NC0072575_Fact Sheet_20210126

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO072575
Permit Writer/Email Contact Julia Byrd, julia.byrd(ancdenr.gov
Date: September 1, 2020
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Complex Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑X Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Pilgrim's Pride Sanford Processing Plant
Applicant Address:
484 Zimmerman Road Sanford, NC 27330
Facility Address:
484 Zimmerman Road Sanford, NC 27330
Permitted Flow:
1.0 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
Minor Industrial
Facility Class:
Class III
Treatment Units:
Mechanically cleaned bar screen, 0.35 flow equalization, DAF
pretreatment, 17 MG anaerobic lagoon with methane flare, 2.5 MG
activated sludge basin, 0.5 MG clarifier with RAS pumps, tertiary
filtration, 14 MG emergency storage lagoon, chlorine contact basin, de -
chlorination contact chamber, Parshall flume. 0.1 MG solids storage tank
with WAS pumps for transfer to belt filter press, dewatered solids are
disposed offsite to a landfill
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
No
County:
Lee
Region
Raleigh
Page 1 of 11

Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background.- Pilgrim's Pride Corporation
operates a poultry processing plant in Sanford, NC. The facility receives and processes approximately
670,000 live poultry per week, 888,251 pounds per day, to various poultry meat products. Company
vehicles and equipment are maintained at a shop located on site. The Permittee is a member of the Upper
Cape Fear Basin Association. In March 2016, Pilgrim's Pride Corp Sanford Plant applied for an NPDES
permit renewal at 1.0 MGD.
Wastewater is generated from various poultry processing operations, boiler and condenser blow down,
maintenance activities, and storm water; and treated in an advance biological treatment system before
discharge to Outfall 001 to the Deep River. Sanitary wastewater is treated and disposed under Non -
Discharge permit WQ0028653. The facility is subject to federal effluent guidelines CFR 40 Section 432
Subpart K Poultry First Processing and Subpart L Poultry Further Processing.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 — Deep River
Stream Segment:
17-(38.7)
Stream Classification:
C
Drainage Area (m12):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
17
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
32
30Q2 (cfs):
-
Average Flow (cfs):
1240
IWC (% effluent):
9.0%
303(d) listed/parameter:
No
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
Yes- Statewide Mercury TMDL implementation.
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC:
Cape Fear; Outfall 001: 03-06-11; HUC: 03030003
USGS Topo Quad:
E22SW Colon, NC
Page 2 of 11

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of January 2016 through January 2020.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Permit
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Limit
Flow
MGD
0.65
1.49
0.01
MA 1.0
mg/1
2.27
15.2
2.00
(April 1- October 31)
MA 5.0
mg/1
2.25
7.1
2.00
(November 1- March 31)
MA 10.0
mg/1
0.14
1.17
0.10
DM 2.0
(April 1- October 31)
MA 1.0
mg/1
0.133
1.4
0.10
MA
(November 1- March 31)
2.0 .0
DM 30.0
TSS
mg/1
2.5
14.8
2.5
MA 20.0
pH
SU
7.2
8.2
6.0
6.0 < pH <
9.0
Oil and Grease
mg/L
5.1
65.0
<5
DM 14.0
MA 8.0
(geometric)
Fecal coliform
4/100 ml
13.9
1200
< 1
DM 400
MA 200
Dissolved Oxygen
mg/1
7.65
11.6
5.1
DA >6.0
DM 28.0
Total Residual Chlorine
µg/1
20.1
195
<20
(< 50
compliance)
Monitor
Temperature
°C
22.0
31.9
6.2
Only
DM 147.0
Total Nitrogen
mg/1
79.2
159.0
7.4
MA 103.0
Monitor
Nitrate/Nitrite Nitrogen
mg/1
79.1
158.0
34.6
1/Month
Monitor
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
mg/1
1.4
11.1
0.1
1/Month
Monitor
Total Phosphorus
mg/1
14.17
45.6
0.4
1/Month
Monitor
Chronic Toxicity
Pass/fail
pass
1/Quarter
MA -Monthly Average, DM -Daily Maximum
Page 3 of 11

4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/1 of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also Monitoring
Coalitions established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case
instream monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action:
The current permit requires instream monitoring for dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, fecal coliform,
and conductivity upstream and downstream of the primary outfall. The Permittee is a member of the Upper
Cape Fear River Association (UCFRA) and the current permit includes a waiver based on this membership.
Instream data were reviewed from the two UCFRA for monitoring stations, upstream (B5685000) and
downstream (B5820000) of the outfall, from January 2016 through December 2019. Average monthly and
maximum day of the required parameters are summarized in the table below.
No changes are proposed to the provisional waiver based on the Permittee's membership with UCFRA; and
nutrient reopener, special condition A. (3) will continue.
Table 2. Instream Ambient Monitoring Station Data Summary
Parameter
Units
Upstream
B5685000
Downstream
B5820000
Average
Max
Min
Average
Max
Min
Temperature
°C
20.5
31.9
2.8
20.4
31.7
2.6
Dissolved Oxygen
mg/l
7.2
11.7
3.8
7.1
12.3
3.2
Conductivity
µmohs/cm
133.1
250.0
63
149.8
305
67
Fecal Coliform
(geo mean)
#/100mL
91
11,800
11
104
8,200
13
Student t-tests were run at a 95% confidence internal to analyze relationships between instream samples. A
statistically significant difference is determined when the t-test p-values result is <0.05.
Instream temperatures did not exceed 32 degrees Celsius during the period of data review, the temperature
differential exceeded 2.8 degrees Celsius on twenty-seven occasions, with a mean increase downstream of
0.22 degrees Celsius [per 15 A NCAC 02B .0211(18)]. However, the results of statistical analysis showed
no significant difference between upstream and downstream temperatures. The current monitoring
requirements and limits will continue.
Downstream DO levels were below 5 mg/L on thirteen occasions [per 15 A NCAC 02B .0211(6)1; and
upstream DO was below 5 mg/L on seven occasions. The mean difference in DO levels indicate a decrease
of 0.28 mg/L downstream. However, it was concluded that no statistically significant difference exists
between upstream and downstream DO. The current monitoring requirements and limits will continue.
Based on results of statistical analysis it was concluded that conductivity levels upstream and downstream
are significantly different with a mean increase of 17.8 umhos/cm downstream. The current permit includes
only monitoring is required for instream conductivity and will continue.
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (YIN): Yes
Name of Monitoring Coalition: Upper Cape Fear River Basin Association
Page 4 of 11

