTP
January 1,2019/2021: Beginning with CY2019,comply with total nitrogen targets the TN Load
limit listed in Condition A.(1.);except that,if the permittee acquires an
authorization-to-construct permit required to meet that limit by December 31,
2019,it shall comply with the limit no later than CY 2021.
All submissions shall be sent to: NCDENR/ DWR/ NPDES Programs
Attn:Jordan Lake Watershed Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
A.(5.) NITROGEN OPTIMIZATION
On February 5, 2010, the City of Mebane submitted a plan to optimize the reduction of nitrogen in its
wastewater discharges. It is expected that the City of Mebane will implement these measures and
continue to evaluate its treatment facilities and operational processes to make reasonable efforts to
reduce nitrogen discharges until process improvements are completed.
A.(6.) NUTRIENT MONITORING REOPENER •
Pursuant to N.C. General Statute Section 143-215.1 and the implementing rules found in Title 15A of
the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H, specifically, 15A NCAC 2H.0112(b) (1) and
2H.0114(a), and Part II, Sections B-12 and B-13 of this permit, the Director of DWR may reopen this
permit to require supplemental nutrient monitoring of the discharge. The additional monitoring will
be to support water quality modeling efforts within the Cape Fear River Basin,and shall be consistent
with a monitoring plan developed jointly by the Division and affected stakeholders.
Page 6 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
A.(7.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum,quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in
the"North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised December 2010,or
subsequent versions or"North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised-December 2010) or subsequent versions.The tests will be performed during the months of
January,April,July,and October.These months signify the first month of each three month toxicity
testing quarter assigned to the facility. Effluent sampling for this testing must be obtained during
representative effluent discharge and shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent
discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV
below the permit limit,then multiple-concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum,in
each of the two following months as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised-December 2010) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form(MR-1)for the months in which tests were performed,using the parameter
code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWR Form AT-3
(original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than 30
days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete,accurate,include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data,and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved
designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and
reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity(AT) test
form indicating the facility name,permit number,pipe number,county,and the month/year of the
report with the notation of"No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted
to the Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month. Assessment of toxicity compliance is based on
the toxicity testing quarter,which is the three month time interval that begins on the first day of the
month in which toxicity testing is required by this permit and continues until the final day of the third
month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document,such as minimum control
organism survival,minimum control organism reproduction,and appropriate environmental controls,
hall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later
than the last day of the month following the month of the initial monitoring.
Page 7 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
A.(8.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
(a.) The Permittee shall perform a total of three(3) Effluent Pollutant Scans for all parameters listed
below. One scan must be performed in each of the following years:2015,2016,and 2017.
Analytical methods shall be in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136 and shall be sufficiently sensitive
to determine whether parameters are present in concentrations greater than applicable standards
and criteria. Samples should be collected with one quarterly toxicity test each year,and must
represent seasonal variation[i.e. do not sample in the same quarter every year]. Unless otherwise
indicated,metals shall be analyzed as"total recoverable."
Ammonia(as N) Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Chlorine(total residual,TRC) 1,1-dichloroethylene Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether
Dissolved oxygen 1,2-dichloropropane Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite 1,3-dichloropropylene 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen Ethylbenzene Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease Methyl bromide 2-chloronaphthalene
Total Phosphorus Methyl chloride 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids Methylene chloride Chrysene
Hardness 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane Di-n-butyl phthalate
Antimony Tetrachloroethylene Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic Toluene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium 1,1,1-trichloroethane 1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium 1,1,2-trichloroethane 1,3-dichlorobenzene
Chromium Trichloroethylene 1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper Vinyl chloride 3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead Acid-extractable compounds:
p Diethyl phthalate
Mercury(EPA Method 1631E) P-chloro-m-cresol Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel 2-chlorophenol 2,4-dinitrotoluene
Selenium 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,6-dinitrotoluene
Silver 2,4-dimethylphenol 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Thallium 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol Fluoranthene
Zinc 2,4-dinitrophenol Fluorene
Cyanide 2-nitrophenol Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds 4-nitrophenol Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile organic compounds: Pentachlorophenol Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein Phenol Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile 2,4,6-trichlorophenol Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzene Base-neutral compounds: Isophorone
Bromoform Acenaphthene Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride Acenaphthylene Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene Anthracene N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane Benzidine N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane Benzo(a)anthracene N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2-chloroethylvinyl ether Benzo(a)pyrene Phenanthrene
Chloroform 3,4 benzofluoranthene Pyrene
Dichlorobromomethane Benzo(ghi)perylene 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethane Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2-dichioroethane Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane
(b.) Reporting.Test results shall be reported on DWR Form-A MR-PPA1(or in a form approved by
the Director)by December 31st of each designated sampling year. The report shall be submitted
to the following address:NCDENR/DWR/Central Files,1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,
North Carolina 27699-1617.
Page 8 of 12

Permit No.NC0021474
A.(9.) ANNUAL LIMITS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN OR TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
(a.) Total Nitrogen(TN) and Total Phosphorus(TP)allocations and load limits for NPDES
dischargers in the Jordan Lake watershed are annual limits and apply on a calendar year basis.
(b.) For any given calendar year,the Permittee shall be in compliance with the annual TN (or TP)
Load limit in this Permit if:
(i.) the Permittee's annual TN(or TP) Load is less than or equal to the effective limit,or
(ii.) the Permittee is a Co-Permittee Member of a compliance association.
(c.) The TN(or TP) Load limit in this Permit may be modified as the result of allowable changes in
the Permittee's allocations.
(i.) Allowable changes include those resulting from purchase of TN(or TP)allocation from an
authorized mitigation banker,the Ecosystem Enhancement Program,or other source
allowed under applicable regulations;purchase,sale,trade,or lease of allocation between ,
the Permittee and other dischargers;regionalization;and other transactions approved by the
Division.
(ii.) The Permittee may request a modification of the TN (or TP)Load limit in this Permit to
reflect allowable changes in its allocation(s).
(A) Upon receipt of timely and proper application,the Division will modify the permit as
appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(B) Changes in TN(or TP)limits become effective on January 1 of the year following
permit modification.The Division must receive application no later than August 31 for
changes proposed for the following calendar year.
(iii.) Any requests for modification should be sent to:
NCDENR/ DWR/ NPDES Programs
Attn:Jordan Lake Watershed Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
(d.) If the Permittee is a member and co-permittee of an approved compliance association on January
1 of a given year,its TN and TP discharges during that year are governed by that association's
group NPDES permit and the limits therein.
(i.) The Permittee shall be considered a Co-Permittee Member for any given calendar year in
which it is identified as such in Appendix A of the association's group NPDES permit.
(ii.) Association roster(s)and members'TN and TP allocations will be updated annually and in
• accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(iii.) If the Permittee intends to join or leave a compliance association,the Division must be
notified of the proposed action in accordance with the procedures defined in the
association's NPDES permit.
(A) Upon receipt of timely and proper notification,the Division will modify the permit as
appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(B) Membership changes in a compliance association become effective on January 1 of the
year following modification of the association's permit.
(e.) The TN and Ti'monitoringand reporting requirements in this Permit remain in effect throughout
P g q
the term of the Permit and are not affected by the Permittee's membership in a compliance
association.
Page 9 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
A.(10.) CALCULATION OF TOTAL NITROGEN OR TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LOADS
(a.) The Permittee shall calculate monthly and annual TN Loads as follows:
(i.) Monthly TN(or TP) Load (lb/mo) =TN(or TP) x TMF x 8.34
where:
TN or TP = the average Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus concentration
(mg/L)of the composite samples collected during the month
TMF = the Total Monthly Flow of wastewater discharged during the
month(MG/mo)
8.34 = conversion factor,from(mg/L x MG) to pounds
(ii.) Annual TN(or TP) Load(lb/yr) =Sum of the 12 Monthly TN(or TP)Loads for the calendar
year
(b.) The Permittee shall report monthly Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus results(mg/L and
lb/mo)in the appropriate discharge monitoring report for each month and shall report each
calendar year's results (lb/yr)with the December report for that year.
A.(11.) ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS
Proposed federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports(DMRs)
and specify that,if a state does not establish a system to receive such submittals,then permittees must
submit DMRs electronically to the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). The Division anticipates
that these regulations will be adopted and is beginning implementation in late 2013.
NOTE: This special condition supplements or supersedes the following sections within Part II of this
permit(Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits):
• Section B. (11.)Signatory Requirements
• Section D. (2.) Reporting
• Section D. (6.) Records Retention
• Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
(a.) Reporting[Supersedes Section D. (2.)and Section E. (5.) (a)1
Beginning no later than March 30,2015,the permittee shall begin reporting discharge monitoring
data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report(eDMR)
internet application.
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s)shall be summarized for each month
and submitted electronically using eDMR. The eDMR system allows permitted facilities to enter
monitoring data and submit DMRs electronically using the Internet. Until such time that the
state's eDMR application is compliant with EPA's Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR),permittees will be required to submit all discharge monitoring data to the state
electronically using eDMR and will be required to complete the eDMR submission by printing,
signing,and submitting one signed original and a copy of the computer printed eDMR to the
following address:
NC DENR/ DWR/ Information Processing Unit
ATTENTION: Central Files/ eDMR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Page 10 of 12

Permit No.NC0021474
(Continued,A.(11.) ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS
If a permittee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a demonstrated hardship or due to the
facility being physically located in an area where less than 10 percent of the households have
broadband access,then a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements
may be granted and discharge monitoring data may be submitted on paper DMR forms(MR 1,
1.1,2,3) or alternative forms approved by the Director. Duplicate signed copies shall be
submitted to the mailing address above.
Requests for temporary waivers from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements must be
submitted in writing to the Division for written approval at least sixty(60)days prior to the date
the facility would be required under this permit to begin using eDMR. Temporary waivers shall
be valid for twelve (12)months and shall thereupon expire. At such time,DMRs shall be
submitted electronically to the Division unless the permittee re-applies for and is granted a new
temporary waiver by the Division.
Information on eDMR and application for a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic
reporting requirements is found on the following web page:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/bog/ipu/edmr
Regardless of the submission method, the first DMR is due on the last day of the month
following the issuance of the permit or in the case of a new facility,on the last day of the month
following the commencement of discharge.
(b.) Signatory Requirements [Supplements Section B. (11.) (b) and supersedes Section B. (11.) (d)]
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in
Part II,Section B. 11. a ora dulyauthorized representative of that person as described in
( )( ) by p
Part II,Section B. (11.)(b). A person,and not a position,must be delegated signatory authority for
eDMR reporting purposes.
For eDMR submissions,the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR user
account and login credentials to access the eDMR system. For more information on North
Carolina's eDMR system,registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account,please
visit the following web page:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/bog/ipu/edmr
Certification. Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall
make the following certification[40 CFR 122.22]. NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF
CERTIFICATION WILL BE ACCEPTED:
"I certifj, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction
or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons wlw manage the system,
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the
best of my knowledge and belief true,accurate,and complete. lam aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing
violations."
(c.) Records Retention[Supplements Section D. (6.)]
The permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports,including eDMR
submissions. These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the
date of the report. This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time[40 CFR
122.41].
Page 11 of 12

Permit No. NC0021474
A.(12.) MERCURY MINIMIZATION PLAN (MMP)
The permittee shall develop and implement a mercury minimization plan during this permit term.The
MMP shall be developed by December 29,2014, and shall be available for inspection on-site. A sample
MMP was developed through a stakeholder review process and has been placed on the Division
website for guidance (http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/npdes, under Model Mercury
Minimization Plan). The MMP should place emphasis on identification of mercury contributors and
goals for reduction. Results shall be summarized and submitted with the next permit renewal.
Page 12 of 12

