NC0026042_Permit (Issuance)_20100714

NPDES DOCUI4ENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
..
044
0114
014,
044
.,
Olt
014
NC0026042
Robersonville WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File
- Historical
Correspondence
Speculative Limits
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
July 14, 2010
.,� This document is printed on reuse paper - igmore any
content on the re'rerse *side
.04

1rflmir*
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
.
July 14, 2010
Mr. John Pritchard, Jr., Town Manager
Town of Robersonville
P. O. Box 487
Robersonville, NC 27871
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0026042
Town of Robersonville WWTP
Martin County
Dear Mr. Pritchard:
The Division of Water Quality (Division) personnel have reviewed and approved your application for
renewal of the subject permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit.
It is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
dated October 15, 2007, or as subsequently amended.
The only significant change in this final permit from the draft permit sent to you on May 12, 2010 is that
the monitoring frequency for total nitrogen and its constituents and for total phosphorus was reduced
from weekly to monthly. This change is to ensure consistency with other major municipalities within the
Tar -Pamlico basin. All additions previously made in the draft permit are retained, as follows:
• Added a special condition A (3) for nutrient reduction, as required for all members of the Tar -
Pamlico Association.
• Eliminated Nickel monitoring and limit. Data analysis shows no reasonable potential for effluent
nickel concentrations to cause an exceedance of the water quality standard.
• Added TKN and Nitrite -Nitrate composite sampling, as per the strategy for Association -member
renewals in the Tar -Pamlico basin. These are the two components of total nitrogen (TN).
• Added a footnote regarding the limit for total residual chlorine (TRC). The Division shall consider all
effluent TRC values reported below 50 pg/I (the quantitation limit) to be in compliance with this
permit. You must record and submit all values reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory
even if these values fall below 50 pg/I.
• Reduced monitoring for mercury form weekly to monthly. Although reasonable potential still exists,
data over the past 30 months has been consistently below the standard.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh; North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity'. Affirmative Action Employer
NorthCarolina
?VaturaIIy •

If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days
after receiving this letter. Your request must take the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter
150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and must be filed with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such demand is
made, this permit remains final and binding.
This permit is not transferable except after notifying the Division of Water Quality. The Division may
modify and reissue, or revoke this permit. Please notice that this permit does not affect your legal
obligation to.obtain other permits required by the Division of Water Quality, the Division of Land
Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or other federal or local governments.
If you have questions, or if we can be of further service, please contact Mr. Gil Vinzani at
[gil.vinzani @ ncdenr.gov] or call [phone].
•
Enclosure: NPDES Permit FINAL NC0026042
cc:
Sinc rely,
y� 1diiikk
oleen H. Sullins
day
Washington Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section
NPDES Permit Files
Central Files
Aquatic Toxicology Unit, Susan Meadows (E-mail copy)
EPA Region 4, Marshall Hyatt (permit and fact sheet, E-mail copy)
1617 Mail Service Center. Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] FAX. [phone] \ Customer Service: 1.877.623.6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity A!hnnalive Action Employer
One
North Carol ina
Naturally

Permit NC0026042
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 provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Town of Robersonville
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Robersonville Waste Water Treatment Plant
1149 Rogerson Road, Robersonville
Martin County
to receiving waters designated as Flat Swamp in the Tar Pamlico 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 August 1, 2010.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on November 30, 2014.
Signed this day July 14, 2010:
een H. Sullins, Director
/ Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0026042
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby
revoked. As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer
effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under
the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Town of Robersonville is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 1.8 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting of the following:
• Mechanical bar screen
• Influent pump station
• Dual oxidation ditches
• Five secondary clarifiers
• Four tertiary filters
• Chlorine contact chamber
• Dechlorination
• Post aeration
• Aerated sludge digester and holding tank
Facility is located at the Robersonville WWTP, at 1149 Rogerson Road, south of Robersonville in
Martin County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Flat
Swamp, classified C-Sw NSW waters in the Tar Pamlico River Basin.

(Il55
.Ao
Robersonville WWTP -
NC0026042
USGS Quad: Robersonville West
Receiving Stream: Flat Swamp
Stream Class; C-Swamp NSW
Subbasin: Tar Pamlico / 03-03-06
Latitude:
35°48'40"
Longitude:
77°15'30"
• Cem
SCALE 1:24,000

Permit NC0026042
A (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the permittee is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as
specifiedibelow:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
• •
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average •
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum*
Measurement
. • Frequency
Sample
. Type
Sample
.Location'
Flow
1.8 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5-day, 20°C z
5 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E,1
Total Suspended Solids z
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E,I
NH3 as N
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen 3
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
3NVeek
Grab
U, D
Fecal Coliform (geometric
mean)
200/100 ml
400/100m1
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine 5
19 erg/L
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature (°C)
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature (°C) 4
3/Week
Grab
U, D
Total Nitrogen
(NO2+NO3+TKN) 6
Monitor and Report (mg/L)
Monthly
(Calculated)
E
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
Monitor and Report (mg/L)
Monthly
Composite
E
Nitrite/Nitrate Nitrogen
(NO2-N+NO3-N) 6
Monitor and Report (mg/L)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus 5
Monitor and Report (mg/L)
Monthly
Composite
E
pH
Between-6.0 and 9.0 s. u.
Daily
Grab
E
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Mercury 1
0.013 pg/L
0.013 pg/L
Monthly
Grab
E
Total Iron
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity u
Quarterly
Composite
E
Pollutant Analysis y
Annually
Composite
E
Footnotes:
1. Sample locations: E-Effluent, I -Influent, U-Upstream at NCSR 1158, D-Downstream at NCSR 1505. Stream
samples shall be grab samples and shall be collected 3/Week during June -September and 1/Week during
the remaining months of the year.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15 percent
of the respective monthly average influent value (85% removal).
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not fall below 6.0 mg/L.
4. The instream monitoring requirements as stated above are waived, due to sampling by the Tar -Pamlico
Basin Association. Should your membership in the Association be terminated, you shall notify the Division
immediately and the instream monitoring requirements specified in your permit shall be reinstalled.
5. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 Ng/l to be in compliance with this
permit. The Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported by a North Carolina certified
laboratory even if these values fall below 50 pg/I.
6. See Special Condition A (3).
7. Mercury sampling shall be done using EPA Method 1631 E.
8. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) P/F at 90%: February, May, August, and November (see Special
Condition A (2)). Toxicity monitoring shall coincide with metals monitoring.
9. See Special Condition A (4)
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or foam.