5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years)
The Permittee has received 25 notices of violation between January 1, 2015 and August 31, 2020 for
exceedances of daily maximum and monthly average permitted effluent limits. In January and March 2015
the facility reported a total of 7 violations daily maximum and monthly average effluent ammonia; and a
total of 3 violations for effluent total nitrogen. In 2015 a Special Order of Consent (SOC) agreement was
initiated in response to the Permittee's consistent non-compliance with the final effluent limits for Total
Nitrogen (TN) and Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) which stipulated that Pilgrim's Progress would complete
activities to implement treatment upgrades to adequately treat wastewater. Interim limits were established
under the SOC which allowed less stringent final effluent limits for daily maximum and monthly average
TN and NH3-N from April 1 to October 31. Winter limits were not changed under the SOC.
In 2015 there were six effluent dissolved oxygen concentrations, six fecal coliform values, and two total
suspended solids concentrations reported in the DMRs which proceeded to notices of violation. In January
2016, the Permittee reported one day of total residual chlorine of 195µg/L which resulted in a notice of
violation. Since 2016, there have been no reported violations of permitted effluent limits; however, the
Permittee received one notice of frequency violation in July 2019 specified for fecal coliform.
Pilgrim's Progress completed an investigation of treatment units; a feasibility study for transferring
wastewater to the City of Sanford's wastewater treatment plant; and a Solids Management Plan. The SOC
expired on September 15, 2017 Pilgrim's Pride has remained in compliance with the current permit.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 29 of 29 quarterly chronic toxicity tests January 2016 to January 2020.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The facility was last inspected for
compliance on 11/20/2018 during which the operators were found to be adding chlorine tablets in the
clarifier for the intended use of controlling excessive algal growth. Examination of the label confirmed that
the chlorine tablets are not to be used for treatment of algae in an industrial wastewater setting. The report
notes the tablets must be removed and an appropriate method of algae control could be utilized. Effluent at
the outfall had an apparent brown tint but was free of solids and foam.
With the exceptions mentioned above, the facility was found to be operating in compliance with the current
permit and upgrades completed during the SOC were operating as intended for additional TN removal.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and MixingZones
ones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with I5A NCAC 2B. 0204(b): NA
Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD= 30 mg/1 for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Page 5 of 11

Ifpermit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed.- Limitations for BOD5,
Ammonia (NH3-N), and Dissolve Oxygen (DO) were defined in 1996 to meet waste load requirements. The
BOD5 and NH3-N limits in the current permit are more stringent that the federal effluent guidelines.
No changes are proposed.
Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/1(summer) and 1.8 mg/1(winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 ug/1) and capped at 28 ug/1 (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/1 are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The current permit
sets a maximum of 28 ug/L for TRC. Seasonal limits for ammonia are currently 1.0 mg/L and 2.0 mg/L for
monthly average and daily maximum, respectively from April Ito October 31; and 2.0 mg/L and 4.0 mg/L
for monthly average and daily maximum, respectively from November 1 to March 31.
TRC and ammonia limits were reviewed in the attached WLA and are consistent with the current limits.
No changes are proposed.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of '/2 detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between April 2016 and
October 2020. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water
quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for this
permit:
Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria: None
Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria, but
the maximum predicted concentration was >50% of the allowable concentration: None
No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria
and the maximum predicted concentration was <50% of the allowable concentration: Total
arsenic, phenols, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, selenium, zinc.
• See attached RPA report
Page 6 of 11

Toxici , Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: The current permit requires quarterly monitoring and testing
for chronic toxicity at effluent concentration of 9%. No changes are proposed
Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a waste
load allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year) and is applicable to municipals and industrial
facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point sources (-2%
of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source control.
Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (>1 ng/1) will receive an MMP
requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case -by -case basis, depending if mercury is a pollutant of
concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed the WQBEL
value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/1) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value of 47 ng/1
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: The permittee is required to perform at
least one effluent mercury analysis using EPA Method 1631E (low-level mercury analysis) within the first
six months of the effective date of the reissued permit. Results will be submitted using the eDMR reporting
system. The special condition notes the permit can be reopened and modified to include additional mercury
monitoring and limitations if effluent mercury shows reasonable potential to exceed water quality standards.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TNDDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation
within this permit:
Per 15A NCAC 0213.0508, the minimum requirements for facilities classified as SIC 2000-2199, and
discharge more than 50,000 gpd to the Cape Fear River Basin, include quarterly monitoring of effluent total
nitrogen (NO3 + NO2 + TKN) and phosphorous (P). The current permit includes monthly monitoring of
effluent phosphorous total nitrogen which were provisionally waived due to membership on the UCFRMA.
Additional Nutrient Monitoring Requirements were implemented per 15A NCAC 02H.0211(b)(1) and
02H.0114(a) which stipulates the Director of DWR to reopen a permit to require supplemental nutrient
monitoring of the discharge. Monitoring for total phosphorous (TP), total nitrogen (TN), total Kjeldahl
nitrogen (TKN), and Nitrate Nitrite (NO3+NO2) nitrogen increased to weekly starting April 1, 2019 and
lasting through December 31,2020. Monitoring results shall be submitted in the DMRs. Nutrient monitoring
shall revert back to previous requirements starting January 1, 2021.
No changes are proposed, the current monitoring reopener will continue until expiration and nutrient re -
opener special condition A. (3) will be included in new permit.
Page 7 of 11

Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: N/A
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody: N/A
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H 0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: N/A
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B. 0226 for this permit renewal: N/A
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Describe what this facility produces: Live poultry processing and poultry products
List the federal effluent limitations guideline (ELG) for this facility: Federal guideline 40 CFR 432 Subpart
K First Processing and Subpart L Poultry Further Processing are applicable to the facility which is an
existing source, discharges process wastewater resulting from the slaughter of poultry, further processing,
and rendering of material. The effluent limits in both sub -categories, summarized below, are equivalent.
40 CFR 432 Subpart K/L Effluent Limits
Parameter Maximum Daily'
Maximum Monthly Average'
BPT
Ammonia (as N)
8.0
4.0
BOD5
26
16
Fecal Coliform
(2)
(1)
O&G (as HEM)
14
8.0
TSS
30
20
BAT
Ammonia (as N)
8.0
4.0
Total Nitrogen
147
103
lmgA- (ppm)
2 Maximum of 400 MPN or CFU per 100 mL at anytime
'No maximum monthly average limitation
If the ELG is based on production or flow, document how the average production/flow value was calculated:
Subpart K applies to any existing point source that slaughters more than 100 million pounds per year
(LWK), and Subpart L applies to an existing point source in this category which processes more than 7
million pounds per year (finished product). Per the 2016 renewal application, facility receives and
slaughters approximately 888,251 pounds/day of live birds; and produces approximately 760,000 pounds/
day of finished product. Based on the production rate of approximately 324 million pounds per year of live
birds slaughtered and approximately 277 million pounds per year of finished production, the facility meets
the criteria specified in both Subpart K and L. The ELGs are based on pollutant concentration and applied
to the combined waste streams.
If any limits are based on best professional judgement (BPJ), describe development: No
Document any TBELs that are more stringent than WQBELs: NA
Document any TBELs that are less stringent than previous permit: NA
Page 8 of 11

8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: NA
9. Antibacksliding Review
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YESINO): NO
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated. NA
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 213.0500; 2) NPDES
Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance, Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti -backsliding
prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective December
21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
electronically. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional NPDES
reports electronically effective December 21, 2020, EPA is proposing to extend this deadline from
December 21, 2020, to December 21, 2025. This permit contains the requirements for electronic reporting,
consistent with Federal requirements. The current compliance date will be extended if the implementation
date is extended as a final regulation change in the federal register.
Page 9 of 11

12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
A. Table. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 1.0 MGD
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 1.0 MGD
No change
15A NCAC 2B .0505
BOD5
Summer:
No change
WQBEL. Based on 1997 for protection of DO
MA 5.0 mg/L
standard. 15A NCAC 2B
DM 10.0 mg/L
Winter:
MA 10.0 mg/L
DM20.Om /L
NH3-N
Summer:
No change
WQBEL. Based on 1997 for protection of DO
MA 1.0 mg/L
standard. 15A NCAC 2B
DM 2.0 mg/L
Winter:
MA 2.0 mg/L
DM 4.0 m /L
TSS
MA 20 mg/L
No change
TBEL. 40 CFR 432 Subpart L /15A NCAC
DM 30 mg/L
2B .0406
Oil and Grease
MA 8.0 mg/L
No Change
TBEL.40 CFR 432 Subpart L /WQBEL 15A
DM 14.0 mg/L
NCAC 2B
Fecal coliform
MA 200 /100ml
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
DM 400 /100ml
DO
> 6 mg/L
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Total Residual
DM 28 ug/L
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Chlorine (TRC)
pH
6.0 — 9.0 SU
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Total Nitrogen
MA 103 mg/L
No change
TBEL. 40 CFR 432 Subpart L
DM 147 mg/L
Nitrate/Nitrite
Monitor Only
No Change
Per Cape Fear River Basin nutrient strategy
Nitrogen
Total Kjeldahl
Monitor Only
No Change
Per Cape Fear River Basin nutrient strategy
Nitrogen
Total
Monitor Only
No change
Surface Water Monitoring, required per 15A
Phosphorus
NCAC 0213.0500 SIC 2000-2199
Chronic
Chronic (a, 9%
No change
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts. 15A
Toxicity
effluent
NCAC 2B
Total Hardness
No requirement
Quarterly monitoring
Hardness -dependent dissolved metals water
U and E
quality standards 2016
Total Mercury
No requirement
Once within six
Hardness -dependent dissolved metals water
months of issuance
quality standards 2016
Fecal Coliform
Monitor Only
No Change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Temperature
Monitor Only
No Change
Surface Water Monitoring, required per 15A
NCAC 0213.0500 SIC 2000-2199
Conductivity
Monitor Only
No Change
Surface Water Monitoring, required per 15A
NCAC 0213.0500 SIC 2000-2199
Electronic
Required
No Change
US EPA Electronic Reporting Rule 2015
Reporting
MGD — Million gallons per day, DM — Daily Max U- Upstream, D-Downstream, E-Effluent
Page 10 of 11

13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 0112612021
Per 15A NCAC 21-1.0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the parry filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.
14. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): NO
If Yes, list changes and their basis below: NA
15. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• Dissolved Metals Implementation Freshwater
• NH3-N, TRC, and Fecal Coliform Waste load allocation summary
• Monitoring and Limits Violations summary
• Form 1 Application addendum
Page 11 of 11