.,._V__ •1) \ ( Q9!v V, 11 ",‘Z; "I ; -:.4i4$4.:,-;it(*,,',, u ---Y t 1! '.' '''.-..-.- ----( C Ir...
) .\\\ Ts. • k ,it. ,
0.
�-•-� • — ty ?�''.; a � ,� �, �;+(-. ,'
471
�/ a 1 /�� A'•
a
' ..41;FIA-;... '
•
• �•• 17 ITS. •`JI 5 i {�•f .
-
• ; 4-
•t__ --- - _ �r - ' _ - • • ' --- - w,, r '{-. �'Ai. ill t-^_ C
.447
' 'yslrf :71/ . 1/zs.,,.,::.,
toilr
' • f :"______
•��• . ?� lip
.,„ : ___„, A .'I: .••-•-..3 .
' r . t
—f-\_, L*44111 f ,
''' I%i. er0lk0.-\4i,1 wj 1 '-,-,...,,,1.1.•,40-..,\.1\eIl%1
,/,0 i I a4.7t.
t� .
_ tdi inn:• %itt...I./.4.I•ip---e)I-.1-,A.'.",',.I.:s':..;,f.-"r,w,"I-1.T/-4-i—1-:.._...,.3` .
t 1/ • .
i„l
ili6
__.-..Th_4__',m\1-..6-.-1.r..:1.(-y,t 1•...,-'A,-:-4-_t_
L.
• . {
/ + :.:e1.,:..d.
/ � .,'
r'N.,
,- 11 �, • / .705 X: tx:',', 6.! .
•
•
V, N - f' •. ,.'17 .,— ,_ 6,5-0 /: IT).- . (
11.
• -�/ % I 6� ON'?
■r• • t / �, �� r . , ,
.tt . t
.. _,..,\:/--\ ,./. 7,' 0 • •
. 1-•\ ' * tj1; A •_:.----,.-•-• 11;
•
6 •50-., )40 -\\; :A.:***).•_)• •iiii•
14
3
' 1' ..- \-) :\
■ r r''"' jj'41°115.......‘'
• `• • _ ill `•
• i II . • • -\ • I. :....
• 6
• • l • •.�w 1 'ark / .� — .f�_ 5 - •
s tt
5 ,- -/-'''' \‘4111V-/-.." '4
..,.„.<.,-.--ASlit
\7_,.. ...11?(
;:ci",,,,- - ( li \'''—)s."--"-C.----: ... . ,,‘,.., e' ------- vv \-
City of Mebane WWTP I
Facility Location
State Grid/Ouad: C21 SE/Mebane Latitude: 36'05'20" not to scale
Receiving Stream: Moadams Creek Longitude: 79° I- I;
Drainage Basin: Cape Fear River Sub-Basin: 03-06-02 NPDES Permit No.NC0021474
Stream Class: WS-V;NSW HUC#: 0303000204 North Alamance County

ti
ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REGAN
vvater JAY ZIMMERMAN
v ater Resources
179,
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
March 22, 2017
Mr. Dennis J. Hodge
Wastewater Director
City of Mebane
106 E. Washington Street
Mebane, North Carolina 27302
Subject: Permit Monitoring Modification
Permit No. NC0021474
Mebane WWTP
Alamance County
Facility Class IV
Dear Mr. Hodge:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for a minor
modification of the subject permit. We are forwarding you the new Section A.(1.)
Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements page with footnotes. You should
replace your existing Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements sheet with this
revised page, effective 4/1/2017. This permit revision is issued pursuant to the
requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated
October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
DWR guidance regarding the reduction of monitoring frequencies in permits for
exceptionally performing facilities is for NPDES permits only and do not apply to
reclaimed water permits. Please contact Jon Risgaard in the Non-Discharge Permitting
Unit if you are interested in obtaining similar monitoring frequency reductions related to
reclaimed water use.
The changes made in this permit modification include:
• Monitoring frequency reductions for BOD and Fecal Coliform from daily to twice
per week, and added footnote#4 to all parameters being monitored twice per
week.
If any parts,measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within
thirty(30)days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written
petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality Water Resources
1617 Mail service('enter Rakigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
919 707 9000

Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-
6714). Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division
may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect
the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Resources or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management
Act or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Gary Perlmutter, Environmental
Senior Specialist by e-mail ([e-mail]) or phone at 919-807-6385.
Sincerely,
,,4e--
4.41.
. ay Zimme , .G.
rector, Division of Water Resources
Enclosure:NPDES Permit NC0021474 (Modified pages)
cc: NPDES Unit
Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Water Quality Operations
e-copy:
EPA, Region IV

PART I
A.(1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(a.) During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until
expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored" by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Sample Sample Location'
Average Average Maximum Frequency Type
Flow 2.5 MGD Continuous Recording Influent or Effluent
Total Monthly Flow(MG) Monitor&Report Monthly Rec. or Calc. Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5 day, 20°C(April 1 October 31) 3 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L Twice per week 4 Composite Influent&Effluent
BOD, 5 day, 20°C(November 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L Twice per week 4 Composite Influent&Effluent
1 - March31) 3
Total Suspended Solids 3 30.0 mg/I_ 45.0 mg/I. Twice per week 4 Composite Influent& Effluent
NH3 as N 2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/L Twice per week Composite Effluent
(April 1 -October 31)
NH3 as N 0m 12.04. m L Twice
(November 1 -March 31) 9/L 9/ per week ' Composite Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen S Daily Grab Effluent
pH 6 Daily Grab Effluent
Temperature(°C) Daily Grab Effluent
Fecal Coliform 200/100mL 400/100mL Twice per week 4 Grab Effluent
(geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine' _ 17 pg/L Daily Grab Effluent
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) Daily Grab Effluent
TKN Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
NO3-N + NO3-N Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
Total Nitrogen, (TN) 8 Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
TN Load 10 Monitor& Report(lb/mo) [QM600] Monthly
40,225 (Ib/yr),11 [QY600] Annually Calculated Effluent
Total Phosphorus, (TP) Monitor&Report(mg/L) Weekly Composite Effluent
TP Load 9 " Monitor& Report(lb/mo) [QM665] Monthly Calculated Effluent
5,056lb/yr [QY665] Annually
-
Total Zinc I Quarterly Composite Effluent
Chronic Toxicity '3 Quarterly Composite Effluent
Effluent Pollutant Scan 14 Monitor& Report Footnote 14 Footnote 14 Effluent
All footnotes are listed on the following page.

Footnotes:
1. No later than March 30,2015,begin submitting discharge monitoring reports electronically using NC
DWR's eDMR application system. See Special Condition A. (11.).
2. See Special Condition A.(2.)for instream sampling locations and requirements. Instream monitoring
requirements may be provisionally waived per Condition A. (2.).
3. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15%
of the respective influent value(85% removal).
4. Where monitoring is reduced to twice per week,it must occur on any two non-consecutive days
during the calendar week(Sunday through Saturday).
5. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L.
6. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
7. The Division shall consider all effluent total residual chlorine values reported below 50 µg/L to be in
compliance with the permit. However,the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values
reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory(including field certified),even if these values fall
below 50 µg/L.
8. TN=TKN +NO3-N +NO2-N,where TN is total nitrogen,TKN is Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen,and NO3-
N and NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen,respectively.
9. TN or TP Load is the mass quantity of Total Nitrogen or Phosphorus discharged in a given period of
time.See Special Condition A. (10.),Calculation of Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus Loads.
10. Compliance with mass limits shall be determined in accordance with Special Condition A. (9.),
Annual Limits for Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus.
11. Per the Jordan Lake Wastewater Discharge Rule(15A NCAC 02B .0270)as modified by North
Carolina Session Laws 2011-394(HB119)and 2013-395(SB515),the annual mass Total Nitrogen limit
shall be effective beginning with calendar year 2019,unless the permittee has received by December
31,2019,an authorization-to-construct permit for construction,installation,or alteration of the
treatment works for purposes of complying with this limit,in which case the limit shall be effective
beginning with calendar year 2021.See special condition A. (4.)on the TN Compliance Schedule.
12. Total Zinc shall be sampled in conjunction with Chronic Toxicity testing
13. Chronic Toxicity(Ceriodaphnia)P/F at 90% with testing in January,April,July and October(see
Special Condition A. (7.)).
14. The permittee shall perform three Effluent Pollutant Scans during the term of this permit. (See
Special Condition A. (8.)).
(b.)There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

APPENDIX B
Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association
Group NPDES Permit NC000003

Permit No. NCC000003
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission,and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,as amended, the
Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association
and Its Co-Permittee Members
are hereby authorized to discharge Total Phosphorus from the Co-Permittee Member treatment
facilities listed herein to receiving waters tributary to the Haw River Arm of Jordan Reservoir in the
Cape Fear River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, reporting requirements, and other conditions set forth in this
permit.
The conditions in this group permit supplement the conditions in the Co-Permittee Members'
individual NPDES wastewater permits. Together, the group and individual permits establish an
integrated set of nutrient control requirements consistent with the B. Everett Jordan Reservoir TMDL. All
conditions in the Co-Permittee Members' individual permits remain in full effect except as specifically
provided in those permits.
This permit shall become effective January 1,2017.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on December 31,2021.
Signed this day December 22,2016.
4- S.Jay Zimmerman,Director
Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCC000003
Certificate of Coverage
Page ii of ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE i
PART I - SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1
SECTION A- WASTEWATER CONTROLS
A.(1.) DEFINITIONS 1
A.(2.) CO-PERMITTEES AND NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS 2
A.(3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 2
A.(4.) MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 3
A.(5.) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 3
A.(6.) COMPLIANCE 4
PARTS II&III-STANDARD CONDITIONS 1
SECTION A-APPLICABILITY OF PARTS II& III 1
SECTION B- DEFINITIONS 1
SECTION C-GENERAL CONDITIONS 2
SECTION D-MONITORING AND RECORDS 5
SECTION E- REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 7
PART III - OTHER REQUIREMENTS 9
APPENDIX A - MEMBERS/ CO-PERMITTEES AND NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS/ LIMITS 1
APPENDIX B - POINT SOURCE FACILITIES ASSIGNED NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS 1

Permit NCC000003
Part I,Page 1 of 5
PART I
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A.(1.) DEFINITIONS
(a.) Active Allocation: Allocation that is included in calculation of nutrient load limits.Allocation
held by a permittee is active by default but may be designated as reserve allocation by the
Division or at the request of the permittee. (See also Reserve Allocation.)
(b.) Allocation(or"TP Allocation"): (1) The mass quantity (as of TP) that a discharger or group of
dischargers(such as the Association)is potentially allowed to release to surface waters in a
calendar year in accordance with the Jordan Reservoir TMDL.TP Allocations may be expressed
as active or reserve allocation. (2) In practice,the term can refer to a permittee's or group's
allocation as a whole or to some portion of those values.
(c.) Association: The Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association,a not-for-profit corporation
whose members are NPDES-permitted dischargers in the Haw River arm of the Jordan Reservoir
watershed;established voluntarily by its members to work cooperatively to meet aggregate TP
Allocations established in the Jordan Reservoir TMDL.
(d.) Co-Permittee Members: Those NPDES dischargers that in a given calendar year are members of
the Association and are listed in Appendix A of this permit.
(e.) Limitation(or"TP Limit(ation)" or"TP Load Limitation)"):The mass quantity,such as of TP,
specified in an NPDES permit as the maximum that an individual discharger or group of
dischargers is authorized to discharge to surface waters in a calendar year. The TP Limitation is
the sum of active allocations held by an individual Co-Permittee Member (in the case of
individual limitations) or held in the aggregate by the Association and its Co-Permittee Members
(in the case of group limitations).
(f.) Load (or"TP Load"): The actual mass quantity (as of TP) that a discharger or group of
dischargers releases into surface waters of the Haw River watershed.
(g.) Regionalization: The consolidation of wastewater collection and/or treatment systems that
results in the elimination of one or more NPDES-permitted discharges.
(h.) Reserve Allocation: Allocation that is not included in the calculation of nutrient limits.The
Division may designate allocation as reserve when water quality-based effluent limitations are
established to prevent localized impacts and render that allocation inactive,when treatment of
the allocation as active would be inconsistent with the Jordan Reservoir TMDL;or at the request
of the member or the association holding the allocation. (See also Active Allocation,WQBELs.)
(i.) Total Maximum Daily Load (of TMDL): (1) Generally,the allowable load of a pollutant that can
be discharged to a water body without causing loss of that water's designated uses. (2) In the
context of this permit,refers to the B. Everett Jordan Reservoir TMDL,approved by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency on September 20,2007,and any subsequent revisions approved
by the EPA.
(j.) Total Nitrogen(TN): The sum of the organic,nitrate,nitrite,and ammonia species of nitrogen in
a water or wastewater.
(k.) Total Phosphorus (TP): The sum of the orthophosphate,polyphosphate,and organic phosphate
species of phosphorus in a water or wastewater.
(1.) Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations (WOBELs): Limitations calculated specifically to
ensure that a discharge does not cause an exceedance of water quality standards in waters
upstream of the Jordan Reservoir. In the context of this permit,individual WQBELs pertain only
to Total Phosphorus limits for individual co-permittee members.