Permit NC0026042
A (2) 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°/0.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in
the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998 or
subsequent versions, or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during the months
of February, May, August, and November. 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 chronic
value 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. If reporting chronic
value results using the parameter code TGP3B, then DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the
following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no
later than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved
designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and
reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test
form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the
report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to
the Environmental Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the .permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring
will be required during the following month.
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.

- Permit NC0026042
If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, the results of such
monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted on the DMR and all
AT Forms.
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.
A (3) NUTRIENT SPECIAL CONDITION
(1) Point source dischargers in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin are subject to the terms and conditions
of the Tar -Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters Implementation Strategy: Phase Ill (the
"Agreement"), agreed to on April 14, 2005; and the nutrient TMDL for the Basin, approved by the
USEPA on August 10, 1995.
(2) The Permittee is a member of the Tar -Pamlico Basin Association, which consists of the following
fifteen facilities:
Membership of Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Permit
Owner
Facility
NC0030317
City of Rocky Mount
Tar River Regional WWTP
NC0023931
Greenville Utilities Commission
GUC WWTP
NC0020605
Town of Tarboro
Tarboro WWTP
NC0025054
City of Oxford
Oxford WWTP
NC0020648
City of Washington
Washington WWTP
NC0069311
Franklin County
Franklin County WWTP
NC0020834
Town of Warrenton
Warrenton WWTP
NC0026042
Town of Robersonville
Robersonville WWTP
NC0020231
Town of Louisburg
Louisburg WWTP
NC0026492
Town of Belhaven
Belhaven WWTP
NC0025402
Town of Enfield
Enfield WWTP
NC0023337
Town of Scotland Neck
Scotland Neck WWTP
NC0020061
Town of Spring Hope
Spring Hope WWTP
NC0020435
Town of Pinetops
Pinetops WWTP
NC0042269
Town of Bunn
Bunn WWTP
(3) The Agreement defines nitrogen and phosphorus caps for the Association as follows:
Phase III Nutrient Caps — Tar -Pamlico Basin Association'
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
(Ib/yr)
(kg/yr)
(Ib/yr)
(kg/yr)
891,272
404,274
161,070
73,060
1) Includes allowed adjustment to the 1991 baseline

Permit NC0026042
The Agreement also specifies that the Association has properly accrued and banked nitrogen
offset credits in the following amounts:
Nitrogen Offset Credits — Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Nitrogen Credits
Timeframe
(lb)
(kg)
Phase I
10,138
4,608
Phase II
30,276
13,762
Phase III
10,564
4,802
(4) Consistent with TMDL requirements of 40 C.F.R. 122.44(d)(1), 122.44(d)(1)(vii)(A) and (B), and
Section 301(b)(1)(C) of the federal Clean Water Act, the Phase III nutrient caps and applied
credits are hereby incorporated into this permit as enforceable limitations on the aggregate
discharge of nitrogen and phosphorus by the Association, as follows:
Nutrient Load Limits — Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
(Ib/yr)
(kg/yr)
(Ib/yr)
(kg/yr)
Nutrient Caps
891,272
404,274
161,070
73,060
Applied Credits
0
0
N/A
N/A
Effective Load Limits
891,272
404,274
161,070
73,060
(5) In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Phase III Agreement, the Association may
apply additional nitrogen offset credits in anticipation of future exceedances. Application of
credits shall be made through modification of the members' NPDES permits.
(6) The Division reserves the right to reopen this permit and make appropriate modifications in the
event that:
a. The current Agreement is revised to add or modify the nutrient caps, reporting requirements,
or other requirements relevant to this permit.
b. The terms of the Agreement are violated, in which case the Division will implement the
strategy in Section X. of the Agreement, Violation of Terms of this Agreement.
c. The Director determines that additional requirements, including effluent limitations, are
necessary to prevent localized adverse impacts to water quality.
(7) No later than March 1 of each year, the Association shall prepare an annual report of its
performance for the previous calendar year to the Division at the following address:
Division of Water Quality, Point Source Branch
Attn: Tar -Pamlico NPDES Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
The report shall include each member's monthly mass loadings and the Association's aggregate
annual loadings for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus for the subject calendar year.

Permit NC0026042
A (4) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The Permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached
table (in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). Samples shall represent seasonal variations. Unless
otherwise indicated, metals shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
• Dissolved oxygen'
Nitrate/Nitrite
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Oil and grease
Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury (Method 1631 E)
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1,1-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid -extractable compounds:
P-chloro-m-creso
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Base -neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy)
methane
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chioronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- DMR-PPA1 or in a form approved by the
Director, within 90 days of sampling. A copy of the report shall be submitted to Central Files at the
following address: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, 1617 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617. Submittal of copies with the next NPDES renewal application is
required.

