NC0024333_Permit (Issuance)_20040719

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0024333
Monroe WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Plan of Action
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
July 19, 2004
This document is prirnted on reuse paper - igiore axiy
content on the resrerse side

Michael F. Easley, Governor
State of North Carolina
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
July 19, 2004
Mr. Russell Colbath, P.E.
Director of Water Resources
P.O. Box 69
Monroe, North Carolina 28111-0069
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Monroe WWTP
Permit No. NC0024333
Union County
Dear Mr. Colbath:
Attached to this letter is the final NPDES permit for Monroe wastewater treatment plant,
NPDES Permit No. NC0024333. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994.
The Division of Water Quality received your comments, dated January 16, 2004, on the
draft permit. The Division also received your additional information to fulfill the permit
application requirements on May 14, 2004. The following comments are offered with regard to
your requests:
• With this permit renewal, the City of Monroe requested a re -rating of the treatment plant
from 9 MGD to 10.4 MGD. Because the re -rating is being issued concurrently with this
permit, this final permit will reflect limits at 10.4 MGD with an expansion phase to 12.5
MGD (the 9 MGD limits will be removed). The new limits will become effective September
1, 2004. The Authorization to Operate at 10.4 MGD will follow under separate cover.
• The cyanide and selenium limits must remain in the permit for this cycle. The most recent
two years of data was reviewed and again found to have reasonable potential to exceed the
allowable level for these parameters.
• The lead limit has been removed from the permit. The most recent two years of data
showed all values to be below detectable levels.
• Oil and grease monitoring has been added to the final permit. Monitoring should be
conducted on a monthly basis. This parameter was added based on comments from EPA
and further review of existing monitoring data.
• The weekly average ammonia limit cannot be removed from the permit. This is a federally
imposed requirement 140 CFR 122.45(d)I, which was adopted by the Division October 15,
2002. All permits containing a monthly average limit and issued after October 15, 2002
were required to meet a weekly average limit (for non -municipalities, the requirement was
a daily maximum limit). If you would like further information on the ammonia
implementation procedure, please contact Susan Wilson at the number listed in the last
paragraph.
• The typographical error in the toxicity testing requirement has been corrected.
• As stated in the draft permit, an annual pollutant scan has been added to your permit. By
performing this scan concurrent with your toxicity test (annually, varying the testing
quarter each year). you will be able to collect sufficient data for the new renewal
application required by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This will also satisfy
the requirement for seasonal variation of the data.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
[phone]
FAX [phone]
On the Internet at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/

Mr. Colbath
Page 2
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 office of Administrative Hearings, Mail Service Center 6714, Raleigh, North Carolina
27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division of
Water Quality. The Division of Water Quality may require modification or revocation and
reissuance of the permit.
This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits that may be required
by the Division of Water Quality, the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or
any other federal or local governmental permit.
If you have any questions regarding the NPDES permit, please contact. Susan Wilson at
(919) 733 - 5083, extension 510.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
Mark McIntire
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Mooresville Regional Office/Water Quality
EPA Region IV, Mr. Marshall Hyatt
Central Files
NPDES Unit
Kim Hinson, Superintendent, Monroe WWTP (same address as above)
Mr. Jim Cramer, P.E. Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.
4011 WestChase Boulevard
Raleigh, NC 27607

Permit NC0024333
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
City of Monroe
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Monroe Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
775 Treeway Drive
Monroe
Union County
to receiving waters designated as Richardson Creek in the Yadkin -Pee Dee 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 September 1, 2004.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on January 31, 2009.
Signed this day July 19, 2004.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
Mark McIntire
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0024333
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge, are hereby
revoked. [The exclusive authority to operate this facility arises under this permit. The authority to
operate the facility under previously issued permits bearing this number is no longer effective.) The
conditions, requirements, terms and provisions of this permit authorizing discharge under the
NPDES govern discharges from this facility.
The City of Monroe is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a 10.4 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of:
• Two influent pump stations
• Two mechanical rotary screens
• Flow equalization basin
• Five activated sludge fine -bubble diffused air aeration basins
• Four secondary clarifiers
• Six activated charcoal tertiary filters
• Chlorine disinfection
• Sulfur dioxide dechlorination
• Five aerobic sludge digesters
• Eleven sand drying beds (inactive)
• Four gravity sludge drying beds
• Two sludge thickening centrifuges
The facility is located at the Monroe WWTP on Treeway Drive in Monroe,
Union County.
2. After the facility receives an Authorization to Construct from the Division of
Water Quality, expand the existing facility not to exceed a design flow of 12.5
MGD. Ya 01401-; ,-'�,;,;►, i
0f1
3. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Richardson Creek, which is classified C waters in the Yadkin -Pee
Dee River Basin.

)01 jirr
Town of Monroe WWTP
Monroe, North Carolina
Receiving Stream: Richardson Creek Permitted Flow: 9.0 -12.0 MGD
Latitude: 34° 59' 48" N Lonaitude: 80° 29' 28" W
Drainage Basin: Yadkin — Pee Dee Sub -Basin: 03-07-14
State Grid / USGS Quad: H 17 NW / Wingate, NC. Stream Class: C
4utfall 001
flo. s .. orthe
NPDES Permit No. NC0024333
Union County

Permit NC0024333
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (10.4 MGD)
During the period beginning on September 1. 2004 and lasting until expansion to 12.5 MGD or expiration,
the Permittee is authorized to discharge municipal wastewater from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location'
Flow
10.4 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(April 1- October 31)2
7.3 mg/L
11.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(November 1-March 31)2
14.5 mg/L
22.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
NH3 as N (April 1- October 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (November 1-March 31)
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen3
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH
Between 6.0 and 9.0 s.u.
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
17 µg/L
28 µg/L4
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (2C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Oil & Grease (mg/I)
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cyanides
5.2 µg/L
22 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Fluoride
1.8 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Selenium
5.2 µg/L
56 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Silver
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Temperature
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Fecal Coliform
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Conductivity
.
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Notes:
1. U: upstream at Walkup Avenue. D: downstream - (1) below discharge at NCSR 1006 and (2) below Stewarts
Creek at NCSR 1630. Instream samples shall be collected 3/week from June 1-September 30 and weekly
throughout the rest of the year. As a participant in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association, the
subject facility is not responsible for conducting the instream monitoring requirements above.
Should your membership in the Association be terminated, you shall notify the Division immediately
and the instream monitoring requirements will be reinstated.
2. The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (85% removal).
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen concentration in the effluent shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
4. The total residual concentration of 28 µg/L shall be the daily average limit.
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 90%; tests shall be conducted in March, June, September and
December [see Part A. (3.) for further details]. Chronic toxicity sampling shall coincide with metals
sampling.
6. The quantitation level for cyanide shall be 10 µg/l. Values reported less than 10 µg/1 shall be considered
zero for compliance purposes.
7.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

•
Permit NC0024333
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (12.5 MGD)
During the period beginning upon expansion to 12.5 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge municipal wastewater from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored
by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location'
Flow
12.5 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(April 1- October 31)2
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(November 1-March 31)2
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
NH3 as N (April 1 - October 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (November 1-March 31)
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved 0xygen3
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH
Between 6.0 and 9.0 s.u.
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
17 µg/L
28 µg/L4
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (2C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Oil & Grease (mgll)
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cyanides
5.1 µg/L
22 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Fluoride
1.8 mgll
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Selenium
5.1 pig/
56 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Silver
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Temperature
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Fecal Coliform
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Conductivity
Footnote 1
Grab
U, D
Notes:
1. U: upstream at Walkup Avenue. D: downstream - (1) below discharge at NCSR 1006 and (2) below
Stewarts Creek at NCSR 1630. lnstream samples shall be collected 3/week from June 1-September 30 and
weekly throughout the rest of the year. As a participant in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association,
the subject facility is not responsible for conducting the instream monitoring requirements above.
Should your membership in the Association be terminatied, you shall notify the Division immediately
and the instream monitoring requirements will be reinstated.
2. The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (85% removal).
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen concentration in the effluent shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
4. The total residual chlorine concentration of 28 µg/L shall be the daily average limit.
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 90%; tests shall be conducted in March, June, September, and
December [see Part A.(3.) for further details]. Chronic toxicity sampling shall coincide with metals sampling.
6. The quantitation level for cyanide shall be 10 µg/1. Values reported less than 10 µg/1 shall be considered
zero for compliance purposes.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NC0024333
A. (3.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90% (this is for both flows
-10.4 MGD, and 12.5 MGD).
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterlu monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February
1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during
the months of March, June, September and December. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be
performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or
ChV below the permit limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in
each of the two following months as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric
mean of the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and
the lowest concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The
definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical
methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the
Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the
parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ
Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no
later than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical
measurements and all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and
ORC or approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be
measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity
monitoring is required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic
toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the
month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report
shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may
be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental
controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed
no later than the last day of the month following the month of the initial monitoring.

Permit NC0024333
A. (4.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The Permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached table.
The 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 shall represent seasonal variations. 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-dichbroethylene Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen 1,2-dichloropropane Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite 1,3-dichloropropylene 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Kjeldahl nitrogen Ethylbenzene Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease Methyl bromide 2-chloronaphthalene
Phosphorus Methyl chloride 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids Methylene chloride Chrysene
Hardness 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane Di-n•butyl phthalate
Antimony Tetrachtoroethylene Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic Toluene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium 1,1,1-trichloroethane 1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium 1,1,2-trichtoroethane 1,3-dichlorobenzene
Chromium Trichloroethylene 1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper Vinyl chloride 3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead Acid -extractable compounds: Diethyl phthalate
Mercury P-chloro•m•cresol Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel 2-chlorophenol 2,4•dinitrotoluene
Selenium 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,6-dinitrototuene
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
Acrotein Phenol Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile 2,4,6-trichlorophenol tndeno(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-chloroethyivinyl ether Benzo(a)pyrene Phenanthrene
Chloroform 3,4 benzofluoranthene Pyrene
Dichtorobromomethane Benzo(ghi)perylene 1,2,4-tichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethane Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2•dichloroethane Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- A MR-PPA1 or in a form approved
by the Director within 90 days of sampling. The report shall be submitted to the following
address: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.

Ja`SE� TFs.
St
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
•19.
q( PROl .S4) ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
JUL 1 2 2004
Ms. Susan Wilson
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
IrD) g f-ll
+, III,
IUD; JUL 1 6 2004
rJ
DENR - WATER— G !Jy
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
SUBJ: Draft NPDES Permit
City of Monroe WWTP - NPDES No. NC0024333
Dear Ms. Wilson:
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR MOA, we have completed review of the draft permit
referenced above and have no comments. We request that we be afforded an additional review
opportunity only if significant changes are made to the permit prior to issuance, or if significant
comments objecting to the draft permit are received. Otherwise, please send us one copy of the final
permit when issued.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
ltia„-fir
Marshall Hyatt, Environmental Scientist
Permits, Grants, and Technical Assistance Branch
Water Management Division
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsurner)

copy 72, efiik 4 toiJ
DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET AMENDMENT FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0024333
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
City of Monroe/ Monroe WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 69; Monroe, North Carolina 28111-0069
Facility Address:
775 Treeway Drive; Monroe, North Carolina 28110
Permitted Flow
9.0 MGD/ 10.4MGD/ 12.5 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (50%) and industrial (50%) with pretreatment program
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Union County
NPDES Contact
Susan A. Wilson, 6/18/04J ✓
AMENDMENT TO FACT SHEET (DECEMBER 15, 2003 FACT SHEET)
The permittee originally submitted the permit application July 29, 2003. This application did
not include all the requirements necessary for EPA Form 2A. The City of Monroe has now
submitted the additional data - received May 14, 2004. This revised application contains 3
priority pollutant analyses and 4 second species tests (with fathead minnow).
The data in the permit reflects any effluent monitoring conducted during the previous 4.5
years. For the reasonable potential analyses (RPA), data from the previous 2 years was
considered (this explains the potential discrepancy between the maximum values reported in
the application and the values used for the RPA). DWQ considers the most recent 2 years of
data the most appropriate for RPA (or a minimum of 12 data points, where feasible).
The City of Monroe has a full pretreatment program with the Division of Water Quality's
Pretreatment Unit, as specified by federal regulations 40 CFR 403 and Title 15A NCAC 2H.0900
of state regulations, and will continue to implement this program in the new permit term. Data
collected through the pretreatment program were used in this permit renewal.
During EPA Region 1V's initial review - several questions were brought forward regarding the
draft and permit application and are addressed below:
Oil and grease data from the application appeared to be elevated. The ORC explained that
most of the maximum values occurred when the new oil/grease methodology was first started.
A review of the most recent 2 years of data indicated that the maximum predicted value
approached 30 mg/l. Because NC has no WQ standard for oil/grease, monthly monitoring for
oil/grease will be recommended at this time. The City has filtration, so DWQ does not believe
that oil/grease is a concern at this facility, but monitoring will provide additional information
for the next permit renewal.
Some organic parameters were above detectable levels in the PPA for the application
(chlorodibromomethane, chloroform, dichlorobromomethane). However, values were below the
human health standard for these parameters (this discharge is not classified as water supply).
Thallium was below detection level in all the PPA samples (below 2 ug/1).
City of Monroe's Comments:
The City of Monroe submitted comments to the draft permit (dated January 16, 2004).
The City requested that the cyanide limit be eliminated. The most recent 2 years of cyanide
data was reviewed again (to include 2 - 3 more months of data). Several values were above the
quantitation level of 10 ug/1. The City indicates that interference may be an issue. DWQ will
require that the limit remain in the permit (because several values are over the quantitation
level and above the allowable level).
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC002 1333 Renewal Amendment
Pa4e 1

v .
•1
FACT SHEET AMENDMENT FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
City of Monroe
The City of Monroe requested relief from the weekly average ammonia limits (although they
understand this is a federal requirement). This request cannot be granted by DWQ.
The City requested that the lead limit be eliminated. The most recent 2 years of data was
reviewed again. All values were below detection level. The lead limit will be eliminated from the
permit (but is a requirement of the pretreatment LTMP).
The City requested that the selenium limit be eliminated. The most recent 2 years of data was
reviewed again. All values were below detect except for the December 2003 data point from the
PPA analysis. This value was above the allowable level. The DWQ cannot eliminate this limit.
Fact Sheet
NPDES N0002.1333 Renewal Amendment
1..>, a4c 2

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) _
7Q10s (cfs)=
IWC (%) _
Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
10.4
0.43
97.40
FINAL RESULTS
Oil Grease
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Acute Value
95.4
30.0
45
mg/I
mg/I
mg/1
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
6.7957
8.8
0.7735
14
3.29
29.0 mg/I
95.4 mg/I
0.0 mg/I
Entered by S. Wilson
Data from 1/02 to 4/04
Parameter =
Standard = mg/1
Oil Grease
Date n < Actual Data BDI.=I/2DL
WO 1 < 5. 5.00
2 < 5. 5.00
3 < 5. 5.00
4 < 5. 5.00
5 < 5. 5.00
6 < 5. 5.00
7 < 5 5.00
8 < 5. 5.00
9 < 5. 5.00
10 29. 29.00-- 1-�'Loo'3
11 1o. 10.00
12 vi. 11.00
13 15. 15.00
14 13. 13.00
To A+toi1 (J jaoketAATiD rJ
Page 1

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
Time Period 0
Ow (MOD) 10.4
7010S (ds) 0.43
7010W (cis) 1
3002 (ds) 0
Avg. Stream Flow. OA (cis) 64
Reeving Stream Richardson Creek
WWTPClass IV
!WC (%) 0 7010S 97.402
7010W 94.159
0 3002 NIA
O OA 20.12
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw-10.4MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
Itl
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC 4VDSl
Chronic
*FAY /
Acute
n
e Del.
Alec Pred Cw
Alloweble Cw
Arsenic
NC
50
ucyL
0
0
N/A
Acute' WA
_ _ ._.._.___._.___.
Chronic:51
_____._._.___. _._______
Beryllium
C
6.5
uryL
0
0 I
WA
Acute: WA
• Chronic: *VALUE!
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: 15
Chronic.z__.___________________.
Chromium
NC
50
1.022
ucyL
0
0
WA
Acute: 1,022
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
uryL
0
0
WA
Acute: 7
•Chronic:---�--------------------•—•—•-----------
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
16
10
28.4
Acute: 22
_ _ — __—
Chronic 5
_ UM IT _ 6,4561/ —DJkl /knST
Fluoride
NC
1,800
ug/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: N/A
Chronic: 1 g4g
—
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ucyL
141
0
2.7
I
Acute: 34
Chronic: ---- 26
GKite “mrr (l 2 Yt.
A _
cit.cu j D. 1. )
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
0
0
WA
Acute: NIA
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
0
0
WA
Acute: N/A
Nickel
NC
c3
261
ug/L
0
0
WA
Acute. 261
Phenols
A
1
N
ug/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: WA
Selenium
NC
5.0
56
ug/L
141
1
5.5
Acute: 56
Chronic: s
(5.2i
1 1 M,T c� -1
N 1 ` k/e+V OP AwST A
-----2Y s)
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1.23
ug/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: 1
Chronic: 0
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: 67
_ _
Chronic: 51
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2 xis, rya
6/22l2004

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Copper
Cyanide
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev. NO DATA
Mean NO DATA
C.V. NO DATA
n 0
Mult Factor = N/A
Max. Value 0.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw N/A ug/L
Date Data
1 Dec-2003
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 Feb-2002
15 Jan-2004
16 Apr-2004
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
BDL=1/2DL Results
10 10.0 Std Dev. 2.7928
2 5.0 Mean 6.2500
2 5.0 C.V. 0.4469
3 5.0 n 16
2 5.0
11 11.0 Mult Factor = 2.0300
2.2 5.0 Max. Value 14.0 ug/L
2.8 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 28.4 ug/L
2 5.000
2 5.000
2 5.000
14 14.000
9 5.000
9 5.0
2 5.0
2 5.0
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2.xls, data
6/22/2004

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Fluoride
Lead
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev. NO DATA
Mean NO DATA
C.V. NO DATA
n 0
Mult Factor = N/A
Max Value 0.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw N/A ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.3772
2 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.3298
3 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0 1619
4 < 5 2.5 n 141
5 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1 0800
7 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2 7 ug/L
9 < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
11 < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
13 < 5 2.5
14 < 5 2.5
15 <, 5 2.5
16 < 5 2.5
17 < 5 2.5
18 < 5 2.5
19 < 5 2.5
20 < 5 2.5
21 < 5 2.5
22 < 5 2.5
23 < 5 2.5
24 < 5 2.5
25 < 5 2.5
26 < 5 2.5
27 < 5 2.5
28 < 5 2.5
29 < 5 2.5
30 < 5 2.5
31 < 5 2.5
32 < 5 2.5
33 < 5 2.5
34 <. 5 2.5
35 . < 5 2.5
36 < 5 2.5
37 < 5 2.5
38 < 5 2.5
39 < 5 2.5
40 < 5 2.5
41 < 5 2.5
42 < 5 2.5
43 < 5 2.5
44 < 5 2.5
45 < 5 2.5
46 < 5 2.5
47 < 5 2.5
48 < 5 2.5
49 < 5 2.5
50 < 5 2.5
51 < 5 2.5
52 < 5 2.5
53 < 5 2.5
54 < 5 2.5
55 < 5 2.5
56 < 5 2.5
57 < 5 2.5
58 < 5 2.5
59 < 5 2.5
60 < 5 2.5
61 < 5 2.5
62 < 5 2.5
63 < 5 2.5
64 < 5 2.5
65 < 5 2.5
66 < 5 2.5
67 < 5 2.5
68 < 5 2.5
69 < 5 2.5
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2.xls, data
- 10 - 6/22/2004

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
70 < 5 2.5
71 < 5 2.5
72 < 5 2.5
73 < 5 2.5
74 < 5 2.5
75 < 5 2.5
76 < 5 2.5
77 < 5 2.5
78 < 5 2.5
79 < 5 2.5
80 < 5 2.5
81 < 5 2.5
82 < 5 2.5
83 < 5 2.5
84 < 5 2.5
85 < 5 2.5
86 < 5 2.5
87 < 5 2.5
88 < 5 2.5
89 < 5 2.5
90 < 5 2.5
91 < 5 2.5
92 < 5 2.5
93 < 5 2.5
94 < 5 2.5
95 < 5 2.5
96 < 5 2.5
97 < 5 2.5
98 < 3 1.5
99 < 3 1.5
100 < 3 1.5
101 < 3 1.5
102 < 3 1.5
103 < 3 1.5
104 < 3 1.5
105 < 3 1.5
106 < 3 1.5
107 < 3 1.5
108 < 3 1.5
109 < 3 1.5
110 < 3 1.5
111 < 3 1.5
112 < 3 1.5
113 < 3 1.5
114 < 3 1.5
115 < 3 1.5
116 < 3 1.5
117 < 3 1.5
118 < 3 1.5
119 < 3 1.5
120 < 3 1.5
121 Jan-2002 < 3 1.5
122 Jan-2004 < 5 2.5
123 < 5 2.5
124 < 5 2.5
125 < 5 2.5
126 < 5 2.5
127 < 5 2.5
128 < 5 2.5
129 < 5 2.5
130 < 5 2.5
131 < 5 2.5
132 < 5 2.5
133 < 5 2.5
134 < 5 2.5
135 < 5 2.5
136 < 5 2.5
137 < 5 2.5
138 < 5 2.5
139 < 5 2.5
140 < 5 2.5
141 Apr-2004 < 5 2.5
142
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2.xls, data
- 11 - 6/22/2004

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Selenium
Silver
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Dec-2003 6.1 6.1 Std Dev. 0.3032
2 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5255
3 . 5 2.5 C.V. 0.1200
4 z.< 5 2.5 n 141
5 5 2.5
6 c< 5 2.5 Mull Factor = 1.0600
7 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 6 1 ug/L
8 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 6 5 ug/L
9 °< 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
11 < 5 2.5
12 `< 5 2.5
13 < 5 2.5
14 < 5 2.5
15 < 5 2.5
16 < 5 2.5
17 < 5 2.5
18 < 5 2.5
19 < 5 2.5
20 ..< 5 2.5
21 . < 5 2.5
22 < 5 2.5
23 < 5 2.5
24 < 5 2.5
25 < 5 2.5
26 < 5 2.5
27 < 5 2.5
28 ' 5 2.5
29 5 2.5
30 < 5 2.5
31 < 5 2.5
32 < 5 2.5
33 < 5 2.5
34 < 5 2.5
35 < 5 2.5
36 < 5 2.5
37 < 5 2.5
38 < 5 2.5
39 < 5 2.5
40 < 5 2.5
41 < 5 2.5
42 < 5 2.5
43 < 5 2.5
44 < 5 2.5
45 < 5 2.5
46 < 5 2.5
47 < 5 2.5
48 < 5 2.5
49 < 5 2.5
50 < 5 2.5
51 < 5 2.5
52 < 5 2.5
53 < 5 2.5
54 < 5 2.5
55 < 5 2.5
56 < 5 2.5
57 < 5 2.5
58 < 5 2.5
59 < 5 2.5
60 < 5 2.5
61 < 5 2.5
62 < 5 2.5
63 < 5 2.5
64 < 5 2.5
65 < 5 2.5
66 < 5 2.5
67 < 5 2.5
68 < 5 2.5
69 < 5 2.5
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev. NO DATA
Mean NO DATA
C.V. NO DATA
n 0
Mult Factor = N/A
Max. Value 0.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw NIA ug/L
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2.xls, data
- 19 - 6/22/2004