Permit NCC000003
Part I,Page 2 of 5
A.(2.) CO-PERMITTEES AND NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS
(a.) Co-Permittees to this permit shall be the Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association(the
"Association") and each of its Co-Permittee Members.The Co-Permittee Members,the Members'
individual TP allocations/ limits,and the Association TP allocations/ limits shall be as listed in
Appendix A,which is hereby incorporated into this permit in its entirety.
(b.) Upon timely and proper notification by the Association as described elsewhere in this permit or
in regulation,the Division shall revise Appendix A to incorporate changes in Association
membership,allowable changes in TP allocations/ limits,or reapportionment of allocations by
the Association and the Co-Permittee Members.
(i.) Changes in membership.
(A) Enrollment. In the event that a discharger is admitted to the Association, the Division
shall add the discharger and its TP allocations to Appendix A as a Co-Permittee
Member and adjust the Association's allocations/ limits accordingly.
(B) Termination. In the event that a Member seeks release as a Co-Permittee to this permit
or its membership is terminated,the Division shall delete the Member and its TP
allocations from Appendix A and adjust the Association's allocations/ limits
accordingly.
(ii.) For the purposes of this permit,allowable changes in TP allocations/ limits include those
resulting from purchase of allocation or offsets from the NC DEQ Division of Mitigation
Services or other authorized source;purchase,sale,trade,or lease of allocation among the
Association,its members,and non-member dischargers;regionalization;and other
transactions approved by the Division.
(iii.) The Association and its Co-Permittee Members may reapportion their TP allocations among
themselves;however,the Division shall modify this permit to incorporate the resulting
changes into Appendix A only when specifically requested in writing by the Association
and after such changes have been incorporated into the affected individual permits at the
request of the permittees.
(c.) For the purposes of this permit,Association membership,individual or Association TP
allocations and associated limits,and allocation status (active or reserve) are effective on a
calendar year basis,and any changes other than technical corrections shall become effective no
sooner than January 1 of the following calendar year.
A.(3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
(a.) Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting no later than the expiration date,the Co-
Permittees are authorized to discharge Total Phosphorus (TP) from the treatment facilities listed
in Appendix A subject to the following effluent limitations.
(i.) Association TP Limitations. In any calendar year,the Association's TP Load shall not
exceed its TP Limitation as specified in Appendix A.
(ii.) Co-Permittee Member TP Limitations.
(A) In any calendar year in which the Association TP Load exceeds the Association TP
Limitation in Appendix A,Co-Permittee Members shall not exceed their individual TP
Limitations as listed in Appendix A;
(B) In any calendar year in which the Association TP Load does not exceed its TP
Limitation,all Co-Permittee Members are deemed to be in compliance with the
individual TP Loads in Appendix A.
(iii.) Individual WOBELs: If the Division determines that a Co-Permittee Member's TP discharge
has reasonable potential to cause localized water quality impacts upstream of the Jordan
Reservoir,it may further restrict the discharge of the nutrient(s) of concern to prevent the
localized impact.The Division will then propose to incorporate the new limit(s) into the

Permit NCC000003
Part I,Page 3 of 5
Member's individual NPDES permit and this group permit according to standard
permitting procedures.Once an individual WQBEL becomes effective in this group permit,
the Member is subject to the new limit in lieu of the Association TP Limit.
(b.) In the event that a Co-Permittee Member's membership in the Association is terminated,the
departing Member shall no longer be a party to this permit and shall become subject to the TP
limitation set forth in its individual NPDES permit.
(i.) Termination of co-permittee status and re-imposition of a discharger's individual TP
limitation shall become effective only at the beginning of a calendar year(January 1).
(ii.) The Association shall notify the Division if it determines that any Member will depart at the
end of a calendar year and shall provide an accounting of all allowable changes in the
Member's TP Allocation since the most recent issuance of the departing Member's
individual NPDES permit.
(iii.) Upon receipt of the notification and accounting described above,the Division shall modify
the TP limitation in the departing Member's individual NPDES permit,as necessary,and
shall also modify Appendix A of this permit and the Association TP Limit accordingly,
effective January 1 of the following year.
A.(4.) MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(a.) Each Co-Permittee Member shall continue to monitor its discharge(s) and report the results to the
Division as specified in its individual NPDES permit.
(b.) The Association shall assemble the results of its Co-Permittee Members and report the combined
results to the Division as specified in Condition A.(5.),below.
A.(5.) REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
(a.) The Association shall serve as the primary point of contact between the Division and the Co-
Permittee Members on matters related to this permit,unless otherwise noted. The Association's
responsibilities in this regard include:
(i.) preparation and submittal of any reports required by this permit or of related information
requested by the Division;
(ii.) submittal of any request for modification or renewal of this permit;and
(iii.) distribution to the Co-Permittee Members of correspondence from the Division,including
but not limited to that pertaining to permit issuance,modification,and renewal;compliance;
and reporting.
(b.) Notification of Membership/ Allocation Changes. No later than July 1 of each year,the
Association shall request,as necessary and in writing, modification of this permit to reflect
changes in membership or in TP allocations to become effective in the following calendar year.
The Association may revise its request through proper written notification.
(c.) Year-End Report. No later than March 31 of each year,the Association shall submit a year-end
report to the Division.The report shall include,at a minimum,the following information for the
previous calendar year:
(i.) a tabular summary of the total and individual TP Loads discharged by the Association and
its Co-Permittee Members during the year;
(ii.) a summary of changes in Association membership;and
(iii.) a summary of all regionalization of discharges,purchases,sales,trades,leases,and other
transactions affecting the TP Allocations of the Association or its Co-Permittee Members.
(d.) Annual Loading Projections;Progress Reports. If the Association exceeds 85% of its TP limitation
in any calendar year,the Association shall,no later than July 1 of the following year, develop
annual loading projections of its co-permittee members' discharges,evaluate the effectiveness of
the members' nutrient controls,identify improvements sufficient to ensure continued compliance

Permit NCC000003
Part I,Page 4 of 5
with the nutrient limits,and submit to the Division a report of its findings,proposed treatment
improvements and related actions,and a timeline for implementing the proposed measures. If
necessary controls cannot be implemented in time to prevent exceedance of the existing TP
limitation,the Association shall purchase offset credit(s) in advance according to Condition
A.(6.)(b.),below.
(e.) Five-Year Report. No later than July 1,2021,in conjunction with application for renewal of this
permit,the Association shall submit a 5-year report to the Division.The report shall include,at a
minimum,the following information:
(i.) a detailed listing of all membership changes and allowable changes in TP Allocations of the
Association or its Co-Permittee Members occurring during the term of this permit;
(ii.) a description of the Association's nutrient control strategy during that time;
(iii.) a summary of substantial new measures undertaken during that time to control nutrient
discharges;
(iv.) a general assessment of progress made;and
(v.) a description of efforts planned for the upcoming permit term,if known.
A.(6.) COMPLIANCE
(a.) In the event that the Association exceeds its TP Limitation in a given calendar year,the
Association shall,no later than July 1 of the following year,make full and sufficient payment to
the NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services or other agent approved by the Division to acquire
offset credits for the excess load(s) and provide documentation of the credits to the Division's
Wastewater Permitting Section,NPDES Program.
(b.) If the annual loading projections developed per Condition A.(5.)(d.),above,indicate that the
Association will likely exceed its TP limitation in the coming year,the Association shall also,no
later than July 1 of the current year:
(i.) acquire sufficient credits to offset the projected exceedance(s),and
(ii.) provide documentation of the credits to the Division's Wastewater Permitting Section,
NPDES Program,along with a written request and applicable fee for modification of this
permit for the purpose of adding the acquired credits to the Association allocations/ limits
in Appendix A.
(c.) For any calendar year in which the Association exceeds its TP limitation,the Association shall be
in violation of this permit,and the Division may take appropriate enforcement action against the
Association.
(d.) For any calendar year in which the Association exceeds its TP limitation,any Co-Permittee
Member that exceeds its corresponding individual limitation shall also be in violation of this
permit,and the Division may take appropriate enforcement action against the Member for such
exceedance.
(e.) For any calendar year in which a Co-Permittee Member exceeds an individual TP WQBEL
applied to it,the Member shall be in violation of this permit,regardless of Association
compliance,and the Division may take appropriate enforcement action against the Member for
such exceedance.
(f.) Submittal of offset payments shall not limit the Division's authority to enforce the terms and
conditions of this permit nor shall it relieve the Association or its Co-Permittee Members of their
responsibility to comply with any other applicable federal,state,or local law,rule,standard,
ordinance,order,judgment,or decree. In determining the amount of any penalty to be assessed
against the Association or its Co-Permittee Members,the Division shall credit the Association or
its Members for any offset payments submitted by each,provided that the Association includes
with the offset payment submittal an accounting of each Member's contribution.

Permit NCC000003
Part I,Page 5of5
(g.) No Co-Permittee Member shall be liable for any other Co-Permittee Member's non-compliance
with this permit.
A.(7.) CALCULATION OF MASS LOADS
For the purposes of this permit, monthly and annual TP Loads shall be calculated as follows:
(a.) Individual Facility Monthly TP Load (lb/mo) =TP x TMF x 8.34
where:
TP = the average Total Phosphorus concentration(mg/L) of the
composite samples collected during the month
TMF = the Total Monthly Flow of wastewater discharged during the
month(MG/mo)
8.34 = conversion factor,from(mg/L x MG) to pounds
(b.) Individual Facility Annual TP Load (lb/yr) =Sum of the 12 Monthly TP Loads for the calendar
year
(c.) Association TP Load (lb/yr) =Sum of All Members' TP Loads for the calendar year
-ENDOFPARTI
-

Permit NCC000003
Appendix A
Page 1 of 1
APPENDIX A
HAW RIVER NUTRIENT COMPLIANCE ASSOCIATION
MEMBERS/CO-PERMITTEES AND NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS/LIMITS
Discharge TP Allocations Delivered TP Allocations/ Limits
Permittee Permit Facility TF Holdings Facility Holdings Facility Individual
Total Total WQBELs
1 Graham,City of 1.1 NC0021211 Graham WWTP 71% 7,079 7,079 5,026 5,026
2 Greensboro,City of 2.1 NC0047384 T. Z. Osborne WRF 44% 80,899 81,156 35,595 35,708
2.1.1 Connection formerly Guilford County Schools, NC0038156 204 90
2.1.2 Connection formerly Guilford County Schools, NC0038172 53 23
2.2 NC0024325 North Buffalo WRF 42% 32,359 32,359 13,591 13,591
3 Mebane,City of 2.1 NC0021474 Mebane WWTP 55% 5,056 5,056 2,781 2,781
4 Reidsville,City of 4.1 NC0024881 Reidsville WWTP 56% 15,169 15,169 8,494 8,494
Association TP Limit(Ib/yr) 65,600
Footnote:
1. The Association TP Limit may not equal the apparent sum due to the effects of rounding the individual values.

Permit NCC000003
Appendix B
Page 1 of 2
APPENDIX B
POINT SOURCE FACILITIES ASSIGNED NUTRIENT ALLOCATIONS
JORDAN RESERVOIR, HAW RIVER WATERSHED
The following is a list of all treatment facilities that, as holders of individual NPDES permits in 2001,
are assigned Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorus allocations pursuant to state rule 15A NCAC
2B .0270,Jordan Water Supply Nutrient Strategy:Wastewater Discharge Requirements, adopted effective
August 2009.
The rule establishes aggregate delivered allocations of 895,000 lb/yr TN and 106,000 lb/yr TP for these
facilities and prescribes how the allocation is to be divided among the individual facilities.The TP
allocations,individual and aggregate,became effective with calendar year 2010.
The B. Everett Jordan Reservoir, North Carolina Pluise I Total Maximum Daily Load,approved by the USEPA
Region 4 on September 20,2007,also concludes that this aggregate allocation is the maximum
allowable contribution from point source dischargers to the Haw River arm of the Jordan Reservoir.
NPDES Transport Factors
Permit No. Permittee Facility
TN TP
1. NC0047384 City of Greensboro T.Z. Osborne WWTP 45% 44%
2. NC0024325 City of Greensboro North Buffalo Creek WWTP 43% 42%
3. NC0023868 City of Burlington Eastside WWTP 77% 69%
4. NC0023876 City of Burlington Southside WWTP 80% 73%
5. NC0024881 City of Reidsville Reidsville WWTP 66% 56%
6. NC0021211 City of Graham Graham WWTP 81% 71%
7. NC0021474 City of Mebane Mebane WWTP 56% 55%
8. NC0020354 Town of Pittsboro Pittsboro WWTP 76% 82%
9. NC0066966 Quarterstone Farm Homeowners Assoc. Quarterstone Farm WWTP 50% 43%
10. NC0003913 Glen Raven Inc Altamahaw Division plant 58% 49%
11. NC0022691 Chateau Communities,Inc. Autumn Forest Manuf. Home Community 52% 46%
12. NC0001210 Monarch Hosiery Mills Inc Monarch Hosiery Mills Incorporated 58% 49%
13. NC0022675 Country Club Communities LLC Birmingham Place 55% 52%
14. NC0042285 Trails Property Owners Assoc Trails WWTP 84% 76%
15. NC0046043 Oak Ridge Military Academy Oak Ridge Military Academy 46% 41%
16. NC0077968 Homers Mobile Home Park Homers Mobile Home Park 58% 49%
17. NC0042528 B Everett Jordan&Son-1927 LLC B Everett Jordan 1927 LLC 84% 76%
18. NC0038156 Guilford County Schools Northeast Middle&Senior High WWTP 52% 46%
19. NC0073571 Mervyn R. King Countryside Manor WWTP 42% 38%
20. NC0029726 NC Department of Correction Guilford Correctional Center WWTP 36% 34%
21. NC0001384 Burlington Industries,Inc Williamsburg plant 48% 47%
22. NC0035866 County of Chatham Bynum WWTP 84% 76%
23. NC0065412 REA Enterprises, LLC Pleasant Ridge WWTP 51% 45%
24. NC0046809 Pentecostal Holiness Church Pentecostal Holiness Church 46% 41%
25. NC0060259 Willow Oak Mobile Home Park Willow Oak Mobile Home Park 51% 45%
26. NC0031607 Alamance-Burlington School System Western Alamance Middle School 64% 58%
27. NC0046019 Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina The Summit WWTP 46% 41%
28. NC0045161 Alamance-Burlington School System Altamahaw/Ossipee Elementary School 58% 49%