Pilgrim's Pride Corp Sanfornd
NCO072575
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Outfall 001
Qw = 1 MGD
Qw (MGD) =
1.0000
1Q10S (cfs) =
14.05
7Q10S (cfs) =
17.00
7Q10W (cfs) =
32.00
30Q2 (cfs) =
NO 30Q2 DATA
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) =
1240.00
Receiving Stream:
Deep River HUC 03030003
WWTP/WTP Class
IWC% @ 1Q10S =
IWC% @ 7Q10S =
IWC% @ 7Q10W =
IWC% @ 30Q2 =
IW%C @ QA =
Stream Class
Minor Industrial
9.935897436
8.355795148
4.619970194
N/A
0.124843945
C
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 63.18 mg/L
Chronic = 57.95 mg/L
PARAMETER
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
J
Cn
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE
IL
H
z
Applied
Chronic Acute
n 4 Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Standard
Acute (FW): 3,421.9
Arsenic
C
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
ug/L
4 0
0.1
Chronic (FW): 1,795.2--
---------------------------------
C.V. (default)
Max 0.1
Arsenic
C
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
Note: n < 9
NO DETECTS
_MDL _=
Chronic (HH): 8,010.0
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Limited data set
Max MDL = 0.1
Acute: 654.19
Beryllium
NC
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
ug/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:------
---------------------------------
77.79---
Acute: 73.212
Cadmium
NC
1.1135 FW(7Q10s) 7.2743
ug/L
0 0
N/A
------13.32E--
---Chronic:
--------------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides
NC
230 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:----- 2,752.E--
---------------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
1 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
------IWC?---
---Chronic:
---------------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
300 A(30Q2)
ug/L
4 0
0.1
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: IWC?
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 0.1
Acute: 19,463.9
Chromium III
NC
234.3799 FW(7Q10s) 1933.9167
µg/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:----- 2,805.0--
---------------------------------
Acute: 161.0
Chromium VI
NC
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
µg/L
0 0
N/A
-------131.E---
---Chronic:
---------------------------------
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
4 0
0.1
Max reported value = 0.05
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 0.1
Acute: 252.45
Copper
NC
16.1639 FW(7Q10s) 25.0832
ug/L
4 4
84.43
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 193.45
RP= No, max predicted <50% of Allowable CW - NO
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
monitoring required
Acute: 221.4
Cyanide
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
10
ug/L
0 0
N/A
-------59.8 ---
---Chronic:
---------------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride
NC
1800 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:----- 21,541.9 -
--------------------------------
Acute: 2,136.494
Lead
NC
7.5195 FW(7Q10s) 212.2799
ug/L
4 0
0.130
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 89.992
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 0.1
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury
NC
12 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
1 0
1.6
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 143.6
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 0.5
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum
NC
2000 HH(7QIOs)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:----- -
---------------------------------
23,935.5
Acute (FW): 7,391.4
Nickel
NC
75.8211 FW(7Q10s) 734.4058
µg/L
4 0
0.1
Chronic (FW):---- 907.4---
---------------------------------
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Max 0.1
Nickel
NC
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
µg/L
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
_MDL _=
Chronic (WS): 299.2
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Max MDL =0.1
Acute: 563.6
Selenium
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
ug/L
4 0
0.1
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 59.8
RP = No detects, no monitoring required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 0.1
Acute: 14.695
Silver
NC
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 1.4601
ug/L
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:------ 0.718---
--------------------------------
Acute: 2,775.2
Zinc
NC
258.3733 FW(7Q10s) 275.7386
ug/L
3 3
210.0
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 3,092.1
No RP, Predicted Max <50% of Allowable Cw - No
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
monitoring required
Acute:
0 0
N/A
--------------------
Chronic:
--------------------------------
Acute:
0 0
N/A
- --------------
Chronic:
--------------------------------
Acute:
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:-------------
---------------------------------
Acute:
0 0
N/A
---Chronic:-------------
---------------------------------
72575- RPA, rpa
Page 1 of 6 12/4/2020

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
Pilgrim's Pride Corp Sanfornd
Minor Industrial
NCO072575
001
1.000
Deep River
03030003
C
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q10w (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
1 Q10s (cfs)
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
Combined Hardness Chronic
Combined Hardness Acute
17.00
32.00
1240.00
14.05
I _ _ ` 361.2 mg/L (Avg)
_ _ _ _ - 30.3 mg/L (Avg)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 57_95 mg/L
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 63_18 mg/L
Data Source(s)
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06E
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Name was Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Arsenic
Aquactic Life
C
150
FW
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Human Health
Water Supply
C
10
HH/WS
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Life
NC
6.5
FW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Life
NC
1.1135
FW
7.2743
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
mg/L
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
234.3799
FW
1933.9167
ug/L
Chromium VI
Aquatic Life
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aquatic Life
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
16.1639
FW
25.0832
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Aquatic Life
NC
1,800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
7.5195
FW
212.2799
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
75.8211
FW
734.4058
pg/L
Nickel
Water Supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
56
ug/L
Silver
Aquatic Life
NC
0.06
FW
1.4601
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
258.3733
FW
275.7386
ug/L
72575- RPA, input
12/4/2020