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
70 < 5 2.5
71 < 5 2.5
72 < 5 2.5
73 < 5 2.5
74 < 5 2.5
75 < 5 2.5
76 < 5 2.5
77 < 5 2.5
78 < 5 2.5
79 < 5 2.5
80 < 5 2.5
81 < 5 2.5
82 < 5 2.5
83 < 5 2.5
84 < 5 2.5
85 < 5 2.5
86 < 5 2.5
87 < 5 2.5
88 < 5 2.5
89 < 5 2.5
90 < 5 2.5
91 < 5 2.5
92 < 5 2.5
93 < 5 2.5
94 < 5 2.5
95 < 5 2.5
96 < 5 2.5
97 < 5 2.5
98 < 5 2.5
99 < 5 2.5
100 < 5 2.5
101 < 5 2.5
102 < 5 2.5
103 < 5 2.5
104 < 5 2.5
105 < 5 2.5
106 < 5 2.5
107 < 5 2.5
108 < 5 2.5
109 < 5 2.5
110 < 5 2.5
111 < 5 2.5
112 < 5 2.5
113 < 5 2.5
114 < 5 2.5
115 < 5 2.5
116 < 5 2.5
117 < 5 2.5
118 < 5 2.5
119 < 5 2.5
120 < 5 2.5
121 < 5 2.5
122 Jan-2002 < 5 2.5
123 Jan-2004 < 5 2.5
124 < 5 2.5
125 < 5 2.5
126 < 5 2.5
127 < 5 2.5
128 < 5 2.5
129 < 5 2.5
130 < 5 2.5
131 < 5 2.5
132 < 5 2.5
133 < 5 2.5
134 < 5 2.5
135 < 5 2.5
136 < 5 2.5
137 < 5 2.5
138 < 5 2.5
139 < 5 2.5
140 < 5 2.5
141 Apr-2004 < 5 2.5
142
npdes rpa Monroe ver 2.xls, data
• 20 - 6/22/2004

5(4))
Lg(14-MP
9l0
,s(sx)
4.(03
7/03
54.3
L Z P
(gx)
4S (CP)
/1 opla ate
(G") z r (g>()
(4%)
ija3
3 Via
2/0 3
2 (t-r t')
L
(02
to(0v
I (l i&P
gX)
G S (LAP
(S?C)
(;-?c)
( OW?)
e.c (3)(
es(q-X)
C(47` ) T (4),)
efx
4C(4'‘)
GS
—TF27-
yoy
2,Z(GThe)
45-CC's )
Gs-- (+A)
L5 (ts�P)
7(0 Z
410 2-
57o z
647,c)
Ls (Ax)
4(dz
oL
L-727o z
26) cZ�G2
Z, I4, 1,4,9,4-
LSM(
l
t..ctc,‹
Ls- CsXj (0
45-(4-)c)
,.5-(4)1)
�111 (Si (3

Permit Number NC0084832
A. (1.) EFFLAENT LIMITATIONS AND MONI
RING REQUIREMENTS — FINAL
During the period eginning on the effective . ate of this permit and lasting until expiration,
the Permittee is au orized to discharge I • outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited
and monitored by the ermittee as spec ed below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
imitS
Monitoring Requirements
nthly''
Av ra . :
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location1
Flow
0.025 ' GD
Weekly
Instantaneous
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
3! .0 MS
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1— October 31)
11.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1— March 31)
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
Weekly
Grab
Effluent,
Upstream &
Downstream
Fecal Coliform (geometric ean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
2/Month
Grab
Effluent,
Upstream &
Downstream
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µg/L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (2C)
Weekly
Grab
Effluent,
Upstream &
Downstream
Oil and Grease
30.0 mg/L
60.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
pH2
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. Upstream = at NC Highway 21 bridge
Downstream = at Mountain View Road bridge
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

•
Altem412.01.:i-
6147g, Cr•1 P(o Se
�r ¢
c-3(cy-e
tact
L2-
(C74) (jx1
J
�.�(4-) Gs(t)
LC G S
( 4-54)
—ziWes
Ls,
Ls

Dy
No
i2©t f I-PW Ci-T( c
,pe®�/�.
r
DPI-6 I o /7C
/.5
7 ‘01-)
(°12
103
io
g (0
k%3/p2
1-/f/0VS/0
2/�/02
2/(a(°&
0(0
9/y
tip(01
t /0V) I
I 17//0
°�l�dl
500fr
6141/0 I
,„\tP
(-Pe
64voitopc 6o.P.Aomeal ANI E
� �1 q a Z 47 hf
0 �,oa.p a- + - Ik)k tortoeito /1/0/tots-TIM 44.ri- 46,
t3
Zo
470
5. 3
30
7ci
ALA_ . Z
4qv
tg+
,/
eri7;) 17i L., RIZAJD(..-S e (0 ppu---
C4 L.otoDi faeomo M fl A ` '7, `i
C4 o� evam 6,1
ptc,1,00-00/44tAlordAtArh; e, 3
bt 14660 - E-Sr$
ki6(A ,3 3 210+ ikCb01'
p9A- ,?-/ ,/G'3 , 3 /4/Q
v 2.1/0t
( ?,r231 3 klf2P110AAm.: 41
- .1
114I4-u- Z
CO; VD

• RE; Monroe NPDES draft permit
Subject: RE: Monroe NPDES draft permit
From: "Kim Hinson" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 15:56:18 -0400
To: "Susan Wilson" <susan. a.wilson@ncmail. net>
Susan The high numbers for oil and grease comes from early 2000 when our contract
lab was having trouble with the new O&G method. If I do not use 2000 data and use 2001,
2002, and 2003 I would have a daily max of 33.0 and a average of 7.34 using numbers that
were reported <5.0 as a 5.0, and a average of 3.54 using numbers reported <5.0 as a zero.
Naturally I feel the 33.o is lab error as my next highest number is 15.0. As a matter of fact
out of 25 samples pulled for this period I only have six numbers that are above the
detection limit of 5.0. Let me know if you think I need to update the data tables on page
eight and ten and go from Jan 2001 to present.
As for cyanide since July 2003 we have 10.0, <2, <2, <2, <2 and <2. Lead is six samples all
at <5 and selenium is one sample at 6.1 and five at <5.
Original Message
From: Susan Wilson [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 5:07 PM
To: Kim Hinson
Subject: Re: Monroe NPDES draft permit
Kim - I'm trying to re-evaluate your lead, selenium, and cyanide data (as you guys
requested in your comments to the draft). Could you tell me what you got for those
parameters in your additonal analyses?
Also - in their original comments - EPA inquired as to why there were elevated values of
oil/grease in the effluent (as was reported on your application) - 53 mg/1 (as a maximum)
with an average of 16.1 mg/1. Could you explain (and how is this level getting through
your filters)? I may have to give you guys a limit for this based on their comments.
Thanks. (No real rush on this - just trying to get this worked out while I was looking at
your potential re -rating.)
Susan
Kim Hinson wrote:
Susan'
I have just finished transfering the data from the three additional PPA tests and the four
fathead minnow tests that we conducted onto the permit renewal forms and I will get them
in the mail today to your attention. Give me a call when you get the information and let me
know if it looks ok. Thanks in advance...Kim
Original Message
From: Susan Wilson [ mailto:[e-mail]]
1 of 4 5/13/2004 4:01 PM

RE: Monroe,NPDES draft permit
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 10:34 AM
To: Russell Colbath
Cc: 'jcramer'; jstruve@hazenandsaw_yer.com; Kim Hinson
Subject: Re: Monroe NPDES draft permit
Russ,
Sorry if I missed your e-mail - I've been in/out of the office quite a
bit in the past few weeks and I've not been doing a great job of keeping
up with them. I did speak to Jim K last week and told him I hoped to be
reviewing Monroe this week. I was speaking at a workshop in Asheville
Thursday and hoped to see Kim, but found out he was at a pretreatment
workshop. I enjoyed meeting Mr. Fox, however - who came in his place.
Hopefully, I'll get the monitoring data soon and can move forward with
both the permit and the Authorization to Operate for the re -rating (I've
not yet reviewed the information Jim left me a few weeks ago) .
Susan
Russ Colbath wrote:
Susan,
Had not heard back on my e-mail to you from April 15th. We actually will
2 of 4 5/13/2004 4:01 PM

RE; P4onroe,NPDES draft permit
not send all the monitoring data until early next week since Kim is at a
pre-treatment seminar until Monday. We would like to get Hazen and Sawyer
started on our design work so that our plant improvements will be done
before next winter. Please let me know how your review is going....Thank
you...
Russell Colbath
Water Resources Director
City of Monroe
704-282-4601
[e-mail]
Original Message
From: Russell Colbath
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:54 PM
To: 'Susan Wilson'
Cc: 'jcramer'; ' [e-mail]'; Kim Hinson
Subject: RE: Monroe NPDES draft permit
Good afternoon Susan,
Wanted to check in with you concerning our WWTP interim expansion/upgrade to
see how your review was proceeding. Kim is finalizing the monitoring data
and should have the final fathead minnow chronic tox test in hand early next
3 of 4 5/13/2004 4:01 PM

REs Monroe,NPDES draft permit
week. He will submit to you a comprehensive package of all the data you
requested. We are anxious to start design work on this project but are
waiting to execute the final design contract with Hazen and Sawyer pending
your review. I would appreciate an update of where we stand and please let
me know if you need anything additional from us...thanks...
Russell Colbath
Water Resources Director
City of Monroe
704-282-4601
[e-mail]
Original Message
4 of 4 5/13/2004 4:01 PM

' Re: cogrnents,on NC0024333, City of Monroe
Subject: Re: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe
From: Susan Wilson <susan.a.wilson©ncmail.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:09:13 -0500
To: [e-mail]
Marshall - Here's what I gather so far (and this is a Susan/Natalie conglomeration permit,
so I have to do some digging.)
1. I'll correct in the amended fact sheet - sorry about that.
2. I want to check again with their ORC - I'm not sure how far back he went on his data
collection and reporting. If necessary, we would usually implement limits of 30 mg/1
monthly average and 60 mg/1 weekly average (although in some older permits I've seen 45
mg/1). I just can't imagine with their treatment level how that much oil and grease could
get through the system.
3. From the spreadsheets Natalie did - they appear to all be below .2 - but I will pull the
DMRs again. We usually go back 2 years - not sure how far back the ORC went with his
data. Also - does Valery not give you guys a copy of the RPA spreadsheets? She is
supposed to send those down along with the fact sheet/draft permit.
4. On the EPA criteria I have (which I thought was the latest greatest) I have a Thallium
level for organism consumption of 6.3 ug/1 (which would be applicable for our C class
water). The stream that Monroe discharges into actually has a high Qavg (64 cfs) - they are
in a strange hydrologic area, so the allowable level using this flow (which we would do for
organism consumption) is 31.5 ug/1.
5. There is some round off differences with Selenium. Monroe does have some dilution
(97-98%). 5.2 ug/1 is OK for 9 and 10.4 MGD, but should be 5.1 ug/1 for 12.5 MGD - I'll
correct in the amended fact sheet and final permit.
[e-mail] wrote:
sorry I couldn't get these to you sooner. This sat for 12 days around
the holidays before getting to my desk. Will you be able to respond by
COB, Tues, Jan 27? If not, I may have to have an extension of our
review period to resolve these. thanks Marshall
1. Based on the permit application and a reference to the LTMP in the
fact sheet, it appears this facility has a pretreatment program. If so,
shouldn't the fact sheet contain the agreed upon standard language that
the permit will require the City to continue to implement its approved
program?
2. For oil and grease, the permit application indicates an average of
16.1 ug/1 and a maximum of 53.0 ug/1, based on 45 samples. For such a
discharger to an essentially zero 7Q 10 flow stream, most other Reg 4
states would require oil and grease monthly and weekly average limits of
10 and 15 mg/1, respectively. Shouldn't the permit contain oil and
grease limits? If not, why not?
3. For mercury, the permit application reports an average of 0.04 ug/1
and a maximum of 0.3 ug/1 based on 46 samples. Based on an essentially
zero 7Q 10, these values appear to exceed NC's 0.012 ug/1 criterion and
that reasonable potential exists. However, the fact sheet states that
1 of 2 6/22/2004 9:51 AM

Re: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe
•
I •
no RP for Hg exists, but no data are provided that demonstrate that
conclusion. Pls explain.
4. For thallium, the permit application reports a value of 2.1 ug/1
based on 1 sample. EPA's human health criteria for consumption of
contaminated water and fish is 0. 24 ug/1 and for consumption of
contaminated fish only is 0.47 ug/l. This effluent value appears to
have RP to exceed EPA's criteria, but the permit does not contain
monitoring or limits for thallium. Pls explain.
5. For selenium, for the 10.4 and 12.5 MGD discharges, the fact sheet
indicates the limits are 5 ug/1. However, the permit limits are 5.2
ug/1. Shouldn't they be the former?
2 of 2 6/22/2004 9:51 AM

corrunaents Qn NC0024333, City of Monroe
Subject: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:26:30 -0500
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]
sorry I couldn't get these to you sooner. This sat for 12 days around
the holidays before getting to my desk. Will you be able to respond by
COB, Tues, Jan 27? If not, I may have to have an extension of our
review period to resolve these. thanks Marshall
1. Based on the permit application and a reference to the LTMP in the
fact sheet, it appears this facility has a pretreatment program. If so, \/ 5 -
shouldn't the fact sheet contain the agreed upon standard language that
the permit will require the City to continue to implement its approved
program?
2. For oil and grease, the permit application indicates an average of
16.1 ug/1 and a maximum of 53.0 ug/1, based on 45 samples. For such a
discharger to an essentially zero 7Q 10 flow stream, most other Reg 4
states would require oil and grease monthly and weekly average limits of
10 and 15 mg/1, respectively. Shouldn't the permit contain oil and
grease limits? If not, why not?
3. For mercury, the permit application reports an average of 0.04 ug/1
and a maximum of 0.3 ug/1 based on 46 samples. Based on an essentially
zero 7Q 10, these values appear to exceed NC's 0.012 ug/1 criterion and
that reasonable potential exists. However, the fact sheet states that
no RP for Hg exists, but no data are provided that demonstrate that
conclusion. Pls explain.
4. For thallium, the permit application reports a value of 2.1 ug/1
based on 1 sample. EPA's human health criteria for consumption of
contaminated water and fish is 0. 24 ug/1 and for consumption of
contaminated fish only is 0.47 ug/1. This effluent value appears to
have RP to exceed EPA's criteria, but the permit does not contain
monitoring or limits for thallium. Pls explain.
WILL -
Alto
R5v- tL u m 1-10,6OII
CooVD 4iJt -30/160
hsk- M
- z rIA4E, 610 crs
1 I1A-v� 6.3/L
Foa- 024 . on1�y-
-RI�2F
is AN AJ $ E F"'' oF
5. For selenium, for the 10.4 and 12.5 MGD discharges, the fact sheet 14'.
indicates the limits are 5 ug/1. However, the permit limits are 5.2 97 - 9 a �"
ug/1. Shouldn't they be the former? i sf�o�` �. ,�%,
r I2.5M4>
i S 500' C
DILI7toN
1 of 1 1/22/2004 12:44 PM

3`0
kr-
(3K)
ilitOAP !ID
Cei
P Se_
5-1_,;?() (4g>4)1'
Ceb,) (4X)
5- (.4)
\ 3 (4b2) (3>)
3 3xi i 45- (3s)
43 (414.)
s1t�)lcr3k\ z3(4:
2/ L
C 3 `4)) s
— Oh()
(1)c)
4-3 (_4-?<)
L S(4)cJ\
Cebc
z 3 . (4->c)
9, 6. (12110i)
83cs
e
G3(3x)
5(3)c) (8,4c 1 va-1 ') ;_.------
-^ �
- r-Gs_C3)c
z 365 1
(3x e5(3),)
4.3 (C )c) z5—(51c)
q- - Z( -a--
i

• "
(171:r5 , 1735 AIM,
,6)14S—
770, .2
go 3
C/o 3
1/0,
4
/1)(0/J Roe
I Ps
I /2 3
0530
c-
45- (A)
>c)
5-
( 5,0
1 2_
I /o'2.-
(0fD2.
LTA, vo
C 0>c)
12-4/0z
8/02—
45—
(‘)
z

Ficv
0
410+ 0:-N7
z.2
(t1 C
o `f —2 c)-%, `f 7 aI 2i pa IL
k.2.0 79?.a3 ; .012.3
e abed
gtiLaioD 1w

PUBLIC NOTICE
STATE OF
NORTH CAROUNA
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION/NPDES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE
CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT
TO ISSUE A NPDES
WASTEWATER PERMIT
0n the basis of Thorough
staff review and application
of NC General Statute
143.21, Public law 92-600
and other lawful standards
and. regulations, the North
Carolina Environmental Man-
agement Commission pro-
poses to issue a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System (NPDES) waste-
water discharge permit to the
person(s) listed below effec-
tive 45 days from the publish
date of this notice.
Written comments regarding
the proposed permit. will be
accepted until 30 days attet
the publish date o1 this no-
tice. All comments received
prior to that date are consid-
ered in the final determina-
tions regarding the proposed
permit. The Director of the
NC Division of Water Quality
may decide to hold a public
meeting for the proposed
permit should the Division re-
ceive a significant degree of
public interest.
Copies of the default permit
and other supporting infor-
mation on file used to deter-
mine conditions present in
the draft permit are available
upon regpest and payment of
the costs of reproduction.
Mail comments and/or re-
quests for information to the
NC Division of Water Quay
at the above address or call
Ms. Valery Stephens at
[phone], extension
520. Please include the
NPDES permit number (at-
tached) in any communica-
tion. Interested persons may
also visit the Division of Wa-
ter Quality at 512 N. Salis-
bury Street, Raleigh, NC
27604-1148 between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p.m. to review information on
file.
The City of Monroe, Monroe
WWTP, P.O. Box 69, Mon-
roe,'NC 28111, has applied
for renewal of its NPDES
Permit No. NC0024333 dis-
bm' charging municipal wastewa-
ter to the Richardson Creek
in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River
Basin, BODS, ammonia, fe-
cal conform, residual chlor-
ine, lead, cyanide, fluoride,
and selenium are water qual-
1 ity limited. This may affect fu- % /, 1 /T ) I{ / % y S
— lure discharges within this / i v / / t.
portion of the basin.,
December 21, 2003
„f sfil ettiCJ .
c5friA)
NORTH CAROLINA,
UNION COUNTY.
AFFIDAVITOF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths,
personally appeared
Pat Deese
who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that he is
Principal Clerk
engaged in the publication
of a newspaper known as The Enquirer -Journal, published, issued, and
entered as second class mail in the City of Monroe in said County and
State: that he is authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement;
that the notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy of which is
attached hereto, was published in The Enquirer -Journal on the following
dates:
Z% AQo3
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or
legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every such
publication, a newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications
of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina and was a
qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section I-597 of the General
Statutes of North Carolina.
2003
Sworn to and subscribed before me. this .A/day of . 2003
Nly Commission expires: .. vlay 1
Notary Public
2008..............
inches: 8 "
11ONROE, N.C.
"Jet;6k 1iC 9, 7,6 99 -/6, /7
—IN ACCOUNT WITH-
2003
Ad=
ACCOUNT 4: 03 /O02 3/ .
COST: $ 8
alit IEnquirir-Juurna1
P.O. Box 5040
500 W. Jefferson St.
Monroe, N.C. 28111-5040
Important Legal Document, Please Retain

North Carolina ) ss
Mecklenburg County)
The Knight Publishing Co., Inc.
Charlotte, NC
Affidavit of Publication
THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER
NCDENR/DWO/BUDGET OFFICE
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1617
REFERENCE: 30019881
5011219 Public Notice
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said
County and State, duly authorized to administer
oaths affirmations, etc., personally appeared,
being duly sworn or affirmed according to law,
doth depose and say that he/she is a
representative of the Knight Publishing Company a
corporation organized and doing business under the
laws of the State of Delaware, and publishing a
newspaper known as The Charlotte Observer in the
city of Charlotte, County of Mecklenburg and State
of North Carolina and that as such he/she is
familiar with the books, records, files and
business of said Corporation and by reference to
the files of said publication
the attached advertisement was inserted. The
following is correctly copied from the books and
files of the aforesaid Corporation and
Publication.
PUBLISHED ON: 12/23
AD SPACE: //."180 LINE
FILED ON:/ • 12/3'0/03
NAME: ;1 ,00(
In Testimony Whereof I have hereunto
day and ear aforesaid.
Puauc NOTICE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION/NPDES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699.1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT To ISSUE A NPDES WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of NC General
Statute 14321. Public law 92-500 and other lawful standards and reg-
ulations, the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission
proposes to Issue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
• (NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the person(s) listed below ef-
Wive 45 days ham the publish date of this notice.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit will be accepted un-
til 30 days after the publish date of this notice. All comments received
prior to that date are considered in the final determinations regarding
the proposed permit. The Director of the NC Division of Water Quality
rnay decide to hold a public meeting tor the proposed pert should
the Division receive a significant degree of public interest.
Copies of the draft permit and other supporting Information on file used
• to determine conditions present in the draft permit are ravailable upon
request and payment of the costs of reproduction. Mall comments
• and/or requests for information to the NC Division of Water Quality at
' the above address or call Ms. Vatery Stephens at [phone], ex-
tension 520. Please include the NPDES permit number (attached) in
any communication. Interested persons may also visit the Division of
Water Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 be-
tween the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to review information on
file.
The City of Hamlet, North Carolina has applied for renewal of NPDES
permit NC0047562 for its Hamlet W WTP in Richmond County. This per-
mitted facility discharges treated wastewater to Marks Creek The Yad-
kin -Pee Dee River Basin. Currently, ammonia nitrogen.BOO, and total
residual chlorine are water quality limited. This dischre may affect fu-
• lure allocations in this portion of the watershed.
The Richmond County Water Department In Rockingham, North Car- I
Dina has applied for renewal of NPDES permit NC0081281 for its Rich-
mond County Water Treatment Plant in Richmond County. The permitted
' facility discharges treated finer backwash to an unnamed tributary to
'the Pee Dee River In the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. Currently total
residual chlorine is water quality limited. This discharge mayaffect fu-
lure allocations in this portion of the watershed.
The City of Rockingham (514 Rockingham Road. Rockingham, 28379)
has applied for renewal of NPDES permit NC0020427 for the Rocking-
ham VIANTPin Richmond County. This permitted fecillty discharges
treated wastewater to the Pee Dee River in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River
Basin. Currently BDD, ammonia nitrogen, cyanide and total residual
chlorine are water quality limited. This discharge may affect future al-
locations in this portion of the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Bashi
Carolina Stable, Old Beatty Ford Rd, Gold HiU, NC, 28071, Rowan Coun-
ty, has applied for renewal of its NPDES discharge permit number
51c0080586 discharg"mg to an unnamed tributary to long Creek In the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin No parameters are currently water quali-
ty limited. However, this discharge may impact future allocation or this
resource.
The City of Monroe, Monroe W WTP, P.O. Box 69, Monroe, NC 28111,
has applied for renewal of its NPDES Permit No. NC0024333 discharging
municipal wastewater to the Richardson Creek in the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basin. BOOS, ammonia, fecal conform, residual chlorine, Toad,
cyanide, fluoride, and selenium are water quality limited. This may af-
fect future discharges within this portion of the basin.
Anson County Utilities in Wadesboro, North Carolina has applied for
renewal of NPDES permit NC0074390 for its Anson County Water Treat-
ment Plant in Anson County. This permitted facility discharges treated
finer backwash from one outfae to McCoy Creek in the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basin. Currently, total residual chlorine is water quality limited.
This discharge may affect tenure allocations In this parson of the wa-
tershed.
Norwood W WTP (U.S. Highway 52, Norwood, NC, 28128), Stanty Coun-
ty has applied for renewal of NPDES permit NC0021628. This permit-
ted facility discharges treated wastewater to the Rocky River in the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. Currently BOD is water quakty limited This
discharge may affect future allocations in this portion of the Yadkin -Pee
Dee River Basin.
Scanty County Utilities/Greater Badin Water 8, Sewer District has ap-
died edor renewal of NPDES permit NC0074756 for its Greater Badin
In SfanN County. This permitted
to Little Mountain Creak in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin. Cur-
rently, BOO, ammonia nitrogen, and total residual chlorine are water
quality limited. This discharge may affect future allocations In this por-
non of the watershed.
LP5011219
TITLE: (A51 (/
42/7
DATE:
set my hand and affixed my seat, the
Nota
My Commission Expires: _/_/_
My Commission Expires May 27, 200b