Permit NCC000003
Appendix B
Page 2 of 2
NPDES Transport Factors
Permit No. Permittee Facility
TN TP
29. NC0045144 Alamance-Burlington School System Western Alamance High School 64% 58%
30. NC0038172 Guilford County Schools McLeansville Middle School WWTP 36% 34%
31. NC0022098 Cedar Valley Communities LLC Cedar Valley WWTP 55% 52%
32. NC0045152 Alamance-Burlington School System Jordan Elementary School 84% 76%
33. NC0055271 Shields Mobile Home Park Shields Mobile Home Park 64% 58%
34. NC0048241 Staley Hosiery Mills Staley Hosiery Mills 74% 65%
35. NC0038164 Guilford County Schools Nathanael Greene Elementary School WWTP 75% 66%
36. NC0036994 Rockingham County Board of Education Monroeton Elementary School 42% 38%
37. NC0066010 Rockingham County Board of Education Williamsburg Elementary School 51% 45%
38. NC0045128 Alamance-Burlington School System Sylvan Elementary School 84% 76%

Permit NCC000003
Parts II& III
Page 1 of 9
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
SECTION A-APPLICABILITY OF PARTS II AND III
Parts II and III of this permit contain standard conditions that apply specifically to individual permittees
that own or operate a treatment facility.These (or similar)conditions are routinely found in North
Carolina's NPDES wastewater permits,including those of the Haw River Nutrient Compliance
Association's co-permittee members.The conditions do not necessarily apply to the Association or its
members within the context of this group permit.The group permit includes those standard conditions that
apply here at least in part. For the purposes of determining compliance with this permit,these conditions
shall be read with the following understanding:
a. The Haw River Nutrient Compliance Association serves as a governing body for its Members. It neither
owns nor operates treatment facilities.Consequently,the standard conditions in Parts II and III of this
permit which by their terms or meaning regulate a permittee that owns or operates a treatment facility,
or which are inconsistent with the Special Conditions in Part I of this permit,shall neither be applicable
to nor enforceable against the Association.
b. Each of the Co-Permittee Members governed by this Association permit owns or operates one or more
treatment facilities. Each holds an individual NPDES permit for each facility and remains subject to the
standard conditions in its permit(s). Consequently,the standard conditions in this Association permit
shall neither be applicable to nor enforceable against the individual Co-Permittee Members under this
group permit unless such is clearly consistent with the construction of the permit.
c. Wherever a standard condition in this Association permit is by its terms or meaning applicable to the
Association or to the membership in its entirety,and it refers to"the permittee," it shall be construed to
mean the Association and its Co-Permittee Members.
SECTION B-DEFINITIONS
1. Act or"the Act"
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act,also known as the Clean Water Act(CWA),as amended,33
USC 1251,et. seq.
2. DWR or"the Division"
The Division of Water Resources,Water Quality Programs, Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
3. EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
4. EPA
The United States Environmental Protection Agency.
5. Permit Issuing Authority
The Director of the Division of Water Resources.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 2 of 9
SECTION C-GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The Permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit.Any permit noncompliance constitutes a
violation of the CWA and is grounds for enforcement action;for permit termination,revocation and
reissuance,or modification;or denial of a permit renewal application[40 CFR 122.41].
a. The Permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under section 307(a)
of the CWA for toxic pollutants and with standards for sewage sludge use or disposal established
under section 405(d)of the CWA within the time provided in the regulations that establish these
standards or prohibitions or standards for sewage sludge use or disposal,even if the permit has not
yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
b. The CWA provides that any person who violates section[s] 301,302,306,307,308,318 or 405 of the
Act,or any permit condition or limitation implementing any such sections in a permit issued under
section 402,or any requirement imposed in a pretreatment program approved under sections
402(a)(3)or 402(b)(8)of the Act,is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed$37,500 per day for each
violation. [33 USC 1319(d)and 40 CFR 122.41(a)(2)]
c. The CWA provides that any person who negligently violates sections 301,302,306,307,308,318,or
405 of the Act,or any condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued
under section 402 of the Act,or any requirement imposed in a pretreatment program approved
under section 402(a)(3)or 402(b)(8)of the Act,is subject to criminal penalties of$2,500 to$25,000 per
day of violation,or imprisonment of not more than 1 year,or both.In the case of a second or
subsequent conviction for a negligent violation,a person shall be subject to criminal penalties of not
more than$50,000 per day of violation,or by imprisonment of not more than 2 years,or both. [33
USC 1319(c)(1)and 40 CFR 122.41(a)(2)]
d. Any person who knowingly violates such sections,or such conditions or limitations is subject to
criminal penalties of$5,000 to$50,000 per day of violation,or imprisonment for not more than 3
years,or both. In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing violation,a person
shall be subject to criminal penalties of not more than$100,000 per day of violation,or imprisonment
of not more than 6 years,or both. [33 USC 1319(c)(2)and 40 CFR 122.41(a)(2)]
e. Any person who knowingly violates section 301,302,303,306,307,308,318 or 405 of the Act,or any
permit condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section
402 of the Act,and who knows at that time that he thereby places another person in imminent
danger of death or serious bodily injury,shall,upon conviction,be subject to a fine of not more than
$250,000 or imprisonment of not more than 15 years,or both.In the case of a second or subsequent
conviction for a knowing endangerment violation,a person shall be subject to a fine of not more
than$500,000 or by imprisonment of not more than 30 years,or both. An organization,as defined in
section 309(c)(3)(B)(iii)of the CWA,shall,upon conviction of violating the imminent danger
provision,be subject to a fine of not more than$1,000,000 and can be fined up to$2,000,000 for
second or subsequent convictions. [40 CFR 122.41(a)(2)]
f. Under state law,a civil penalty of not more than$25,000 per violation may be assessed against any
person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms,conditions,or requirements of a
permit. [North Carolina General Statutes§143-215.6A]
g. Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for violating section
301,302,306,307,308,318 or 405 of this Act,or any permit condition or limitation implementing any
of such sections in a permit issued under section 402 of this Act.Administrative penalties for Class I
violations are not to exceed$16,000 per violation,with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty
assessed not to exceed$37,500.Penalties for Class II violations are not to exceed$16,000 per day for
each day during which the violation continues,with the maximum amount of any Class II penalty
not to exceed$177,500. [33 USC 1319(g)(2)and 40 CFR 122.41(a)(3)]

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 3 of 9
2. Duty to Mitigate
The Permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or
disposal in violation of this permit with a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or
the environment[40 CFR 122.41(d)].
3. Civil and Criminal Liability
Except as provided in permit conditions on"Bypassing" (Part II.C.4),"Upsets" (Part II.C.5)and"Power
Failures" (Part II.C.7),nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the Permittee from any
responsibilities,liabilities,or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3,143-215.6 or
Section 309 of the Federal Act,33 USC 1319.Furthermore,the Permittee is responsible for consequential
damages,such as fish kills,even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily
suspended.
4. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the
Permittee from any responsibilities,liabilities,or penalties to which the Permittee is or may be subject to
under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq.or Section 311 of the Federal Act,33 USG 1321.Furthermore,the
Permittee is responsible for consequential damages,such as fish kills,even though the responsibility for
effective compliance may be temporarily suspended.
5. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property,or
any exclusive privileges,nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal
rights,nor any infringement of Federal,State or local laws or regulations [40 CFR 122.41(g)].
6. Onshore or Offshore Construction
This permit does not authorize or approve the construction of any onshore or offshore physical
structures or facilities or the undertaking of any work in any navigable waters.
7. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable.If any provision of this permit,or the application of any
provision of this permit to any circumstances,is held invalid,the application of such provision to other
circumstances,and the remainder of this permit,shall not be affected thereby[NCGS 150B-23].
8. Duty to Provide Information
The Permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority,within a reasonable time,any information
which the Permit Issuing Authority may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying,
revoking and reissuing,or terminating this permit or to determine compliance with this permit.The
Permittee shall also furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority upon request,copies of records required by
this permit[40 CFR 122.41(h)].
9. Duty to Reapply
If the Permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this
permit,the Permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit[40 CFR 122.41(b)].
10. Expiration of Permit
The Permittee is not authorized to discharge after the expiration date. In order to receive automatic
authorization to discharge beyond the expiration date,the Permittee shall submit such information,
forms,and fees as are required by the agency authorized to issue permits no later than 180 days prior to
the expiration date unless permission for a later date has been granted by the Director. (The Director
shall not grant permission for applications to be submitted later than the expiration date of the existing
permit.) [40 CFR 122.21(d)] Any Permittee that has not requested renewal at least 180 days prior to
expiration,or any Permittee that does not have a permit after the expiration and has not requested
renewal at least 180 days prior to expiration,will subject the Permittee to enforcement procedures as
provided in NCGS 143-215.6 and 33 USC 1251 et.seq.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 4 of 9
11. Signatory Requirements
All applications,reports,or information submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed and
certified [40 CFR 122.41(k)].
a. All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer.For the purpose of this Section,a
responsible corporate officer means: (a)a president,secretary,treasurer or vice president of the
corporation in charge of a principal business function,or any other person who performs similar
policy or decision making functions for the corporation,or(b)the manager of one or more
manufacturing,production,or operating facilities,provided,the manager is authorized to make
management decisions which govern the operation of the regulated facility including having the
explicit or implicit duty of making major capital investment recommendations, and initiating
and directing other comprehensive measures to assure long term environmental compliance
with environmental laws and regulations;the manager can ensure that the necessary systems are
established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for permit application
requirements;and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the
manager in accordance with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,respectively;or
(3) For a municipality,State,Federal,or other public agency: by either a principal executive officer
or ranking elected official [40 CFR 122.22].
b. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Permit Issuing Authority
shall be signed by a person described in paragraph a.above or by a duly authorized representative
of that person.A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
(2) The authorization specified either an individual or a position having responsibility for the
overall operation of the regulated facility or activity,such as the position of plant manager,
operator of a well or well field,superintendent,a position of equivalent responsibility,or an
individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters for the company.
(A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual
occupying a named position.);and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority [40 CFR 122.22]
c. Changes to authorization: If an authorization under paragraph(b)of this section is no longer
accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the
facility,a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph(b)of this section must be
submitted to the Director prior to or together with any reports,information,or applications to be
signed by an authorized representative [40 CFR 122.22]
d. Certification.Any person signing a document under paragraphs a.or b.of this section shall make
the following certification[40 CFR 122.22].NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL
BE ACCEPTED:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief true,accurate,and complete.I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
12. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified,revoked and reissued,or terminated for cause.The filing of a request by
the Permittee for a permit modification,revocation and reissuance,or termination,or a notification of
planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit condition[40 CFR 122.41(f)].