Vinzani, Gil
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 11:10 AM
To: Vinzani, Gil
Subject: NC0026042, Robersonville WWTP
EPA has no comments on this draft permit.
1

BEAUF.ORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned. a Notary Public of said County
and State- duly commissioned, qualified and authorized
law to ainister oaths. personally appeared
efei dc? , t - . who being first duly
sworn as a representative of the Washington Daily
News. a newspaper, published, issued and entered as
second class mail in Washington, NC in said county and
state and 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 Washington Daily News on the following dates:
(,--9vP fD
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper,
document, or legal advertisement was published was, at
the time of each and every publication, a newspaper
meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of
Section I-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina
and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of
Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 1 day of � ,� /yl.Q , 20 / C.)
,e-zax.,ze -Ka2A
(Signature of person making affidavit)
Sworn to and subscribed before me, a Notary Public,
this l day of 20 / D .
otary Public)
My commission ex.' s (,) �-, , 9 d3o%.
Publication cost $ paid.
PUBLIC NOTICE
North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission/NPDES
Unit
1617 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Permit
The North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission proposes
to issue a NPDES wastewater dis-
charge permit to the person(s) listed
below.
Written comments regarding the pro-
posed permit will be accepted until
30 days after the publish date of this
notice. The Director of the NC Divi-
sion of Water Quality (DWQ) may
hold a public hearing should there
be a significant degree of public in-
terest. Please mail comments and/or
information requests to DWQ at the
above address. Interested persons
may visit the DWQ at 512 N. Salis-
bury Street, Raleigh, NC to review
information on file. Additional infor-
mation on NPDES permits and this
notice may be found on our website:
www.ncwaterquality.org, or by call-
ing [phone].
The Town of Robersonville has ap-
plied for renewal of NPDES permit
NC0026042 for its Robersonville
WWTP in Martin County. This per-
mitted facility discharges treated
wastewater to Flat Swamp in the Tar
Pamlico River Basin.
Aurora Packing Company Inc. of Au-
rora, NC has applied to renew
NPDES permit NC0004081 for dis-
charge a UT of South Creek in the
Tar -Pamlico River Basin. No param-
eters are water quality limited.
5-14 itc

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit No. NC0026042
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Robersonville/ Robersonville WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 487; Robersonville, North Carolina 27871
Facility Address:
1149 Rogerson Road; Robersonville, North Carolina 27871
Permitted Flow
1.8 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (100%)
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Martin County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Flat Swamp
Regional Office:
Fayetteville (FRO)
Stream Classification:
C SW; NSW
State Grid / USGS
Quad:
D29SE/Robersonville
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Gil Vinzani
Subbasin:
03-03-06
Date:
•
May 7, 2010
8-Digit HUC
03020103
Drainage Area (mi2):
18
_: _,,,-pt -..
:K �.,
, ,.wy t11+Y a4�
. .
Lat. 35° 48' 43" N Long. 77° 15' 32" W
7Q10 (cfs)
0.27
Average Flow (cfs):
18
IWC (%):
91%
Background
The Robersonville WWTP is a Class IV facility with a permitted flow of 1.8 MGD. Although its
flow is less than 2.5 MGD, it must still be considered a Class IV facility due to the presence of
BNR treatment. The Permittee submitted an application for renewal on June 2, 2009. Three
Priority Pollutant Analyses and four chronic toxicity tests using two species were included. In
2003, the Town lost its only SIU and is now receiving only domestic waste. The facility did not
request any changes to the permit.
Robersonville is a member of the Tar Pamlico Nutrient Trading Association.
This facility discharges to Flat Swamp in subbasin 03-03-06 in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin. At
the location of the outfall, the receiving water is classified C-Sw NSW. The receiving waters are
not on the 303(d) list.
History:
In the previous permit, issued May 3, 2005, several additions were made. These include a
weekly average ammonia limit, an annual pollutant scan, a TRC limit, and nickel limits and
monitoring. At that time, both nickel and mercury were judged to have a reasonable potential.
On February 5, 2007, the Division notified the Town that instream monitoring requirements were
waived, due to the Town's joining the Tar Pamlico Association's Monitoring Coalition.
As true for all members of the Tar -Pamlico Association, the reissuance of this permit was
delayed for eight months due to a nutrient enforcement controversy between the US EPA and
the Association. (refer to section on nutrient controls).
DMR Data Review
DMR data from January 2006 through August 2009 were reviewed. DMR flow data shows that
the last 14 months' flow averaged 0.608 MGD. This is slightly higher than the application
submittal, which showed an average of 0.571 MGD over the latest 12 months.

Nutrient Controls
History and Status of Nutrient Management Strategy for Point Sources.
On September 12, 1989, the Environmental Managements Commission classified the Tar -
Pamlico River Basin as Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). On February 13, 1992, the
Commission approved a revised NSW Implementation Strategy that established the framework
for a nutrient reduction trading program between point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The
Strategy also established certain conditions to be met by an association of dischargers known
as the Tar -Pamlico Basin Association (the Association). Those conditions are defined in the Tar -
Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters Implementation Strategy (the "Agreement").
The Association agreed to meet specific conditions in order to have the opportunity both to
pursue alternative approaches to managing its nutrient discharges and to reduce nutrient
loading in the most cost-effective manner, including the option to fund agricultural best
management practices (BMPs). These conditions included the development of an estuarine
hydrodynamic computer model, engineering evaluations of wastewater treatment plants, annual
monitoring reports on nutrient loading, and minimum payments for the administration and
implementation of agricultural BMPs. The Association met all conditions established in Phase I.
The Phase I Agreement set collective, technology -based discharge loading limits for the
Association in the form of an annually decreasing, combined nitrogen and phosphorus cap.
During the 1990 to 1991 period, low cost operational changes were implemented at several
facilities to reduce nitrogen loadings. The engineering evaluation of member facilities and
implementation of the study's recommended nutrient removal improvements also yielded
significant loading reductions. These changes, combined with installation of nutrient removal at
several of the larger facilities, allowed the Association to reduce its nutrient loads and stay
beneath its caps throughout Phase I.
The Phase II Agreement spanned ten years from January 1995 through December 2004.
Modeling of the Pamlico River estuary during Phase I provided a foundation for water quality -
based loading goals for Phase II. Based on the estuary modeling, Phase II established overall
performance goals for the nutrient strategy of 30 percent reduction in nitrogen loading from a
baseline year of 1991 and no increase in loading of phosphorus from that baseline. Based on
these goals, it also established nitrogen and phosphorus discharge loading caps for the
Association. These caps also accounted for the load reductions achieved through operational
changes implemented during the 1990/1991 period. The Association stayed beneath both caps
throughout Phase II, steadily reducing its loading of both nutrients despite steady increases in
flow. Overall, from 1990 through 2003, the Association decreased nitrogen loads to the river by
approximately 45% and phosphorus loads by over 60%, while flows increased approximately
30%. The attached table summarizes caps and loads through 2008. The success of this
collective cap approach may be attributed in part to the element of time it provided for individual
facilities to implement nutrient removal as it became most cost-effective for them.
Phase II also established requirements for non -Association point source dischargers and called
for rulemaking to fully enact those requirements. That rulemaking became effective in April
1997. It required new and expanding dischargers over certain sizes to meet effluent
concentration limits and to fully offset new or increased loads using the same offset approach
developed for the Association. During Phase II, there were no new dischargers to the basin, and
no existing dischargers became subject to the rule's requirements.
Phase II also established instream nutrient goals for nonpoint sources and called for a separate
nonpoint source (NPS) strategy. These were used to establish a nutrient TMDL, which was
approved by the USEPA on August 10, 1995.
The NPS strategy was put into effect in January 1996 as a voluntary effort that would work from
existing programs, seeking additional funds and developing accounting tools. After two years of
voluntary implementation, the EMC found progress insufficient and initiated nonpoint source
rulemaking. Rules were fashioned after those recently adopted in the adjacent Neuse River
NPI)ES NCOO2(i042 Rcm wa!