RE: Monroe. NPDES draft permit
Subject: RE: Monroe NPDES draft permit
From: "Russ Colbath" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 12:14:19 -0400
To: "'Susan Wilson- <[e-mail]>
CC: "'jcramer"' <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, "Kim
Hinson" <[e-mail]>
Thanks for your reply Susan, Kim will be sending out the data package this
week. Let us know if you need anything else..
Russell Colbath
Water Resources Director
City of Monroe
704-282-4601
[e-mail]
Original Message
From: Susan Wilson[mailto:susan.a.wilson©ncmail.net)
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 10:34 AM
To: Russell Colbath
Cc:'jcramer'; [e-mail]; Kim Hinson
Subject: Re: Monroe NPDES draft permit
Russ,
Sorry if I missed your e-mail - I've been in/out of the office quite a
bit in the past few weeks and I've not been doing a great job of keeping
up with them. I did speak to Jim K last week and told him I hoped to be
reviewing Monroe this week. I was speaking at a workshop in Asheville
Thursday and hoped to see Kim, but found out he was at a pretreatment
workshop. I enjoyed meeting Mr. Fox, however - who came in his place.
Hopefully, I'll get the monitoring data soon and can move forward with
both the permit and the Authorization to Operate for the re -rating (I've
not yet reviewed the information Jim left me a few weeks ago) .
Susan
Russ Colbath wrote:
Susan,
Had not heard back on my e-mail to you from April 15th. We actually
will not send all the monitoring data until early next week since Kim
is at a pre-treatment seminar until Monday. We would like to get Hazen
and Sawyer started on our design work so that our plant improvements
will be done before next winter. Please let me know how your review is
going....Thank you...
Russell Colbath
Water Resources Director
1 of 2 5/3/2004 5:08 PM

RE: 1V onroe, NPDES draft permit
City of Monroe
704-282-4601
rcolbath@monroenc. org
Original Message
From: Russell Colbath
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 12:54 PM
To: 'Susan Wilson'
Cc: 'jcramer'; '[e-mail]'; Kim Hinson
Subject: RE: Monroe NPDES draft permit
Good afternoon Susan,
Wanted to check in with you concerning our WWTP interim
expansion/upgrade to see how your review was proceeding. Kim is
finalizing the monitoring data and should have the final fathead minnow
chronic tox test in hand early next week. He will submit to you a
comprehensive package of all the data you requested. We are anxious to
start design work on this project but are waiting to execute the final
design contract with Hazen and Sawyer pending your review. I would
appreciate an update of where we stand and please let me know if you
need anything additional from us...thanks...
Russell Colbath
Water Resources Director
City of Monroe
704-282-4601
[e-mail]
Original Message
2 of 2 5/3/2004 5:08 PM

Draft Permit Review
Subject: Draft Permit Review
From: John Giorgino <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:00:48 -0500
To: Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Hi Susan, I have reviewed Monroe WWTP (NC0024333) and have no comments. Thanks for
forwarding it to our unit.
John Giorgino
Environmental Biologist
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
[e-mail]
http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us
Mailing Address:
1621 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Office: 919 733-2136
Fax: [phone]
1 of 1 1/30/2004 10:22 AM

[F wd: ,lie: [Fwd: Re: comments on NC0024333,...
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe]]
From: Connie Brower <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:43:19 -0500
To: Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>, Tom Reeder I'[e-mail]>
Susan - sent this to you earlier - it "spooled back" to me from both you and Tom sorry
Original Message
Subject:Re: [Fwd: Re: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe]
Date:Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:36:46 -0500
From:Connie Brower <[e-mail]>
Organization:NC DENR DWQ
To:Susan Wilson <[e-mail]>
CC:tom.reeder <[e-mail]>
References: <4010339E. 2080803 @ncmail. net>
Susan -
We have new criteria (November 2002 and December 2003) ----the 15 updates from
December include the Thallium to which Marshall refers (0.24 for WS --- and 0.47 for HH
Thallium and the rest will be added to our growing list of compounds that will be altered
during the next Triennial Review. The bottom line on most of them is the use of a revised
Fish Consumption Rate (from 6.5 grams/day to 17.5 grams/day) - this will effectively
reduce most of the human health standards by 30 - 50%. In some cases, the changes also
are from revised carcinogenic potency factors (some making the numbers "higher" - some
reduce the standard -- or, some changes just compound the effect with the FCR issue)....
lastly - the revisions (on occasion) are using an additional factor referred to as the Relative
Source Contribution- to account for non -water sources of exposure. (Not used for
carcinogens.) May be either a percentage (multiplied) or amount subtracted, depending on
whether multiple criteria are relevant to the chemical.
For Thallium - we currently have posted (on our larger table) a value of 4 ug/L for Aquatic
Life (Freshwater CCC) , 1.7 ug/L for WS and 6.3 ug/L for HH (fish consumption). These
were calculated from EPA '99 guidance and would still apply for us until the Triennial
Review changes the fish consumption rate and brings into account the updated RfD's and
or RSC's as appropriate.
I have attached the PDF file that came out in 2002 (the numbers that I gave you above for
Thallium were STILL in that version --) and the link below for the additional 15 that came
out in December of 2003
Hope this helps -- if not, please feel free to go to lunch with me next week....and I'll try to
explain it with greater clarity! ...
connie ---
http: //epa.gov/waterscience/humanhealth/15table-fs.htm
Susan Wilson wrote:
1 of 2 1/23/2004 12:02 PM

[Fwd:r Re: [Fwd: Re: comments on NC0024333,...
Connie - Marshall is indicating some change to the human health criteria for some
parameters. Can you give us an update? For this permit I am working on he brought up
Thallium from the application. so, do we now have to give limits for that obscure
parameter, Thallium??
Original Message
Subject:Re: comments on NC0024333, City of Monroe
Date:Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:14:23 -0500
From:[e-mail]
To:Susan Wilson <[e-mail]>
thanks for digging into this so quickly. know you will get back to me
when you can.
re the RPAs, usually they are submitted, but they were not included with
this draft permit or fact sheet.
re thallium, EPA recently finalized revisions to the thallium (and 14
other pollutants) human health criteria.
need anything else from me?
2 of 2 1/23/2004 12:02 PM

CITY OF MONROE
P.O. BOX 69 • MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 28111-0069
FAX [phone]
January 16, 2004
Ms. Susan Wilson
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Water Quality Division — NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Draft WWTP NPDES Permit, NC0024333
Dear Ms. Wilson,
We have received your letter dated December 17, 2003 and the associated draft NPDES
permit referenced above, and appreciate the opportunity to comment on this important
permit. Our comments are outlined below.
Addition of cyanide limit: Previous to our last permit renewal we had a limit for
cyanide. It was removed in 1999. Our Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) data since
that time shows very low levels of both influent and effluent cyanide. We believe that
the data does not show a reasonable potential for exceeding the water quality standards.
Additionally, there is uncertainty across the state regarding the appropriate quantitation
level for cyanide, and this uncertainty is specific to each plant's effluent. Quantitation
levels as high as 20 ppb have been established. Also, the potential for laboratory testing
interference, in effluents that are chlorinated for disinfection, makes permit limits for this
parameter more difficult to meet. We have observed this interference relationship at our
plant. Based on all of these factors, we respectively request that the limit for this
parameter be removed from our permit, or at most, changed to monitor only.
u)1 LL g; .nCw
pf7 A
Addition of weekly average limit for ammonia: This new mandate poses some
concerns. We have on very limited occasions experienced an unexplained short term
(single day) ammonia spike in our effluent sampling. Generally it has been difficult to
fmd a valid cause for these spikes and they may be caused by inaccurate laboratory
results. While these unexplained spikes have not caused us a problem with our monthly
average limit, the mandating of a weekly average limit by EPA removes the flexibility of cR �T
recovering for an unexplained event or laboratory problem. Our preference is not to Mo,,Ccy
have weekly limits for this parameter, and would like information on when the weekly
average limit became mandatory on all municipal permits.

• •
Limits for lead and selenium: In reviewing our LTMP effluent data, all samples for
these two parameters have shown concentrations less than the water quality standards in
all samples. We believe that the data does not show a reasonable potential for exceeding
the water quality standards and respectively request that the limits for these parameters be
removed from our permit.
Chronic toxicity monitoring: There appears to be a discrepancy in the required timing
and monitoring for this parameter. Please review Section A (4) of the permit and note 5
under the effluent limits pages and clarify the monitoring timing and frequency.
In closing, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on this draft permit and request that
you consider the items outlined above. We would also like to get preliminary comments
from you on the WWTP re -rating evaluation report sent to your office from Hazen and
Sawyer Engineers. This will expedite our design efforts on the improvements identified
in the evaluation and assist us in staying on the schedule submitted to you in my letter
dated October 29, 2003.
Should you need additional information concerning this matter, please feel free to
contact me at 704-282-4601.
Sincerely,
Russell Colbath, P.E.
Director of Water Resources
CC: Rex Gleason, NCDENR, Mooresville Regional Office
Kim Hinson, WWTP Superintendent
Jim Cramer, Hazen and Sawyer Engineers
Jim Struve, Hazen and Sawyer Engineers
File: S-1, NPDES 2004

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0024333
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
City of Monroe/ Monroe WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 69; Monroe, North Carolina 28111-0069
Facility Address:
775 Treeway Drive; Monroe, North Carolina 28110
Permitted Flow
9.0 MGD/ 10.4MGD/ 12.5 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (50%) and industrial (50%) with pretreatment program
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Union County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
303(d) Listed?
Subbasin:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Richardson Regional Office:
Creek
C
Yes
03-07-14
71.1
0.43
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
State Grid / USGS Quad:
Mooresville (MRO)
H 17NW
Winter 7Q10 (cfs)
1.0
30Q2 (cfs)
1.8
Average Flow (cfs):
64
IWC (%):
97% at 9 MGD
97% at 10.4 MGD
98% at 12.5 MGD
Permit Writer:
Susan A. Wilson
(with original dra t
b NVS)
Date:
December 15, 2003
AdadmIP
Lat. 34° 59' 48" N Long. 80° 29' 28" W
BACKGROUND
The City of Monroe's Wastewater Treatment Plant (Monroe WWTP) is a Class IV facility with a
phased permit allowing flows of 9.0 MGD and 12.5 MGD. The plant has equivalent limits 'of
7.3/1 (BODS/NH3, which is equivalent to 5/2 limits) at 9 MGD, and 5/1 (BOD5/NH3) at 12.5
MGD. Essentially, the facility has tertiary limits at both flows. The plant treats wastewater
from residential, commercial and industrial sources. Monroe has a full Long Term Monitoring
Plan (LTMP) with the Division of Water Quality's Pretreatment Unit that it will continue to
implement in the coming permit term.
The current permit was originally issued on March 1, 2001 and expires on January 31, 2004.
The Permittee submitted EPA Form 2A on July 29, 2003 in order to request renewal of the
permit. The permittee submitted only one data set for the priority pollutant analysis. After
notification that two more tests were required, the superintendent committed to performing the
two additional tests during the notice period (and the City will be reminded of this in the cover
letter to the draft permit). Also, although Monroe has done extensive toxicity testing, the City
neglected to perform the 2nc1 species tests, but will conduct them during the notice period.
Based on the results of this additional data, monitoring or limits in the permit may need to be
modified and the fact sheet may need to be amended.
For this permit cycle, the City requested that a set of phased limits be given for a flow of 10.4
MGD. The City has lost some industrial users and has not needed the wastewater capacity to
expand to 12.5 MGD, but plans to perform some minor alterations to achieve an hydraulic re -
rating of 10.4 MGD.
Instream Monitoring, Verification of Existing Conditions and DMR Data Review
This facility discharges to Richardson Creek in subbasin 03-07-14 of the Yadkin -Pee Dee River
Basin. Richardson Creek is classified C waters at the point of discharge and is listed as
impaired for sediment on the 2002-303(d) list. The creek skirts the urbanized areas around
Monroe. The City is required to sample upstream and downstream of the discharge for
dissolved oxygen, temperature, fecal coliform; and conductivity, but is a member of the Yadkin
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0024333 Renewal
Page 1

Pee Dee monitoring coalition; the coalition performs monitoring upstream and downstream of
the discharge. Plots of these data, dating from January 2001-July 2003, are attached to this
fact sheet.
Little difference and no trends were noted between upstream and downstream values for
dissolved oxygen, temperature, and fecal coliform. Depressed dissolved oxygen values were
noted both upstream and downstream of the discharge during the summer months of 2001,
with no values below 5 mg/1 during 2002 and 2003. There was a noticeable difference between
the upstream and downstream conductivity values.
Effluent DMR data from January 2001 through July 2003 were reviewed. Data for
conventional parameters are summarized in Table 1. The Permittee maintained compliance
with the monthly average permit limits for those parameters.
In addition to the parameters listed in Table 1, the Permittee is also required to monitor for
total nitrogen, total phosphorus, ammonia nitrogen and total residual chlorine. These are
summarized in Table 2. Values for ammonia nitrogen and total residual chlorine are within
permit limits.
Average
Maximum
Minimum
Flow Temperatur Dissolved BOD TSS Fecal
(MGD) e (°C) Oxygen (mg/L) (mg/L) Coliform
(mg/L) (#/100
mL)
6.86
1 1. 10
3.67
18.65
25.10
11.8
7.16
8.28
5.58
3.90
8.13
2.07
1.94
4.60
0.5
27.11
191.55
0.0
Table 1. NC0024333 Conventional Data (January 2001-July 2003)
Average
Maximum
Minimum
Total Nitrogen Total NH3-N Total Residual
(mg/L) Phosphorus (mg/L) Chlorine (ttg/L)
(mg/L)
17.50
34.30
0.02
6.86
23.00
1.30
0.22
1.28
0
5.53
15.30
0
Table 2. NC0024333 Nutrient and Toxicant Data (January 2001 - July 2003) .
A review of the metals (from both the DMRs and Pretreatment data) data was also performed.
These are discussed in the Reasonable Potential Analysis section.
Correspondence
A review of correspondence files for the 2001-2003 period revealed no recurring problems or
major deficiencies in Monroe's compliance history. Compliance Evaluation Inspections note
that the operation and maintenance of the facility are `commendable' and the facility has an
extensive preventative maintenance plan.
In March 2002 facility underwent construction to eliminate a flow restriction between the
tertiary filters and the chlorine contact chamber. New augers were installed in the preliminary
treatment building to improve screenings and grit removal.
In 2003, the Permittee received three Notices of Violation (NOVs) for flow limit violations, two of
which carried associated civil penalty assessments. All violations appear to have been due to
heavy rainfall. The WWTP also failed a WET test in March 2003, however it is noted that heavy
rains (>6 inches) occurred during the week and the samples may not have been representative
of typical discharge. No TIE test results have been submitted to determine the cause of the
toxicity. The Permittee has only failed one other WET test - in June 2001.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
Waste Load Allocation (WLA)
The Division prepared the last WLA for the previous permit renewal. The previous and current
effluent limits were based on guidelines and water quality standards. The Division has judged
previous parameters and limits to be appropriate for renewal with some exceptions. Changes
to toxicant monitoring are discussed in the Reasonable Potential Analysis section, with the
exception of ammonia.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0024333 Renewal
Page 2

Weekly average ammonia limits based on a 3:1 ratio with the monthly average (but no higher
than 35.0 mg/L) will be implemented in this permit. This is a new statewide guidance that
resulted from EPA requirements. The resulting summer weekly average limit will be 3.0 mg/L
and the winter limit will be 6.0 mg/L.
In addition, an annual pollutant scan will be added such that the Permittee can collect the
necessary data required by EPA Form 2A throughout the permit term. This condition is now
standard on all major municipal permits in North Carolina.
Also note that total residual chlorine is limited as a weekly average and daily average. The
weekly average is based on the chronic standard for chlorine, while the daily average is based
on the acute cap. The City requested this in 1998.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The Division conducted EPA -recommended analyses to determine the reasonable potential for
toxicants to be discharged by this facility, based on DMR data from January 2000-July 2003.
The analyses were performed for each of the permitted flows: 9.0 MGD, 10.4 MGD, and 12.5
MGD. Calculations included parameters listed in the previous permit and pre-treatment
documents to include: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, cyanide, flouride, lead, MBAS, mercury,
nickel, phenol, vinyl chloride, selenium, silver, copper, and zinc.
The City of Monroe currently monitors for cadmium, nickel, lead, copper, zinc, and selenium
through the permit (with cadmium,- nickel, lead, and selenium limited in the permit).
Several volatile organics were above. detection. level on the permit application. However, all of
them were below the EPA human health .criteria and will not be ' monitored or limited.
90MGD •
Results suggest no reasonable potential for the facility to discharge arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, MBAS, mercury, nickel, phenol, and vinyl chloride. 'Monitoring for cadmium and
nickel, currently performed through the NPDES permit, may. be eliminated from the permit, as
they are required parameters to be monitored through the Pretreatment Long Term Monitoring
Plan (LTMP).
Effluent from the facility did demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed water quality criteria
for copper, cyanide, fluoride, lead, silver, selenium and zinc. The existing limits and monitoring
associated copper, lead, selenium and zinc will be carried over into this permit term. Weekly
monitoring, a daily maximum limit of 22 µg/L and a weekly average limit of 5µg/L will be added
for cyanide. Weekly monitoring and a weekly average limit of 1.9 mg/L will be added for
fluoride. Twice monthly monitoring for silver will also be added; since silver is an action level
parameter, no limit is necessary at this time.
10.4 MGD
The results of the reasonable potential analysis for 10.4 MGD were identical to those for 9
MGD. The limits assigned to fluoride are different, however. Fluoride will have a weekly
average limit of 1.8 mg/L. Since the previous permit did not contain a limit page for 10.4
MGD, it should be noted that the weekly average limit for lead will be 26 µg/L and the weekly
average limit for selenium will be 5 µg/L. The daily maximum limits for these parameters will
be the same as at 9 MGD.
12.5 MGD
The results of the reasonable potential analysis for 12.5 MGD were identical to those for 9 MGD
and 10.4 MGD. Limits and monitoring for cadmium and nickel will therefore be removed for
this effluent limits page as well.
The new limit assigned to fluoride will be 1.8 mg/L.
Fact Sheet.
NPDES NC0024333 Renewal
Page 3

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
In keeping with Division policies, the following will be incorporated into the permit:
• New weekly average ammonia limits (both summer and winter)
• Annual pollutant scan
• New monitoring and limits for fluoride
• New monitoring for silver
• Elimination of cadmium and nickel monitoring and limits
New Weekly Average and Daily Maximum limits are derived from the latest NC/EPA standards/criteria
considering 1/2 FAVs and allowable concentrations based on reasonable potential.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
December 17, 2003 (est.)
February 9, 2003 (est.)
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Susan Wilson at [phone] ext. 510.
NAME: DATE: b(ce' 7
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
NAME: DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0024333 Renewal
Page 4

Facility Name =
Qw (MGD) _
WWTP Classification
NPDES # =
Receiving Stream
IWC (%n) =
City of Monroe WWTP
9
4
NC0024333
Richardson Creek
97.01
Reasonable Potential Summary
Stream Classification
7Q10s (cfs)=
30Q2 (cfs)
Qavg (cfs)
1° 2° 3°
4°
C
0.43
64
Final Results:
Arsenic
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
2.5 µg/l
51.5 µg/1
' Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
i Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No ✓ !Monitoring
No [Frequency None
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.5 µg/1
2.1 g/1
:Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
!Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No ✓ 'Monitoring
No ! Frequency None
1/2 FAV (non Trout)
15.0
µg/t
1/2 FAV (Trout)
2.1
µg/I
I
I/2 FAV
42
µg/1
1
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5
51.5
µg/I
g/1
'Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
Its the detection limit acceptable?
1
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No ✓ fMonitoring
No (Frequency None
1/2 FAV
10221µg/1
Copi*:::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::.:
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
984.3 µg/l
7.2 µg/l
:Implementation
:Are all reported values less than?
,Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Limit?
No ;Monitoring
Yes
Monitor?
Yes " Frequency 2/Month
1/2 FAV
µfill
1!2 FAV
µgd
I
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.5 µg/1
5.2 µg/1
'Implementation
:Are all reported values less than?
:Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes V : Monitoring
Yes Frequency Weekly
1/2 FAV
22.0
µg/1
1
1/2 FAV
1.0
µg/1
!
Flouride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw I.Ft Pit
45421.1 µg/1
1855.5 µg/1
!Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
:Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes V !Monitoring
Yes :Frequency Weekly
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
29.0 µg/l
25.8 g/I
i Implementation
fAre all reported values less than?
Its the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
i
Yes ✓ !Monitoring
Yes !Frequency Weekly
1/2 Fav
33.8
µg/1
1
1/2 FAV
221.0
µg/1
1
MBAS
,I Implementation • • •

Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw N 0 W
at il 1657.3 µg/I
SS[D1171 IM C wA 0.0 µg/I
'Are
!Is
all reported values less than? No
the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
)
s_
IMonitoring
!Frequency Weekly
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw A IA. vlkLues
F'd,oc•u Di-- .
0.1000 µg/l
0.0124 µg/I
Immplementation
!Are
'Is
all reported values Tess than? Yes
the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
,o
''l
I
IMonitoring
'Frequency Weekly
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.2 µg/I
90.7 g/l
I
IAre
'Is
Implementation
all reported values less than? No
the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No v-
No
I
IMonitoring
'Frequency None
'
I
1/2 FAV
261.0
µg/1
'
1/2 FAV
75.0
µg/1
I
Phenol
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
7727.9126 µg/1
No Standard µg/1
!Implementation
lAre
;
all reported values less than? No
Is the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
IMonitoring
Frequency None
Silveri ....:::.::::::::::::::
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
-- 4.8 RA
0.1 g/I
'Implementation
!Are
I
all reported values less than? No
Is the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No ✓
Yes
'
! Monitoring
I Frequency 2/Month
'
1/2 FAV
1.2
µg/1
I
1/2 FAV
1.9
µg/1
'
Selenium k Fit
Max. Pred Cw 2 J _
Allowable Cw
�� /
' 6
8.8 µg/1
5.2 µg/l
'Are
i
Implementation
all reported values less than? No
Is the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes ✓
Yes
IMonitoring
j Frequency Weekly
Vinyl Chloride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
11.4 µg/1
529.6 µg/I
'Implementation
!Are
!
all reported values less than? Yes
Is the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No ✓
No
'
IMonitoring
'Frequency None
............................
Zine::::::::::::..:........:........
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
443.7 µg/1
51.5 µg/l
I
IAre
u
Implementation
all reported values less than? No
Is the detection limit acceptable? Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
I
' Monitoring
;Frequency 2/Month
I
I
1/2 FAV
67.0
µg/l
!
1/2 FAV
95.0
µg/I
I