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 5 of 9
13. Permit Modification,Revocation and Reissuance,or Termination
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the permit issuing authority from reopening and
modifying the permit,revoking and reissuing the permit,or terminating the permit as allowed by the
laws,rules,and regulations contained in Title 40,Code of Federal Regulations,Parts 122 and 123;Title
15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code,Subchapter 02H .0100;and North Carolina General
Statute 143.215.1 et.al.
14. Annual Administering and Compliance Monitoring Fee Requirements
The Permittee must pay the annual administering and compliance monitoring fee within thirty days
after being billed by the Division.Failure to pay the fee in a timely manner in accordance with 15A
NCAC 02H.0105(b)(2)may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.
SECTION D-MONITORING AND RECORDS
1. Representative Sampling
Samples collected and measurements taken,as required herein,shall be representative of the permitted
discharge.Samples collected at a frequency less than daily shall be taken on a day and time that is
representative of the discharge for the period the sample represents.All samples shall be taken at the
monitoring points specified in this permit and,unless otherwise specified,before the effluent joins or is
diluted by any other wastestream,body of water,or substance.Monitoring points shall not be changed
without notification to and the approval of the Permit Issuing Authority[40 CFR 122.41(j)].
2. Reporting
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s)shall be summarized for each month and
reported on a monthly Discharge Monitoring Report(DMR)Form(MR 1,1.1,2,3)or alternative forms
approved by the Director,postmarked no later than the last calendar day of the month following the
completed reporting period.
The first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the issuance of the permit or in the case of a
new facility,on the last day of the month following the commencement of discharge.Duplicate signed
copies of these,and all other reports required herein,shall be submitted to the following address:
NC DEQ/ Division of Water Resources/ Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION:Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
3. Flow Measurements
Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with accepted scientific practices shall
be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored
discharges.The devices shall be installed,calibrated and maintained to ensure that the accuracy of the
measurements is consistent with the accepted capability of that type of device.Devices selected shall be
capable of measuring flows with a maximum deviation of less than 10% from the true discharge rates
throughout the range of expected discharge volumes.Flow measurement devices shall be accurately
calibrated at a minimum of once per year and maintained to ensure that the accuracy of the
measurements is consistent with the accepted capability of that type of device.The Director shall
approve the flow measurement device and monitoring location prior to installation.
Once-through condenser cooling water flow monitored by pump logs,or pump hour meters as specified
in Part I of this permit and based on the manufacturer's pump curves shall not be subject to this
requirement.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 6 of 9
4. Test Procedures
Laboratories used for sample analysis must be certified by the Division.Permittees should contact the
Division's Laboratory Certification Section(919 733-3908 or
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/lab/cert)for information regarding laboratory certifications.
Facilities whose personnel are conducting testing of field-certified parameters only must hold the
appropriate field parameter laboratory certifications.
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations(published pursuant
to NCGS 143-215.63 et.seq.),the Water and Air Quality Reporting Acts,and to regulations published
pursuant to Section 304(g),33 USC 1314,of the CWA(as amended),and 40 CFR 136;or in the case of
sludge use or disposal,approved under 40 CFR 136,unless otherwise specified in 40 CFR 503,unless
other test procedures have been specified in this permit[40 CFR 122.41].
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this permit,all test procedures must produce minimum
detection and reporting levels that are below the permit discharge requirements and all data generated
must be reported down to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.If no
approved methods are determined capable of achieving minimum detection and reporting levels below
permit discharge requirements,then the most sensitive(method with the lowest possible detection and
reporting level)approved method must be used.
5. Penalties for Tampering
The CWA provides that any person who falsifies,tampers with,or knowingly renders inaccurate,any
monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit shall,upon conviction,be
punished by a fine of not more than$10,000 per violation,or by imprisonment for not more than two
years per violation,or by both.If a conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first
conviction of such person under this paragraph,punishment is a fine of not more than$20,000 per day
of violation,or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years,or both[40 CFR 122.411
6. Records Retention
Except for records of monitoring information required by this permit related to the Permittee's sewage
sludge use and disposal activities,which shall be retained for a period of at least five years(or longer as
required by 40 CFR 503),the Permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information,including:
> all calibration and maintenance records
➢ all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation
> copies of all reports required by this permit
> copies of all data used to complete the application for this permit
These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the sample,
measurement,report or application.This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time
[40 CFR 122.41].
7. Recording Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit,the Permittee shall
record the following information[40 CFR 122.41]:
a. The date,exact place,and time of sampling or measurements;
b. The individual(s)who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s)analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s)who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used;and
f. The results of such analyses.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 7 of 9
8. Inspection and Entry
The Permittee shall allow the Director,or an authorized representative (including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Director),upon the presentation of credentials and other
documents as may be required by law,to;
a. Enter,at reasonable times,upon the Permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is
located or conducted,or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy,at reasonable times,any records that must be kept under the conditions of
this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities,equipment(including monitoring and control equipment),
practices,or operations regulated or required under this permit;and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit compliance or as
otherwise authorized by the CWA,any substances or parameters at any location [40 CFR 122.41(i)].
SECTION E-REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Change in Discharge
All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.The
discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or at a level in excess of that
authorized shall constitute a violation of the permit.
2. Planned Changes
The Permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or
additions to the permitted facility [40 CFR 122.41(1)]. Notice is required only when:
a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one of the criteria for new sources at 40
CFR 122.29(b);or
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the quantity of pollutants
discharged.This notification applies to pollutants subject neither to effluent limitations in the
permit,nor to notification requirements under 40 CFR 122.42(a)(1);or
c. The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the Permittee's sludge use or disposal
practices,and such alteration,addition or change may justify the application of permit conditions
that are different from or absent in the existing permit,including notification of additional use or
disposal sites not reported during the permit application process or not reported pursuant to an
approved land application plan.
3. Anticipated Noncompliance
The Permittee shall give advance notice to the Director of any planned changes to the permitted facility
or other activities that might result in noncompliance with the permit[40 CFR 122.41(1)(2)].
4. Transfers
This permit is not transferable to any person without prior written notice to and approval from the
Director in accordance with 40 CFR 122.61.The Director may condition approval in accordance with
NCGS 143-215.1,in particular NCGS 143-215.1(b)(4)b.2.,and may require modification or revocation and
reissuance of the permit,or a minor modification,to identify the new permittee and incorporate such
other requirements as may be necessary under the CWA [40 CFR 122.41(1)(3),122.61] or state statute.
5. Monitoring Reports
Monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere in this permit [40 CFR
122.41(1)(4)].
a. Monitoring results must be reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report(DMR) (See Part II.D.2)or
forms provided by the Director for reporting results of monitoring of sludge use or disposal
practices.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 8 of 9
b. If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit using test
procedures approved under 40 CFR Part 136 and at a sampling location specified in this permit or
other appropriate instrument governing the discharge,the results of such monitoring shall be
included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted on the DMR.
6. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
a. The Permittee shall report to the Director or the appropriate Regional Office any noncompliance that
potentially threatens public health or the environment.Any information shall be provided orally
within 24 hours from the time the Permittee became aware of the circumstances.A written
submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the Permittee becomes aware of the
circumstances.The written submission shall contain a description of the noncompliance,and its
cause;the period of noncompliance,including exact dates and times,and if the noncompliance has
not been corrected,the anticipated time it is expected to continue;and steps taken or planned to
reduce,eliminate,and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance [40 CFR 122.41(1)(6)].
b. The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis for reports under this section if
the oral report has been received within 24 hours.
c. Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency
Response personnel at(800)662-7956,[phone] or(919)733-3300.
7. Other Noncompliance
The Permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under Part II.E.5 and 6.of this
permit at the time monitoring reports are submitted.The reports shall contain the information listed in
Part II.E.6.of this permit[40 CFR 122.41(1)(7)].
8. Other Information
Where the Permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application,or
submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the Director,it shall promptly
submit such facts or information[40 CFR 122.41(1)(8)].
9. Noncompliance Notification
The Permittee shall report by telephone to either the central office or the appropriate regional office of
the Division as soon as possible,but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working day following
the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following:
a. Any occurrence at the water pollution control facility which results in the discharge of significant
amounts of wastes which are abnormal in quantity or characteristic,such as the dumping of the
contents of a sludge digester;the known passage of a slug of hazardous substance through the
facility;or any other unusual circumstances.
b. Any process unit failure,due to known or unknown reasons,that render the facility incapable of
adequate wastewater treatment such as mechanical or electrical failures of pumps,aerators,
compressors,etc.
c. Any failure of a pumping station,sewer line,or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass without
treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such station or facility.
Persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall also file a written report within 5 days following
first knowledge of the occurrence.Also see reporting requirements for municipalities in Part IV.C.2.c.of
this permit.
10. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215.3(a)(2)or Section 308 of the Federal
Act,33 USC 1318,all reports prepared in accordance with the terms shall be available for public
inspection at the offices of the Division.As required by the Act,effluent data shall not be considered
confidential.Knowingly making any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of
criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-215.1(b)(2)or in Section 309 of the Federal Act.

Permit NCC000003
Parts II&III
Page 9 of 9
11. Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The CWA provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement,representation,or
certification in any record or other document submitted or required to be maintained under this permit,
including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or noncompliance shall,upon conviction,be
punished by a fine of not more than$25,000 per violation,or by imprisonment for not more than two
years per violation,or by both[40 CFR 122.41].
12. Annual Performance Reports
Permittees who own or operate facilities that collect or treat municipal or domestic waste shall provide
an annual report to the Permit Issuing Authority and to the users/customers served by the Permittee
(NCGS 143-215.1C).The report shall summarize the performance of the collection or treatment system,
as well as the extent to which the facility was compliant with applicable Federal or State laws,
regulations and rules pertaining to water quality.The report shall be provided no later than sixty days
after the end of the calendar or fiscal year,depending upon which annual period is used for evaluation.
The report shall be sent to:
NC DEQ/ Division of Water Resources/ Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION:Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
PART III
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
SECTION A-CONSTRUCTION
a. The Permittee shall not commence construction of wastewater treatment facilities,nor add to the plant's
treatment capacity,nor change the treatment process(es)utilized at the treatment plant unless(1)the
Division has issued an Authorization to Construct(AtC)permit or(2)the Permittee is exempted from
such AtC permit requirements under Item b.of this Section.
b. In accordance with NCGS 143-215.1(a5) [SL 2011-394],no permit shall be required to enter into a
contract for the construction,installation,or alteration of any treatment work or disposal system or to
construct,install,or alter any treatment works or disposal system within the State when the systems or
work's principle function is to conduct,treat,equalize,neutralize,stabilize,recycle,or dispose of
industrial waste or sewage from an industrial facility and the discharge of the industrial waste or
sewage is authorized under a permit issued for the discharge of the industrial waste or sewage into the
waters of the State. Notwithstanding the above,the permit issued for the discharge may be modified if
required by federal regulation.
c. Issuance of an AtC will not occur until Final Plans and Specifications for the proposed construction have
been submitted by the Permittee and approved by the Division.
-END OF PARTS II&III-

APPENDIX C
2020 U.S. Census Data

r
■ An official website of the United States government
C ensu
United States
Facts
e city,North Carolina;Orange County,North Carolina;Alamance County,North Carolina
QuickFacts provides statistics for at states and counties,and for cities and towns with a population of 5,000 or more.
Table
Orange County, Alamance
All Topics North Carolina County,North
Carolina
Population Estimates,July 1 2021,(V2021) 6 NA & NA m NA
Population
Population Estimates,July 1 2021,(V2021) 6 NA 6 NA m NA
Population estimates base,April 1,2020,(V2021) 6 NA 6 NA 6 NA
Population,percent change-April 1,2020(estimates base)to July 6 NA 6 NA 6 NA
1,2021,(V2021)
• Population,Census,April 1,2020 17,797 148,696 171,415
Population,Census,April 1,2010 11,393 133,801 151,131
Age and Sex
Persons under 5 years,percent 6 6.3% 6 4.4% 6 5.9%
Persons under 18 years,percent 6 29.0% 6 19.2% 6 22.0%
Persons 65 years and over,percent 6 10.6% 6 14.6% . 17.1%
Female persons,percent t 53.9% 6 52.3% 6 52.5%
Race and Hispanic Origin
White alone,percent 6 66.7% 6 76.9% 6 73.6%
Black or African American alone,percent 6 24.7% 6 11.8% 6 20.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone,percent 6 0.2% 6 0.6% 6 1.5%
Asian alone,percent 6 2.3% 6 8.1% 6 1.7%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone,percent -.-+. 6 0.0% 6 0.1% 6 0.1%
Two or More Races,percent 6 3.1% 6 2.6% 6 2.3%
•
Hispanic or Latino,percent 6 6.9% 6 8.6% 6 13.1%
White alone,not Hispanic or Latino,percent 6 63.0% 6 69.5% 6 62.9%
Population Characteristics
Veterans,2015-2019 760 5,441 9,184
Foreign born persons,percent,2015-2019 6.6% 13.2% 7.9%
Housing
Housing units,July 1,2019,(V2019) X 60,273 72,827
Owner-rrr rpied housing unit rate,2015-2019 61.9% 62.6% 65.2%
Median value of owner-occupied housing units,2015-2019 $189,600 $308,800 $154,800
Median selected monthly owner costs-with a mortgage,2015-2019 $1,410 $1,833 $1,185
Median selected monthly owner costs-without a mortgage,2015- $408 $597 $367
2019
Median gross rent,2015-2019 $937 $1,093 $813
Building permits,2020 X 465 1,784
Families 8 Living Arrangements
Households,2015-2019 5,763 53,376 64,439
Persons per household,2015-2019 2.59 2.49 2.46
Living in same house 1 year ago,percent of persons age 1 year+, 85.0% 77.2% 85.9%
2015-2019
Language other than English spoken at home,percent of persons
age 5 years+,2015-2019 9.7% 17.1% 12.6
Computer and Internet Use
Households with a computer,percent,2015-2019 94.8% 94.3% 88.9%
Households with a broadband Internet subscription,percent,2015- 87.6% 88.2% 77.6
2019
Education
High school graduate or higher,percent of persons age 25 years+,
2015-2019 94.2% 92.7% 86.3%
Bachelor's degree or higher,percent of persons age 25 years+, 39.9% 59.7% 24.8
2015-2019
1