Monitoring Frequencies
2B .0500 Effluent Limited
pH E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
Temp, C E 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
BOD5 I, E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
TSS I, E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
NH3-N E 1/Month 2/Month 1/Week
3/Week
Fecal Col. E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
TN E See notes below.
TP E See notes below.
Water Quality Limited
Frequency
Parameter Location Class I Class II Class III
Class IV
D.O. E 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
D.O. U, D 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week*
3/Week*
pH E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
Temp, C E Daily Daily Daily
Daily
Temp, C U, D 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week*
3/Week*
BOD5 I, E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
TSS I, E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
NH3-N E 1/Month 2/Month 1/Week
3/Week
TRC E 2/Week 2/Week 3/Week
Daily
Fecal Col. E 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
Fecal Col. U, D 2/Month 1/Week 3/Week*
3/Week*
Conductivii E 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week
Daily
Conductivii U, D 1/Week 1/Week 3/Week*
3/Week*
TN E See notes below.
TP E See notes below.
Notes:
* Upstream and downstream monitoring in WQ-limited waters is to be conducted
3/Week during Jun, Jul, Aug, and Sep; and 1/Week during
the rest of the year.
TN, TP Monitoring
All facilities >= 0.05 MGD will monitor TN and TP
Those < 0.05 MGD will monitor if discharging to NSW
For the Neuse, Tar -Pamlico, and any other river basins
classified as NSW, use limits
and monitoring requirements according to the basin's
permitting strategy.
For French Broad, Broad, Savannah, New Watauga, Little Tennessee, and Hiwassee:
- >= 0.05 M(- monitor semi-annually
- >= 1.0 MG - monitor quarterly
For all other river basins:
- >= 0.05 M(- monitor quarterly
- >= 1.0 MG - monitor monthly
Msg00
< No Data Entered >
NO DATA
Msg01
MaxPredCw < Acute
MONITOR?
Msg02
MaxPredCw < Chronic
MONITOR?
Msg03
MaxPredCw « Acute
REMOVE?
Msg04
MaxPredCw « Chronic
REMOVE?
Msg05
MaxPredCw > Acute
DAILY MAX LIMIT?
Msg06
MaxPredCw > Chronic
MO AVG LIMIT?
Msg07
MaxPredCw » Acute
DAILY MAX LIMIT?
Msg08
MaxPredCw » Chronic
MO AVG LIMIT?
Msg09
No acute standard or 1/2 FAV
N/A
Msg10
No chronic standard or criterion
N/A
Per Memo Dated 7-15-2010
RPA Condition
Permit Monitoring Frequency
1.RPA Exists
Monitor Monthh, and add Permit Limit
2.RPA Exists but Action Levels (Cu. Zn, Ag ,Fe, Cl)
Monitor Quarterly in conjunction v6th Tox Test
3a.RPA Exists but Dataset Limited (n< S samples)
3b. RPA exists, dataset limited, but `' values >
allo%viable C"-
Monitor Quarterly
MDrjitDr Monthly and add Permit Limit
4.No RPA (Predicted Max > 50% of Allowable)
Monitor Quarterl (or defer to Pretreat LTMP)
S,No RPA (Predicted Max < 50% Allo-wable)
No Monitoring
6a,No Data (Ne"- Permit, Ne"- Waste Stream)
6b, Ne"- Greensand or Conventional WTP
Monitor Monthly for Toxic Pollutants of Concern
Monitor Quarterly for Toxic Pollutants of Concern
password all sheets = rpa2017
4/28/16: Note Action Level designation no longer allowed per EPA.
11/20/17 Chlorides still listed as have action levels but will be coorected at next EPA review
Sample recommendations:
Daily max limit
Monitor 1/month
Monitor 1/week
Monitor 2/month
Monitoring not necessary in permit
No limit
No limit - assuming no tox (Action Level parameter)
No limit (Action Level parameter)
Continue to monitor at 2/month
Mo. avg. limit (keep wk. avg. if existing)
Revise daily max. limit