basin. They addressed riparian buffer protection, agriculture, urban stormwater, and fertilizer
management. The rules became effective during 2000 and 2001 and are currently in various
stages of implementation.
Phase III of this Agreement was approved by the EMC on April 14, 2005. It spans an additional
ten years through December 31, 2014. This third phase continues the structure established in
Phase II including overall performance goals for the nutrient strategy of 30 percent reduction in
nitrogen loading from a baseline year of 1991 and no increase in loading of phosphorus from
that baseline. The Phase III Agreement updated Association membership and related nutrient
caps. It proposed action in the first two years to improve the offset rate, resolve related temporal
issues, and revisit alternative offset options. The parties to the Agreement met several times
during the first four years of the Agreement to work on addressing these action items and came
to agreement on issues related to banked credit and credit life.
In 2006 DWQ contracted the NCSU Water Quality Group to estimate the cost-effectiveness of
agricultural BMPs to use for updating the nitrogen offset rate in the Agreement and to establish
a phosphorus offset rate. As a result of the study, the parties to the Agreement indentified
actions to be taken by the conclusion of Phase III and addressed in the Phase IV Agreement:
1. Evaluate whether the Agricultural Cost Share Program continues to provide the most
efficient vehicle to implement the pollution credits trading program. This evaluation
should consider the effect of delays in BMP implementation relative to nutrient cap
exceedance and how such delays may impact the allowable point source nutrient
budget.
2. Evaluate the trading offset credit cost calculation method to ensure the offset rate
reflects all actual costs incurred in program development and implementation and
reflects the costs of the type of agricultural BMPs implemented through this program.
3. Conduct a water quality trend analysis, including evaluation of TN losses occurring
during transport to the estuary. This analysis will inform the parties regarding the need
for changes in acceptable loads and the relative impacts of point and non -point
contributions.
N.PDES NCO026042 Renewal

Nutrient Limits.
Point source dischargers in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin are subject to the terms and conditions
of the Agreement and to the nutrient TMDL developed for the Basin. The Agreement provided a
cost-effective alternative to uniform technology -based nutrient concentration limits. It later added
elements of the TMDL, including estuary loading goals and point and nonpoint source
allocations.
As of December 2009, the Association consists of fifteen members. The member facilities are
listed in the following table, and their locations are shown on the attached map.
Membership of Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Permit
Owner
Facility
NC0030317
City of Rocky Mount
Tar River Regional WWTP
NC0023931
Greenville Utilities Commission
GUC WWTP
NC0020605
Town of Tarboro
Tarboro WWTP
NC0025054
City of Oxford
Oxford WWTP
NC0020648
City of Washington
Washington WWTP
NC0069311
Franklin County
Franklin County WWTP
NC0020834
Town of Warrenton
Warrenton WWTP
NC0026042
Town of Robersonville
Robersonville WWTP
NC0020231
Town of Louisburg
Louisburg WWTP
NC0026492
Town of Belhaven
Belhaven WWTP
NC0025402
Town of Enfield
Enfield WWTP
NC0023337
Town of Scotland
Neck Scotland Neck WWTP
NC0020061
Town of Spring Hope
Spring Hope WWTP
NC0020435
Town of Pinetops
Pinetops WWTP
NC0042269
Town of Bunn
Bunn WWTP
The nitrogen and phosphorus caps for the Association are defined in the Phase III Agreement
as follows:
Phase III Nutrient Caps — Tar -Pamlico Basin Association'
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
(I b/yr)
(kg/yr)
(I b/yr)
(kg/yr)
891,272
404,274
161,070
73,060
' Includes allowed adjustment to the 1991 baseline
The Agreement further provides that the Association may accrue and bank nitrogen credits by
funding nonpoint source nutrient reduction measures (e.g., agricultural BMPs) and that it may
purchase credits or apply banked credits in anticipation of future cap exceedances. The current
Agreement specifies that the Association holds offset credits in the following amounts:
NPE)ES NC0026042 Rcncwal