Facility Name =
Qw (MGD) =
WWTP Classification
NPDES # =
Receiving Stream
IWC (%) _
City of Monroe WWTP
10.4
4
NC0024333
Richardson Creek
97.40
Reasonable Potential Summary
Stream Classification
7Q10s (cfs)=
30Q2 (cfs)
Qavg (cfs)
1° 7° 3° 4°
C
0.43
64
Final Results:
Arsenic
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
;Implementation .
2.5 µg/1 !Are all reported values less than?
51.3 µg/1 lls the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
!Monitoring
'Frequency None
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.5
2.1
i Implementation
µg/1 'Are all reported values less than?
jig/1 iIs the detection limit acceptable?
µg/l I . . . •
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
i
'Monitoring
!Frequency None
1/2 FAV (non Trout)
15.0
1/2 FAV (Trout)
2.1
µg/1 i
1/2 FAV
42
µg/I '
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5
51.3
i Implementation
µg/l !Are all reported values less than?
g/l • • - I Is the detection limit acceptable?
I
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
!Monitoring
'Frequency None
l
1/2 FAV
10221µg/I
Cappe e::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
j Implementation
984.3 µg/1 'Are all reported values less than?
7.2 g/I iIs the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
'Monitoring
' Frequency 2/Month
I
I
1/2 FAV
7.3
µg/1 i
1/2 FAV
5.8
µg/I I
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
'Implementation
41.5 µg/1 iAre all reported values less than?
5.1 g/l iIs the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
I
: Monitoring
: Frequency Weekly
1
1/2 FAV
22.0
µg/1 '
1/2 FAV
1.0
µg/I !
Fluoride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw ik eifrxit
!Implementation
45421.1 AO'Are all reported values less than?
1848.0 µg/I the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
I
1 Monitoring
Frequency Weekly
I .ea d
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
iIs
il Implementation
29.0 µg/I !Are all reported values less than?
25.7 g/I I Is the detection limit.acoeptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
i
'
i Monitoring
I Frequency Weekly
1/2 Fay
33.8
µg/l
1/2 FAV
221.0
µg/1 i

MBAS
Max. Pred Cw 1657.3 µg/I
Allowable Cw (No PI) yr1Y2ij Ir.) ,t c h w fL51 0.0 µg/1
'Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
Its the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
'e
I
!Monitoring
(Frequency Weekly
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw (At-1- ' AVJ 5
//
0.1000 µg/1
1�55 i14,J b. L.> 0.0123 RA
!Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
!Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
1
'Monitoring
Frequency None
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
/
41.2 µg/1
90.3 µg/1
!Implementation •
'Are all reported values less than?
Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
1 Monitoring
:Frequency None
1
I
1/2 FAV
261.0
µg/1
i
,
1/2 FAV
75.0
µg/1
1
Phenol
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
7727.9126 µg/I
No Standard µg/I
!Implementation
iAre all reported values Tess than?
GIs the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
:Monitoring
Frequency None
$ilver::;::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
4.8 µg/1
0.1 AO
!Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
jIs the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
1 Monitoring
i Frequency 2/Month
I
1/2 FAV
1.2
µg/I
1
1/2 FAV
1.9
µg/l
Selenium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
8.8 µg/1
5.1 µg/1
!Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
'Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
I
i Monitoring
;Frequency Weekly
Vinyl Chloride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
11.4 µg/1
529.0 µg/1
,Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
lls the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
,
!Monitoring
I Frequency None
Zinc . .:.:.:.:.:.::::::: •:-...
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
443.7 µg/I
51.3 µg/I
immpeementation
'Are all reported values less than?
!Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
'Monitoring
!Frequency 2/Month
I
1/2 FAV
67.0
µg/1
1
1/2 FAV
95.0
µg/1
j

Facility Name =
Qw (MGD) =
WWTP Classification
NPDES # =
Receiving Stream
IWC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
12.5
4
NC0024333
Richardson Creek
97.83
Reasonable Potential Summary
Stream Classification
7Q10s (cfs)=
30Q2 (cfs)
Qavg (cfs)
I° 2°
C
3° F°
l
0.43
64
Final Results:
Arsenic
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
:Implementation
2.5 µg/I !Are all reported values less than?
51.1 µg/1 I Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
(Monitoring
'Frequency None
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.5
2.0
i Implementation
µg/1 'Are all reported values less than?
j.i.g/1 _ Its the detection limit acceptable?
µg/1 I , _
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
i
Monitoring
!Frequency None
1/2 FAV (non Trout)
15.0
1/2 FAV (Trout)
2.1
µg/1 1
l/2 FAV
42
µg/1 1
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5
51.1
i Implementation
µgll !Are all reported values less than?
g/l Its the detection limit acceptable?
1
No
Yes..
Limit?
,;, Monitor?
No
No
!Monitoring
I Frequency None
1/2 FAV
10221µg/1
Coppe>c:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw .
i Implementation
984.3 µg/1 ;Are all reported values less than?
7.2 AOI Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No •
Yes
'Monitoring
' Frequency 2/Month
I
1
I
1/2 FAV
7.3
µg /I I
1/2 FAV
5.8
µg/1 I
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
'Implementation
41.5 µg/1 iAre all reported values less than?
5.1 µg/l the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
1
i Monitoring
i Frequency Weekly
I
1/2 FAV
22.0
iIs
µg/1 1
1/2 FAV
1.0
µgll I
Flouride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw I. , 04
1f.',
!Implementation
45421.1 µg/1 'Are all reported values less than?
1839.9 µg/1 :Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes.
1
!Monitoring
i Frequency Weekly
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
(J
'Implementation
29.0 µg/1 !Are all reported values less than?
25.6 µg/1 I is the -detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes .
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
1
'Monitoring
'Frequency Weekly
i
1/2 Fav
33.8
µg/1 I
1/2 FAV
221.0
µg/1 ! •

MBAS
Max. Pred Cw 1657.3 µg/1
Allowable Cw ( my t,JQ ST-044) (Ai "CI( lMY9T6+24) 0.0 µg/1
'Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
Its the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
N o
K
I
!Monitoring
I Frequency Weekly
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw (At t, V�-LLccS gc�Lo�nl D.L • 1
0.1000 µg/1
0.0123 µg/I
immplementation
'Are all reported values less than?
!Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
' Monitoring
!Frequency None
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.2 µg/I
90.0 g/I
'Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
i Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
.
No
No
I
I Monitoring
' Frequency None
i
I
1/2 FAV
261.0
µg/1
'
1/2 FAV
75.0
µg/I
I
Phenol
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
7727.9126 µg/I
No Standard µg/1
I Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
'Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
' Monitoring
i Frequency None
Silver• ::'::::::::::::i.i.i.i.i." :::::::...
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
4.8
0.1
µg/1
µg/1
µg/I
Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
i Is the detection limit acceptable?
'
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
'Monitoring
j Frequency 2/Month
'
I
1/2 FAV
1.2
1/2 FAV
1.9
µgll
Selenium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
8.8 nil
5.1 µg/1
I Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
'Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
I
i Monitoring
;Frequency Weekly
Vinyl Chloride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
11.4 µg/1
528.3 µg/1
!Implementation
!Are all reported values less than?
I Is the detection limit acceptable? •
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
! Monitoring
!Frequency None
Zinc• :::::::::
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
443.7 µg/1
51.1 g/1
!Implementation
'Are all reported values less than?
!Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
i
' Monitoring
! Frequency 2/Month
1/2 FAV
67.0
µg/I
I
1/2 FAV
95.0
µg/I
j

Facility Name =
NYDES#=
Qiv (MGD) =
7Q10s (cJs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Arsenic
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
2.5
51.5
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.0000
2.5
0.0000
1.00
2.5 µg/I
2.5 µg/I
51.5 µg/I
.r)F 1 oWL
Yammerer =
Standard =
Arsenic
50.0
Date n < Actual Data 6DL=I/2DL
1 < 5 2.5
2 < 5 2.5
3 < 5 2.5
4t < 5 2.5
5 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5
7 < 5 2.5
8 < 5 2.5
9 < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
11 < 5 2.5
12 < 5 2.5
13 < 5 2.5
14 < 5 2.5
15 < 5 2.5
16 < 5 2.5
17 < 5 2.5
18 < 5 2.5
19 < 5 2.5
20 < 5 2.5
21 < 5 2.5
22 < 5 2.5
23 < 5 2.5
24 < 5 2.5

r M A
Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.5
2.1
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.0000
0.5
0.0000
43
1.00
0.5 µg/1
0.5 µg/I
2.1 µg/I
Parameter =
,Standard =
Cadmium
2.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=I/2DL
1 < 1.0 0.5
2 < 1.0 0.5
3 < 1.0 0.5
4 < 1.0 0.5
5 < 1.0 0.5
6 < 1.0 0.5
7 < 1.0 0.5
8 < 1.0 0.5
9 < 1.0 0.5
10 < 1.0 0.5
11 < 1.0 0.5
12 < 1.0 0.5
13 < 1.0 0.5
14 < 1.0 0.5
15 < 1.0 0.5
16 < 1.0 0.5
17 < 1.0 0.5
18 < 1.0 0.5
19 < 1.0 0.5
20 < 1.0 0.5
21 < 1.0 0.5
22 < 1.0 0.5
23 < 1.0 0.5
24 < 1.0 0.5
25 < 1.0 0.5
26 < 1.0 0.5
27 < 1.0 0.5
28 < 1.0 0.5
29 < 1.0 0.5
30 < 1.0 0.5
31 < 1.0 0.5
32 < 1.0 0.5
33 < 1.0 0.5
34 < 1.0 0.5
35 < 1.0 0.5
36 < 1.0 0.5
37 < 1.0 0.5
38 < 1.0 0.5
39 < 1.0 0.5
40 < 1.0 0.5
41 < 1.0 0.5
42 < 1.0 0.5
43 < 1.0 0.5
µg/1

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5
51.5
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.2858
1.1
0.2700
24
1.45
2.4 µg/1
3.5 µg/1
51.5 µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
Chromium
50.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
µg/1
1 < 2.0000 1.0
2 < 2.0000 1.0
3 < 2.0000 1.0
4 < 2.0000 1.0
5 < 2.0000 1.0
6 < 2.0000 1.0
7 < 2.0000 1.0
8 < 2.0000 1.0
9 < 2.0000 1.0
10 < 2.0000 1.0
11 < 2.0000 1.0
12 2.4000 2.4
13 < 2.0000 1.0
14 < 2.0000 1.0
15 < 2.0000 1.0
16 < 2.0000 1.0
17 < 2.0000 1.0
18 < 2.0000 1.0
19 < 2.0000 1.0
20 < 2.0000 1.0
21 < 2.0000 1.0
22 < 2.0000 1.0
23 < 2.0000 1.0
24 < 2.0000 1.0

r � a
Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q1Os (cfs)=
IWC (%)
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Copper
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
984.3
7.2
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
38.6681
11.1
3.4973
145
2.09
470.0 µg/1
984.3 µg/1
7.2 µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
Copper
7.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 8.20 8.20
2 12.00 12.00
3 8.80 8.80
4 6.80 6.80
5 11.00 11.00
6 9.10 9.10
7 6.20 6.20
8 10.00 10.00
9 7.40 7.40
10 12.00 12.00
11 10.00 10.00
12 9.20 9.20
13 9.40 9.40
14 4.80 4.80
15 13.00 13.00
16 5.90 5.90
17 9.70 9.70
18 8.20 8.20
19 12.00 .12.00
20 7.60 7.60
21 10.00 10.00
22 5.90 5.90
23 12.00 12.00
24 8.50 8.50
25 6.80 6.80
26 6.90 6.90
27 < 2.00 1.00
28 9.00 9.00
29 3.80 3.80
30 8.50 8.50
31 5.90 5.90
32 6.50 6.50
33 < 2.00 1.00
34 5.70 5.70
35 < 2.00 1.00
36 < 2.00 1.00
37 8.70 8.70
38 4.00 4.00
39 18.00 18.00
40 8.20 8.20
41 7.20 7.20
42 18.00 18.00
43 7.10 7.10
44 6.80 6.80
45 5.40 5.40
46 12.00 12.00
47 17.00 17.00
48 12.00 12.00
µg/l

49 12.00 12.00
50 9.30 9.30
51 11.00 11.00
52 7.80 7.80
53 4.20 4.20
54 6.60 6.60
55 11.00 11.00
56 26.00 26.00
57 19.00 19.00
58 9.90 9.90
59 15.00 15.00
60 13.00 13.00
61 17.00 17.00
62 10.00 10.00
63 17.00 17.00
64 17.00 17.00
65 13.00 13.00
66 < 2.00 1.00
67 9.20 9.20
68 15.00 15.00
69 13.00 13.00
70 9.60 9.60
71 12.00 12.00
72 6.20 6.20
73 6.20 6.20
74 12.00 12.00
75 6.70 6.70
76 11.00 11.00
77 8.90 8.90
78 7.40 7.40
79 9.20 9.20
80 5.90 5.90
81 6.20 6.20
82 4.20 4.20
83 6.10 6.10
84 7.60 7.60
85 < 2.00 1.00
86 5.30 5.30
87 < 2.00 1.00
88 3.50 3.50
89 6.70 6.70
90 2.10 2.10
91 5.30 5.30
92 < 2.00 1.00
93 < 2.00 1.00
94 < 2.00 1.00
95 6.10 6.10
96 3.50 3.50
97 3.20 3.20
98 < 2.00 1.00
99 9.80 9.80
100 9.10 9.10

101 12.00 12.00
102 3.90 3.90
103 8.40 8.40
104 13.00 13.00
105 20.00 20.00
106 470.00 470.00
107 7.10 7.10
108 4.50 4.50
109 6.20 6.20
110 18.00 18.00
111 5.90 5.90
112 3.40 3.40
113 7.90 7.90
114 22.00 22.00
115 3.40 3.40
116 2.50 2.50
117 4.30 4.30
118 2.60 2.60
119 < 2.00 1.00
120 6.60 6.60
121: 3.10 3.10
122 2.70 2.70
123 7.40 7.40
124 3.40 3.40
125. 6.50 6.50
126 3.00 3.00
127 4.70 4.70
128 7.70 7.70
129 8.60 8.60
130 12.00 12.00
131 6.40 6.40
132 7.60 7.60
133 11.00 11.00
134 < 2.00 1.00
135 13.00 13.00
136 7.40 7.40
137 3.00 3.00
138 4.60 4.60
139 3.40 3.40
140 2.80 2.80
141 3.30 3.30
142 3.00 3.00
143 7.40 7.40
144 4.80 4.80
145 6.70 6.70

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qiy (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
lWC(%) _
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.5
5.2
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5497
3.9
0.9160
24
2.96
14.0 µg/I
41.5 µg/I
5.2 µg/I
Parameter =
Stanulard =
Cyanide
5.0
ILO
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 2 1.00
2 3 3.00
3 2 2.00
4 2 2.00
5 14 I4.00'/
6 9.4 9.40" Li MP
7 9.4 9.4e
8 2.8 2.80
9 < 2 1.00
10 < 2 1.00
11 2.2 2.20
12 11 11.00 ✓
13 4.1 4.10
14 4.3 4.30
15 5.5 5.50
16 < 2 1,00
17 2.8 2.80
18 4.9 4.90
19 2.3 2.30
20 2 2.00
21 < 2 1.00
22 2.5 2.50
23 2.8 2.80
24 < 2 1.00

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qu (MGD) =
7Q10s (cf c)=
!WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Flouride
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
45421.1
1855.5
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mnit Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
1815.4354
1151.7
1.5764
24
4.73
9600.0 µg/I
45421.1 µg/I
1855.5 µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
Flouride
1800.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 800 800.0
2 390 390.0
3 580 580.0
4 820 820.0
5 800 800.0
6 720 720.0
7 500 500.0
8 650 650.0
9 760 760.0
10 730 730.0
11 1000 1000.0
12 740 740.0
13 730 730.0
14 710 710.0
15 790 790.0
16 1000 1000.0
17 < 200 100.0
18 9600 9600.0
19 990 990.0
20 1200 1200.0
21 1100 1100.0
22 910 910.0
23 920 920.0
24 1100 1100.0

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
29.0
25.'
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
1.9452
2.4
0.7954
145
1.38
21.0 µg/I
29.0 µg/I
25.8 µg/I
(9r41- Y P raw PO,A175- ko J a D. L . )
(a at-7 of l4 5
Parameter =
Standard =
Lead
25.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 5.0 2.5
2 < 5.0 2.5
3 < 5.0 2.5
4 < 5.0 2.5
5 < 5.0 2.5
6 < 5.0 2.5
7 < 5.0 2.5
8 < 5.0 2.5
9 < 5.0 2.5
10 < 5.0 2.5
11 < 5.0 2.5
12 < 5.0 2.5
13 < 5.0 2.5
14 < 5.0 2.5
15 < 5.0 2.5
16 < 5.0 2.5
17 < 5.0 2.5
18 < 5.0 2.5
19 < 5.0 2.5
20 < 5.0 2.5
21 < 5.0 2.5
22 < 5.0 2.5
23 < 5.0 2.5
24 < 5.0 2.5
25 < 5.0 2.5
26 < 5.0 2.5
27 < 5.0 2.5
28 < 5.0 2.5
29 < 5.0 2.5
30 < 5.0 2.5
31 < 5.0 2.5
32 < 5.0 2.5
33 < 5.0 2.5
34 < 3.0 1.5
35 < 3,0 1.5
36 < 3.0 1.5
37 < 3.0 1.5
38 < 3.0 1.5
39 < 3.0 1.5
40 < 3.0 1.5
41 < 3.0 1.5
42 < 3.0 1.5
43 < 3.0 1.5
44 < 3.0 1.5
45 < 3.0 1.5
46 < 3.0 1.5
47 < 3.0 1.5
48 < 3.0 1.5
49 < 3.0 1.5

50 < 5.0 2.5
51 < 5.0 2.5
52 < 5.0 2.5
53 < 5.0 2.5
54 < 5.0 2.5
55 < 5.0 2.5
56 < 5.0 2.5
57 < 5.0 2.5
58 < 5.0 2.5
59 < 5.0 2.5
60 < 5.0 2.5
61 < 5.0 2.5
62 < 5.0 2.5
63 < 5.0 2.5
64 < 5.0 2.5
65 < 5.0 2.5
66 < 5.0 2.5
67 < 5.0 2.5
68 < 5.0 2.5
69 < 5.0 2.5
70 < 5.0 2.5
71 < 5.0 2.5
72 < 5.0 2.5
73 < 5.0 2.5
74 < 5.0 2.5
75 < 5.0 2.5
76 < 5.0 2.5
77 < 5.0 2.5
78 < 5.0 2.5
79 < 5.0 2.5
80 < 5.0 2.5
81 < 5.0 2.5
82 < 5.0 2.5
83 < 5.0 2.5
84 < 5.0 2.5
85 < 5.0 2.5
86 < 5.0 2.5
87 < 5.0 2.5_
88 6.8 6.8
89 5.8 5.8
90 9.3 9.3
91 < 5.0 2.5
92 < 5.0 2.5
93 < 5.0 2.5
94 < 5.0 2.5
95 < 5.0 2.5
96 < 5.0 2.5
97 < 5.0 2.5
98 < 5.0 2.5
99 < 5.0 2.5
100 < 5.0 2.5
101 < 5.0 2.5
102 < 5.0 2.5

103 < 5.0 2.5
104 < 5.0 2.5
105 < 5.0 2.5
106 < 3.0 1.5
107 21.0 21.0 --�
108 < 3.0 1.5
109 < 3.0 1.5
110 < 3.0 1.5
111 < 3.0 1.5
112 < 3.0 1.5
113 < 3.0 1.5
114 < 3.0 1.5
115 < 3.0 1.5
116 < 3.0 1.5
117 < 3.0 1.5
118 < 3.0 1.5
119 < 3.0 1.5
120 < 3.0 1.5
121 < 3.0 1.5
122 < 3.0 1.5
123 < 3.0 1.5
124 < 3.0 1.5
125 < 3.0 1.5
126 < 3.0 1.5
127 < 3.0 1.5
128 < 3.0 1.5
129 < 3.0 1.5
130 < 3.0 1.5
131 < 3.0 1.5
132 < 3.0 1.5
133 < 3.0 1.5
134 < 3.0 1.5
135 < 3.0 1.5
136 < 3.0 1.5
137 < 3.0 1.5
138 8,6 8.6
139 < 3.0 1.5
140 < 3.0 1.5
141 < 3.0 1.5
142 < 3.0 1.5
143 8.6 8.6 ✓
144 < 3.0 1.5
145 < 3.0 1.5

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
IWC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
MBAS
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
(No standard except in WS waters)
1657.3
0.0
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
121.0681
126.5
0.9567
24
3.07
540.0 µg/1
1657.3 µg/1
0.0 µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
MBAS
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 100 50.0
2 < 100 50.0
3 120 120.0
4 210 210.0
5 100 100.0
6 < 100 50.0
7 < 100 50.0
8 170 170.0
9 370 370.0
10 127 127.0
11 < 100 50.0
12 180 180.0
13 200 200.0
14 240 240.0
15 540 540.0
16 < 100 50.0
17 < 100 50.0
18 < 100 50.0
19 < 100 50.0
20 < 100 50.0
21 < 100 50.0
22 130 130.0
23 < 100 50.0
24 < 100 50.0
µg/1

Facility Name =
NPDLS # =
Qw (MCH)) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
!WC (%)=
City of Monroe W WTP
NC002-l333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.100
0.012
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.0000
0.100
0.0000
24
1.000
0.100 µg/l
0.100 µg/1
0.012 µgll
(lMI1 lidL aeLOAi
Parameter =
Standard =
Mercury
0.012
µgll
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 0.2 0.100 1000
2 < 0.2 0.100
3 < 0.2 0.100
4 < 0.2 0.100
5 < 0.2 0.100
6 < 0.2 0.100
7 < 0.2 0.100
8 < 0.2 0.100
9 < 0.2 0.100
10 < 0.2 0.100
11 < 0.2 0.100
12 < 0.2 0.100
13 < 0.2 0.100
14 < 0.2 0.100
15 < 0.2 0.100
16 < 0.2 0.100
17 < 0.2 0.100
18 < 0.2 0.100
19 < 0.2 0.100
20 < 0.2 0.100
21 < 0.2 0.100
22 < 0.2 0.100
23 < 0.2 0.100
24 < 0.2 0.100