Date: 12/4/2020
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
Do NOT enter any data directly into this spreadsheet.
Enter data onto "Table 1" under the Input Sheet and enter
"Effluent Hardness" under the Data Sheet.
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.45 (c ), permits are, have and
must be written as total metals.
FACILITY: Pilgrim's Pride Corp Sanfornd Outfall 001
NPDES PERMIT: NCO072575
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
In accordance with Federal Regulations, permit limitations must be written as Total Metals per 40 CFR 122.45(c)
This calculator has been inserted into the RPA to calculate
Total Metal allowable allocations once Table 1 has been
completed (Input Sheet) and Effluent hardness has been
entered (Data Sheet).
1) Following the spreadsheet from left to right.
First the allowable allocations for the dissolved metals
PARAMETER
will appear for all the metals listed once Table 1 is
complete and effluent hardness entered. Use a default
Cadmium (d)
value of 25 mg/L if no hardness data is available.
Cd -Trout streams
Second, the Dissolved Metal allocations are divided by
the Translators to determine the Total Metals that can be
allocated to the Permittee. These Total Metals values are
Chromium III (d)(h)
Chromium VI (d)
Chromium, Total (t)
Copper (d)(h)
automatically inserted into Table 2 and are the allowable
Lead (d)(h)
Total Metal allocations determined for the Permittee
Nickel (d)(h)
prior to allowing for dilution. See Input sheet Table 2. The
final acute and chronic values shown under the RPA sheet
Ni - WS streams (t)
(d)( h,acute)
Zinc Silver (d)(
are the Total Metal values listed in Table 2 divided by the
acute and chronic IWC, respectively.
Beryllium
Arsenic (d)
2) The Translators used in the freshwater RPA are the
Partition Coefficients published by US EPA in 1984. They
Receiving
Receiving
Rec. Stream
NPDES Total Suspended
Combined
Combined
Instream
Instream Effluent
Stream
Stream
Solids
Hardness
Hardness
Wastewater
Upstream
Wastewater Hardness
summer
summer 7Q10
1 Q10
Flow Limit
-Fixed Value-
chronic
Acute
Concentration
ConcentratiHardness on Average
7Q10 (CFS)
(MGD)
[MGD]
[MGD] (mg/L)
1.0000 10
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(Chronic)
Avera
(Acute) ge (mg/L) (mg/L)
9.9359 30.3 361.2
17.0000
10.9677
9.0645
57.949
63.178
8.3558
after applying hardness I Translators- using
equation
Default Partition
Coefficients
(streams)
Chronic Acute
[ug/1] [ug/1]
0.28 1.84
0.252
0."1391
0.252
0.202
1.000
0.348
"139
0.184
0.432
0.061 1.461 1.
74_11�791 0.
6.51 651 1.000
1501 3401 1.000
Upstream Hard Avg (mg/L) = 30.3
EFF Hard Avg (mg/L) = 361.2
Total Metal Criteria Total Metal = (COMMENTS (identify parameters to PERCS Branch to maintain in facility's LTMP/STMP):
Dissolved Metal = Translator
Chronic I Acute I
1.111
7.27
1.11;
4.52
234.38;
1933.92
11.00;
16.00
N/A1
N/A
16.16;
25.08
212.28
-7.521
75.8211734.41
25
N/A
0.061
1.46
258.37
275.74
6.51 j 65
1501 9r340
(d) = dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
are TSS dependent equations and can be found listed (h) = hardness -dependent dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
with the WQS hardness dependent equations under the (t) = based upon measurement of total recoveable metal. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
sheet labeled Equations. A fixed TSS value of 10 mg/L is The Human Health standard for Nickel in Water Supply Streams is 25 mg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.
used to calculate the Translator values. The Human Health standard for Arsenic is 10 µg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.
3) Pretreatment Facilities - PERCS will need a copy of the
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator spreadsheet and the
RPA sheet along with the Final Permit. Pretreatment
Facilities are required to renew their Headwords Analysis
after renewal of their permits. Since all their metal
allocations are likely to change PERCS needs to see any
new metal permit limits and the allowable allocations for
the dissolved metals to assess Maximum Allowable
Headworks Loading (MAHL) numbers for each metal
based on the Combined Hardness values used in the
permit writers RPA calculations.
4) For Cadmium, Lead, Nickel, Chromium and Beryllium, if
all the effluent sampling data for the last three to five
years shows the pollutant at concentrations less than the
Practical Quantitative Level (PQL), it is not likely a limit or
monitoring will be put in the permit. However, if the
estimated NPDES permit limit is less than the Practical
Quantitative Limit (particularly, Cadmium and Lead) and
the pollutant is believed to be present, to assess
compliance with the new standards and for future permit
limit development, monitoring for the pollutant will be
required. If the facility is monitoring for the pollutant in
its Pretreatment LTMP, no monitoring is needed in the
permit.
ACAH 63.17788
ACCH 57.94933

Permit No. NC0072575
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard (WQS) Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6, 2016, with some exceptions. Therefore, metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6, 2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards - as
approved.
Table 1. NC Dissolved Metals Water Quality Standards/Aquatic Life Protection
Parameter
Acute FW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Chronic FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Acute SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic SW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Arsenic
340
150
69
36
Beryllium
65
6.5
---
---
Cadmium
Calculation
Calculation
40
8.8
Chromium III
Calculation
Calculation
---
---
Chromium VI
16
11
1100
50
Copper
Calculation
Calculation
4.8
3.1
Lead
Calculation
Calculation
210
8.1
Nickel
Calculation
Calculation
74
8.2
Silver
Calculation
0.06
1.9
0.1
Zinc
Calculation
Calculation
90
81
Table 1 Notes:
FW= Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
Calculation = Hardness dependent standard
Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary to
evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC 213.0200
(e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/l for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at 1.8 mg/L
for aquatic life protection).
Table 2. Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness -Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph (11)(d)
Metal
NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium, Acute
WER* 11.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^ f 0.9151 [In hardness]-3.1485 }
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9151[1n hardness]-3.6236}
Cadmium, Chronic
WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)1 e^{0.7998[ln hardness]-4.44511
Chromium III, Acute
WER*0.316 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.72561
Chromium III, Chronic
WER*0.860 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.68481
Copper, Acute
WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.7001
Copper, Chronic
WER*0.960 e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.7021
Lead, Acute
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)1 • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-1.4601
Lead, Chronic
WER* {1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)1 • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-4.7051
Nickel, Acute
WER*0.998 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.2551
Nickel, Chronic
WER*0.997 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.05841
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO072575
Silver, Acute
WER*0.85 • e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.591
Silver, Chronic
Not applicable
Zinc, Acute
WER*0.978 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.8841
Zinc, Chronic
WER*0.986 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.8841
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness -dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness -based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream (upstream) hardness
and so must be calculated case -by -case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge -specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal (more on that
below), but it is also possible to consider case -specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WOBELs for Hardness -Dependent Metals - Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations, based on applicable
standards and the critical low -flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value (chronic or acute), the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard, which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present (i.e. consistently below
detection level), then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
1. To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness -dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q10 (the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1 Q 10 using the formula 1 Q 10 = 0.843 (s7Q 10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site -specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness -dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge, the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream) hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values, upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available, the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L (CaCO3 or (Ca + Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L, respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness -dependent metal showing reasonable
potential, the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site -specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO072575
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
_ (Permitted Flow, cfs *Avg. Effluent Hardness, ma/L) + (s7Q10, cfs *Avs4. Upstream Hardness, m�4/L)
(Permitted Flow, cfs + s7Q 10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the 1Q10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal, using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients (DPCs) or site -specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the "Fraction Dissolved" converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in -stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-B-96-007, June 1996) and the
equation:
_Cdiss - I
Ctotal I + f [Kpo] [ss(i+a)] [10 6]
Where:
ss = in -stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1], minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a = constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness -dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient (or
site -specific translator) to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases, where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist (le. silver), the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals. For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca = (s7010 + Qw) (Cwgs) - (s7010) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca = allowable effluent concentration (µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs = NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria (µg/L or mg/L)
Cb = background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw = permitted effluent flow (cfs, match s7Q10)
s7Q10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q10 may be incorporated as applicable:
IQIO = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0072575
QA = used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2 = used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application (40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations, the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit (Total allowable
concentration) is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate, permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10, 2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure, total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases, the projected maximum concentration (95th %) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness -dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter
Value
Comments (Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness (mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or (Ca+Mg)]
400.00
Maximum value, average effluent
hardness exceeds 400 mg/L
Average Upstream Hardness (mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or (Ca+Mg)]
30.3
Hardness data provided by
applicant
7Q 10 summer (cfs)
17
NPDES Files
1Q10 (cfs)
32
NPDES Files
Flow (MGD)
1.0
NPDES Permitted Flow
Date: 9/16/2020
Permit Writer: Julia Byrd
Page 4 of 4