Nitrogen Offset Credits — Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Nitrogen Credits
Timeframe
(lb)
(kg)
Phase I
10,138
4,608
Phase II
30,276
13,762
Phase III
10,564
4,802
The Association has consistently and reliably kept its nutrient loadings beneath the caps without
relying on banked credits. By calendar year 2008, the group had reduced its loads to 63% of its
nitrogen cap and 60% of the phosphorus cap.
Since the Tar -Pamlico strategy's inception, the EPA has praised the strategy for its innovative
and integrative approach to nutrient management and has touted it repeatedly as a model for
others to use. However, guidance released by the EPA's Office of Water Management in 2007
re -iterates that federal NPDES regulations (40 C.F.R. 122.44(d)(1)) and Section 301(b)(1)(C) of
the federal Clean Water Act require that NPDES permits include any applicable limitations
established in or based upon an approved TMDL. The Tar -Pamlico permits have not included
nutrient limits, because the Agreement specified the Association's caps and, until recently, the
EPA Region 4 office had accepted that approach. In Tight of the 2007 guidance, Region 4 has
modified its position on the matter and is requiring that the members' permits include the group
nutrient limits at this time and individual limits in 2014.
Therefore, the Division proposes at this time to include the Phase III nutrient caps as
enforceable permit limits in the members' individual permits. These limits, like the caps, apply to
the aggregate discharge of nitrogen and phosphorus by the Association members as a group.
In order to establish individual nutrient limits by 2014, the Division must conduct additional
technical studies (e.g., determine delivery rates for each discharger, develop individual N and P
allocations) and work with the Association to complete major revisions to the Tar -Pamlico
strategy and the Agreement. It is also likely that the Division must adopt rules to provide for the
operation of the Association under a group NPDES permit.
Annual Nutrient Loads And Caps, Tar -Pamlico Basin Association
Phase I
Combined
19911
19921
19931
19941
N+P
Loading Cap a
N (kg/yr)
525,00
500,00
475,000
425,000
0
0
Actual Load
N (kg/yr)
461,39
436,12
417,217
371,200
4
8
% of Cap
N
88
87
88
87
Average Daily
Flow (MGD)
24.88
26.86
28.46
26.65
NPI)3'.5 ti( 002604.2 Renewal

Phase II
Separate
19952
19962
19972
19982
19992
20002
20013
20024
20034
20044
20055
2006
2007
2008
N,P
Loading
Cap a
N (kg/yr)
P (kg/yr)
405,256
69,744
405,256
69,744
405,256
69,744
405,256
69,744
405,256
69,744
405,256
69,744
421,972
73,060
426,782
73,694
426,782
73,694
426,782
73,694
404,274
73,060
404,274
73,060
404,274
73,060
404,274
73,060
Actual
Load
N (kg/yr)
P (kg/yr)
372,582
37,360
354,219
43,266
320,670
36,532
344,781
36,864
309,476
32,052
297,988
30,277
279,958
32,730
279,330
34,076
309,724
30,856
256,791*
33,566*
242,020
39,267
232,568
46,995
246,465
50,077
253,818
43,821
of
Cap
N
P
92
54
87
62
79 '
52
85
53
76
46
74
43
66
45
65
46
72
42
60*
45*
60
54
58
64
61
69
63
60
Average
Daily
Flow
(MGD)
31.03
33.57
29.84
, 33.31
33.39
32.74
30.21
30.54
36.86
29.56
29.21
32.85
27.05
27.39
1,---le. ..yore -+irr.+orl k , AIC rlivi,inn of %A/afcr ( i ialif , ac the el im of nalonriar-v61ar mnnthlv load values for each facility. which are based on
minimum biweekly nutrient concentrations and daily mass flows.
a Cap values and changes result from the following:
1. Phase I - Original 12-member Association.
2. Phase II through 2000 - 14-member Association.
3. Robersonville added in 2001, making a 15-member Association.
4. Scotland Neck added in 2002, making a 16-member Association.
5. National Spinning Removed in 2005, making a 15 member Association in Phase III

Compliance
To evaluate compliance, a BIMS report was generated for the period from January 2005 until
the present. Seven violations of the mercury limit (13 ng/L) were found, with four of these
significant enough for further enforcement action. None of these exceedances have occurred
since September 2007. The other listed exceedances, all for TSS, were deemed to be data
reporting errors. •
Regarding toxicity, the facility failed two toxicity tests during this renewal period. These
occurred in May 2006 and May 2009.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
Reasonable potential was assessed for toxicants to be discharged by this facility, based on
DMR and PPA data. Checks were made for the following four parameters: mercury, nickel,
copper, and zinc. No LTMP data was available, since there are no present SIUs. Results
indicated that there was a reasonable potential for three of the four parameters: mercury,
copper, and zinc. Copper and zinc are action level parameters and therefore will not be limited,
but will continue to be monitored. Nickel limits and monitoring will be eliminated from this
permit.
A large amount of mercury data was available for review, because of the present weekly
monitoring requirement. Overall, including all data beginning in 2006, reasonable potential is
still present. However, since September 2007, there have been no exceedances, and there is
no reasonable potential. Considering the clean record over the past 21 years, the monitoring
frequency was changed to monthly.
Summary of Proposed Changes
• Monthly composite sampling for TKN and Nitrite -Nitrate, the components of total nitrogen,
was added. This is in accordance with the strategy for Association -member renewals in the
Tar -Pamlico basin.
• Special condition A (3) for nutrient reductions was added. This change has been made in
the permit renewals for each member of the Tar -Pamlico Association. It includes the Phase
III nutrient caps as enforceable permit limits in each members' individual permit. These
limits, like the caps, apply to the aggregate discharge of nitrogen and phosphorus by the
Association members as a group.
• Standard TRC footnote was added, noting quantitation limit of 50 pg/L
• Monitoring for mercury was reduced from weekly to monthly.
• Nickel monitoring and limit eliminated due to lack of reasonable potential
Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
Draft Permit to Public Notice: May 12, 2010
Permit Scheduled to Issue: July, 2010
NPDES CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Gil Vinzani at [e-mail], or at [phone].
NAME:
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
(See attached)
DATE: 9 _2 9 _ 1
N1'1)I .ti '',(.0026(I42 Rcncv:a1

