NC0026611_Permit Issuance_20071012

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
Permit:
NC0026611
Morehead City WWTP
NPDES
Document Type:
Permit Issuance . j
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Technical Correction
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
October 12, 2007
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerse wide

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
October 12, 2007
Mr. Randy Martin, City Manager
Town of Morehead City
706 Arendell St.
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit
Permit no. NC0026611
Morehead City WWTP
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Marti
Division pers�nnel have reviewed and approved your application for the subject permit.
Accordingly, e are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum
of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9,
1994 (or as subsequently amended).
The final permit includes the following changes from your draft permit:
• Since the ATC for the expansion was approved before the total nitrogen and total
phosphorus limits were implemented the Division agrees to implement a schedule of
compli nce of one year for the expanded flow of 2.5 MGD.
• Based on your corrected data showing no detections for lead, monitoring for Total Lead
was deleted from the permit.
• Monito 'ng for cyanide and mercury shall take place quarterly. After obtaining at least
12 data point you can request a modification of your monitoring requirements if the
data shows no reasonable potential to exceed the applicable water quality standards.
• Copper and zinc show reasonable potential to exceed the water quality standards. It is
standard policy for the Division to require 2/month sampling instead of a permit limit
when these two parameters show reasonable potential.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within
thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written
petition, confgrming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the
Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714).
Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note t 'at this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division
may require odification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect
the legal req -rements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act
or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
No `Carolina
/Vaturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]

•
•
Permit No. NC0026611
Town of Morehead City
Page 2
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Teresa Rodriguez at telephone
number [phone], extension 553.
Sincerely,
Coleen H. Sullins
Cc: NPDES Files
Central Files
U.S. EPA Region 4
Wilmington Regional Office
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
PERCS Unit

Permit No. NC0026611
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, the
Town of Morehead City
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Morehead City WWTP
Treatment Plant Road
Northwest of Morehead City
Carteret County
to receiving waters designated as Calico Creek in the White Oak 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 November 1, 2007.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2012.
Signed this day October 12, 2007.
•
..cor Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1

i
Permit No. NC0026611
r
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 Morehead City
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 1.7 MGD wastewater treatment facility located at
Treatment Plant Road, Morehead City, Carteret County, and consisting of:
• Mechanical bar screen
• Influent flow metering
• Grit removal
• Primary clarifiers
• Dual trickling filters
• Dual secondary clarifiers
• Dual chlorine chamber
• Post aeration chamber
• Effluent flow metering
• Aerobic digesters
• Sludge drying beds
• Emergency generator
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division, construct and operate
facilities for a design capacity of 2.5 MGD, and
3. Discharge from said treatment works, through outfall 001, into Calico Creek, a Class SC-
HQW water in the White Oak River Basin, at the location specified on the attached map.
Page 2

Permit No. NC0026611
t
f
/
5E
•
lr/ ; ". rs__1 `t 1. L.,rat�
// t
/ 1 / 11» .- _ r 1 ' `� `
~ \� it `k. � L_/ 0 ``
Golf, ''�j nurse �� -\ - �� �\
t. 2/ t. 'i
j��•• . ., . ' ;�, rr \ ��
•; . �, • �I . r !
\{/. ��--�, /;fir \- .4 U __. `.
t i
J`
1
rr
C)' ' /i
S I17 I\
,
rvffILI .' roc..'
j
` \\ `/% �1
�1 \, J S1
j ik t •
I �f x
`\ I. 4 Ai}
�i t \\
I\; 1.
/r ry ,,{ 5
1,..,,�`�`
-.-^.
r ... i ,
Outfa11001
-•
i` i -:-.: - ~'
=
•
` i
] r. 1 .
/6tiI
<—.
.-�.
_r.7)
.Ir
`\
J `.1
1,•
�-t•,r . N
. t. Igi i fi mom•
• r•
,
• IL
` \ ' � it
G
ii
•,�
•
•
k1•••,
,rl
I`
!
ems;
:5,
Piggott
'{ 'I:'Li?W {� ��-: •� -!" • .
i' •
^�.'
t
�ty1
. .
l . ••
.1i • •
i
/sal
• is
_ -�_r , —
is : ..
4111,w_itailinto
. -tr:. -
•
..,: ;nu.,
r• •
d1r»Si • r
s q ..:
i
t13•
i ..
)bins",t
vt
•I
�iphins 7�, . •' �'.�. •
ata«m
l INTRACOq o t
S7A4
1 0 Beacon
f ,1 o Light
i Fr;. WA r k>ti
t_.
Latitude:
Town of Morehead City
4°44'00" Sub -Basin: 03-05-03
Facility
Location
L onRitude:
6°44' 15" Stream Class: SC- HQW
Ouad It:
Permitted Flow:
32NW Receiving Stream: Calico Creek
.7 MGD
Town of Morehead City
North
NC00266t1
Morehead City WWTP
Page 3