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: Blank WWTP
PermitNo. NC0072757
Prepared By: Julia Byrd
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 1
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 17
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 32
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1)
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS)
17
s7Q10 (CFS)
17
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
1.55
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
1.55
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1)
0
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
8.36
IWC (%)
8.36
Allowable Conc. (ug/1)
203
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
9.6
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform
w7Q10 (CFS)
32
Monthly Average Limit:
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1
(If DF >331; Monitor)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
1.55
(If DF<331; Limit)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
Dilution Factor (DF)
11.97 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
4.62
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
34.4
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
Farral (r lifnrm
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

MON TOR REPO
NITORR LUPPVFI
oolOrygen,
EL NTVPE WELL
IN
IAT
ei�oNea (DC1_5
(DC
(DC
FREOeENCV
FMEAAURE
LIMIT LceLAT
VER
VOLATIONCOMM
(DC
lC
wily Maximum Ecce<Praceea to NOVz.r
D. M�imem E«ee<Pro<eea m Nov
nski
oeiy M�imem E,see<Pro<eea m Nov
oeiy M�imem E,see<Pro<eea to Nov
Daly M�imem E,see<Pro<eea m Nov
0_0
oxyq� owoxea(oc
wy(m oeq. c
mN m
Owen
Enwem
Sa��.Total =o ae
weer
o
xiwoo
380000
oxygen ea(oc
yi
zo per<em ��aer umo a�wm�rome�aNi
oxygen, o�issoNea (oc
oxygen, oissolvea (oc
myi
zo per«m uneer Iimii auwmn romanski
-TTT
wiN MmumNE,seee<rvo xao<. epe
Be- owc v -
oei�N M�imem E,see<rvo xao<. ePe
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xao<. ePe
17
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xao<. ePe
wiN M�.im<m E, =No xao<, ePe
t
Oeman
Enwem
ry oq ,Toel-co�<e
y
myi
taT0000
tss0000
o
taR000
179 woo
=
wM.m<m Ervo o<. eP
owPa imen
-
zoinv�oe�e�
-
po Lee
tlgg�
Effluent
e(c
91
F-appowy(moeq.c
wiy Me.�im<m E,see<rvo xaos. ePe
wiN Masim<m E,see<rvo xaos. ePeCo
owo ce,�°mlmma�imep,oa <,e�
Re—owo
wiy Me.�im<m E,see<rvo xaos. ePe
owo ce�.,vl an<aimev oe<�e�
ce,mlmmaimep,oe <,e�
owo 1,mlmmaim
owo ce,mlmmaimep,oe
wiy M��imem E,see<rvo xaos. ePe
<,e�AM
141 wiN Maximum E,see<rvo xaos. ePeMM
No
O.ygeri, oissoi Rea(oc
m��
za 0000
u0000
0
wiy M��imem E,see<rvo xaos. ePe
on, EPJ
wiN M�imem E,see< No xaos. ePe
�cniryro e�e<orreasav�seal<oo
oeiNM�imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
acoiv to<sa a�a <orr<esav seal
wiN M_imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiNnwtmum�F-,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiN M�imem E,see<No xaos, epe
wiry M-imem E,see<rvo xaos. ePe
0 IXwiN
M�imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiry M��imem E,see<No xaos. ePe
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xaos. epe
wiN M�imem E,see<rvo xaos, epe
Le— C­pLan,bm5pod
RtN
omN&erege Ex<eIrvo Acton, epe
wiN Me.im<m E,see<rvo xaos. epe
t
OMrau
Effluent
N oqe ,Toni-coo<e
omyt
myi
to3.000o
tzt o000
ro Lee
q
a zote at
OMfau
Em�em
ry oqe ,Tool-coo<e
oa3orzote Momnyn
mq
wrame�er Mi q No a<m�,MMs
'1c 1 ameter is usea o�[ y arzwmt73za sa IN

Dissolved Oxygen
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
-
—
0
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln�0
�0
�0
�0
�0
�0
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
00
00
00
00
00
00
rn
rn
rn
rn
rn rn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N N
\ \
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci
ci ci
-i
m
Ln
r,
rn
-1-1
-i
m
Ln
r,
rn
-1-1
-i
m
Ln
r,
rn
-1
-i
-1
m
Ln
r,
rn
-1
-i
-1
m
Ln
r,
rn -1
-i
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
tUpstream --& Downstream
Fecal Coliforms
ti( ti( tit tiA tit tit tiA tit tiI tiI ti0 tiI tiI tiI tiC tiC ti� ti� ti� ti�
tUpstream 530 23 20 34 18 19 53 45 114 55 2600 27 67 38 25 22 57 200 190 44 31
t Downstream 49 13 35 3118 124 124 133 86 2400 25 86 95 18 23 67 1811400 50 35