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Robersonville WWTP
NC0026042
Time Period 0
Ow (MGD) 1.8
7010S (cfs) 0.27
7010W (cfs) 0.73
3002 (cfs) 0
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 18
Reeving Stream Flat Swamp
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7010S 91.176
@ 7010W 79.261
@ 3002 WA
QA 13.42
Stream Class SC- Sw NSW
Outfall 001
Qw=1.8MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC Was/ *FAY/
Bark Andyn
Mt Max Pred av Allowable C4,
Arsenic
C
50
ug/L
0 0
WA
Acute: WA
Chronic:-- 373—•
_•—•—•—•—•—•—•-------------------
Beryllium
C
6.5
ug/L
0 Q
WA
Acute: N/A
Chronic: �48 —.
_.—_—.—.-------------------------
Cadmium
NC
2 15
ug/L
0 0
WA
Acute: 15
_
Chronic:--- 2---
----------------- — --- --------
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
0 0
WA
Acute: 1,022
_ _
Chronic:---55 --
-------------- — --- —---------
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
109 109
51.3---------------------
Acute: 7
_ _ _
RP Continue monitoimg this action level parameter
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
0 0
•
WA
Acute: 22
Chronic: •—• 5.—•
_•—•—.—•—•—•—•—•—•-------•-------
Fluoride
NC
1,800
ug/L
0 0
WA
Acute: N/A
_ _
Chronic:- 1,974 '
----------------- — --•---•---•—
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: 34
_ _
Chronc ---27 "II—
--------- — — — --- — ----------
-------
ALL I2414
Mercury
NC
12
2.0000
nail_
teo to
23.3000
Acute: WA
_ _
Chronic: - 13 -
RP; 180 data points; Keep limits and reduce monitoring
to m_nexonthtydue _to compliant past 30 months data
(see t entry)---- --------- —-------
..-0—..69..
Si Nev. rvr[i7
Mercury 1- 1
NC
12
2
ng/L
90 51
10.9
Acute: N/A
No RP for data since Oct 2007
-•-------------------------------
Nickel
NC
88 261
ugIL
200 6
19.6
Acute: 261
Chronic:---97 --
No RP; eliminate monitoimg and limit
-.-------------------------------
Phenols
A
1 N
ug4L
0 0
WA
Acute: N/A
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic: A /R-ui!
---------------------- -----
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
•
ug/L
0 0
WA
Acute: 56
Chronic:--- 5--.
_----•--------- --- - ----------
Silver
NC
I
0.06 AL 1.23
uglL
0 0
N/A
Acute: 1
---------------------------------
Zinc
NCI
I_•
50 AL 67
ugtL
105 105
67.7
Acute: 67
RP; continue monitoirng this action level parameter
—.—._.—.—•—.—.-----------------
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
•• Freshwater Discharge
Robersonville rpa 26042, rpa
6/29/2010

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Mercury
Mercury
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Date Data
Jan-2006
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63 Sept.2007
64
65
66
67
68
69
BDL=1/2DL Results
2.8 2.8 Std Dev.
16 16.0 Mean
4.7 4.7 C.V.
3.1 3.1 n
8.1 8.1
3.4 3.4 Mult Factor =
2.6 2 6 Max. Value
3.2 3.2 Max. Pred Cw
2.6 2.6
3.2 3.2
3.2 3.2
2.8 2.8
3.9 3.9
2.4 2.4
2.7 2.7
6.3 6.3
3.9 3.9
2.8 2.8
3.8 3.8
6.1 6.1
5.6 5.6
4.5 4.5
1 1.0
5.5 5.5
2.7 2.7
1.3 1.0
6.2 6.2
4.9 4.9
1 1.0
5.8 5.8
2.4 2.4
5 5.0
6.1 6.1
6.4 6.4
7.2 7.2
17.5 17.5
5.2 5.2
3.6 3.6
16.4 16.4
2.6 2.6
3.3 3.3
8.5 8.5
1 1.0
23.3 23.3
4.6 4.6
3.2 3.2
2.1 2.1
1.6 1.0
4.5 4.5
1 1.0
1.6 1.0
1.6 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1.3 1.0
2.6 2.6
2.2 2.2
1.7 1.0
1.2 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
14 14.0
8.2 8.2
1 1.0
1.7 1.0
1.4 1.0
2.2 2.2
1.1 1.0
3.1061
2.5129
1.2361
178
1.00
23.3 ng/L
23.3 ng/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15 7.1 7.1
16 1.9 1.0
17 3.1 3.1
18 5.4 5.4
19 1.1 1.0
20 3.1 3.1
21 2.1 2.1
22 1.2 1.0
23
24 3.3 3.3
25 2.1 2.1
26 - 2.3 2.3
27 - 1.6 1.0
28 1.2 1.0
29 14 1.0
30 2.1 2.1
31 2.1 2.1
32 < 1 1.0
33 < 1 1.0
34 < 1 1.0
35 < 1 1.0
36 <. 1 1.0
37 < • 1 1.0
38 < 1 1.0
39 1.4 1.0
40 < 1 1.0
41 1.5 1.0
42 < 1 1.0
43 < 1 1.0
44 2.4 2.4
45 1.6 1.0
46 <. 1 1.0
47 < 1 1.0
48 <' 1 1.0
49 < 1 1.0
50 < 1 1.0
51 <' 1 1.0
52 < 1 1.0
53 < 1 1.0
54 < 1 1.0
55 < 1 1.0
56 < 1 1.0
57 1.9 1.0
58 1.1 1.0
59 1.1 1.0
60 3.3 3.3
61 3.8 3.8
62 < 1 1.0
63 1.7 1.0
64 3.4 3.4
65 2.9 2.9
66 2.7 2.7
67 2.3 2.3
68 1,2 1.0
69 2.3 2.3
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
< 1 1.0 Std Dev. 1.03
1.7 1.0 Mean 1.51
1.4 1.0 C.V. 0.69
2.2 2.2 n 90
1.1 1.0
< 1 1.0 Mutt Factor = 1.5300
< 1 1.0 Max. Value 7.1 ng/L
1.5 1.0 Max. Pred Cw 10.9 ng/L
1.4 1.0
2.4 2.4
• 1 1.0
1.7 1.0
1.8 1.0
Robersonville rpa 26042, data
- 1 - 6/29/2010