Health
With a disability,under age 65 years,percent,2015-2019 9.9% 5.8% 8.9%
Persons without health insurance,under age 65 years,percent 6 6.1% 6 10.5% & 14.8%
Economy
In civilian labor force,total,percent of population age 16 years+, 67.2% 64.1% 62.6%
2015-2019
In civilian labor force,female,percent of population age 16 years+, 64.3% 61.4% 58.1
2015-2019
Total accommodation and food services sales,2012($1,000) c. 37,431 283,037 254,425
Total health care and social assistance receipts/revenue,2012 39,242 1,389,903 801,896
($1,000)
Total manufacturers shipments,2012($1,000) i:•. 1,503,833 161,418 3,138,351
Total retail sales,2012($1,000) . 368,636 1,385,293 2,108,413
Total retail sales per capita,2012 $29,061 S10,043 513,698
Transportation
Mean travel time to work(minutes),workers age 16 years+,2015- 26.1 23.5 24.2
2019
Income&Poverty
Median household income(in 2019 dollars),2015-2019 $64,726 $71,723 649,688
Per capita income in past 12 months(in 2019 dollars),2015-2019 $28,978 S42,231 $27,312
Persons in poverty,percent 6 11.2% 6 10.3% 6 15.1%
Businesses
Total employer establishments,2019 X 3,328 3,346
Total employment,2019 X 49,242 61,650
Total annual payroll,2019(61,000) X 2,258,917 2,453,856
Total employment,percent change,2018-2019 X 3.0% 3.3%
Total nonemployer establishments,2018 X 13,826 10,616
All firms,2012 1,245 14,373 10,990
Men-owned firms,2012 614 7,689 5,939
Women-owned firms,2012 438 5,219 3,804
Minority-owned firms,2012 235 2,019 2,283
Nonminority-owned firms,2012 885 11,822 8,295
Veteran-owned firms,2012 103 1,240 1,203
Nonveteranowned firms,2012 1,017 12,448 9,138
GEOGRAPHY
Geography
Population per square mile,2010 1,363.3 336.2 356.5
Land area in square miles,2010 8.36 397.96 423.94
FIPS Code 3742240 37135 37001

•
About datasets used in this table
Value Notes
Estimates are not comparable to other geographic levels due to methodology differences that may exist between different data sources.
Some estimates presented here come from sample data,and thus have sampling errors that may render some apparent differences between geographies statistically indistinguishable.Click the Quick Info 0 icon to the
•
BLE view to learn about sampling error.
ge year(e.g.,V2021)refers to the final year of the series(2020 thru 2021).Different vintage years of estimates are not comparable.
Fact Notes
(a) Includes persons reporting only one race
(c) Economic Census-Puerto Rico data are not comparable to U.S.Economic Census data
(b) Hispanics may be of any race,so also are included in applicable race categories
•
Value Flags
- Either no or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate,or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest or upper inl
open ended distribution.
F Fewer than 25 firms
D Suppressed to avoid disclosure of confidential information
N Data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small.
FN Footnote on this item in place of data •
X Not applicable •
S Suppressed;does not meet publication standards •
NA Not available
Z Value greater than zero but less than half unit of measure shown
QuickFacts data are derived from:Population Estimates,American Community Survey,Census of Population and Housing,Current Population Survey,Small Area Health Insurance Estimates,Small Area Income and F
Estimates,State and County Housing Unit Estimates,County Business Patterns,Nonemployer Statistics,Economic Census,Survey of Business Owners,Building Permits.
CONNECT WITH US 0 0 O O O
Accessibility Information Duality I FOIA I Data Protection and Privacy Policy I U.S.Department of Commerce

APPENDIX D
2017 City of Mebane Comprehensive Development Plan
Population Data

MEBANE
BY DESIGN
Comprehensive Land Development Plan
City of Mebane
= 1 /
Tancier
h. ----� e aiteH outrets
._ _., Mk 1
NORTH CAROLINA j Midway
INDUSTRIAL CENTER i, Ni•,t coAcH
i 4' 1 CIN Ell
so
'' a, . 1ir. ”- �.
f
c�(e6axe � �: - ' :
HISTOg� %g ,
HOLT STREET PARK nowa'TMN MEM r ;t/ '
ufw.Ho¢Sneet f //] j
...rc i I ( 1..J ' A
i � ' 1 e9C -
.. -0-.,41 1' f A -;---;-
Ii F ,r
��:.,. t
FINAL REPORT
Adopted by Mebane City Council
May 1, 2017
/
MONT T of Mk-
I?/ y
9 Z
ID Alliii/11P(11.1.1.4%\16
1LAe6aKe r/0N Positively Charming 41i
1

e ayce
Positively Cho,COMPREHENSIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Advisory Committee Members
Jill Auditori—Council Member Jeff Jeffries
Alice Bordsen—Former Council Member Jason Massey
Rebecca Brouwer Gregory Messinger-Former Planning Board
Kathy Colville Gregory Payne
Marcia Culler Kurt Pearson
Shawn Cummings Jessica Simmons
Joey Dail Dave Roth
Traci Davenport Carl Steinbicker
Morris Dean Alan Stephenson-Planning Board Chair
Scott Dorsett Judy Taylor-Planning Board
Chip Foushee Thomas Vinson-Planning Board
Steven Gray Ken Walker
Sarah Hamlett Edward Woodall
Richard Holt-Former Planning Board Chair Ben Wooten
Ed Hooks—Mayor Pro Tern Jane Zilles
City Council Members Planning Board Members
Glendel Stephenson-Mayor Alan Stephenson—Chairman
Ed Hooks—Mayor Pro-Tern Edward Tulauskas— Vice Chairman
Jill Auditori Twila Buffington
Tim Bradley Peter Cannell
Everette Greene Thomas Fenske
Patty Philipps Kurt Pearson
Gale Pettiford
Judy Taylor
Thomas Vinson
Project Consulting Staff City and County Staff Representatives
Jesse Day-PTRC David Cheek—City of Mebane
Malinda Ford—PTRC Montrena Hadley—City of Mebane
Joseph Furstenberg—PTRC Libby Hodges—Alamance County
Elizabeth Jernigan-PTRC Perdita Holtz—Orange County
Anna Leonard-PTRC Franz Holt—City of Mebane,AWCK
Brooke Massa—NCWRC Chris Rollins—City of Mebane
Darrell Russell—City of Mebane/AWCK
Prepared by the Piedmont Triad Regional Council for the City of Mebane
Supported with a grant from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan (201 7

Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION & VISION I
Introduction 1
Purpose and Organization of the Plan 2
Vision of Mebane in 2035 3
Planning Process Outcomes 4
Goals for Development Policy 5
Local and Regional Plan Summary 9
MEBANE COMPREHENSIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE 16
2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 18
SUMMARY OF A DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 18
Population I8
Population Projections I9
Employment 21
Major Employers 25
Earnings 27
LAND DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE 29
Water& Sewer 29
Transportation System 33
Parks and Recreation System 36
CURRENT LAND USE,ZONING,AND LAND SUITABILITY 39
Existing Land Uses 39
Existing Zoning 44
Land Suitability Factors 48
3. ADVISORY COMMITTEE & PUBLIC INPUT 57
4. GROWTH STRATEGY 58
GROWTH STRATEGY AREA DESCRIPTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS 64
GROWTH STRATEGY AREA DEFINITIONS 65
Secondary Growth Areas (G-4) 66
Conservation Areas (C) 67
Primary Growth Area (G-I) 68
5. LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS AND ACTIONS 82
I. Growth Management 82
2. Public Facilities and Infrastructure 84
3. Community Appearance 85
4. Open Space and Natural Resource Protection 87
5. Coordination 91
APPENDIX A: MEBANE DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 92
Population 93
Historical Population 94
MIGRATION 99
Population Projections 100
RACE& ETHNICITY 101
iii I City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan(2017

AGE& GENDER 106
HOUSEHOLDS 108
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 109
INCOME I I I
POVERTY 1 12
HOUSING 1 12
Housing Units 112
Vacancy 114
Tenure 115
Housing Unit by Type and Age of Householder 115
Employment 116
Major Employers 120
Earnings 122
COMMUTING PATTERNS 123
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY 124
APPENDIX B: MEBANE ZONING DISTRICT DESCRIPTIONS 126
APPENDIX C: EXAMPLE OPEN SPACE DEDICATION POLICY 129
REFERENCES 131
iv City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan (20I 7)

List Figures, Tables and Maps
Figure I: Mebane Population Projections (2020-2035) 20
Figure 2: Unemployment Rate Comparison (2014) 21
Figure 3: Unemployment Rate Trend (1990-2014) 22
Figure 4: Recent Unemployment Rate Trend (2008-2015) 22
Figure 5: Employment by Class for Mebane's Residential Civilian Population (Ages 16+) 24
Figure 6: Median Earnings Comparison (2014) 27
Figure 7: Median Earnings in Mebane by Race & Ethnicity (2014) 27
Figure 8: Median Earnings in Mebane by Educational Attainment (2014) 28
Figure 9: Parks and Recreation 10 Year Capital Improvements Plan 37
Figure 10: Greensboro's Gate City Boulevard, from yesweekly.com 59
Figure 11: Clay Street, Mebane, NC 59
Figure 12: Image courtesy of USA Street Blog 61
Figure 13: Diagram courtesy of the Institute for Transportation Development Policy 61
Figure 14: Mebane Population Count (1950-2014) 95
Figure 15: Mebane Decade Growth Rates (1950-2010) 96
Figure 16: Mebane Population Projections (2020-2035) 100
Figure 17: Race & Ethnicity Comparison (2014) 101
Figure 18: Mebane Age Group Distribution (2014) 107
Figure 19: Mebane Age Group Distribution (2010) 107
Figure 20: Mebane Age Group Distribution (2000) 108
Figure 21: Comparison of Household Types (2014) 109
Figure 22: Educational Attainment Comparison (2014) I I 0
Figure 23: Per Capita Comparison (2014) I I I
Figure 24: Median Household Income Comparison (2014) I I I
Figure 25: Comparison of Housing Units by Structure Type (2014) 113
Figure 26: Vacancy Rate Comparison (2014) 1 14
Figure 27: Renter Rate Comparison (2014) 115
Figure 28: Unemployment Rate Comparison (2014) 1 16
Figure 29: Unemployment Rate Trend (1990-2014) 117
Figure 30: Recent Unemployment Rate Trend (2008-2015) 117
Figure 3 I: Employment by Class for Mebane's Residential Civilian Population (Ages 16+) 1 19
Figure 32: Median Earnings Comparison (2014) 122
Figure 33: Median Earnings in Mebane by Race & Ethnicity (2014) 122
Figure 34: Median Earnings in Mebane by Educational Attainment (2014) 123
Figure 35: Mebane Residential Building Permits (1996-2010) 125
Table l: Land Development Policy Implementation Matrix 17
Table 2: Population Density Comparison (2014) 19
Table 3: Mebane Population Comparison for Alamance-Orange County Split (2014) 19
Table 4: Employment Comparison (2014) 21
Table 5: Employment by Industry for Mebane's Residential Civilian Population (Ages 16+) 23
Table 6: Mebane Top 10 Employers (2015) 25
v City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan(2017)

Table 7: Population Density Comparison (2014) 93
Table 8: Mebane Population Comparison for Alamance-Orange County Split (2014) 93
Table 9: Population Count Comparison (1950-2014) 95
Table 10: Decade Growth Rate Comparison (1950-2010) 96
Table I I: Mebane Migration Profile (2014) 99
Table 12: Mebane Race & Ethnicity (2014) 101
Table 13: Changes in Mebane Population Percentages by Race (2000-2014) 102
Table 14: Mebane Population Growth by Race (2000-2014) 102
Table 15: Median Age Comparison (2014) 106
Table 16: Mebane Household Types (2014) 108
Table 17: Mebane Educational Attainment (2014) 109
Table 19: Mebane Poverty Rates by Age Group (2014) 1 12
Table 20: Housing Unit Comparison (1990-2014) 1 12
Table 20: Comparison of Housing Units by Structure Type (2014) 1 13
Table 21: Employment Comparison (2014) 116
Table 22: Employment by Industry for Mebane's Residential Civilian Population (Ages 16+) 118
Table 23: Mebane Top 10 Employers (2015) 120
Table 24: Employment Inflow/Outflow Job Counts (2013) 124
Table 25: Mebane Employment Flow by Place (2013) 124
Table 26: Mebane Building Permits (2011-2015) 125
Map I: Study Area Overview 2
Map 2: Comparison Municipalities 18
Map 3:Job Density (2015) 26
Map 4: Existing Water Infrastructure 31
Map 5: Existing Sewer Infrastructure 32
Map 6: Comprehensive Transportation Plan Roadway Network 34
Map 7: Bicycle and Pedestrian Network 35
Map 8: Existing and Proposed Parks, Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements 38
Map 9: Existing Subdivisions and Planned Residential Development 41
Map 10: Existing Land Use 46
Map I I: Existing Zoning 47
Map 12: Physical Development Constraints 55
Map 13: Natural Resources 56
Map 14: Growth Strategy Areas 64
Map 15: Streams and Contiguous Forest Intersections 88
Map 16: Comparison Municipalities 92
Map 17: Study Area Population Density by Block Group (2014) 94
Map 18: Annualized Percent Population Change (2000 to 2010) 97
Map 19: Annualized Percent Population Change (2010 to 2014) 98
Map 20: Percent White by Block Group (2014) 103
Map 21: Percent African American by Block Group (2014) 104
Map 22: Percent Hispanic by Block Group (2014) 105
Map 23:Job Density (2015) 121
vi City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan (201 7)