Permit No. NC0026611
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration or expansion above 1.7
MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such
discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample
Location 1
Flow (MGD)
1.7
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD5 (Summer)2,3
20.0 mg/L
30.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
BOD5 (Winter)2,3
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
NH3 as N
Weekly
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen .
Daily average not less than 5.0 mg/L
3/Week
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
86/100 ml
172/100 ml
3/Week
Grab
• E
Total Residual Chlorines
13 µg/L
3/Week
Grab
E
Enterococci (geometric mean)
35/100 ml
276/100 ml
3/Week
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Composite
E
pH •
Between 6.8 and 8.5 Standard Units
3/Week
Grab
E
Total Cyanide5,6
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Mercury6
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
E
Acute Toxicity?
Quarterly
Composite
E
Footnotes:
1. I: Influent. E: Effluent. See condition A. (3) of this permit for instream monitoring requirements.
2. The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (85% removal).
3. Summer shall be defined as April 1 — October 31 with winter defined as the balance of the year.
4. See Condition A.(4.)
5. The Division shall consider all cyanide values reported below 10 µg/1 to be "zero" for compliance
purposes. However, Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) shall record all values reported by a North
Carolina -certified laboratory (even if these values fall below 10 µg/1.)
6. Effluent monitoring may be deleted in the future upon written notification of the Division, if the
permittee provides updated effluent data (at least 12 data points) that shows no reasonable potential to
exceed applicable state water quality standards.
7. Acute Toxicity (Mysidopsis bahia) P/F, February, May, August and November; see special condition A.
(5.) of this permit.
THERE SHALL BE NO DISCHARGE OF FLOATING SOLIDS OR VISIBLE FOAM IN OTHER THAN TRACE
AMOUNTS.
Page 4

Permit No. NC0026611
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning upon expansion above 1.7 MGD, and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAME
ER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
g
Weekly
Average
g
Daily
Maximum
Measurement FrequencySample
Sample Type
Location 1
Flow (MGD)
2.5
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD5 (Summer)23
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
BOD5 (Winter)2.3
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids2
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
NH3 as N (Summer) .3
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
E
NH3 as N (Winter)31
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily average
not less than
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
14/100 ml
28/100 ml
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlckne4
13 µg/L
Daily
Grab
E
Enterococci (geomtric mean)
35/100 ml
276/100 ml
3/Week
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen5
41,856 lb/yr
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus5
7,610 lb/yr
Weekly
Composite
E
pH
Between 6.8 and 8.5 Standard Units
Daily
Grab
E
Total Cyanide6.7
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Mercury'
Quarterly
Composite .
E
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
E
Acute Toxicity8
Quarterly
Composite
E
Footnotes:
1.
2.
I: Influent. E: Effluent. See condition A. (3) of this permit for instream monitoring requirements.
The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (85% removal).
3. Summer shall be defined as April 1 - October 31 with winter defined as the balance of the year.
4. See Conditio A.(4.)
5. Total nitrogen and total phosphorus limits will become effective one year after the expansion to 2.5 mgd
becomes effective.
6. The Division, shall consider all cyanide values reported below 10 µg/l to be "zero" for compliance
purposes. However, Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) shall record all values reported by a North
Carolina -certified laboratory (even if these values fall below 10 µg/1.)
7. Effluent mo itoring may be deleted in the future upon written notification of the Division, if the
permittee pr vides updated effluent data (at least 12 data points) that shows no reasonable potential to
exceed applic ble state water quality standards.
8. Acute Toxici y (Mysidopsis bahia) P/F, February, May, August and November; see special condition A.
(5.) of this permit.
Page 5