Conductivity, umhos/cm
350
300
250
200
150
\ �1
100
50
0
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
L0
W
W
W
W
W
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
00
00
00
00
00
00
m
m
m
m
m
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
CAN
\
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
-1
M
Ln
n
m
1\-4
1-1
1\-4
M
Ln
n
0)
-1
1-4
-1
M
Ln
n
m
c\-I
c-I
-1
M
Ln
n
m
c\-I
1-1
c\-I
M
Ln
n
m
c\-I
c-I
—*--Upstream --*--Downstream
Temperature
35
30
OL
25
20
Au
IRA
jr
A
15
NL
10
1
xv_
me�
5
0
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
W
W
W
W
W
L0
rl
rl
rl
rl
rl
rl
00
00
00
00
00
00
m
m
m
m
m m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N N
\ \
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I c-I
c\-I
M
Ln
n
0)
1\-4
1-4
1\-4
M
Ln
n
0)
-1
1-1
-1
M
Ln
n
0)
-1
1-4
-1
M
Ln
n
0)
1\-1
1-1
1\-1
M
Ln
n
0) -1-1
1-1
--*--Upstream --*--Downstream
pH
7.6
7.4
7.2
7
6.8
6.6
6.4
41
6.2
6
5.8
5.6
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
Ln
w
w
w
w
w
w
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
r,
oo
00
00
00
00
m
m
m
m
m
m m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
N N
\ \
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N N
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I
c-I c-I
c\-I
M
Ln
n
m
1\-1
c-1
1\-4
M
Ln
n
m
1\-1
1-1
1\-1
M
Ln
n
m
-1
1-4
-1
M
Ln
n
m
1\-4
1-4
1\-4
M
Ln
n
m 1\-4
1-4
tUpstream —*--Downstream

Attachment A —Request for Missing Information
i
1.1 Email address of facility contact [e-mail]
1.2 NAICS Code(s) Description (optionai)
311615 (Primary) Poultry Processing
484110 (Secondary) Trucking, General Freight, Local
.i
1.3 Email address of operator [e-mail]
,i
1.4 Does your facility use cooling water?
❑ Yes X No 4 SKIP to Item 1.6
1.5 Identify the source of cooling water. (Note that facilities that use a cooling water intake structure as described at 40 CFR 125.
Subparts I and J may have additional application requirements at 40 CFR 122.21(r) Consu t with your NPDES permitting
authority to determine what specific information needs to be submitted and when.)
40 i
7.r Do you intend to request or renew one or more of the variances authorized at 40 CFR 122.21fm)? (Check all that apply. Consult
with your NPDES permitting authority to determine what information needs to be submitted and when.)
❑ Fundamentally different factors (CWA ❑ Water quality related effluent limitations (CWA Section
Section 301(n)) 302(b)(2))
❑ Non -conventional pollutants (CWA ❑ Thermal discharges (CWA Section 316(a))
Section 301(c) and (g))
X Not applicable
i
1.7 Certification Statement
l certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in
accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel property gather and evaluate the information submitted.
Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. l am aware that
there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing
violations.
Name (print or type first and last name) Official title
Jamal Mohammed Complex Manager
Signature Date signed

Attachment A —Request for Missing Information
NPDES APPLICATION COMPLETENESS REVIEWS
FOLLOWING THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
NPDES APPLICATIONS AND PROGRAM UPDATES RULE
On February 12, 2019, the EPA finalized revisions to the application requirements at 40 CFR 122.21 in the NPDES
Applications and Program Updates Rule. The final rule became effective on June 12, 2019. On and after this
date, applicants for EPA -issued permits are required to meet the new application requirements through
completion of updated application forms that conform to the final rule.
During the transition to the updated forms, the EPA anticipates that applicants may inadvertently complete and
submit applications using the older outdated forms for a period after the June 12, 2019 effective date. If this
occurs, applications submitted using the outdated Forms 1 and 2A will not conform to the regulatory
requirements for applications at 40 CFR 122.21 and should be deemed incomplete by the EPA Regions. (Note
that the final rule did not include regulatory changes pertaining to the form requirements for Forms 26, 20, 21),
2E, and 2F; therefore, submission of the outdated forms may be deemed complete at the EPA Regions'
discretion.)
Requiring applicants to transfer information from the outdated forms and resubmit the new updated forms may
be time-consuming and costly. In lieu of transferring the information and resubmitting the updated forms, EPA
Regions may consider issuing a "Notice of Incomplete Application" to the applicant requesting only the missing
information. Any information provided by the applicant in response to the notice must include the certification
statement from 40 CFR 122.22(d) and be signed in accordance with 40 CFR 122.22(a).
The EPA Regions have the discretion to determine the period of time for which they will allow applicants to
submit the outdated forms along with the missing information to accommodate applicants that may have begun
the permit application process prior to the availability of the updated forms; however, it is expected that this
practice will only be allowed for a short period of time (perhaps six months), after which the EPA Regions should
require that all applications be submitted using the updated forms.
Permittees to which the aforementioned transition period applies may complete and submit the tables
provided on Attachment A to the North Carolina DEQ's Division of Water Resources as an addendum to their
NPDES renewal applications.
These addenda only apply to facilities submitting Forms 1 and/or 2A:
Applicants submitting a renewal application addendum for Form 1(Non-POTW, private facilities)
should fill out Table 1, found on page 2 of this document & sign and submit document.
Submit completed files to the following address:
NC DEQ/ Division of Water Resources/Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Table 1. EPA Application Form 1 Missing Information
1 The final rule clarified that existing data may be used, if available, in lieu of sampling done solely for the purpose of the
application, provided that sampling was performed, collected, and analyzed no more than 4.5 years prior to submission.