Map 17:Study Area Population Density by Block Group(2014)
r\„) I 17 7 I
�> j Population Density
1 People Per Acre
It I ' 0.01 -0.24
�. j 1 a
0.25 -0.49
._ /4
� ` — 0.50 -0.99
- � 11 � � 1.00- 1.99
rMil
�Q i i v 4re
2.00- 4.00
AI*'; ill of 1NI'o .4 Q Study Area
Green` \ 7 • 1,•( ��4 Q Municipal Limits I
244,Level \ III / r `i • I _s
1 ' i `
I1 i-
t-0i1--1fi 4a—c
l#5.h'2-,91r01--e./
7_i,v o
--ei'prt'
--w--1
hm bane Ili
►iMIt1 i
H yW j_ r � � ' +i.
River — I '��
-I.-.4O*1i-.4r/1N
i'6.I10IP.1.1:4.'P.7'1'4---'-.Ai_-mA iS,i-41i-s 4,l,o-'6,,r-o/..
41 R
. ',. Mebane A9.i0.„.r-i4-PV,4,•T 1-°t.
_ `" mirr_
iv..'-t.lit.-.-k.,.,r.,m.v.1-g r.oi'-U.rt
ii
m ` a: .40' 1
P,d4..0.0-0cd1.4&103_..,•o11rS V,-.t(i.Iw2:O4.,y.i ru—li4 kw•.
i _, iuu,#V_
1 1 14410f ,:\" i_
-op epsonville .` 1
NIP
i
►•. /1 ' :\-,5 , I
Source:(U.S. Census Bureau,American Community Survey, 2010-2014)
HISTORICAL POPULATION
Mebane's population has increased dramatically over the past several decades to reach a total
population of 13,277 people in 2014, according to the U.S. Census Bureau 2014 Population
Estimates (see Figure 14). Mebane is similar in population and growth to Belmont (population of
10,456) and Knightdale (population of 13,871). Before their population explosion in the 2000's
Mebane was also similar in population to Fuquay-Varina and Holly Springs - these towns'
populations are now double that of Mebane (see Table 9). Population growth remained steady
between 1950 and 1980, only adding 714 people over 30 years. Growth escalated during the
94 I City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan(2017)

1980's with a 70.9% growth rate that decade. Growth rates have remained over 50% per decade
ever since (see Figure 150).
Figure 14: Mebane Population Count(1950-2014)
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000 U 1111
2,000 . ■
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014
Population: 2,068 2,364 2,573 2,782 4,754 7,284 11,393 13.277
Source:(U.S. Census Bureau,Decennial Census)(U.S. Census Bureau,Population Estimates, 2014)
Table 9: Population Count Comparison(1950-2014)
.Jurisdiction: 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2014
Mebane 7,284 13,277
Belmont 10,456
Fuquay-Varina 22,644
Holly Springs 30,157
Knightdale 13,871
Alamance County 155,792
Orange County 140,420
Source:(U.S. Census Bureau,Decennial Census) (U.S. Census Bureau,Population Estimates,2014)
95 City of Mebane Comprehensive Land Development Plan (201 it

APPENDIX E
City of Mebane 2020 Local Water Supply Plan

12/7/21, 1:18 PM DWR::Local Water Supply Planning
B19 2020
The Drvisan o1 Wald Remora.(DWR)pgd0..M0asem5 red wane this Local Water Supply Plan(LWSP)as a courtesy and*wir°to our customers.DWR staff does not field verity data.Neither DWR.nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP amens
that the data is completely free of error.ad mf6Rbs Prlho s m .data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff Subsequent review may result in sgmficant revision.Questions regarding the accurecy or limbtions of
usage of this data should be directed b 616•4sf10.spasm maw 0W1.
1.System Information
Contact Informal°
Water System Name. Mebane itWSO 02-0t-018
Mailing Address 106 E.Washington St MunicipalityComplete
DesswershipMebane,NC 27302
Contact Person Kyle Smith '"7s: Pudic Utilities Director
Phone. [phone] :.abteo$a. 336-213-2746
Distribution Syete,
Asbestos Cement t_ r` �.r ..8-10 4 10%
Cast Iron 012 32.20%
Ductile Iron 044 81.00%
Gatranded Iron 2 0.30%
Polyvinyl CMwide N 2.40%
What are the estimated total miles of distributor system 124 Miles
How many feet of distnbution hoes were-e. '^during. 0 Feet
How teeny feel of new water mains weer ..rang. 9,926 Fat
Hoe many meters were replaced in 20? 1.025
How old are the oldest meters in this syti' 15 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use r - 102
What is this systems finished water storage capacdy-+ 3.3000 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any par'c"- :she beaks!hal mere sparred quickly should not be inofuded No
Pr,grams
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydra Yes,Annually
Does this system have a valve exerose program? h..Annually
Does this system have a cross-connectron program?ye.
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yoe
Does thus system have a plumbing retrofit program? Na
" hystem have an active water conservation pubic educaton program? YY.
system have a leak detection program? Yob
sO detection on as needed haws
Water Corserratid•,
What type of rate structure..used? UniO 111
How much redeemed water does this system use' 0.0000 1400 For how many connecvons? 0
Does this system have an interconnection web another system capable of prodding water in an emergency? Yes
Hes an emergency eoroecian with Orange A arnanoe Water System and recently nodded the potential of the Cry of Burlington supplym9
Mebane wafer through the interconnection with the City of Graham
2.Water Use Information
Sub-Bawn(s) %of Service POpulaOon -anMs) %or Sr: Population
Now Rlwr(0%1) 100% Alamance 04%
Orange 16%
What was the year-round populaton served in 2020? 17,472
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No
.Yarv•...t Dr rp
vies of Use Metered Metered Non-Metered Non-Metered
Connections Average Use(MGD) Connections Estimated Use IMGD)
ResidsrbC 6,461 0.4015 0 0.0000
CoronhersAi 370 0.2030 0 02000
Industrial M 0.20)0 0 0.0000
Institutional 77 05040 0 0.0000
was used for system processes!backwash line leaning,rushing,elc)? 0.0410 M0D
Average Days Contract Required Pipe Siza(.s Use
PWSID Daily Sold comply with
(MGD) Use. Ex;;-.. P= -. use rsstrietions?
Orange-Alamance 0340020 0.1260 1 0.0000 2020 Yes Here 12 Emergency
3.Water Supply Sources
Mont/sty withdrawals 8 Purchases
Average Daily Max Day .viaya Liu..) Max Day Average ualy
Use(MGD) .se(MGDI Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) -"
1400 16560 May 13200 13110 Sap 2.0763 2.1260
rW 1.500 1.9000 Jun 2.0913 2.1570 Oct 2 0355 2.2010
Mar 1.7760 1.8940 Jul 2.4381 21300 Nov 1.8583 2.0900
Apr 1.7100 2.0010 Aug 2 1897 22240 Dec 1.8100 1.8810
Water Purchase From Other Systems
https://wow.ncwater.org/WUDC/app/LWSP/report.php?pwsid=02-01-018 1/3

12/7/21, 1:18 PM DWR::Local Water Supply Planning
A.,. Required to
PWSID Daily G r comply with water Poe Saes) Use
(Mr,: use restrictions? (Inches) Type
Graham-Mebane POOP 0241-015 1.1101 365 60000 2020 Yes tee 1424 Rspar
Orange-Alamance 0548020 0.0000 0 2020 Yes Yee 12 Ernargercry
4.Wastewater Information
Mcrrthly Discharges
Average Deity Average Daily Average Daily
Ois barge(MOD) Discharge(MOO) Discharge(MGD)
Jan 1.8080 May 1.8780 Sep 1.5780
Feb 2.0430 Jun 1.7870 Oct 1.5510
Mea 1.5800 lui 1.4520 Nov 1.7470
Apr 1.4400 , 1.4840 Dec 21390
Mebane's 2020 Monthly Discharges
3
T. Avg Daily i
i
r
Y
a• 2
c
.
T.
F.
E 1
Haw many sewer connections does this system have? 5,420
How many water service connections with septic systems does Me system nave+ 232
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years, Yee
The City is under contract to expand our wastewater treatment facilities Work is expected to start summer of 2021 Additional expansion is in the CIP in the next few years
Weetawater Permits
Parsley Runstar Pormtted Capacity Des,g,Capa,y Average Mnuat Maetnwm Day Discharge
IM(iD) I MOD, Daily Discharge (MGD) Receiving Stream Receiving Basin
tMGD)
NO7021474 24000 2.3000 1.7050 8.4510 Moderns Creek Haw River(021)
WI2C$00081 0=0 0.0000 0.0000 Ma Beres Creek Hew River(02-1)
Wastewater tnterc0nnections
Average Daily Amount Contract
Water System PWSID TyGe MGD Days Used Maximum(MGDI
Ott affialrn 0241-015 DM s.s5Brg 0.0180 385 0.7500
Mebane has an industrial campus that is shared with Graham and a pump station went on tine in May of 2020 that pumps to them Collection system The discharge is a calculation of the average daily from the new pump station and the industrial campus
5.Planning
2020 2030 1040 2056 20,1. 201,,
Year-Round Population 17,472 33.484 40.911 45,155 55.996 85,089
Seasonal Population 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0.8615 1 5850 1 9080 2.2120 2.5340 2.9020
Commercial 02530 0 3800 0.5690 0 8540 1 2810 1.9210
Industrial 0.2890 0 3360 0.4200 0 5250 0 6570 0.0210
Institutional 0.0840 0.0920 0.1010 0 1110 0.1220 0 1340
System Process 0.0410 0 0513 0.0841 0 0801 0.1001 01251
Unecc anted-tor 0.3704 0.3700 0.3610 03520 03430 0.3340
Surrace Water Supply 0.0000 0 0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Ground Water Supply 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000
Purchases 6.0000 8.0000 6.0000 6 0000 8.0000 8.0000
Future Supplies 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000
Total Available Supply(MGD) 6.0000 6.0000 6.0000 6.0000 8.0000 8.0000
Service Area Demand 1.9089 2.8143 3.4231 4 1341 5.0371 6.2371
Sates 0.0025 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Future Sales 0.0000 0 0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.D000
Total Demand(MGD) 1.9114 2.8143 3.4231 4.1341 5.0371 8.2371
ill.
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general od.anon of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time The per capita water demand may actually be different than indicated due to leaser.populations and the accuracy of data submitted Water systems that
have calculated long-tern per capita water demand based on a rreex,a.ejy thel produces different results may submit their information in the notes field
Your long-term wafer demand s 51 galore per cepa per day What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water demand(i a.>',,i,...,-e,,,: e,,.er audits.vrpnement a piurrhbrg retroat program,employ practices such as rainwater
harvesting or reclaimed water),it these practices are covered elsewhere in your pan indicate where the practices are discussed here
Are there other demand management pradwaa you are nnpernant to reduce your future supply needs?An eddlleW leseetd srsan tank M induded in the 5 year Capital Improvement Pan.
What supplies other than the once listed in future apples are being considered to meet rag future supply needs?
How does the water system intend tr implement the demand nunagemot and supply euanrvng components above,
Has this system participated in regional wafer suet. - • Yee.The Cities of Grattan"and Mebane have worked together for the past severe ye rs to spend asOUYY away beassMM Ya Uh aeer0 kl pis for future water and sewer needs
What mapr water supply reports or studies were, The Cities of Graham.Mebane,and Burlington have partopated ate shdy for emergency eater supply and to stay Is the 3 Mee la supply Milt ether if needed.
Please describe any other needs or issues regardirg F.. .ementa(storage treatment.etc.)or your ability to meet present and- ,a quality con:
_ :::splsar We are undergoing a complete meter replacement program In order ba help reduce unemw8ed SWIM Nee galumph ads process we are ending meters that have not been In Clew big system along with meters
that have not worked in some lime.We are app Is y 75%through the process arid anticipate a complete change out within the next 1 5 years.
https://www.ncwater.org/WUDC/app/LWSP/report.php?pwsid=02-01-018 2/3

12/7/21, 1:18 PM DWR::Local Water Supply Planning
The Division of Water Resources(DWR)provides the data contained within this Loral Water Supply Ran(LWSP)as a courtesy and service to our customers.DWR staff does not field verify data Nether DWR,nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests
that the data is completely hee of errors and omissions.Furthemore,data users are auhoned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR staff Subsequent review may resud in significant revision Questions regarding the accuracy pr limitations of
usage of this data should be directed to the water system and/or DWR.
https://www.ncwater.org/W U DC/app/LWS P/report.ph p?pwsid=02-01-018 3/3