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Nickel
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 < 10 5.0 Std Dev. 1.4674
2 < 10 5.0 Mean 5.2400
3 < 10 5.0 C.V. 0.2800
4 < 10 5.0 n 200
5 < 10 5.0
6 < 10 5.0 Mull Factor = 1.0900
7 < 10 5.0 Max. Value 18.0 ug/L
8 < 10 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 19.6 ug/L
9 < 10 5.0
10 <. 10 5.0
11 <: 10 5.0
12 <. 10 5.0
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
24 < 10 5.0
25 10 5.0
26 10 5.0
27 <' 10 5.0
28 <: 10 5.0
29 <r 10 5.0
30 r' 10 5.0
31 < 10 5.0
32 < 10 5.0
33 10 5.0
34 10 5.0
35 10 5.0
36 10 5.0
37 10 5.0
38 10 5.0
39 10 5.0
40 10 5.0
41 10 5.0
42 10 5.0
43 10 5.0
44 10 5.0
45 10 5.0
46 10 5.0
47 10 5.0
48 10 5.0
49 10 5.0
.
50 ==� 10 5.0
51 10 5.0
52 10 5.0
53 10 5.0
54 S 10 5.0
55 <; 10 5.0
56 < 10 5.0
57 <i 10 5.0
58 <s 10 5.0
59 <4 10 5.0
60 10 5.0
61 < 10 5.0
62 < 10 5.0
63 < 10 5.0
64 < 10 5.0
65 < 10 5.0
66 < 10 5.0
67 < 10 5.0
68 < 10 5.0
69 < 10 5.0
Robersonville rpa 26042, data
- 3 - 6/29/2010

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
5
Copper
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
11 11.0 Std Dev. 7.5614
Mean 13.9268
C.V. 0.5429
16 16.0 n 109
17 17.0
Mult Factor = 1.3500
15 15.0 Max. Value 38.0
13 13.0 Max. Pred Cw 51.3
14 14.0
12 12.0
18 18.0
15 15.0
38 38.0
20 20.0
16 16.0
16 16.0
14 14.0
29 29.0
21 21.0
34 34.0
17 17.0
13 13.0
13 13.0
11 11.0
13 13.0
16 16.0
12 12.0
25 25.0
12 12.0
25 25.0
21 21.0
12 12.0
14 14.0
12 12.0
15 15.0
Robersonville rpa 26042. data
- 1 - 6/29/2010

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
15
Zinc
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 15 15.0 Std Dev. 8.0855
2 Mean 23.2381
3 25 25.0 C.V. 0.3479
4 15 15.0 n 105
5 22 22.0
6 50 50.0 Mult Factor = 1.2300
7 23 23.0 Max. Value 55.0
8 Max. Pred Cw 67.7
9 17 17.0
10 15 15.0
11 21 21.0
12 18 18.0
13
14 15 15.0
15 33 33.0
16
17 30 30.0
18 16 16.0
19 24 24.0
20
21
22 16 16.0
23 35 35.0
24 20 20.0
25 12 12.0
26 11 11.0
27
28 13 13.0
29
30
31 21 21.0
32 13 13.0
33
34
35
36
37 17 17.0
38 22 22.0
39 35 35.0
40 35 35.0
41 29 29.0
42 31 31.0
43 14 14.0
44 19 19.0
45
46 16 16.0
Robersonville rpa 26042, data
- 1 - 6/29/2010

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: YES NO_X_
IF YES, SOC NO.
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attn: Gil Vinzani
Date: December 4, 2009
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Martin County
Permit No. NC0026042
PART I — GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Town of Robersonville Wastewater Treatment Plant
Martin County
P.O. Box 487
Robersonville, NC 27871
2. Date of Investigation: 11/20/2009
3. Report Prepared by: Kristin Jarman
4. Person(s) contacted and telephone number(s): Willie Andrews
Operator in Responsible Charge
[phone]
5. Directions to Site: From Hwy 11 North take Hwy y 903 North to Robersonville.
At the caution light turn left onto 3r1 Street. Go about 3/4 of a mile to Rogerson
Road and turn left. Approx. 1/4 of a mile turn left onto the first dirt road. Facility
is straight ahead.
6. Discharge Point:
001-- Latitude: 35° 48' 40"N Longitude: 77° 15' 30"W
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge
point on map.
USGS Quad. No. USGS Quad Name: Robersonville,West

7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain:
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): flat; approx. 14 meters above
sea level.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: Approx. 3/4 of a mile
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Flat Swamp Creek
a. Classification: C Sw NSW
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 03-03-06
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Flat
Swamp Creek is a low -flow creek tributary to Tranters Creek which
supports fishing, fish propagation -and the other uses of a class C stream.
PART II —DESCRIPTION OF DISCARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: 1.8 MGD Monthly Avg.
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater Treatment
facility? 1.8 MGD Monthly Avg.
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design capacity)?
1.8 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to
Construct issued in the previous two years:
NA
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed
wastewater treatment facilities:
Mechanical bar screen (out of service and can't be fixed, need a new one),
Influent pump station with 3 submersible pumps, Mechanical Grit
chamber (out of service, grit settles but can't be suctioned out), Anoxic
Basin, Dual oxidation ditches, 6 clarifiers, 4 Tertiary Filters (2 have
ruptured plates and facility is not using any of the filters because of the
way they are tied together), Intermediate pump station, 3 Chlorine Contact
Chambers, Dechlorination, Postaeration, Effluent flow meter, Aerated
sludge digester and holding tank.
Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities:
NA
f. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Chlorine Disinfection

g•
Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ permit no.
WQ0002897
Residuals Contractor:_ Town of Robersonville
Telephone No. : (252)-795-4558
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP x PFRP Other
c. Landfill: NA
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify): NA
e. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): Grade III
3. SIC Code: 4952, 2015
Wastewater Code of actual wastewater, not particular facilities.
001-- Primary_01_ Secondary _78
Main Treatment Unit Code: 10 7 3
PART III —OTHER PERTINTENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public
monies involved? (municipals only) NA
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None
3. Additional effluent limits requested: None
4. Other: None
PART IV —EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Washington Regional Office recommends that this permit be reissued. However, we
are instigating an enforcement against the Town due to the state of their equipment.
eport Preparer
Water a uality Regional Supervisor
-V-'?
Date