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
IWC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.2
90.7
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
3.5073
4.5
0.7786
147
1.37
30.0 µg/1
41.2 µg/1
90.7 AO
Parameter =
Standard =
Nickel
88.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 7.2 7.2
2 6.1 6.1
3 5.1 5.1
4 2.0 2.0
5 8.0 8.0
6 < 5.0 2.5
7 < 5.0 2.5
8 6.4 6.4
9 6.7 6.7
10 5.4 5.4
11 13.0 13.0
12 7.5 7.5
13 5.3 5.3
14 < 5.0 2.5
15 5.2 5.2
16 < 5.0 2.5
17 8.7 8.7
18 < 5.0 : 2.5
19 5.6 : 5.6
20 5.4 5.4
21 < 5.0 2.5
22 5.4 5.4
23 6.0 6.0
24 5.6 5.6
25 < 5.0 2.5
26 30.0 30.0
27 5.5 5.5
28 5.4 5.4
29 < 5.0 2.5
30 < 5.0 2.5
31 < 5.0 2.5
32 < 5.0 2.5
33 < 5.0 2.5
34 < 5.0 2.5
35 < 5.0 2.5
36 5.2 5.2
37 < 5.0 2.5
38 5.5 5.5
39 8.6 8.6
40 < 5.0 2.5
41 < 5.0 2.5
42 < 5.0 2.5
43 < 5.0 2.5
44 < 5.0 2.5
45 < 5.0 2.5
46 < 5.0 2.5
47 < 5.0 2.5
48 < 5.0 2.5
µg/1

49 < 5.0 2.5
50 < 5.0 2.5
51 < 5.0 2.5
52 9.1 9.1
53 5.3 5.3
54 < 5.0 2.5
55 < 5.0 2.5
56 < 5.0 2.5
57 < 5.0 2.5
58 < 5.0 2.5
59 < 5.0 2.5
60 < 5.0 2.5
61 < 5.0 2.5
62 < 5.0 2.5
63 < 5.0 2.5
64 < 5.0 2.5
65 17.0 17.0
66 6.7 6.7
67 5.9 5.9
68 < 5.0 '2.5
69 < 5.0 2.5
70 14.0 14.0
71 < 5.0 2.5
72 < 5.0 2.5
73 < 5.0 2.5
74 < 5.0 2.5
75 8.4 8.4
76 7.0 7.0
77 6.2 6.2
78 8.0 8.0
79 5.3 5.3
80 < 5.0 2.5
81 < 5.0 2.5
82 16.0 16.0
83 < 5.0 2.5
84 < 5.0 2.5
85 < 5.0 2.5
86 5.4 5.4
87 < 5.0 2.5
88 < 5.0 2.5
89 6.8 6.8
90 5.8 5.8
91 9.3 9.3
92 < 5.0 2.5
93 < 5.0 2.5
94 < 5.0 2.5
95 5.8 5.8
96 < 5.0 2.5
97 < 5.0 2.5
98 < 5.0 2.5
99 < 5.0 2.5
100 < 5.0 2.5

101 < 5.0 2.5
102 < 5.0 2.5
103 < 5.0 2.5
104 < 5.0 2.5
105 < 5.0 2.5
106 < 5.0 2.5
107 7.7 7.7
108 < 5.0 2.5
109 6.4 6.4
110 < 5.0 2.5
111 < 5.0 2.5
112 5.7 5.7
113 6.3 6.3
114 5.0 5.0
115 5.5 5.5
116 < 5.0 2.5
117 5.7 5.7
118 < 5.0 2.5
119 < 5.0 2.5
120 5.7 5.7
121 11.0 11.0
122 < 5.0 2.5
123 < 5.0 2.5
124 < 5.0 2.5
125 < 5.0 2.5
126 < 5.0 2.5
127 < 5.0 2.5
128 < 5.0 2.5
129 < 5.0 2.5
130 < 5.0 2.5
131 5.0 5.0
132 < 5.0 2.5
133 6.3 6.3
134 < 5.0 2.5
135 < 5.0 2.5
136 < 5.0 2.5
137 < 5.0 2.5
138 < 5.0 2.5
139 5.4 5.4
140 < 5.0 2.5
141 10.0 10.0
142 10.0 10.0
143 5.3 5.3
144 5.4 5.4
145 5.7 5.7
146 8.4 8.4
147 7.4 7.4

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Phenol
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
7727.9
0.0
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
1141.0663
243.2
4.6927
24
1.38
5600.0 µg/l
7727.9 µg/1
No Standard µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
Phenol
No Standard
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 60 60.0
2 < 5 2.5
3 5 5.0
4 7 7.0
5 5.2 5.2
6 7 7.0
7 7 7.0
8 < 5 2.5
9 13 13.0
10 10 10.0
11 21 21.0
12 < 5 2.5
13 12.4 12.4
14 17 17.0
15 5600 5600.0
16 7 7.0
17 9 9.0
18 9 9.0
19 5.7 5.7 .
20< 5 2.5
21 < 5 2.5
22 < 5 2.5
23 23 23.0
24< 5 2.5

Facility Nwne =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
IWC(%)=
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Silver
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
4.80
0.06
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.4468
2.1
0.2093
24
1.33
3.60 µg/1
4.80 µg/I
0.06 µg/I
Parameter =
Standard =
Silver
0.06
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 2 1.0
2 < 2 1.0
3 < 2 1.0
4 < 2 1.0
5 < 2 1.0
6 < 2 1.0
7 < 2 1.0
8 < 2 1.0
9 < 2 1.0
10 3.5 3.5
11 < 2 1.0
12 3.6 3.6
13 < 2 1.0
14 < 2 1.0
15 < 2 1.0
16 < 2 1.0
17 < 2 1.0
18 < 2 1.0
19 < 2 1.0
20 < 2 1.0
21 < 2 I.0
22 < 2 l.o
23 < 2 1.0
24 < 2 1.0

Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qtt• (MGD) _
7Q10s (cfs)=
1WC (%) =
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Selenium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
8.8
5.2
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0.5899
2.6
0.2295
141
1.11
7.9 µg/1
8.8 µg/1
5.2 µg/1
ono Z M o4C b, I,., our ( ,ova k ,okA LE
Pc'a►netcr =
Standard =
Selenium
5.0
Date n < Actual Data 13DL=1/2DL
1 < 5.0 2.5
2 < 5.0 2.5
3 < 5.0 2.5
4 < 5.0 2.5
5 < 5.0 2.5
6 < 5.0 2.5
7 < 5.0 2.5
8 < 5.0 2.5
9 < 5.0 2.5
10 < 5.0 2.5
11 < 5.0 2.5
12 < 5.0 2.5
13 < 5.0 2.5
14 < 5.0 2.5
15 < 5.0 2.5
16 < 5.0 2.5
17 < 5.0 2.5
18 < 5.0 2.5
19 < 5.0 2.5
20 < 5.0 2.5
21 < 5.0 2.5
22 < 5.0 2.5
23 < 5.0 2.5
24 < 5.0 2.5
25 < 5.0 2.5
26 < 5.0 2.5
27 < 5.0 2.5
28 < 5.0 2.5
29 < 5.0 2.5
30 < 5.0 2.5
31 < 5.0 2.5
32 < 5.0 2.5
33 < 5.0 2.5
34 < 5.0 2.5
35 < 5.0 2.5
36 < 5.0 2.5
37 < 5.0 2.5
38 < 5.0 2.5
39 < 5.0 2.5
40 < 5.0 2.5
41 < 5.0 2.5
42 < 5.0 2.5
43 < 5.0 2.5
44 < 5.0 2.5
45 < 5.0 2.5
µg/I

5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
9l
7.0
92 < 5.0
7.0-
2
.5
2.5
.. 9~ �< 5.0

95 < 5.0 2.5
96 < 5.0 2.5
97 < 5.0 2.5
98 < 5.0 2.5
99 < 5.0 2.5
100 < 5.0 2.5
101 < 5.0 2.5
102 < 5.0 2.5
103 < 5.0 2.5
104 < 5.0 2.5
105 < 5.0 2.5
106 < 5.0 2.5
107 < 5.0 2.5
108 < 5.0 2.5
109 < 5.0 2.5
110 < 5.0 2.5
111 < 5.0 2.5
112 < 5.0 2.5
113 < 5.0 2.5
114 < 5.0 2.5
115 < 5.0 2.5
116 < 5.0 2.5
117 < 5.0 2.5
118 < 5.0 2.5
119 < 5.0 2.5
120 < 5.0 2.5
121 < 5.0 2.5
122 < 5.0 2.5
123 < 5.0 2.5
124 < 5.0 2.5
125 < 5.0 2.5
126 < 5.0 2.5
127 < 5.0 2.5
128 < 5.0 2.5
129 < 5.0 2.5
130 < 5.0 2.5
131 < 5.0 2.5
132 < 5.0 2.5
133 < 5.0 2.5
134 < 5.0 2.5
135 < 5.0 2.5
136 < 5.0 2.5
137 < 5.0 2.5
138 < 5.0 2.5
139 < 5.0 2.5
140 < 5.0 2.5
141 < 5.0 2.5

4
Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Q►v (MGD) =
Average Q (cfs)=
City of Monroe WWTP
NC0024333
9
64
FINAL RESULTS
Vinyl Chloride
Max. Pred Cw 11.4
Allowable Cw 529.6
Allo #/mac 4! , . c s its <<« e e��44-
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
2.1914
3.4
0.6380
23
2.28
5.0 µg/1
11.4 µg/1
529.6 µg/1
Parameter =
Standard =
Vinyl Chloride
525.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
1 < 1 0.5
2 < 1 0.5
3 < 1 0.5
4 < 10 5.0
5 < 10 5.0
6 < 10 5.0
7 < 10 5.0
8 < 1 0.5
9 < 1 0.5
10 < 1 0.5
11 < 1 0.5
12 < 1 0.5
13 < 10 5.0
14 < 10 5.0
15 < 10 5.0
16 < 10 5.0
17 < 10 5.0
18 < 10 5.0
19 < 10 5.0
20 < 10 5.0
21 < 10 5.0
22 < 10 5.0
23 < 10 5.0
/tgIl (K).J)

Facility Name =
NI'!)IS # =
Qw (i%IGI)) =
7Q Ills (cfs)=
!WC (%) =
City of Monroc 1V\V"i'P
NC0024333
9
0.43
97.01
FINAL RESULTS
Zinc
Max. Prcd Cw
Allowable Cw
Allowable #/day
443.7
51.5
0.0
RESULTS
Std Dcv.
Mean
C.V.
Number
of data points
Malt Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
41.7957
75.7
0.5519
146
1.27
350.0 µg/I
443.7 µg/I
51.5 µg/1
Parameter =
.S,a,ndard =
Zinc
50.0
Date n < Actual Data BDL=1/2DL
50.0 50.0
2 40.0 40.0
3 34.0 34.0
4 43.0 43.0
5 20.0 20.0
6 58.0 58.0
7 26.0 26.0
8 53.0 53.0
9 55.0 55.0
10 54.0 54.0
11 64.0 64.0
12 61.0 61.0
13 55.0 55.0
14 32.0 32.0
15 68.0 68.0
16 39.0 39.0
17 70.0 70.0
18 33.0 33.0
19 53.0 53.0
20 37.0 37.0
21 42.0 42.0
22 54.0 54.0
23 71.0 71.0
24 63.0 63.0
25 33.0 33.0
26 57.0 57.0
27 27.0 27.0
28 44.0 44.0
29 44.0 44.0
30 51.0 51.0
31 48.0 48.0
32 50.0 50.0
33 36.0 36.0
34 38.0 38.0
35 130.0 130.0
36 57.0 57.0
37 89.0 89.0
38 90.0 90.0
39 52.0 52.0
40 120.0 120.0
41 93.0 93.0
42 54.0 54.0
43 120.0 120.0
44 87.0 87.0
45 100.0 100.0

46 52.0 52.0
47 90.0 90.0
48 100.0 100.0
49 97.0 97.0
50 88.0 88.0
51 71.0 71.0
52 96.0 96.0
53 74.0 74.0
54 67.0 67.0
55 110.0 110.0
56 91.0 91.0
57 350.0 350.0
58 110.0 110.0
59 82.0 82.0
60 170.0 170.0
61 66.0 66.0
62 77.0 77.0
63 86.0 86.0
64 72.0 72.0
65 220.0 220.0
66 97.0 97.0
67 58.0 58.0
68 46.0 46.0
69 94.0 94.0
70 58.0 58.0
71 78.0 78.0
72 94.0 94.0
73 98.0 98.0
74 42.0 42.0
75 99.0 99.0
76 81.0 81.0
77 88.0 88.0
78 80.0 80.0
79 36.0 36.0
80 84.0 84.0
81 58.0 58.0
82 66.0 66.0
83 40.0 40.0
84 76.0 76.0
85 37.0 37.0
86 71.0 71.0
87 110.0 110.0
88 92.0 92.0
89 49.0 49.0
90 120.0 120.0
91 88.0 88.0
92 72.0 72.0
93 33.0 33.0
94 63.0 63.0

95 38.0 38.0
96 62.0 62.0
97 54.0 54.0
98 55.0 55.0
99 41.0 41.0
100 66.0 66.0
101 49.0 49.0
102 86.0 86.0
103 72.0 72.0
104 78.0 78.0
105 79.0 79.0
106 87.0 87.0
107 310.0 310.0
108 110.0 110.0
109 85.0 85.0
110 79.0 79.0
111 160.0 160.0
112 53.0 53.0
113 33.0 33.0
114 86.0 86.0
115 120.0 120.0
116 85.0 85.0
117 76.0 76.0
118 83.0 83.0
119 68.0 68.0
120 92.0 92.0
121 68.0 68.0
122 60.0 60.0
123 87.0 87.0
124 100.0 100.0
125 78.0 78.0
126 73.0 73.0
127 67.0 67.0
128 72.0 72.0
129 78.0 78.0
130 92.0 92.0
131 89.0 89.0
132 100.0 100.0
133 59.0 59.0
134 80.0 80.0
135 100.0 100.0
136 92.0 92.0
137 110.0 110.0
138 89.0 89.0
139 61.0 61.0
140 74.0 74.0
141 7.8 7.8
142 72.0 72.0
143 89.0 89.0

144 78.0
145 .49.0 49.0
146 53.0 ‘ 53.0

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary December 15, 2003
FACILITY REQUIREMENT YEAR JAN FEB NIAR APR MAY JUN 1111. AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Monroe WWTP chr lim: 90% 1999 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
NC0024333/001 Begin:3/12001 Frequency Q Mar Jun Sep Dec + NonComp Singk 2000 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
County:Union Region: MRO Subbasin: YAD14 2001 — — Pass — — Fail >100 <45 >100(s) — — Pass(s)
PF: 9.0 Special 2002 — — Pass(s) — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
7Q10: 0.43 IWC(%;96.I8 2003 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass —
Monsanto/001,002 24hr p/fac lira: 90% Bhd (combined outfall) 6 1999 — Pass — — Lale Pass — Fad Pass.Pass — Pass
NC00037(9/002 Begin:I/1/1996 Frequency Q P/F + Feb May Aug Nov NonComp Single 2000 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
County:Cumberland Region: FRO Subbasin: CPFIS 2001 — Pass — — Pass Pass — Pass — — Pass
PF: 1.3 Special 2002 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
7Q10: 791.0 IWC(%;0.25 2003 — Pass — — Fail Pass — Pass — — Pass
Moore County WWTP chr lim: 41 %
N00037508/001 Begin:6/I/2000 Frequency Q Mar Jun Sep Dec + NonComp Single
County:Moore Region: FRO Subbasin: LUM50
PF: 6.7 Special
7Q10: 15.2 IWC(%; 40.54
6 1999 — — Pass — — Pass — — Lale Pass — Pass
2000 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2001 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2002 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2003 — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass —
Mooresville WWTP chr lim: 90% 6 1999 — Pass — — Pass — — Fail Fail Pass Pass
NC0046728100I Begin:3/12001 Frequency Q Feb May Aug Nov + NonComp Single 2000 — Pass — — Pass — — Fail >100 >100 Pass
County:lredell Region: MRO Subbasin: YADI 1 2001 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
PF: 5.2 Special 2002 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
7Q10: 0.5 IWC(%;94.15 2003 — Fail 97.5 >100 Pass — — Pass — —
Morehead City \V\VTP 24hr p/fae lira: 9014 mysid 1999 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Invalid —
NC0026611/001 Begin:8/12003 Frequency Q + Feb May Aug Nov + NonComp Single 2000 — Pass — — Pass — — Fall Pass — Pass
County:Caneret Region: WIRO Subbasin: WOKO 2001 — Pass — — Pass — — NR/Pass — — Pass
PF: 1.7 Special 2002 — Fail.Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
7Q10: TIDAL 1WC(%;NA 2003 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — —
Morganton -Catawba R. PCF chr lim: 9%; ifpf 10.5 chr lim 12%; ifpf 13 chr lim 15%
+ NonComp Single
NC0026573/001 Begin:10/12002 Frequency Jan Apr Jul Oct
County:Burke Region: ARO Subbasin: CTB31
PF: 8.0 Spcciat
7Q10: 126 1WC(%;8.96
1999 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2000 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2001 Fail >18 16.4 Fall >18 >18 NR/Lalo Pass — Pass
2002 Fail >100 25.5 Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2003 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass
Motive Enterprises LLC-Greensbora 24hr LC50 ac monit epis Bhd (grab)
NC0022209/001 Begin:8/1/1996 Frequency A
County:Guilford Region: WSRO Subbasin: CPFOS
PF: VAR Special
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%; 100
NonComp
1999 >100
2000 NR/>100
2001 —
2002 >100.>100
2003 >100
>1- 00
Moths Enterprises LLC-Long Cr-001 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd (grab)
NC00468921001 Begin:9/12001 FrequencyA
County: Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34
PF: NA Special
7Q10: 0.0 1 W C(%; 100
NonComp
1999 — — — — >100
2000 — — — — >100
2001 — — — — Lale >100
2002 — — — — >100 —
2003 — — — — >100
Motiva Enterprises LLC-Long Cr-002 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd (grab)
NC0046892/002 Begin:9/12001 Frequency A
County: Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34
PF: 0.864 Special
7Q10: 0.0 1WC(%; 100
1999 — NR/H Pass — Pass — — Pass — — H Pass
NonComp Single 2000 — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass —
2001 — Pass — — Late Pass — Pass — — —
2002 — — — — Pass — — — — —
2003 — — — — >100 — — — — —
Motiva Enterprises LLC-Wake 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd (grab) 1999 — — >100
NC0022217/001 Begiml/I2001 Frequency A NonComp 2000 — — —
County:Wake Region: RRO Subbasin: NEU03 2001 — — >100
PF: N/A Special 2002 >100 — —
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%; 100.0 2003 >100
>1- 00
Motive Enterprises -Paw Creek 24hr LCSO ac monis epis fthd (grab)
NC0022187/001 Begim9/I2001 Frequency A
County:Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34
PF: NA Special
7Q10: 0.0 1WC(%; 100
NonComp
1999 —
2000 86.1
2001 —
2002 —
2003 —
>100
>100
Pass
>100
Pass — —
— — >100
6 Pre 1999 Data Available
LEGEND:
PERM - Permit Requirement LET - Administrative Letter - Target Frequency- Monitoring frequency: Q- Quarterly; M• Monthly; BM- Bimonthly; SA- Semiannually; A- Annually; OWD- Only when discharging; D- Discontinued monitoring requirement
Begin — First month required 7Q10 - Receiving stream low Row criterion (cfs +- quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or N Months that testing must occur - ex. Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct NonComp - Current Compliance Requirement
PF - Permitted flow (MGD) IWC%- Instream waste concentrati P/F = Pass/Fail test AC - Acute CHR - Chronic
Data Notation: f - Fathead Minnow; • - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my • Mysid shrimp; ChV - Chronic value; P - Mortality of stated percentage at highest concentration; at - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tox Unit; bt - Bad test
Reporting Notation: -- = Data not required; NR • Not reporte Facility Activity Status: 1- Inactive, N - Newly Issued(To construct); H - Active but not discharging; f-More data available for month in question; • - ORC signature needed
30

Monitoring Coalition Data - stations Q8800000 (upstream) and Q8820000 (downstream)
Upstream
Fecal
TEMP DO Conductivity Coliform
DATE (°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1)
01 /11 /2001 7.0 11.3 227 1.8
02/21/2001 12.4 12.1 156 200
03/13/2001 17.4 9.3 157 82
04/19/2001 15.9 8.8 139 15
05/04/2001 23.9 9.4
05/09/2001 22.0 12.4 192 27
05/17/2001 20.7 10.1
05/21/2001 25.2 5.2 218
05/31/2001 25.1 13.7
06/07/2001 28.3 7.4 292 41
06/15/2001 28.0 6.2
06/18/2001 29.6 7.5 196
06/28/2001 30.2 9.4
07/03/2001 24.2 4.7
07/19/2001 25.6 5.6 172 11
07/25/2001 26.1 5.7 140
07/30/2001 25.7 5.0
08/09/2001 25.6 5.1 290 21
08/13/2001 28.2 6.2
08/22/2001 24.9 5.6 186
08/26/2001 27.1 5.3
09/04/2001 23.0 5.3
09/13/2001 21.3 5.2 182 130
09/17/2001 19.5 6.2
09/26/2001 18.7 5.2 149
10/11/2001 13.2 6.8 136 14
11/15/2001 8.7 5.2 212 3
12/06/2001 9.9 6.1 202 4
01/17/2002 5.8 9.2 129 31
02/14/2002 8.0 8.1 193 160
03/07/2002 8.0 9.2 106 53
04/11/2002 17.6 7.0 90
05/09/2002 21.3 5.6 329 56
05/15/2002 21.5 9.5
05/22/2002 15.8 7.8
05/28/2002 23.5 5.7 321
06/05/2002 24.4 5.6
06/13/2002 22.9 5.9 394 320
06/19/2002 24.6 5.7
06/25/2002 24.4 5.5 281
07/02/2002 23.8 5.6
07/11/2002 24.2 5.6 461
07/17/2002 23.1 6.0
07/23/2002 26.2 5.1 246
08/08/2002 21.9 5.5 591 74
08/14/2002 21.8 5.6
08/19/2002 27.6 5.2 234
08/28/2002 20.9 5.8
09/04/2002 20.6 5.9
09/11/2002 21.2 5.7 553
Downstream
Fecal
TEMP Conductivity Coliform
(°C) DO (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1)
7.8 11.0 649 150
12.8 9.7 394 160
17.4 9.3 514 18
14.8 9.0 522 38
21.0 5.6
20.4 7.2 698 36
20.7 5.2
23.7 5.2 570
22.6 6.8
25.9 6.7 775 69
24.8 5.6
26.9 6.3 401
26.6 5.2
24.9 4.3
25.4 4.6 474 48
25.4 5.2 708
25.3 5.5
26.1 5.0 864 540
26.9 4.2
23.3 5.2 742
27.9 5.1
21.7 4.3
21.9 5.1 800 200
19.8 6.4
18.0 5.7 572
12.8 7.2 564 .240
8.2 5.8 649 310
9.6 6.6 584 580
5.4 9.7 496 50
7.8 8.4 518 180
8.3 9.6 273 120
17.9 7.3 220
21.8 5.9 492 80
18.8 6.9
15.3 7.4
23.9 5.9 473
24.8 5.9
23.2 6.1 527 310
24.9 6.0
24.9 5.8 352
24.2 5.9
24.7 5.8 548 6900
23.6 6.0
26.6 5.3 314
22.2 5.6 685 39
22.2 5.6
27.9 5.3 298
21.3 5.7
21.0 5.6
21.5 5.9 641