APPENDIX F
Expanded Mebane WRRF Speculative Effluent Limits

a +ROY COOPER ,�\toskf�
Governor L N" J
ri ' ABETH S.BISER ` ,**
ary
\NIEL SMITH NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
DATE
Dennis Hodge
Water Resources Director
City of Mebane
106 East Washington St.
Mebane,North Carolina 27302
Subject: Speculative Effluent Limits
Mebane WWTP
Permit No. NC0021474
Alamance County
Cape Fear River Basin
Dear Mr. Hodge:
This letter provides speculative effluent limits for expansion to 4.0 and 6.0 MGD at
the Mebane WWTP. The Division received the speculative limits request in
a letter dated November 15, 2021 from Dennis Hodge, Water Resources Director for
Mebane. Please recognize that speculative limits may change based on future water quality
initiatives, and it is highly recommended that the applicant verify the speculative limits with the
Division's NPDES Unit prior to any engineering design work.
Receiving Stream. Moadams Creek is located within the Cape Fear River Basin. Moadams
Creek has a stream classification of WS-IV, NSW and waters with this classification have a best
usage for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary
recreation, agriculture, and as a water supply source for drinking, culinary, and food-processing
purposes. The stream has a supplemental classification of nutrient sensitive water(NSW)because
of downstream chlorophyll a impairment in Jordan Lake. The stream has a summer 7Q10 flow
of 0 cfs, a winter 7Q10 flow of 0 cfs, and an annual average flow of 0.9 cfs. Moadams Creek at
this location is not listed on the 303(d) list of impaired waters.
Based upon a review of information available from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Online Map Viewer, there are not any Federally Listed threatened or endangered aquatic species
identified within a 5-mile radius of the proposed discharge location. If there are any identified
threatened/endangered species, it is recommended that the applicant discuss the proposed project
with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether the proposed discharge location might
impact such species.
Qwv North CarolinallorthSalisbury DepartmentStreet (of
16 Environmental17MailServiceCenter Quality Division of WaterNorthCarolina 2769 Resources
D_E Raleigh, 9-1617
o.......•: 'f ....++nrr.\ / 919.707.9000

Speculative Effluent Limits. Based on Division review of receiving stream conditions and water
quality modeling results, speculative limits for the proposed expansions to 4.0 and
6.0 MGD are presented in Tables 1 and 2. A complete evaluation of these limits and monitoring
requirements for metals and other toxicants,as well as potential instream monitoring requirements,
will be addressed upon receipt of a formal NPDES permit application. Some features of the
speculative limit development include the following:
• BOD/NH3 Limits. Biochemical oxygen demand(BOD) and ammonia-nitrogen limits are based
on water quality modeling for the receiving stream, minimum treatment levels for streams with
zero flow but with a positive 30Q2 flow [15A NCAC 2B .0206(d)(1)], and protection for
ammonia toxicity.
• Nutrients: Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorus (TP)mass limits are assigned according
to the Jordan Lake nutrient management rules, 15A NCAC 2B .0270. The facility must
demonstrate the ability to comply with these limits upon expansion or obtain additional nutrient
allocation per 2B .0270.
TABLE 1. Speculative Limits for Mebane WWTP(4.0 MGD)
Effluent Characteristic Effluent Limitations
Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum
Flow 4.0 MGD
BOD5 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L
NH3 as N (Nov.-Mar.) 1.8 mg/L 5.4 mg/L
TSS 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen Minimum Daily Average>6.0 mg/L
TRC (if used for 17 µg/L
disinfection)
TN' 40,225 lbs/year
TP2 5,056 lbs/year
Fecal coliform(geometric 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
mean)
Chronic Toxicity, Pass/Fail 90%
(Quarterly test)
1 TABLE 2. Speculative Limits for Mebane WWTP (6.0 MGD)
Effluent Characteristic Effluent Limitations
Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum
Flow 6.0 MGD
BOD5 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L
NH3 as N (Nov.-Mar.) 1.8 mg/L 5.4 mg/L
TSS 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen Minimum Daily Average>6.0 mg/L
D E Q North
North CarolinaSalisb DepartmenturyStreet of1617 Environmental
rviceCenter I Rale Quality Division
igh. of WaterNorthCarolina Resources
27699 1617
/' 919.707.9000

TRC (if used for 17µg/L
disinfection)
TN 1 40,225 lbs/year
TP2 5,056 lbs/year
Fecal coliform(geometric 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
mean)
Chronic Toxicity, Pass/Fail 90%
(Quarterly test)
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA). Please note that the Division cannot guarantee that an
NPDES permit for a new or expanding discharge will be issued with these speculative limits. Final
decisions can only be made after the Division receives and evaluates a formal permit application
for the new/expanded discharge. In accordance with North Carolina Administrative Code 15A
NCAC 2H.0105(c), the most environmentally sound alternative should be selected from all
reasonably cost-effective options. Therefore, as a component of all NPDES permit applications
for new or expanding flow, a detailed engineering alternatives analysis (EAA) must be
prepared. The EAA must justify requested flows and provide an analysis of potential wastewater
treatment alternatives.
State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)EA/EIS Requirements. A SEPA EA/EIS document may
be required for projects that: 1)involve$10 Million or more of state funds;or 2)will significantly
and permanently impact 10 or more acres of public lands. Please check with the DWR SEPA
coordinator(David Wainwright,919-707-9045)as to whether your project requires SEPA review.
For projects that are subject to SEPA, the EAA requirements discussed above will need to be
folded into the SEPA document. Additionally, if subject to SEPA, the NPDES Unit will not
process an NPDES permit application for a new/expanding discharge until the Division has
approved the SEPA document and sent a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) to the State
Clearinghouse for review and comment.
Should you have any questions about these speculative limits or NPDES permitting requirements,
please feel free to contact Michael Montebello at [e-mail](919) 707-
3624.
Respectfully,
Michael Montebello
Supervisor,NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
Electronic Copy:
NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Inland Fisheries,
[e-mail]
US Fish and Wildlife Service, [e-mail]
DWR/Water Quality Regional Operations/Winston-Salem
DWR/Basinwide Planning, Jim Hawhee
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
D E��� S12 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh.North Carolina 27699-1617
� �+�+� 919.707.9000

APPENDIX G
United States Golf Association
Golf's Use of Water Report

,, ,.
G 0 L Fps ,
i .
USE
- __ :, .
OF WATER
, i
SOLUTIONS FORA MORE SUSTAINABLE GAME
iiiita ,
PRESENTED BY THE
How Much Water Does Golf Use and
Where Does It Come From?
Gregory T. Lyman, Environmental Programs Director
Golf Course Superintendent Association of America
The information presented for the USGA Water Superintendents at all golf facilities in the U.S.
Summit is provided through GCSAA's Golf Course (16,797)were invited to participate in the survey. A total
Environmental Profile, a series of surveys to collect data of 2,548 golf facilities participated in the survey,
on golf courses throughout the United States. The accounting for 15 percent of the nation's facilities.
Profile reports provide insight and perspective into the
property features, management practices and inputs Report Highlights:
sociated with U.S. golf courses.
Water Use and Conservation Practices on U.S. Golf There are an estimated 1,504,210 acres of
Courses is the second report produced from the project. maintained turfgrass(greens, tees, fairways, rough) on
It provides an accurate portrayal of water use, costs, golf facilities in the U.S.An estimated 1,198,381 acres or
sources and conservation practices on golf courses in 80 percent of maintained turfgrass are irrigated.
the United States. It also establishes a baseline that will Approximately 80 acres of an average 18—hole golf
be compared to data from future surveys to identify course's 100 acres of maintained turfgrass are irrigated.
change over time.All reports from the project are From 2001-2005, an estimated total of 31,877 acres of
available at www.gcsaa.orq. irrigated turfgrass were added to existing golf facilities
The objectives of the water use and conservation in the U.S. The greatest net gain in irrigated acreage
survey were to measure:
• Number of irrigated turfgrass Table 1. Number of irrigated acres and percentage of total irrigated
acres for the U.S. and in acres by golf cours component for an average 18—hold golf facility in
agronomic regions the USA.
• Total water use in the U.S. and in
agronomic regions Component Irrigated acres % total irrigated acres
• Water cost averages for the U.S.
and in agronomic regions Greens 3.7 4.6
• Water sources used for irrigation Tees 3.4 4.2
• Recycled water use in the U.S. Fairways 30.7 38.0
and in agronomic regions Rough 33.8 41.9
• Water quality
• Irrigation system characteristics Practice area 5.6 6.9
• Water management and Clubhouse grounds 3.5 4.3
conservation practices. Total 80.7 99.9
©2012 by United States Golf Association.All rights reserved. Golf's Use of Water:Challenges and Opportunities.
Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section U ) A USGA Summit on Golf Course Water Use,November 2012.
Publications.Suscribe to the USGA Green Section Record. TGIF Record Number 214418
1

occurred in the North Central and Table 2. Irrigated turfgrass acres,water use, and water use per irrigated
Northeast regions,where 13,513 turfgrass acre on an average 18—hole golf facility by agronomic region.
and 8,442 new acres were
irrigated, respectively.The Agronomic regionX
Southwest region had an • NE NC Trans SE SW UW/Mtn Pac
estimated net decrease of 12 acres. Irrigated turfgrass(acres)Y 54f 66e 74d 100b 115a 103b 84c
From 2003-2005,the average
Water use(acre-feet)Y 42.4f 76.7e 78.9e 241.8c 459.0a 300.4b 158.0d
water use for golf course irrigation
in the U.S.was estimated to be Water use(acre-feet)/ 0.8 1.2 1.1 2.4 4.0 2.9 1.9
2,312,701 acrefeet per year.That irrigated turfgrass acre
equates to approximately 2.08 Water use(inches)/ 9,4 13.9 12.8 29.0 47.9 35.0 22.6
irrigated turfgrass acre
billion gallons of water per day for ..--- -
golf course irrigation in the U.S. X Agronomic regions: NE = Northeast; NC = North Central; Trans = Transition;
According to the U.S.Geological SE = Southeast; SW = Southwest; UW/Mtn = Upper West/Mountain;
Pac = Pacific.
Survey's""Estimated Use of Water Y
in the United States in 2000"" Within a row, values followed by the same letter are not different
from one another. Letters denote significance at the 900
/o confidence level.
report,approximately 408 billion
gallons of water per day are withdrawn in the U.S. Golf In general, irrigation water quality is acceptable or
course irrigation accounts for 0.5 percent of this total. better in all agronomic regions, although there are golf
Water use varies significantly by agronomic region. facilities in all agronomic regions that face significant
An average 18—hole golf facility in the Southwest region agronomic challenges due to the quality of their
uses an average of 4 acre—feet of water per irrigated irrigation water.
acre per year.An average 18—hole golf facility in the Approximately 46 percent of 18—hole golf facilities
Northeast region uses an average of 0.8 acre—feet of treat their irrigation water or distribute products via the
water per irrigated acre per year. irrigation system.The most common products
Annual irrigation water cost also varies significantly distributed through the irrigation system are wetting
by agronomic region. Golf course facilities in the agents and fertilizers.
Southwest region had the highest water costs— Nearly all 18—hole golf facilities use multiple
approximately$107,800 per year for an average 18— irrigation scheduling techniques to aid in making water
hole golf course. Golf facilities in the North Central, application decisions. Most facilities utilize direct
Northeast and Transition regions had the lowest water observations of turfgrass and soil conditions to aid in
costs, paying$4,700,$6,300 and$6,900 per year, irrigation scheduling decisions.Approximately 35
respectively. percent routinely utilize evapotranspiration data and
Multiple sources are utilized for irrigation water and approximately 3 percent use soil moisture sensors to aid
many golf facilities have more than one source available in irrigation scheduling.
for irrigation. Most 18—hole golf facilities utilize surface Superintendents at 18—hole golf facilities utilize
waters(ponds, lakes)or on—site irrigation wells. numerous methods to conserve water.The top three
Approximately 14 percent of golf facilities use water conservation methods and the percent of golf facilities
from a public municipal source and approximately 12 utilizing that method are:wetting agents(92%); hand
percent use recycled water as a source for irrigation. watering (78%); and keeping turfgrass drier(69%).
Specific water sources for 18—hole courses as indicated An estimated 25 percent of18—hole golf facilities are
by participants are noted below: subjected to recurring annual water allocations.
• 52 percent use water from ponds or lakes. Facilities in the Southwest(40%), Upper West/
• 46 percent use water from on—site wells. Mountain (39%)and Southeast(36%)are most likely to
• 17 percent use water from rivers,streams and be subjected to a recurring annual irrigation water
creeks. allocation. From 2001 to 2005, 16 percent of 18—hole
• 14 percent use water from municipal water golf facilities in the U.S.were subjected to mandatory
systems. irrigation water restrictions more stringent than the
• 12 percent use recycled water for irrigation. normal recurring annual irrigation water allocation for at
• least one year. Facilities in the Northeast and Upper
As previously noted, 12 percent of 18—hole courses West/Mountain agronomic regions were more likely to
use recycled water for irrigation.The most common experience more stringent restrictions.Approximately
reason cited for not using it was a lack of an available 28 percent of 18—hole golf facilities in the Northeast
source for recycled water as indicated by 53 percent of agronomic region have written drought management
respondents. plans, more than any other agronomic region.
©2012 by United States Golf Association.All rights reserved. . Golfs Use of Water.Challenges and Opportunities.
Please see Policies for the Reuse of USGA Green Section USGAM A USGA Summit on Golf Course Water Use,November 2012.
Publications.Suscribe to the USGA Green Section Record.
2