Vinzani, Gil
From: Jarman, Kristin
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:07 AM
To: Vinzani, Gil
Subject: Robersonville WWTP (NC0026042) Staff Report
Hi Gil,
Attached you will find the Robersonville WWTP Staff Report. I will also be writing up a Notice of Noncompliance
Inspection report and sending an enforcement action for failure to meet permit conditions (bypassing 3 treatment
units).
Thanks,
Kristin
Kristin Jarman
Environmental Senior Specialist
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington NC 27889
252-948-3918
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
1

NO
gown o/ of vr.lonuiL7E
May 28, 2009
Mr. Charles Weaver
NC DENR/DWQ/Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
P.O. BOX 487
ROBERSONVILLE, N. C. 27871
PHONE [phone]
Re: Request for Permit Renewal
NPDES Permit No. NC0026042
"" Town of Robersonville, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Enclosed please find one (1) original and two (2) copies of an application package requesting renewal of the NPDES
Permit for the Robersonville Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located in Robersonville, North Carolina. Each
application package contains the following:
1. EPA NPDES Form 1
2. EPA NPDES Form 2A
3. Topographic Site Map
4. Process Flow Schematic
5. Three (3) Priority Pollutant Analyses
6. Four (4) Chronic Toxicity Tests
7. Sludge Management Plan
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
- Sincerejy,
Ai8ifa,c)
hn Pritchard, Jr.
.. Town Manager
Enclosures
oak c: Charlie Davis, The Wooten Company
MO
JUN 0 1 2009
THE WOOTEN COMPANY

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Robersonville VIANTP, NC0026042
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Tar -Pamlico
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION. INFORMATION,.
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRAICERCLA WASTES .:
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. 0
b. Number of CIUs. 0
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: n/a
Mailing Address:
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
n/a
F.S. 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): n/a
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.
n/a gpd n/a continuous or n/a intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
n/a gpd n/a continuous or n/a intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits 0 Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes 0 No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
n/a
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 18 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Robersonville WWTP, NC0026042
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Tar -Pamlico
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 ® No If yes, describe each episode.
n/a
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 El No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck 0 Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
n/a
n/a
n/a
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. Describe 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).
n/a
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.)
n/a
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):
n/a
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
n/a
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

Oft
0.1
ORR
f a.°
TOWN OF ROBERSONVILLE WWTP
NPDES PERMIT NO. NCOO26O42
USGS QUAD:
ROBERSONVILLE WEST, NC - O35O77G3
ROBERSONVILLE EAST, NC - O35077G2
1 "-2000'-0"
2000' 1000'
0
2000'
Yse.1.mJ
r_r'1• N N {
it % 1 `";:
j Roberson+/ill
rTaJa�- -ti
Park _,
:M 27
SkAil04°
1
Sch-� • Y
■■ ...'•
,�' _.sue .e
• ,• r,�� 21.5.
EXHIBIT 3.2
THE WOOTEN COMPANY
ENGINEERING PLANNING ARCHITECTURE
120 North Boylan Avenue Raleigh NC 27603-1423
919.828.0531 fax [phone]
MAY 2009
•YUPotStt.W10i000l vv zS o 101118 AV

1 1 1
ROBERSONVILLE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
Permit No. NC0026042
INFLUENT
1.80
LAB./ ADMIN.
BUILDING
SLUDGE
LOADING STATION
INFLUENT
PUMP STATION
RECYCLE
PUMP STATION
FILTERS
SPLITTER
BOX —
OXIDATION
DITCH
OXIDATION
DITCH
RECYCLE
PUMP STATION
LJ
GRIT
REMOVAL 7
1.80
L
0.90
3.60
1.80
POST
AERATION
1.80
0.90 0.00
SLUDGE
HOLDING
BASIN
♦
•
•
•
EFFLUENT TO FLAT SWAMP CREEK
CHLORINATION/
DECHLORNATION
1.20
1.35
480
FILTER
INTERMED.
LIFT PUMP —
STATION
CLARIFIER
1.80
rL ------- WASTE SLUDGE
I � }
\ ANAEROBIC
& ANOXIC
BIOREACTORS
(
1.80
CHLORINE
CONTACT
CHAMBER
AEROBIC SLUDGE
DIGESTERS
SLUDGE
LOADING PUMP
SLUDGE RECIRCULATION
r
J

1001
Sludge Management Plan
Town of Robersonville Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0026042
Non -Discharge Permit No. WQ0002897
The Town of Robersonville operates a 1.80 mgd modified biological nutrient removal (BNR)
plant which discharges its effluent into the Flat Swamp Creek in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin
under NPDES Permit No. NC0026042. Waste sludge from the BNR System is pumped to two
(2) aerated sludge basins for long term stabilization and storage prior to disposal by land
application. Periodically, supernatant from the sludge stabilization/storage basins is withdrawn
and recycled back to the headworks for processing.
The stabilized sludge that meets pollutant limits and Class B pathogen reduction and vector
attraction reduction requirements is disposed of in accordance with Non -Discharge Permit No.
WQ0002897. The Class B pathogen reduction requirement is met using Alternatives 1 and 3, and
the vector attraction reduction requirement is met using Option 9. Pathogen reduction is verified
through in-house monitoring of fecal coliform bacteria. Sludge is land applied on one (1) field
totaling 34.6 acres.