09/18/2002 22.7 5.6
09/26/2002 20.2 5.7 552 112
10/10/2002 17.9 5.9 551 73
11/07/2002 11.6 6.2 193 240
12/11/2002 7.5 7.3 142 480
01/09/2003 7.5 7.1 182 9.5
02/13/2003 6.1 9.4 154 21.0
03/20/2003 11.6 10.6 147 40
04/10/2003 8.5 11.3 169 45.0
05/07/2003 17.3 9.3
05/15/2003 18.9 6.6 276 4.8
05/21/2003 16.8 9.4
05/27/2003 17.3 8.9 148
06/04/2003 18.6 8.9
06/12/2003 22.8 6.8 184 5.3
06/18/2003 21.1 7.5
06/25/2003 23.9 7.5 159
07/17/2003 25.6 6.5 173 10.0
07/30/2003 26.7 5.6 152
23.0 5.8
20.6 5.8 631 127
18.2 6.1 646 260
11.2 6.4 378 370
7.3 7.5 268 260
7.2 7.3 136 5.7
5.8 9.4 126 14.0
11.4 10.5 150 70
8.4 11.1 182 60.0
17.3 9.1
18.7 6.4 294 4.4
16.7 9.2
17.2 8.8 170
18.7 8.9
22.7 6.6 203 7.1
21.2 7.1
23.7 7.6 170
25.5 6.4 195 6.6
26.4 5.7 170
Average 20.0 7.1 238.7 79.1
Max 30.2 13.7 591.0 480.0
Min 5.8 4.7 106.0 1.8
= D.O. values that are less than upstream
= D.O. values that are less than 5 mg/
Total samples (summer to date): 56
Total samples Tess than upstream: 29 (or 52%)
Total samples less than 5 mg/I: 4 (or 7.1 %)
19.7 6.7 460.8 370.1
27.9 11.1 864.0 6900.0
5.4 4.2 126.0 4.4

16.0
14.0
12.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Monroe WWTP - Instream Dissolved Oxygen
4
♦
♦
0
•
It
it
a
®
♦
g
•
•
•
iffl
a♦♦
Elli
®
•
(
0
•
®
Ww
88 it
ID El♦
♦0
El
El
®
®
{ ii r: , , !'s
♦
:� L' ,
in:.1n
�7
Y
10/01/2000 04/19/2001
11/05/2001
05/24/2002 12/10/2002 06/28/2003 01/14/2004
Date
• Upstream
Et Downstream_

Town of Monroe - Monroe WWTP
N C0024333
Date
Total
Residual
Flow Temp. Chlorine BOD NH3-N Fecal
(MGD) (deg C) (ug/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) (#/100 mL) D.O. (mg/L) TN (mg/L) TP (mg/L)
Jan-01 3.6735 13.40 9.33 3.57 0.19 2.07 133.29 8.06 16.70
Feb-01 6.9196 15.03 7.13 3.91 1.28 2.87 191.55 7.80 16.80
Mar-01 6.5639 15.03 10.46 4.65 0.20 3.66 69.16 7.49 13.10
Apr-01 6.5400 18.30 15.30 4.66 0.26 3.80 36.49 7.04 17.10
May-01 5.6900 21.10 13.30 4.04 0.00 3.60 30.60 6.58 15.40
Jun-01 6.0900 23.90 14.35 2.68 0.00 1.60 24.19 6.34
Jul-01 6.0300 24.60 12.40 2.07 0.12 0.90 29.55 7.06 24.50
Aug-01 5.7000 25.10 11.50 2.55 0.79 0.70 31.80 7.20 24.20
Sep-01 5.7100 22.70 9.00 3.89 0.99 0.80 14.19 7.32 1.60
Oct-01 5.6400 19.80 5.50 2.82 0.26 0.90 28.97 7.18 21.00
Nov-01 5.1000 17.80 7.50 2.45 0.00 1.10 17.69 7.24 22.00
Dec-01 5.2100 15.30 11.10 3.43 0.10 2.00 17.78 7.24 19.55
Jan-02 7.5600 13.80 8.64 4.31 0.55 3.00 88.04 7.78 2.50
Feb-02 6.8700 14.30 8.18 5.77 0.46 4.60 30.39 7.76 22.20
Mar-02 7.0300 15.30 12.90 5.24 0.00 3.90 9.78 7.61 2.40
Apr-02 6.1900 18.80 7.40 5.23 0.00 2.10 15.91 6.96 24.60
May-02 5.7700 21.00 1.52 3.38 0.00 1.10 19.42 6.48 26.70
Jun-02 5.7300 23.20 0.60 3.35 0.98 1.10 19.37 6.42 25.60
Jul-02 5.3600 24.40 0.95 2.48 0.00 0.50 7.84 5.58 30.30
Aug-02 5.7400 24.20 1.15 2.66 0.00 0.60 2.63 6.53 26.60
Sep-02 6.0900 23.10 0.70 4.47 0.00 0.70 3.60 6.83 34.30
Oct-02 7.1800 20.50 0.00 3.64 0.00 1.30 2.20 6.91 25.00
Nov-02 7.7400 17.30 0.00 3.50 0.00 1.00 2.15 7.25 14.60
Dec-02 8.2900 13.80 0.00 4.51 0.00 1.70 2.34 8.04 13.90
Jan-03 6.7600 13.10 0.00 4.43 0.09 2.07 1.28 8.28 19.64
Feb-03 10.4000 11.80 0.00 4.95 0.00 2.80 2.27 8.07 19.30
Mar-03 11.1000 14.10 0.00 8.13 0.41 3.70 2.62 7.20 21.60
Apr-03 10.9700 15.60 1.74 4.32 0.00 2.50 1.50 7.50 3.70
May-03 8.8600 18.40 0.00 3.95 0.00 2.10 2.44 6.68 0.02
Jun-03 8.4400 20.60 0.81 2.94 0.00 1.00 1.30 6.99 19.00
Jul-03 7.7600 22.80 0.00 2.98 0.00 0.50 0.00 6.68 1.10
'Average 6.8615 18.65 515r 3.90 E22 1.94 °'r i'`1! 7.16 17.50
Maximum 11.1000 25.10 15.30 8.13 1.28 4.60 191.55 8.28 34.30 23.00
Minimum 3.6735 11.8 0 2.07 0 0.5 0 5.58 0.023
5.1
7.1
4.1
14.0
11.0
7.1
9.0
7.1
4.5
8.4
8.6
12.0
1.5
2.4
7.0
4.6
7.5
8.7
9.2
8.0
23.0
2.1
2.2
6.4
5.4
5.1
1.3
4.3
1.9
7.2
1.3

4‘.Aiet,cgo m42.kni; 0 ,
gem_ ._._LA/q-iv (=-1pu (v. w2-. z6s 5 p: .
e2cAlaDAI
#1444-r- #0/73- 7/11,(107*- AAW*
rger 7Z5i> 7-xa- of
I U.- -/ f I L.11 1. V - I if 1 ..-rr'l
-'- ‘'
.....
-
'-
A..
,0 414(040 0
.
' . .
`:,
•
.
.
t.
..
--1"-%
Kg, "-I 5ot4 e Atot411.0 emc..., 0 _
•
-,,,:.,
,.,: . .
, .
• ,-_. . .
pil-
ZS- - 30 DPfys
-----7
ifeei-T-
Po z
(Ni
1-g5T-5
21-eittir
4
i 6 CANN Do 4-
(kik
N6-‘,. 7b rynx,

fss.112171171" 1)4174 6.44-u?O1•1
SEW Zoo 1 = Z 3 5-41.? c
7 5t.11P Les [.cs, Tx/..fry tcfsn2 +4
:.
.
.. ,..°
4 _
+- op Mi e LE5 S 7.1444( s--e
`-\.
Zo0 2 = 22 5,4.,AAPLEs
_SUM
4- L& :7 mv UPSrW-- 4
..
.
G ! aev s �-e
--UM zoo3(t SAPLE
Cr- ,/;a/ )Q S IWuM £ _ jiM*I ZW /U'
dtoti
- 0 6» rr&&/ S. /-�
R.
j2 rte, /ces . "q µ/te5
., n
90/
2_4'1 s47,PL txss .
4- Li 5 YXsM/ itip
(No CADS
s6 = sz 'Po
¢�s�=7/g

Monitoring Coalition Data - stations Q8800000 (upstream) and Q8820000 (downstream)
Upstream
Fecal
TEMP DO Conductivity Coliform
DATE (°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1)
01 /11 /2001 7.0 11.3 227 1.8
02/21/2001 12.4 12.1 156 200
03/13/2001 17.4 9.3 157 82
04/19/2001 15.9 8.8 139 15
05/04/2001 23.9 9.4
05/09/2001 22.0 12.4 192 27
05/17/2001 20.7 10.1
05/21/2001 25.2 5.2 218
05/31/2001 25.1 13.7
06/07/2001 28.3 7.4 292 41
06/15/2001 28.0 6.2
06/18/2001 29.6 7.5 196
06/28/2001 30.2 9.4
07/03/2001 24.2 4.7
07/19/2001 25.6 5.6 172 11
07/25/2001 26.1 5.7 140
07/30/2001 25.7 5.0
08/09/2001 25.6 5.1 290 21
08/13/2001 28.2 6.2
08/22/2001 24.9 5.6 186
08/26/2001 27.1 5.3
09/04/2001 23.0 5.3
09/13/2001 21.3 5,2 182 130
09/17/2001 19.5 6.2
09/26/2001 18.7 5.2 149
10/11/2001 13.2 6.8 136 14
11/15/2001 8.7 5.2 212 3
12/06/2001 9.9 6.1 202 4
01/17/2002 5.8 9.2 129 31
02/14/2002 8.0 8.1 193 160
03/07/2002 8.0 9.2 106 53
04/11/2002 17.6 7.0 90
05/09/2002 21.3 5.6 329 56
05/15/2002 21.5 9.5
05/22/2002 15.8 7.8
05/28/2002 23.5 5.7 321
06/05/2002 24.4 5.6
06/13/2002 22.9 5.9 394 320
06/19/2002 24.6 5.7
06/25/2002 24.4 5.5 281
07/02/2002 23.8 5.6
07/11/2002 24.2 5.6 461
07/17/2002 23.1 6.0
07/23/2002 26.2 5.1 246
08/08/2002 21.9 5.5 591 74
08/14/2002 21.8 5.6
08/19/2002 27.6 5.2 234
08/28/2002 20.9 5.8
09/04/2002 20.6 5.9
09/11/2002 21.2 5.7 553
Downstream
Fecal
TEMP Conductivity Coliform
(°C) DO (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1)
7.8 11.0 649 150
12.8 9.7 394 160
17.4 9.3 514 18
14.8 9.0 522 38
21.0 5.6
20.4 7.2 698 36
20.7 5.2
23.7 5.2 570
22.6 6.8
25.9 6.7 775 69
24.8 5.6
26.9 6.3 401
26.6 5,2
24.9 4.3
25.4 4.6474 48
25.4 5,2 708
25.3 5.5
26.1 5.0 864 540
26.9
23.3 5.2 742
27.9 5.1
21.7 *
21.9 5.1 800 200
19.8 6.4
18.0 5.7 572
12.8 7.2 564 240
8.2 5.8 649 310
9.6 6.6 584 580
5.4 9.7 496 50
7.8 8.4 518 180
8.3 9.6 273 120
17.9 7.3 220
21.8 5.9 492 80
18.8 6.9
15.3 7.4
23.9 5.9 473
24.8 5.9
23.2 6.1 527 310
24.9 6.0
24.9 5.8 352
24.2 5.9
24.7 5.8 548 6900
23.6 6.0
26.6 5.3 314
22.2 5.6 685 39
22.2 5.6
27.9 5.3
21.3 5.7
21.0 5.6
21.5 5.9
298

09/18/2002 22.7 5,6
09/26/2002 20.2 5.7 552 112
10/10/2002 17.9 5.9 551 73
11 /07/2002 11.6 6.2 193 240
12/11/2002 7.5 7.3 142 480
01/09/2003 7.5 7.1 182 9.5
02/13/2003 6.1 9.4 154 21.0
03/20/2003 11.6 10.6 147 40
04/10/2003 8.5 11.3 169 45.0
05/07/2003 17.3 9.3
05/15/2003 18.9 6.6 276 4.8
05/21/2003 16.8 9.4
05/27/2003 17.3 8.9 148
06/04/2003 18.6 8.9
06/12/2003 22.8 6.8 184 5.3
06/18/2003 21.1 7.5
06/25/2003 23.9 7.5 159
07/17/2003 25.6 6.5 173 10.0
07/30/2003 26.7 5.6 152
23.0 5.8
20.6 5.8 631 127
18.2 6.1 646 260
11.2 6.4 378 370
7.3 7.5 268 260
7.2 7.3 136 5.7
5.8 9.4 126 14.0
11.4 10.5 150 70
8.4 11.1 182 60.0
17.3 9.1
18.7 6.4 294 4.4
16.7 9.2
17.2 8.8 170
18.7 8.9
22.7 6.6 203 7.1
21.2 7.1
23.7 7.6 170
25.5 6.4 195 6.6
26.4 5.7 170
Average 20.0 7.1 238.7 79.1
Max 30.2 13.7 591.0 480.0
Min 5.8 4.7 106.0 1.8
= D.O. values that are Tess than upstream
= D.O. values that are Tess than 5 mg/I
Total samples (summer to date): 56
Total samples less than upstream: 29 (or 52%)
Total samples less than 5 mg/I: 4 (or 7.1 %)
19.7 6.7 460.8 370.1
27.9 11.1 864.0 6900.0
5.4 4.2 126.0 4.4

35.0
30.0
25.0
d 20.0
a,
a 15.0
E
d
1-
10.0
5.0
Monroe WWTP - Instream Temperature
•
♦
• •
..■_ _ a
♦® ♦
•
1
■
1
♦
■
•
■
■
i
1
■ i ig i
•
1
■
0.0
10/01/2000 04/19/2001 11/05/2001 05/24/2002 12/10/2002 06/28/2003 01/14/2004
Date
• Upstream
■ Downstream

16.0
14.0
12.0
J_
11 10.0
E
C
d
a)
x 8.0
a)
(n 6.0
0
4.0
2.0
0.0
10/01/2000 04/19/2001 11/05/2001 05/24/2002 12/10/2002 06/28/2003 01/14/2004
Date
Monroe WWTP - Instream Dissolved Oxygen
•
•
•
•
•
a
•
1
a
a • •
V
■ •
•
•
•
•
1I
■ '♦ ■ . ■ I
• ■
s ♦ ! ' _ !
• • 4. • •:Ar, ■ ■�• ♦ e
♦.
• .■
■
ill a
• Upstream
• Downstream

i)owNsfi
-Mani urSricil
Monitoring Coalition Data - stations Q8800000 (upstream) and Q8820000 (downstream)
Upstream Downstream
Fecal Fecal
TEMP DO Conductivity Coliform TEMP Conductivity Coliform
DATE (°C) (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1) (°C) DO (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (no./100m1)
01 /11 /2001 7.0 11.3 227 1.8 7.8 11.0 649 150
02/21/2001 12.4 12.1 156 200 12.8 9.7 394 160
03/13/2001 17.4 9.3 157 82 17.4 9.3 514 18
04/19/2001 15.9 8.8 139 15 14.8 - 9.0 522 38
05/04/2001 23.9 9.4 21.0 5.6
05/09/2001 22.0 12.4 192 27 20.4 7.2 698 36 5uM
05/17/2001 20.7 10.1 20.7 5.2 2001
05/21/2001 25.2 5.2 218 23.7 5.2 570 2 36
05/31 /2001 25.1 13.7 22.6 6.8
06/07/2001 28.3 7.4 292 41 25.9 6.7 775 69
06/15/2001 28.0 6.2 24.8 5.6 (17 54µAP S
06/18/2001 29.6 7.5 196 26.9 6.3 401 t,Vp.n0
06/28/2001 30.2 9.4 26.6 5.2 uP5712. M
07/03/2001 24.2 4.7 _ 24.9 4.3
07/19/2001 25.6 5.6 172 11 25.4 4.6 474 48 4 oG 7 /05c
07/25/2001 26.1 5.7 140 25.4 5.2 708 L ' -11-1A-4
07/30/2001 25.7 5.0 25.3 5.5 5-e.3-/L
08/09/2001 25.6 5.1 290 21 26.1 5.0 864 ' .540
08/13/2001 28.2 6.2 26.9 4.2
08/22/2001 24.9 5.6 186 23.3 5.2 742
08/26/2001 27.1 5.3 27.9 5.1
09/04/2001 23.0 5.3 21.7 4.3
09/13/2001 21.3 5.2 182 130 21.9 5.1 800 200
09/17/2001 19.5 6.2 19.8 6.4
09/26/2001 18.7 5.2 149 18.0 5.7 572
10/11 /2001 13.2 6.8 136 14 12.8 7.2 564 240
11/15/2001 8.7 5.2 212 3 8.2 5.8 649 310
12/06/2001 9.9 6.1 202 4 9.6 6.6 584 580
01/17/2002 5.8 9.2 129 31 5.4 9.7 496 50
02/14/2002 8.0 8.1 193 160 7.8 8.4 518 180
03/07/2002 8.0 9.2 106 53 8.3 9.6 _ 273 120 Su M
r04/11/2002 17.6 7.0 90 17.9 7.3 220 2002
05/09/2002 21.3 5.6 329 56 21.8 5.9 492 80 0 2 5A,,. -,-'€ i
05/15/2002 21.5 9.5 18.8 6.9
05/22/2002 15.8 7.8 15.3 7.4 4 cEss 70&
05/28/2002 23.5 5.7 321 23.9 5.9 473 U F 6fkc>
06/05/2002 24.4 5.6 24.8 5.9
06/13/2002 22.9 5.9 394 320 23.2 6.1 527 310 p u 55_ /�
06/19/2002 24.6 5.7 24.9 6.0 7}14N 5+
06/25/2002 24.4 5.5 281 24.9 5.8 352
07/02/2002 23.8 5.6 24.2 5.9
07/11/2002 24.2 5.6 461 24.7 5.8 548 6900
07/17/2002 23.1 6.0 23.6 6.0
07/23/2002 26.2 5.1 246 26.6 5.3 314
08/08/2002 21.9 5.5 591 74 22.2 5.6 685 39
08/14/2002 21.8 5.6 22.2 5.6
08/19/2002 27.6 5.2 234 27.9 5.3 298
08/28/2002 20.9 5.8 21.3 5.7
09/04/2002 20.6 5.9 21.0 5.6
09/11/2002 21.2 5.7 553 21.5 5.9 641

iFPP. D,,\ ....
09/18/2002 22.7 5.6
09/26/2002 20.2 5.7 552 112
10/10/2002 17.9 5.9 551 73
11/07/2002 11.6 6.2 193 240
12/11/2002 7.5 7.3 142 480
01/09/2003 7.5 7.1 182 9.5
02/13/2003 6.1 9.4 154 21.0
03/20/2003 11.6 10.6 147 40
' 04/10/2003 8.5 11.3 169 45.0
05/07/2003 17.3 9.3
05/15/2003 18.9 6.6 276 4.8
05/21/2003 16.8 9.4
05/27/2003 17.3 8.9 148
06/04/2003 18.6 8.9
06/12/2003 22.8 6.8 184 5.3
06/18/2003 21.1 7.5
06/25/2003 23.9 7.5 159
07/17/2003 25.6 6.5 173 10.0
' 07/30/2003 26.7 5.6 152
23.0
20.6
18.2
11.2
7.3
7.2
5.8
11.4
8.4
17.3
18.7
16.7
17.2
18.7
22.7
21.2
23.7
25.5
26.4
,1, .
5.8
5.8 631 127
6.1 646 260
6.4 378 370
7.5 268 260
7.3 136 5.7
9.4 126 14.0
10.5_ 150 70 Zoo 3
11.1 182 60.0
9.1
6.4 294 4.4
9.2 S s,4.KPLey
8.8 170 7d'r+t)
8.9 Ups r'a^
6.6 203 7.1 D �c'.SS
7.1 TFIP,N
7.6 170 ��, /L
6.4 195 6.6
5.7 170
Average 20.0 7.1 238.7 79.1
Max 30.2 13.7 591.0 480.0
Min 5.8 4.7 106.0 1.8
19.7 6.7 460.8 370.1
27.9 11.1 864.0 6900.0
5.4 4.2 126.0 4.4

'Lola' Al,
Y. W.
ACTIVE ACTIVE ESB Fltt4 Nuuwntc ToW Cr,
2003 1988 STATION STREAM Subbssln Musus0,pm, NO2, Cu. W Pb, Bacteria:
rro. 0o, y 7K M, TP , NI, Rr4 Po
MOAT MOAT NUMBER LOCATION Stettin Significance LATITUDE LONGITUDE COUNTY INDEX CLASS Number Can4tcsriry TtIN, iP Zn Turbidity 783 CmoropMr • CdNOrm
Yes Y. 06800000 RICHARDSON CRK AT SR 1751 (WALKUP AVE.) AT MONROE Ups of Monroe WWTP, urban stream 34.9897-80.50965 UNION 13.17.38 (5) C 03-07.14 M.2SM M M M
Yos Y. 08820000 RICHARDSON CRK AT SR I008 (OUE BRANCH RD) NR MONROE Dna of Monroe WWTP . 35.0322 80.47183 UNION 13.17-36 (5) C 0307.14 M.2SM M M
Bolow Lake Twi0y and Slowons Crook, water quality data similar to up5O892
No Yes 08850000 RICHARDSON CRK AT SR 1758 (AUSTIN-CHENEY RD) nr MONROE Mallon, DWO ambient station about 4 Miles dns 35.04597-80.45607 UNION 13-17.3815) C 0307.14

sw�J 5Z71.60 - Mo Sr Stile PaM No4 Pee
i t AP-1• So NJ c:Pr--
E E
v
a 2 2
STATION DATE TIME
Station Date Time Depth 10.010rmk
08850000 06/02/1998 24.0
Q8850000 06/11/1998 23.0
08850000 06/18/1998 25.0
Q8850000 06/25/1998 28.0
Q8850000 07/02/1998 26.0
08850000 07/10/1998 29.0
Q8850000 07/15/1998 24.0
08850000 07/22/1998 28.0
Q8850000 07/29/1998 26.0
Q8850000 08/04/1998 24.0
08850000 08/12/1998 27.0
08850000 08/20/1998 25.5
08850000 08/26/1998 25.0
Q8850000 09/03/1998 22.5
Q8850000 09/10/1998 19.5
Q8850000 10/07/1998 22.0
Q8850000 10/22/1998 14.0
08850000 11/17/1998 14.0
Q8850000 12/21/1998 11.5
Q8850000 01/13/1999 9:40 AM 0.01 7.0
Q8850000 02/09/1999 9:50 AM 0.01 10.5
Q8850000 03/18/1999 10:10 AM 0.01 10.0
08850000 04/13/1999 10:10 AM 0.01 17.9
Q8850000 05/04/1999 9:18 AM 0.01 15.2
08850000 05/13/1999 9:45 AM 0.01 20.7
Q8850000 05/20/1999 9:05 AM 0.01 19.6
Q8850000 05/25/1999 11:03 AM 0.01 21.7
Q8850000 06/04/1999 1:08 PM 0.01 24.1
Q8850000 06/08/1999 10:30 AM 0.01 23.1
Q8850000 06/18/1999 11:10 AM 0.01 22.3
08850000 06/22/1999 12:12 PM 0.01 20.4
Q8850000 07/01/1999 1:30 PM 0.01 26.1
Q8850000 07/09/1999 12:45 PM 0.01 27.5
08850000 07/16/1999 1:27 PM 0.01 24.9
Q8850000 07/21/1999 8:51 AM 0.01 26.1
Q8850000 07/27/1999 9:59 AM 0.01 25.6
08850000 08/03/1999 10:04 AM 0.01 26.5
Q8850000 08/12/1999 3:21 PM 0.01 27.8
Q8850000 08/20/1999 10:19 AM 0.01 23.0
08850000 08/24/1999 10:19 AM 0.01 21.0
Q8850000 09/01/1999 12:15 PM 0.01 18.0
Q8850000 09/09/1999 2:46 PM 0.01 23.5
08850000 09/16/1999 10:29 AM 0.01 19.0
Q8850000 09/23/1999 12:33 PM 0.01 15.0
08850000 09/29/1999 2:37 PM 0.01 19.0
E
0 0
0 0
300.0 300m1k
5.4
7.3
8.3
6.3
5.2
6.8
6.4
5.3
5.7
5.4
5.3
6.7
8.2
5.4
6.4
7.1
8.4
6.4
8.2
9.0
8.6
9.2
7.2
7.9
9.2
7.0
7.3
8.4
6.1
7.0
8.4
7.6
7.5
9.5
5.5
6.2
5.0
8.4
5.2
6.4
6.2
7.2
6.4
8.2
7.8
pH a.
400.0 400rmk
6.4
7.4
E
0
� E
> >
'00 v
0 0
94 94rmk
244
672
6.9 279
7.1 •!•- :286
7.2 • • .616
7.5 • . 324 • "•
7.7 495 .
7.4 .334
7.4 .415 .`
7.4 > .291•
7.4 ::-.200
6.8 •203
7.5 ...375 ,
7.2 210
7.2
7.4
7.1
7.4
7.1
7.4
7.4
7.0
7.1
467
705
325
700
212
457
758
552
229
1