Permit No. NC0026611
THERE SHALL BE NO DISCHARGE OF FLOATING SOLIDS OR VISIBLE FOAM IN OTHER THAN TRACE
AMOUNTS.
A. (3.) INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Instream monitoring is required for the following parameters at the locations specified:
,�
EFFL' UENT
= ;
' w
a
Measurement�Frequency
F
s_
Sample Type
Sam le
P
+ `.
a Lcation1
I s
CHARACTERISTICS < _•
Fecal Coliform
June -Sept
3/week
Grab
U, D
October -May
1/week
Dissolved Oxygen
June -Sept
3/week
Grab
U, D
October -May
1/week
Temperature
June -Sept
3/week
Grab
U, D
October -May
1/week
Chlorophyll -a
Monthly
Grab
U, D
Total Nitrogen
Monthly
Grab
U, D
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Grab
U, D
Footnotes:
1. U - Upstream at Barbour Road Bridge, D- Downstream at Piggotts Bridge.
A. (4.) Total Residual Chlorine
The limit for total residual chlorine shall become effective upon completion of the wastewater
treatment plant expansion, but no later than December 1, 2008. If a disinfection method different
than chlorination/dechlorination is used, the total residual chlorine limit will not be applicable.
A. (5.) Quarterly Acute Toxicity Limit
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a quarterly basis using protocols defined in the
North Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute
Toxicity In A Single Effluent Concentration" (Revised July, 1992 or subsequent versions). The
monitoring shall be performed as a Mysid shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia) 24-hour static test. The
effluent concentration at which there may be at no time significant acute mortality is 90 %
(defined as treatment two in the procedure document). Effluent samples for self -monitoring
purposes must be obtained during representative effluent discharge below all waste treatment.
The tests will be performed during the months of February, May, August and November.
Page 6

Permit No. NC0026611
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monito:ing Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the
parameter code TGE3E. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-2 (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 Aqua 'c Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no
later than 30 days fter the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
measurements performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data.
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 n� discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity
monitoring is req red, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the
aquatic toxicity (AIT) 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 any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then
monthly monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon
passing, this monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit
may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival 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. (6.) Notification of Release
The permittee shall notify the Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section of any
release of partially treated wastewater or untreated wastewater into Calico Creek. The notification
shall be made within three hours of the spill to the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
communication center at 252-726-7021. This notification does not relieve the permittee of other
spill notifications procedures as required by other agencies.
Page 7

Permit No. NC0026611
A. (7.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the table below
(in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). The annual effluent pollutant scan samples shall represent seasonal
(summer, winter, fall, spring) variations over the 5-year permit cycle. Unless otherwise indicated, metals
shall be analyzed as "total recoverable." Additionally, the method detection level and the minimum level
shall be the most sensitive as provided by the appropriate analytical procedure.
Ammonia (as N) Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene Bis (2-chtoroethyl) ether
Chlorine (total residual, TRC) 1,1-dichloroethylene Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen 1,2-dichloropropane Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite 1,3-dichloropropylene 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen Ethylbenzene Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease Methyl bromide 2-chloronaphthalene
Total Phosphorus Methyl chloride 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids Methylene chloride Chrysene
Hardness 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane Di-n-butyl phthalate
Antimony Tetrachloroethylene Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic Toluene . Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium 1,1,1-trichtoroethane 1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium 1,1,2-trichloroethane 1,3-dichlorobenzene
Chromium Trichloroethylene 1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper Vinyl chloride 3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead Acid -extractable compounds: Diethyl phthalate
Mercury' P-chloro-m-cresol Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel 2-chlorophenol 2,4-dinitrotoluene
Selenium 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,6-dinitrotoluene
Silver 2,4-dimethylphenol 1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Thallium 4,6-dinitro-o-cresol Fluoranthene
Zinc 2,4-dinitrophenol Fluorene
Cyanide 2-nitrophenol Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds 4-nitrophenol Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile organic compounds: Pentachlorophenol Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein Phenol Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile 2,4,6-tichlorophenol Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzene Base -neutral compounds: Isophorone
Bromoform Acenaphthene Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride Acenaphthylene Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene Anthracene N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane Benzidine N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane Benzo(a)anthracene N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2-chloroethylvinyl ether Benzo(a)pyrene Phenanthrene
Chloroform 3,4 benzofluoranthene Pyrene
Dichlorobromomethane Benzo(ghi)perylene 1,2,4-tichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethane Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2-dichloroethane Bis (2-chtoroethoxy) methane
* All samples collected for Mercury shall be analyzed by a low level method (EPA Method 1631)
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 to the following address:
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.
Page 8