Q8850000 10/19/1999 9:58 AM 0.01 17.5
Q8850000 11/09/1999 10:52 AM 0.01 14.4
Q8850000 12/21/1999 10:37 AM 0.01 10.4
Q8850000 01/19/2000 11:20 AM 0.01 6.7
Q8850000 02/07/2000 3:58 PM 0.01 7.0
Q8850000 03/30/2000 3:10 PM 0.01 16.1
Q8850000 04/28/2000 6:08 AM 0.01 16.5
Q8850000 05/03/2000 5:58 AM 0.01 19.0
Q8850000 05/11/2000 5:50 PM 0.01 23.0
Q8850000 05/15/2000 7:00 PM 0.01 22.4
Q8850000 05/26/2000 10:00 AM 0.01 22.7
08850000 06/02/2000 6:25 PM 0.01 25.0 E
08850000 06/07/2000 2:05 PM 0.01 21.7
08850000 06/16/2000 4:45 PM 0.01 27.1
08850000 06/19/2000 5:40 PM 0.01 26.9 E
08850000 06/30/2000 7:30 PM 0.01 24.1 E
08850000 07/06/2000 4:45 PM 0.01 27.3
Q8850000 07/14/2000 12:21 PM 0.01 25.5
08850000 07/20/2000 2:45 PM 0.01 27.4
Q8850000 07/24/2000 6:05 PM 0.01 24.0
Q8850000 08/04/2000 1:17 PM 0.01 25.3
Q8850000 08/08/2000 12:00 PM 0.01 27.6
Q8850000 08/18/2000 4:15 PM 0.01 24.5
Q8850000 08/21/2000 4:20 PM 0.01 24.8
08850000 08/28/2000 6:43 PM 0.01 25.1
08850000 09/08/2000 5:26 PM 0.01 22.4
08850000 09/15/2000 5:13 PM 0.01 25.0
08850000 09/18/2000 5:13 PM 0.01 18.5
Q8850000 09/29/2000 7:55 PM 0.01 18.3
08850000 10/19/2000 6:05 PM 0.01 18.1
Q8850000 11/20/2000 6:26 PM 0.01 9.3
Q8850000 12/19/2000 3:36 PM 0.01 6.3
08850000 01/11/2001 4:28 PM 0.01 6.0
Q8850000 02/21/2001 3:46 PM 0.01 12.0
Q8850000 03/13/2001 3:21 PM 0.01 16.2
Q8850000 04/19/2001 1:18 PM 0.01 14.6
Q8850000 05/04/2001 1:41 PM 0.01 21.7
Q8850000 05/09/2001 2:44 PM 0.01 20.4
Q8850000 05/17/2001 12:49 PM 0.01 20.2
Q8850000 05/21/2001 3:00 PM 0.01 24.1
Q8850000 05/31/2001 3:39 PM 0.01 23.0
08850000 06/07/2001 3:44 PM 0.01 26.6
Q8850000 06/15/2001 12:53 PM 0.01 25.7
Q8850000 06/18/2001 3:11 PM 0.01 27.5
Q8850000 06/28/2001 2:25 PM 0.01 26.7
Q8850000 07/03/2001 11:34 AM 0.01 25.5
Q8850000 07/19/2001 7:31 AM 0.01 24.7
Q8850000 07/25/2001 2:14 PM 0.01 25.2
Q8850000 07/30/2001 2:29 PM 0.01 24.7
Q8850000 08/09/2001 7:22 PM 0.01 26.3
Q8850000 08/13/2001 2:14 PM 0.01 27.5
Q8850000 08/22/2001 11:16 AM 0.01 24.5
08850000 08/26/2001 5:55 PM 0.01 28.0
Q8850000 09/04/2001 2:03 PM 0.01 21.9
Q8850000 09/13/2001 7:34 AM 0.01 21.3
7.0 6.9 266
8.7 7.0 588
7.9 7.2 297
8.6 7.0 388
11.2 7.3 132
9.2 7.3 306
4.3 7.2 334
7.0 7.5 409
6.3
6.1 7.5 648
5.3
6.4 E
9.3 7.5 279
7.1
6.4E 7.3E 745E
7.8 E
6.8 7.4 761
7.3
7.8 7.7 778 •
6.3
6.3
6.9 7.5
7.0
7.1 7.5
5.6
7.3 ;;
6.5 7.5 " 739
7.9 7.2
7.5
7.8 7.6 - 669
8.4 7.4 671
9.8 7.4 234
12.3 8.2 545
10.3 7.5 339
9.6 7.7 420
9.7 7.5 470
7.2
7.8 7.2 627
5.4
6.2 7.1 738
7.1
7.0 7.5 677
6.0
6.5 7.5 278
7.0
5.2
5.5 7.1 680
5.1 7.2 668
5.3
4.2 7.3 389
5.5
5.1 7.4 673
5.0
5.1
5.4 7.6 742
5974;
81.1:
2

Q8850000 09/17/2001 1:51 PM 0.01 19.4 6.5
Q8850000 09/26/2001 11:27 AM 0.01 18.8 5.9 7.4 486
08850000 10/11/2001 7:18 AM 0.01 14.0 7.4 8.4 489
Q8850000 11/15/2001 7:18 AM 0.01 9.4 6.1 8.2 588
08850000 12/06/2001 7:18 AM 0.01 10.4 7.1 8.2 522
Q8850000 01/17/2002 7:15 AM 0.01 6.2 10.1 8.4 420
Q8850000 02/14/2002 7:06 AM 0.01 8.3 9.2 8.1 479
08850000 03/07/2002 6:52 AM 0.01 8.7 10.0 8.0 227
Q8850000 04/11/2002 6:53 AM 0.01 18.5 7.5 8.6
Q8850000 05/09/2002 6:40 AM 0.01 22.2 6.1 8.9 457
08850000 05/15/2002 1:05 PM 0.01 19.9 7.7
Q8850000 05/22/2002 11:47 AM 0.01 15.8 7.8
08850000 05/28/2002 7:15 PM 0.01 24.6 6.2 8.5 420
Q8850000 06/05/2002 12:28 PM 0.01 25.2 5.8
08850000 06/13/2002 6:35 AM 0.01 23.7 6.4 8.4 490
08850000 06/19/2002 3:30 PM 0.01 25.2 5.8
Q8850000 06/25/2002 5:10 PM 0.01 25.5 6.0 8.3 321
08850000 07/02/2002 7:14 AM 0.01 24.5 6.0
08850000 07/11/2002 6:32 AM 0.01 25.6 6.1 8.3 517
08850000 07/17/2002 7:06 AM 0.01 23.8 6.2
08850000 07/23/2002 4:58 PM 0.01 27.2 - 5.4 8.3 - 295
08850000 08 0 002 6:44 AM 0.10 22.9 5.8 8.2 .;, 72•663..`
08850000 08/14/2002 7:11 AM 0.10 22.8 5.7 ` .. -..,
Q8850000 ' 08/19/2002 5:45 PM 0.10 28.3 5.3 8.1 ::273'
08850000 08/28/2002 6:32 AM 0.10 21.3 5.5 ' lc,: ' :...,.?:. "'.
08850000 09/04/2002 6:39 AM 0.10 21.4 5.6 :..; N ( 7
Q8850000 09/11/2002 8:09 AM 0.10 22.0 6.1 . ' 8.1 ';''608.
Q8850000 09/18/2002 1:28 PM 0.10 23.4 6.0 . - : •; '
08850000 09/26/2002 7:00 AM 0.10 21.2 6.1 8.0 -' • 602 _ .
Q8850000 10/10/2002 6:45 AM 0.01 18.7 : 6.4 7.9 t, 603 .• • • . !. ' ,
08850000 11/07/2002 - 6:39 AM 0.01 12.1 6.8 7.8 :. - •_ . 334
Q8850000 12/1172002 6:50 AM 0.01 7.7 7.8 7.8 • ' ` 202.7 '
08850000 1/9/2003 6:54 0.1 7.6 8.0 7.9 : 222
08850000 2/13/2003 6:52 0.1 6.5 9.8 7.6 190
08850000 3/20/2003 6:40 0.1 11.8 10.9 7.1 173
08850000 4/10/2003 6:40 0.1 8.7 11.2 6.9 203
Q8850000 5/7/2003 6:42 0.1 17.6 9.1
Q8850000 5/15/2003 6:38 0.1 19.1 6.4 7.0 326
Q8850000 5/21/2003 6:34 0.1 17.0 9.1
Q8850000 5/27/2003 17:33 0.1 17.5 8.7 7.3 205
08850000 6/4/2003 6:24 0.1 19.0 8.7
Q8850000 6/12/2003 6:40 0.1 23.1 6.5 7.0 224
Q8850000 6/18/2003 6:31 0.1 21.4 7.3
Q8850000 6/25/2003 6:36 0.1 24.0 7.3 7.3 193
•
3

To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Charles Weaver
Date: October 27, 2003
SOC Priority Project: No
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Union
MRO No. 03-82
Permit No. NC0024333
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: City of Monroe WWTP
Post Office Box 69
Monroe, North Carolina 28111
2. Date of Investigation: September 24, 2003
3. Report Prepared by: Michael L. Parker, Environmental Engineer II
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Kim Hinson, [phone].
OCT 3 0 ?003
5. Directions to Site: From the intersection of US Hwy 74 and Walkup Ave. in the City of Monroe,
travel northeast on Walkup Ave. approximately 2.4 miles to Treeway Drive. Turn left onto
Treeway Drive and the WWTP is located at the end of Treeway Drive.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 34° 59' 48" Longitude: 80° 29' 28"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No.: H17NW U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Wingate, NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application? Yes.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Moderate slopes; the WWTP does not appear
to be located within the 100 year flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: None within 500 feet.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Richardson Creek
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Yadkin, 030714

Page Two
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Receiving stream is a
moderate -sized creek with a rocky bottom. Lake Lee, a water supply reservoir, is located
upstream on Richardson Creek. It is unknown if there is a minimum flow released under
drought conditions. General "C" classification uses downstream.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted: 9.0 & 12.5 MGD (ultimate design capacity)
b. Current permitted capacity of the wastewater treatment facility: 9.0 & 12.5 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design capacity): 9.0 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to Construct
issued in the previous two years: There have been no ATCs issued in the past two years.
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater treatment
facilities: Existing treatment facilities consist of two influent pumping stations, two
mechanical rotary screens, a flow equalization basin, five aeration basins with fine -bubble
diffused air, four secondary clarifiers, six activated charcoal tertiary filters, chlorine
disinfection, sulfur dioxide dechlorination, cascade post aeration, five aerobic sludge
digesters (one doubles as a sludge storage tank), eleven vacuum assisted sludge drying
beds (currently not used), four gravity sludge drying beds, and two sludge thickening
centrifuges. The facility also has an onsite generator for the influent pumping station.
The facility is served by dual source power (two power grids).
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: There are no
proposed WWT facilities at this time, however, if the WWTP is to eventually expand to
12.5 MGD, the following WWT components were proposed in the 201 Plan: additional
flow equalization, replacing the rotary screens with mechanical bar screens, adding an
additional aeration basin and two (2) clarifiers, replacing the disinfection and
dechlorination systems with UV disinfection, and adding gravity belt thickeners. The
City may be considering an interim expansion to 10.4 (?) MGD, pending resolution of the
Town of Marshville and/or Pilgrims's Pride Poultry Processing plant flow situation.
g•
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Pretreatment information submitted in the
application indicates several industries which may contribute toxic constituents to the
WWTP if not properly controlled through the City's pretreatment program. See permit
application for more information.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): The City has an approved pretreatment program.
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. Land application: DWQ Permit No. WQ0001346
Residuals Contractor: Synagro, Inc. Telephone No.: 336-766-0328 (Main Office)

Page Three
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP (Class B)
3. Treatment plant classification: Class IV
4. SIC Code(s): 4952 Wastewater Code(s) 01 Main Treatment Unit Code: 02103
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved (municipals only)? Public monies were used in the construction of this facility.
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: N/A
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: This facility in not under an SOC or JOC
nor is one proposed.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The permittee, City of Monroe, has applied for permit renewal. There have been no changes to
the WWT facility and/or the permit since the permit was last renewed. The City completed an upgrade
of the WWT facility during the term of the previous permit (1995 through 2000); however, with 2002-
2003 average daily flows at or above 80% of the plant's hydraulic capacity, it would appear that it is
time for the City to initiate expansion. Unusually heavy rains, however, that started in late fall 2002,
may skew the hydraulic flow data for the most recent review period. Actual flow data (during periods
of normal rainfall) should be used in determining whether or not this facility may be at or near 80% of
it's hydraulic capacity (See comments in Part II (f)).
The Instream Assessment Unit should carefully evaluate this facility prior to the reissuance of
this permit. Historical instream monitoring data reflected dissolved oxygen levels at or below the
water quality stream standard at both upstream and downstream monitoring locations. Downstream
dissolved oxygen levels at SR 1006 were slightly lower than upstream values. Instream monitoring is
now being performed by a coalition of dischargers in the basin known as the Yadkin River Basin
Association. Should there be any instream impacts as a result of this discharge, these impacts may
have been magnified by the drought conditions experienced in 2002 and before.
Pending a final review and approval by the NPDES Unit, it is recommended that the permit be
renewed with flow limits for 9.0 MGD (existing), and 12.5 MGD (upon expansion).
4e7d4''a / 223
3
gnaturert preparer D to
Water Quality Regional .1ervisor Date
h:ldsrldsr031monroe.sr
.,i0/6 /..0_3

CITY OF MONROE
P.O. BOX 69 • MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 26111-0069
FAX [phone]
O Ci 3 0 2003
October 29, 2003
Ms. Susan Wilson
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Water Quality Division
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Monroe WWTP Interim Expansion
Dear Ms. Wilson,
This letter is a written follow up to our conversation last week and your e-mail dated
October 22, 2003. As we discussed, the City Monroe desires to pursue an interim
expansion of our wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) from 9.0 MGD to 10.4 MGD.
Our plans to expand the plant from 9.0 to 12.5 MGD were put on hold two years ago due
to decreasing flows and the planned Schaefer wastewater system. Now that the Schaefer
system is on hold, combined with one of the wettest 12 month periods on record, our
flows are currently at 90% of capacity and could exceed 90 % for calendar year 2003.
We want to be proactive to ensure adequate future wastewater capacity for our
community.
Hazen and Sawyer Engineer's have completed a process review of the existing plant
based on current hydraulic and pollutant loading. Actual plant performance and process
calculations confirm that the Monroe WWTP can be re -rated to 10.4 MGD and that no
new facilities are needed to re -rate. However, we plan to spend almost $1 million to
expand flow equalization volume and upgrade filtration capacity as part of re -rating.
This will provide additional assurance that we can meet all permit parameters.
We discussed on the telephone possible discharge limits for a flow of 10.4 MGD. Our
previous NPDES permit contained limits for 9.0 and 11.0 MGD. We respectfully request
the previously established limits for 11.0 MGD be used for our requested 10.4 MGD
flow, with the addition of a selenium limit that was added to our 9.0 MGD permit during
the last renewal. Also, in evaluating our request, please consider comments made in the
February 2003 Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin Wide Plan that water quality improvements
have been made in Richardson Creek since the last Basin Plan, and that the "City of
Monroe has worked extensively in recent years to upgrade its WWTP". Once we

complete the full expansion to 12.5 MGD, we understand the slightly lower limits for
BOD will apply. We believe this is a reasonable approach and will result in no increased
impact to our receiving stream.
Our preferred timetable for this permit modification and project is as follows:
• October 29, 2003, preliminary request to Division of Water Quality outlining
proposed WWTP re -rate from 9.0 to 10.4 MGD.
• November 20, 2003 submittal of "Process and Hydraulic Re -rating Evaluation"
from Hazen and Sawyer Engineer's to NCDENR for preliminary review.
• January 15, 2004, issuance of revised NPDES permit for 10.4 MGD (Division of
Water Quality currently has Monroe's renewal application in office which will
expedite this timing).
• March 12, 2004, Plans and specification along with final "Process and Hydraulic
Re -rating Evaluation" submitted to NCDENR.
• June 2004, Authorization to Construct issued.
• July 2004, bid advertisement/opening for WWTP improvements.
• September -December 2004, construction of WWTP improvements.
In summary, we believe the proposed plan of action outlined herein provides a sound
strategy for providing interim wastewater capacity to the City of Monroe while allowing
us to meet all discharge requirements. Should you need additional information
concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me at 704-282-4601.
Sincerely,
Russell Colbath, P.E.
Director of Water Resources
CC: Rex Gleason, NCDENR, Mooresville Regional Office
Kim Hinson, WWTP Superintendent
Jim Cramer, Hazen and Sawyer Engineers
Jim Struve, Hazen and Sawyer Engineers
File: S-1, NPDES 2003

[Fwd: Aerating Monroe to 10.4 mgdl
Subject: [Fwd: Rerating Monroe to 10.4 mgd]
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:50:41 -0400
From: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: Susan A Wilson <Susan.A.Wilson@ncmail.m
Subject: Rerating Monroe to 10.4 mgd
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 10:28:19 -0400
From: "jcramer" <[e-mail]>
Organization:
To:
CC:
Jackie,
Hazen and Sawyer
<jackie.nowell @ncmail.net>, <dave.goodrich @nc
"Russ Colbath 1(E-mail1)" <rcolbath @monroenc.oi
fib �` �.
fir' „1m.'
An4\cc,
"Kim Hinson" <[e-mail]>, J��~
"James N. Struve" <[e-mail]>---'
Thank you for taking time to talk about the procedures
Monroe's NPDES permitfor an "interim" expanded flow of
current permit has three "pages" of limits at 9 mgd,
An environmental assessment was done and FONSI issue
for modifying
4) mgd. Monroe's
, and 12.5 mgd.
bids were received
in 2000 for the project to expand Monroe's WWTP to 12.5 mgd. The bids came
in high and the project was shelved. Since 2000, influent BOD's have
declined because of fewer industrial contributors and improved pretreatment
at the remaining industries. As most plants, the capacity of the Monroe
WWTP is based on organic loading. Since influent BOD concentrations have
gone down. the plant's flow capacity has increased. With increased rainfall
in 2003, flow in calendar year 2003 will exceed 90% of the current permitted
capacity of 9 mgd. Hazen and Sawyer has completed a process review. Actual
plant performance and process calculations confirm that the Monroe WWTP can
be rerated to 10.4 mgd. No new facilities are needed to rerate from 9 to
10.4 mgd; however, the City plans to spend almost $1 million to expand flow
equalization capacity and replace filter media as part of rerating.
Based on the above, what will the State require to modify Monroe's permit
for an expanded flow of 10.4 mgd? Based on our conversation, we are
anticipating submitting to DWQ a request for a permit modification(i.e.
application) with a 2 to 3 page attachment summarizing Hazen and Sawyer's
process evaluation. Plans and specifications for the expanded flow
equalization and new filter media will be submitted to Permits and
Engineering when completed. Please advise what procedures/submittals are
needed to modify Monroe's permit for a permitted flow of 10.4 mgd.
y P,I rr''J 9' MS J)
co_ 1-0AD OF (2,S n �
I of I
Lc&D
4M 55 trA7 i A-)�j
12.E
7
12,E b, 311- -
S2 J J4/oAy
10/22/03 2:54 PM

l
14-‘
; u (w4_ :::
L7 ; No co N ioA7e '4J
M Jvt (13 /2-
tt
0v61,Ua.PMc.c '-1 w5 fir"' Nl
bLV o - W n1974,+1-

l3ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
01 o4 inPriCoc �JW-v , N(0OZ4 333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
(' otto.)a1
RIVER BASIN:
Ygciltin — Pee bee
_{.d .'.' :K'�.
SUPPLEMENTAL:APPLt l '� O1 ;!
..i•'q. ... �� _ 1 c, y_,i RA .' y .Z1 `T...' :Tx - SJ. "K ..1 .aj
I RMATION ' ' ,' S `•`S �` . ." �`"'
PART F INDUSTRIAL USER DI Ct ARGUES- FIND: RCRA/CERCLA WASTES M ,7 } ° .' R ;° t�
All treatment works receiving discharges from
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number
works.
9
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
[iYes IN No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)
industrial users that discharge to the treatment
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
J
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. •
Name: dePIe A si4644 - Q:v:S:oan, lark 10.s.c.Pl43'tt .r.-.c.
Mailing Address: 300 4Goi L %.: dt.
l On ro C.it1C /. ol$ I I �•
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
E ! C.Ii ^)) Pr kris A.6 r;c...+ j A...o ASSeN► 6 )i
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): 1) G cor.4../4- -Fr f•-+ avi4 lOakos 4.Ple41..0
Raw material(s): P 1. S AC., fl e 4 .1 Sn 1LS So I &ft.+, 4c ; dS
/ ,
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
61 78'g gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
a1 s00 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits dYes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards £ Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
iia c4cR 433
following:
• No
• No
subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

1=ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
G;'y o 4 l�onrol. WWTP� NCo024333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
ctncwa�
RIVERE1BASIN:
gK1n - ��ec Otc-
Efa
'''r. ---"- 1r. 74-4^ ,• '- .e'4y''T :4'• f,}„ a.. :.i
S UPPLEMENTAL APPLI',.ti,,� I }(tNF ` RMATION ' } ' ' $ � � f ' �� 1� Y s �
PART FANDUSTRIAL USER ogolikR+ ESAND: RCRA/CERCLA WASTES. ` . °-, �, • - . x
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. • /j
Name: 4 I I ✓a _-
Mailing Address: vZ' a O 451 r. C+ Alicrvt
/ l&nroL, Ac. Silo
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge. _t
VACUUI :ncLc4:o" ,,,c,14.:.,,1 cor�;,.. roIP..• P.n.:0 ft •e-1• 3.:•.y w..J J Cw+ '�'rGw14rtg
Ji
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): MC* 41 wn01 +'4' ,Ii vs. o►1layS . Srec.:o.1,1 Sh S
Raw material(s): lV t, Co, C L, III, 71 , Cu, Fe" G, Sii Crf PIA, /'?e, ✓I Zr, / j
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
!Pi J) 3 gpd ( %'( continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
Oa 000 gpd ( y continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits I/Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
gel cf.117/
following:
IN No
0 No
subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CA 1 0-4 fr)onro t L3U-IT 1 N C o0 2433 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
irM o.) a\
RIVER_BASIN:
YQcI ltin — PPt bcc
- .•!�c- ! s i` .:' r tl •r,<ryR K. 'Y 1. �_ r � rT '77 P5,1 Yr94.:. Y'"
SUPPLEMENTAL API'LIG1►�'TOI�INF�MATION ' `�=`:' `, `' °`t�`, . '' "�
•.- y.. ..._ ..-_ r- ,a,...-.... .. -..+ -.. ••... ..
PARMINDUSTRIAL USER DJEDHAi 'GEStND. RCRA/CERCLA WASTES 4 :` ' 4 - t "
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. ?:
Name: Q loo"s I urj eIIS, i'•.c .
Mailing Address: 2e ob S-!- # S+rtc.+
/'%rnroel NC. .)BIIO
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
tye.:„�, 1, �o.+s�.+, scouring , c:..: S .;.,a
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materiat(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge. (r11
Principalproduct(s): Qytot c►^0t c:";$ c4 *CX.�k P�:GCe_.8o0AS
Raw material(s): D yeS1 C fo+k, Pro L e SS: r' C )tnii c.• IS
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
.S7,5 1 g6 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3, �o �S gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes LN' No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C141 94 (noproc ww-rP Nt0024333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
rentwA1
RIVER BASIN:
Yadlc>, -� Ptc QcC
SUPPLEMENTAL •'
PART F INDUSTRIAL USER [Si$CHAR ES AND R RId►/CERCLAWASTES - ' ' ' � "
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ Yes ■ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. •
Name: C, Laelok Pipe. w..d cov„dry Go.•.p,,,,.,, PI.s4;c Aiv:SJo.,
Mailing Address: W ?/0 0 id cL..r I a l'c- thi),w.r
rion rot, NC. a$/!O
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
e tic Cor• Pau.•o1S or C.1.1.:.c. usc.J extrude: Pita, Ass` a..01 cPvc. p PG ki,,,4io-• "Ids P✓c, 4gs, C PVG
c:1+.35 w..d ASSe.4 .bl:c$ .
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): PVC-, MSS 0..4 Chic Pak., C; #i .. j s o.,oi a SS e... L J: e.S
Raw material(s)• PVC. Res:..s1 C PVC, Co,.. pou.•d ,4 3$ Re.s1••S, C. is:.... Coo' L e.,ai't, Act ): c Re$:..s,Tf.�. »:.
:oxtdP. t, r.. wax '. Cv.. 1f't.r.#t. J O fa...oi•:.. Si%lb: l:ssrS, C.ribo..
F.6. Flow Rate. 1vdC.r -.4 i+oK.aas f QN�'.Ici o.leca,.Hnt. 'f tet., C..,CI.-`)'4-.i.. ,
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
17, 6'(P gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
�IwCit~� PO4 14.y11..4. wax,
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
/4r ?SO gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits 134es
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
following:
■ No
crr.10
subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

4
i=ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
6.147 o -c I'fonroc U )TP, N coo 33 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
«news`
RIVER BASIN:
'Ya 1Vtn — Pee. pee
.a 1--.; .. .yp c• 1ST 5.� . r z T' .
•
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLI � .114F I {MATION , : - _ t.. _ .<y yr -
PART FANDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES -.AND RCRA/CERCLAWASTE S=: ; ' - ,�= '��' _ . ' A•" L - -
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
❑ Yes ■ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. •
Name: Gold S;a"4-,re.. AaociS1 4LC.
Mailing Address: '? 701 .S, tr., S+<<s-t
0011retI NC %geII ).
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the Industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
/vr44.tr ProCeSSeJI Po4.4.141, Lea, Vea t4-able.S
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): F +ally Coogcc1 Pou l4.ey Sea C, ah J Ved.4.11e. Qroaiu c+.s
j
Raw material(s)• R.w Y oul ') a teSi Vet? e#o k S o..•oI ac�oa.+: v4S
F.6. Flow Rate. 9
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
9.t 3/1 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per 7j day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3 7f gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits E Ysues ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes IP'6o
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

1
t
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
G;Aj 04 Plonr.,t; WWII)/ NCoozy 333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
rcr)e.Ja1
RIVER BASIN:
Yf>< 414.111 Pcc bee.
SUPPLEMENTAL?APPLI
PART ,F.INDUSTRIAL USER DJSDHARGESAND RCRA/CERCLA WASTE
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name:
Mailing Address:
GoulOor% rcc.i,noloreSi .�•
%DO Zo Ls, ,S1-rt,c+
/%arot i ,NL c?V/0
F.4. Industrial Processes. —Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
I.ile r 4:, Oc I Cx# k LV I ri Cwn+i •
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s):
/'rAT��Spi�:.�� 1�►►:st.LS� Spi. 1--��wiSLe,S ipk.Sh 4c. d cn+S) 474..+5
Raw material(s): E+toxyl..+,1 ES'crS, AlcoL• AS a.•o: PgoSPI•..+cS /11y Ac:d FEhr,S iMenl 0:IS
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
it; /3.S gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3, L/ gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits LE Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes E IO
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Gt�y oMonroc WW113, Ncoo2M333
new
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: O
RIVER BASIN:
.114ckG1>7 — PeG tCG.
SUPPLEMENTALA
MF�RMAT1ON
PART F:INDUSTRIAL USER DJSCHJ RC%ES. AI DRCRA/GERCLA WASTES;. -
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
•
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. •
Name:
L.. D. 11,,is
Mailing Address: 0b.31 E..$4- kooSevcl+
'Monroe, /t.G c,?811 _
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affector contribute to the SIU's discharge.
`
"A1 cmefurt. Profit;.. Dosed vS4r4' ,4nisi ✓cS
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materia!(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s):
'4- ..1 14w4r lawsLd Aol„tSi vcS `1,r L' .bp .:L AriS .i,•,�CIvs#ry
Raw material(s): G e c, r ^ E p.sc + 5,.1+) Co-" S y rvP!
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge Is continuous or intermittent.
gPd
continuous or X intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
$OD gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits 1341es 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes [!o
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C' i " Monrec., I,JW'P -- �Ncoo29333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
rent wa\
RIVER BASIN:
`441zin - Pec bet
. t.•.7 • t-, • - •i :"2 .in' ',4 _.•., ? ! H .S. 6."� -� 11 N i 1 - -'S' ' f''"1'•,:.A?..11- L_,�
•_• _ .. r.,y .._,_ t- 4 !-P:k7 •.;-77
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLE` , =;11Vb11►T'{C3N :' r,-` `*= ''
PART F1NDUSTRIAL USER D, 0CWARGES AND RCI A/CERCLA WASTES;, ; f 'F _ ` � <� ` . t <<; _ z; K,••"
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ Yes ■ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: NO r4o^ Door Cor+4o1S
Mailing Address: .306o G.S4 Roe,Se da « %IAA .
/yllr rot., NC ...limo
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
C IQ,A,.:w), /ic.k -(-re.41 �/i, in, p er.3:o.. /7 SSes+hii, RIM- PICK OP boor C IbSe.rS ••%« k..,-o J. eL
,
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge. + R
Principalproduct(s): Door GIoStrS a..ol ISS6Ci..4Ld1 �S4'..11.4+o.. / •ed')".re-
Raw material(s): Ah":.+td.._ -I- 54-otI 4J:4. So.••c. Povo4cred ,nc.44 c i}I:^) 11,14 ,,,I:c.o;IS, P,a�f,
E
F.6. Flow Rate. P°X y Povds j eit"M•.•+o I.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
c2/ %/ 9 gpd ( continuous or )( intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
4, g 7S gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits ['Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards [j'Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
y0 CA I/33
following:
0 No
■ No
subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CIAl o-4 ffonrot \3L) VP NCoo29 33 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
t'tnewai
RIVER BASIN:
\<0,c1 ) - Pcc bcc.
• •
• 'SUPPLEMENTAL'APPLU NT, NPRMOON - }4, '- `., r ; .S=
PART F INDUSTRIAL USER DIi3£ CHAR 3ES AND-RCRA/CERCLA WASTES ..- } _ t : E . '' y `t
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (CIUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ Yes ■ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: 01kO / rw•tuLae •:erg COMPar.y
Mailing Address: SSOC S'I-: it STrtG+
"Ant i NL ague:,
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affectorcontribute to the SIU's discharge.
ewnvlr civrce pwA wSSer.ulte• ;n �'..b�:c.a.to.. ...1 F:n:s4:7 oC Sk,c ple:Ta) . d 7y-ij1)tjlt wr pm,hl F/1 .,Z(u$%1
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materiat(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge. tom
Principal product(s): -1 Voor See.+S Per Arc r..ct, f/ar; ou$ Si.ett.`i' .....I +.1. Air elci. i Phir: o.4.J .►..I c4.:00i R'oJ'ts
Raw materiat(s): Sfccl .,,.d AI1/0.:.,,.rift S ket.et+1 rod, l,,r .,.,ol %beS
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1, ¥(b gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
7-51, gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
following:
[f No
❑ No
subcategory?
a. Local limits • Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 2/Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
yo cp'& q33
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CAI o -C tfionroc. UU)`TP NCoo29 3 3 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
FC.fleW G.
RIVER BASIN:
is dVt» — Pce bee
PART .INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND. RGRA/CERCLAWASTES
-
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of Gills.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name:
Mailing Address:
a i
Pi la r: w+s Pr ;Jc. CO r
r%wr'SJ. 11.11t, »c 4a %ts3
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
C1:cf.t.... S/a►1%j 4-tr a..d Pro Le.Stinq
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s):
2.„,) ?r-ad vC+$
Raw material(s): L. VC- c1.001 ~.s
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
77',oW gpd
continuous or intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
) g, %SAD gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits
b. Categorical pretreatment standards
L" Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [!o
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510.2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C,iry e-( Monroe. \RAYIP — NC°029 333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER RBASIN: 1 i�
CG>7cw� QgK1n - Pcc bet
SUPPLEMENTAL APP,LI0471i 1N
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER D. 0HARGES= 1ND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: S14.)wr•Sor. S.AGC P)e4'+1, X„G
Mailing Address: 3 DO Q room C .S+r a e+
flo„rac.,NO 018110
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Ar:G..�iOr• ti."01 .i$i�in� of j'7cv..t l cAuc.+S 0no5 pLk i'red:11.0) ..,d R.:.,"
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge. 11 1 f 1
Principal product(s): C v Sfor., r: c. rcJ /%G+� t Pr-o vc+S
C1, /'T,Np,in�%,., Sf..t..kss 14e% �LiolS� /7�� w ti��..tis f Pyi�.♦ SOki&►•+S
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
13 if gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
ysD gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ❑ Yes [/No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 1 'Yes ❑ No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
yo cFR 1/33
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

I=ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C 41 o 4 ronroc, L TAP NC 0024 33 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RIVER BASIN:
.(ad1Zik) - Pec Dee.
PART F INDUSTRIAL USER 010400 S,AND RCRNCERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
•
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name:
Ty so.. Pow's,
Mailing Address: vi 3.3 ,sou 4--. SecrcS4- Ave
Ion ro e, N 6- 08110
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
sig%ti j l't 11 G u-u pl 04.60,41) o..,d PAS 1C..; c Pov I4e1 Pro du a.4S /74.#6. ry
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Po v I �7 wsolucAs Suptr !''1wr 11e.4 IcsS
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
L:vc. P0.,1+11
1, 776, gy0 gpd ( /l continuous or intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
34; 000 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local Limits
b. Categorical pretreatment standards
s 0 No
❑ Yes L�l' No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C.ki D-4 nlonro( WUTP , NCoD2933 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
anewa\
RIVER BASIN:
lac r — Pcc fee.
SUPPLEMENTAL'APPLI X f10N IFC�RMAT{ON ••_'• "" t ` "� " :#, '� "� s `�
PART F: NDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES µND: RCRAICERCLA WASTES• ` _ f - = -' ''
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
■ Yes ■ No
F.2. Number of Significant industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary. •
�1�
Name: Un;0r Rel;....itt /'1e4:edb GGrthe
Mailing Address: 600 f%S p; 4 Qr;1t-
Mo•►roeI NG o781i D.
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
il4..I+L Corr- /AG✓k Gwrt i tonj '76r, C.rt,. — /lo,Spa
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): de.141` fir`
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3 b1 34 4 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ril4s 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes L1fIlo
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Cs41 o 4' Inonroc. k.JWV Nc o02'13 3 3
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
VCneWo+\
RIVER BASIN:
'<Qa In — Pc.‘ tCC.
rr"r�~wr11�
SUPPLEMENTALAPPL1RMAT{ON
PART F.INDUSTRIAL l�S DJS H R ES AND-RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
{
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following Information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: V•PI0.<c1 St rerviG.
Mailing Address: LA I /7',4r4kvr C: ecl<-
"Arot1 ,„P$//0
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe ail the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
QVN;a^ A/•(A "nu caL 1 . Kn
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge. Principal product(s): C r G I , r 4"; +I-:.
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3, gpd ( /1 continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
Ste- C4604151 S 411. e' e4' 11,s. ..1, A1...4..,./,,41
K..+ ^401 -N.:...,,es
f✓: 1 rw}b f i InectAl a; LSI 4604144
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
C'tk7 0-rr Mont* oc W1i TV' NCoo2`1333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
rcrxtao-\
RIVER BASIN:
‘(o,c11c',n — Pam. Dcc
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes 131 No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes 0 No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ❑ No
F.13. Waste Origin. Desciibe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22
Page 19 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CAA 04 Mont- ot WWVP) NNCoo29333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
reneWa\
RIVER BASIN:
/►adk',n — Pe.e.,)eC_
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART G. COMBINED SEWER SYSTEMS
If the treatment works has a combined sewer system, complete Part G.
G.1. System Map. Provide a map indicating the following: (may be included with Basic Application Information)
a. All CSO discharge points.
b. Sensitive use areas potentially affected by CSOs (e.g., beaches, drinking water supplies, shellfish beds, sensitive aquatic ecosystems, and
outstanding natural resource waters).
c. Waters that support threatened and endangered species potentially affected by CSOs.
G.2. System Diagram. Provide a diagram, either in the map provided in G.1 or on a separate drawing, of the combined sewer collection system that
includes the following information.
a. Location of major sewer trunk lines, both combined and separate sanitary.
b. Locations of points where separate sanitary sewers feed into the combined sewer system.
c. Locations of in -line and off-line storage structures.
d. Locations of flow -regulating devices.
e. Locations of pump stations.
CSO OUTFALLS:
Complete questions G.3 through G.6 once for each CSO discharge point.
G.3. Description of Outfall.
a. Outfall number
b. Location
(City or town, if applicable) (Zip Code)
(County) (State)
(Latitude) (Longitude)
c. Distance from shore (if applicable) ft.
d. Depth below surface (if applicable) ft.
e. Which of the following were monitored during the last year for this
0 Rainfall 0 CSO pollutant concentrations
0 CSO flow volume 0 Receiving water quality
f. How many storm events were monitored during the last year?
G.4. CSO Events.
a. Give the number of CSO events in the last year.
events (0 actual or 0 approx.)
CSO?
0 CSO frequency
b. Give the average duration per CSO event.
hours (0 actual or 0 approx.)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 20 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CIrl or oc '.7WZP) NCoo2y 333
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
('Cr)ewal
RIVER BASIN:
i0,d16" - Pcc D c c.
c. Give the average volume per CSO event.
million gallons (0 actual or 0 approx.)
year
d. Give the minimum rainfall that caused a CSO event in the last
Inches of rainfall
G.5. Description of Receiving Waters.
a. Name of receiving water:
b. Name of watershed/river/stream system:
United State Soil Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code
c. Name of State Management/River Basin:
(if known):
United States Geological Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit
G.6. CSO Operations.
Describe any known water quality impacts on the receiving water caused
intermittent shell fish bed closings, fish kills, fish advisories, other recreational
code (if known):
by this CSO (e.g., permanent or intermittent beach closings, permanent or
loss, or violation of any applicable State water quality standard).
END OF PART G.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE.
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 21 of 22

City of Monroe
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Sludge Management Plan
NPDES NC0024333
Discharge 001
Solids treatment and disposal facilities consist of aerobic digestion for
stabilization of waste activated sludge and storage of liquid sludge prior to
contract land application as a liquid on privately owned farmland. Five
aerobic digesters are used for thickening, stabilization and storage of sludge.
The waste activated sludge is first pumped from secondary clarifiers via
RAS pumps to two 250,000 gallon digesters where it is thickened and
aerated until it reaches about three percent. Thickened solids are then
pumped into a 1,150,000 gallon digester where it is constantly aerated. The
solids are then pumped into a 500,000 gallon aerobic digester and then into a
3,000,000 fine bubble diffused aerated digester where they are stored until
being loaded onto tanker trucks and hauled to application sites. During this
pumping and storage process two centrifuges are used to further thicken the
solids from three percent to four percent which is about the average percent
solids that are land applied.
The City of Monroe currently holds land application permit number
WQ0001346 which contains 3,231.6 acres of privately owned farmland. We
currently meet Class B residual requirements and land apply approximately
1,200 dry tons per year.

ELMS POND RD
Waste Water Treatment Plant
City of Monroe
Monroe, North Carolina
A1/4.1� mna\ a "Cor rna:VIo'n
NCoozy333
D'iscVAr c. Oo 1
Q.. T C l O ii 16. 2_
0 750 1,500
3,000
4.500
Feet
6,000

Ae►1•,lrtono►\ Ih f orM*Ai Op
`\
N
N
N
N
N
N
r^�
r �
� r
r r
r r
0
r
0
oa'
t4c oo 2`t333
tiso\wlt. 00' p
4.1eMoh s�.2.•
/
/
/
/
r r
❑ off° NTS
PROPERTY BOUNDARIES
CRY OF MONROE
WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLAT
MONROE, NORTH CAROUNA

LATITUDE 34• 59. 47.
LONGITUDE BO. 29• 29•
30• RAW SEWER
/ 54' RAW SEVER
MVP
STATXN N0 2
MIAMI BASIN
NO 1
— CLARFIFR
spur=
AERATION BASIN
AERATION BASH
AERATION BASIN
BOX NOI
NO2
NO3
NO
rRAS METER
VAULTS
LRAS RAP
STATION ND 1
POWER SUPPLY
13.2KV
1600 KW DIESEL
GENERATOR
lNDY FLAW
O • METER VAULT
FLAW E JMQA1ON
KIP STAAON
ltiVik ior►a, In'•6rrna "Ion
NCo°Z' 333
tri VCS4)O✓
ch $.2.
W
AIIIOBIc DNESTER/
SWOOE MACE
TANK NO 5
BLOM \—TRUCK LOADING
PAD STAT1@1

FILE= H:\30201\FIGURES\30201-001 by PIZL XREFs=00\Sp—st.dwg,
09/14/98 2:58pm
4
DECHLORINATION
FACILITY
CHLORINE
BUILDING
ANDSAYER
Environmental Engineers is Scientists
EFFLUENT
FLOW
MEASUREMENT
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO 4
/ GENERATOR
INFLUENT
PUMPING
• STATION
NO 1
RAS PUMP
STATION NO 2
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO 3
AERATION BASIN
NO 5
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO 2
lr1 Cot M at tOr'
NC oo ZM 333
Sc IM*34
Qucs7.ior1
CASCADE
AERATOR
INFLUENT
PUMPING
STATION
0
AERATION BASIN
NO 1
LCLARIFIER
SPLITTER
BOX NO 1
RAS METER
VAULTS
SLUDGE
PUMPING
STATION
AEROBIC
DIGESTER
NO 4
AERATION BASIN
NO 2
CLARIFIER SPUTTER
BOX NO 2
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO 1
RAS PUMP
STATION NO 1
O
AERATION
NO 4
AEROBIC
DIGESTER
NO 3
AERATION BASIN
NO 3
1
— AERATION BASIN
SPUTTER BOX
CONTRI
BUILD*
O

T
FIGURE 2-1
VACUUM
DRYING
BEDS
r1
;ENTRtFUGE
BUILDING
POLYMER
BUILDING
SLUDGE
DRYING
BEDS
Mar
O 0
AEROBIC
DIGESTER
NOt
......)
0
a
FLOW EQUALIZATION
PUMP STATION
I FLOW EQUALIZATION BASIN
O•
• I
FLOW METER I
VAULTS
IA--
SCREENING BUILDING
COUNTY FLOW
METER VAULT
BLOWER BUILDING
14ilk.;-.%nna1 1.n'torMo.Tlon
NC of 24 333
(Lc Skb."Dn 1.2.
1
BLOWER TRUCK LOADING
PAD STATION
•
MONROE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
CITY OF MONROE
EXISTING PLANT LAYOUT

PLOT DATE 12/03/i AM PLOT SCALE a 1:1 CAD FILE = H:\DRAWINGS\3515-3\O&M\3515-007 by eta XREF h,.c = NONE
t,:'�
INFLUENT
PUMPING
STATIONS
1.64 P'16D
COUNTY FLOW
METER
6.55 m60
CITY FLOW
METERS
ROTARY
SCREENS
FLOW
EQUALIZATION
BASIN
LO MID
CENTRATE .04 m 60
SUPERNATANT
.1rnco
AEROBIC
DIGESTERS/
THICKENERS
NO 3&4
AEROBIC
DIGESTER/
STORAGE
TANK NO
AERATION BASINS I
SPUTTER BOX I
RAS ]RAS PUMPING
3.o M GO STATIONS
FILTER BACKWASH RETURN
AERATION
BASINS
l.o M60
SECONDARY
CLARIFIERS/
WAS .115 nn cD
CENTRIFUGES
AEROBIC
DIGESTER/
STORAGE
TANK NO 1
J
I
I
P I AEROBIC
._ -Li STORAGE
r
STORAGE
j, H TANK N0 5
TRUCK LOADING PUMP
HAZENAND SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
RALEIGH. NORTH CAROUNA
LIME
.off itt GO
LAND APPLICATION
Ada;wet A1 Ih-pornw4lorl
NCoo2.y333
Rvcs- ion $.3.
LEGEND
TERTIARY
FILTERS
FILTER
BACKWASH
PUMPS
WASTEWATER FLOW
— -- — SOLIDS FLOW
CHLORINE
CONTACT
TANKS
FLOW
MEASUREMENT
CASCADE
AERATION
EFFLUENT TO
RICHARDSON CREEK
CL2
SO2
NPW
14,
MONROE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA
EXISTING PLANT
PROCESS FLOW SCHEMATIC