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0026611
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Morehead City WWTP
Applicant Address:
706 Arendell Street, P.O. Drawer M, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Facility Address:
Treatment Plant Rd., Morehead City, North Carolina
Permitted Flow (MGD):
1.7 / 2.5 _
Type of Waste:
Domestic
Facility Classification:
III
Permit Status:
Renewal
County:
Carteret
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Calico Creek (21-32)
Regional Office:
Wilmington
Stream Classification:
SC HQW PNA
State Grid / USGS Quad:
I32NW
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Teresa Rodriguez
Basin/Subbasin:
03-05-03
Date:
7/26/07
Drainage Area (mi2):
NA
•
Lat. 34° 44' 00" N Long. 76° 44' 15" W
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
Tidal
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Tidal
30Q2 (cfs)
Tidal
Average Flow (cfs):
Tidal
IWC (%):
N/A
Summary: The Town of Morehead City submitted a permit renewal application on January 16, 2007. The
current permit was issued in July 2005 has an expiration date of July 31, 2007. Construction is underway for
the expansion to 2.5 MGD. The expected completion date of the project is December 2008.
Facility Description: The existing treatment system consists of a mechanical bar screen, influent flow
metering, grit removal, primary clarifiers, dual trickling filters, dual secondary clarifiers, dual chlorine chamber,
post aeration chamber, effluent flow metering, aerobic digesters, sludge drying beds, and emergency
generator. The proposed plant will include an oxidation ditch preceded by anaerobic/anoxic chambers, two
secondary clarifiers, dual tertiary filters, and dechlorination.
Basin Plan/303(d): Calico Creek has experience water quality problems over the years. Although Calico
Creek is not listed in the 2006 303(d) list, the creek is newly impaired in the aquatic life subcategory due to
exceedances of turbidity, DO, and fecal coliform standards. Calico Creek will be listed in the 2008 303(d) list.
Data also indicates high chlorophyll -a levels, but the minimum criteria for use assessment was not met.
COMPLIANCE REVIEW
DMR Instream and Effluent Data Review
Data was reviewed for the period of January 2004 to April 2007. A summary of the data is presented in Table I.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0026611
Page I

Table I
Flow
MGD
BOD
mg/I
TSS
mg/I
Ammonia
mg/I
TN
mg/I
TP
mg/I
Fecal
coliform
/100mI
Enterococci
/100 ml
Aver 05-07
1.48
18.4 mg/I
21 mg/I
3.6 mg/I
20.6 mg/I
3.6 mg/I
12
18
Max
4.7
34.9 mg/I
56 mg/I
12 mg/I
81 mg/I
5 mg/I
6000
2419
The permit includes monitoring for copper, zinc, and total residual chlorine. No reasonable potential was
performed for copp r and zinc because the discharge is to tidal conditions. Reported values are above the
acute standards, m nitoring will remain in the permit.
The Division monitors to locations in Calico Creek through the ambient monitoring program. Data for the 2005-
2007 is summarize
in the following table:
Table II
Ammonia
mg/I
TN
mg/I
TP
mg/I
DO
mg/I
Fecal coliform
/100m1
Chlorophyl -a
mg/I
Upstream — P8750000
Aver
0.34 I
2.42
0.53
8.3
948
35.1
Max
1.101
15.6
3.10
13.9/2.6*
9600
158
Downstream — P8800000
Aver
0.39
2.29
0.44
9.17
79.17
19.86
Max
1.1
6.5
1.2
15.7/4.2*
3400
98
* DO max/min
Notices of Violation (NOVs)
The town has received five Notices of Violations for flow exceedances in 2005 and one for TSS in 2006.
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Test
The permit require a quarterly acute toxicity test. They passed all the tests for the period of January 2004 to
May 2007.
Proposed permit changes:
• The weekly avgrage limit for enterococci was modified to 276/100 ml. A new guidance was developed in
2006 for the implementation of the enterococci water quality standard. The Division and EPA agreed to
use this value for discharges to SC waters based on the frequency of use.
• Mercury, cyanide and lead were detected in the Priority Pollutant Analysis. Cyanide was detected above
the water quality standards therefore a limit of 1.0 ug/I was established. Monitoring for mercury and lead
will be required on a quarterly basis.
• Limits for total iitrogen and total phosphorus are included for the expanded flow of 2.5 MGD. Calico Creek
has noted water quality problems including chlorophyll -a and nutrients. For expansions of facilities into
waters where nutrient over enrichment is a concern the Division can set effluent limitations for total
nitrogen and t o tal phosphorus as per 15A NCAC 02B .0224 (1)(b). The limit for total nitrogen of 41,856
pounds/year is equivalent to a concentration of 5.5 mg/I. The limit of 7,610 pounds/year for total
phosphorus is equivalent to 1 mg/I. If future nutrient strategies for the receiving stream are developed
these limit may be modified accordingly.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Pu
Permit Scheduled
lic Notice:
o Issue:
August 1, 2007
September 10, 2007
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0026611
Page 2

NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Teresa
Rodriguez at [phone] ext. 553.
NAME: ///- DATE: /.5��/17
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
NAME:
SUPERVISOR:
DATE:
DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0026611
Page 3

DEMUS L. THOMPSON, Mayor Pro-Tem
Council
GEORGE W. BALLOU
PAUL W. CORDOVA
DAVID HORTON
JOHN F. NELSON
MOREHEAD CITY
11
NORTH CAROLINA
706 Arendell Street �}� (K ^'�
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-4234 RG•l� j
_I TEL [phone]
' " FAX [phone] Ali
www.townofmorehead.com
AUG 2 4 2007
August 22, 2007
Ms. Teresa Rodriguez
NPDES Unit / NCDWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: NPDES Draft Permit No. NC0026611 / Morehead City WWTP / Carteret County
GERALD A. JONES, JR., Mayor
R. RANDY MARTIN
City Manager
Dear Ms. Rodriguez,
We have received and reviewed the referenced Draft NPDES Permit No. NC0026611 and
would like to request the following changes:
1) Mercury was detected at 0.0000125 mg/1 and 0.0000119 mg/1 in the 2006 and
2007 Priority Pollutant Analyses (PPA) respectively; cyanide was detected at
0.007 mg/1 in the 2006 PPA; lead has always been below quantitative limits. All
other testing done for mercury, cyanide and lead since 2002 has been below
quantitative limits. Also, per Footnote No. 5 on pages 4 and 5 of the Draft Permit,
cyanide levels below 0.010 mg/1 are considered to be zero. Based on the above
noted extremely low or non-existent levels of these three priority pollutants, we
respectfully request that the level of testing required be reduced to annually in the
Priority Pollutant Analysis. We also question the statement regarding a 1
microgram per liter (0.001 mg/1) limit on cyanide included in the second bullet
point.,
2) We have been testing zinc and copper twice per month since the last permit was
issued. The average copper level for the past eighteen months was 0.029 mg/1
with maximum and minimum levels of 0.042 mg/1 and 0.017 mg/1 respectively.
The average zinc level for the past eighteen months was 0.066 mg/1 with
maximum and minimum levels of 0.108 mg/1 and BQL respectively. Based on
these low levels and no problems with our Toxicity Testing, we respectfully
request that the copper and zinc testing be reduced to annual testing in the PPA.
3) We are currently monitoring total nitrogen and total phosphorus with no discharge
limits. We respectfully request that this remain at monitor only for total nitrogen
and total phosphorus in the new permit until the new plant is fully operational, all
ADA/EOE/P Equal Opportunity Employee Provider

processes have time to balance and reach equilibrium and we have data
cortceming the nutrient removal capabilities of the new WWTP.
We appreciate your consideration of our requests and would like an opportunity to
discuss or respond to any of these requests that will not be granted.
R. Randy Marti
City Manger

Draft Permits Reviewed
Subject: Draft Permits Reviewed
From: Susan Meadows [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:12:44 -0400
To: Teresa Rodriguez <[e-mail]>
Hello Teresa,
I have looked over 3 of }dour Permit Drafts and they all look good.
They are:
NC0063029, Camp I.4jeune WWTP
NC0026611, Moreheltd City
NC0088650, Mainland WTP
Susie
Susan Meadows, Environmental Biologist
Aquatic Toxicolog4 Unit
DWQ/Environmen al Sciences Section
4401 Reedy Creek oad
Raleigh, NC 27607
[e-mail]
t: [phone] x256
f: [phone]
1 of 1
8/24/2007 7:50 AM

NC00266'11
•
Subject: NC0026611
From: Linda Willis <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:10:31-0400
To: teresa.rodriguez@n mail.net
CC: [e-mail]
Teresa,
I reviewed the drafts permit. Thanks for putting in the TN and TP limits. That will ensure they run the BNR
plant like they sho ld. I would have liked to see the tighter TSS in the 1.7 MGD permit page, but under the
circumstances, they probably couldn't meet it reliably without tertiary filters.
Thanks for taking i to consideration the requests of the Wilmington Regional Office and the special study
conducted by Stepha ie Garrett.
Best Regards,
Linda Willis
Linda Willis <[e-mail]>
Environmental Engin I
Surface Water Protec ion Section
Division Of Water Quality
1 of 1
8/14/2007 2:38 PM

cARTERET COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
0
Before the undersigned, a tary public of said County and State, duly commis-
sioned, qualified, and auth rized by law to administer oaths, personally appeared
Patti J. Lyerly who being
first duly sworn, deposes and says that he (she) is Clerk
(Owner, partner, publisher or other officer or employee
authorized to make this affidavit)
of THE CARTERET PUBLISHING CO., INC., engaged in the publication of a
newspaper known as CARTERET COUNTY NEWS -TIMES, published, issued,
and entered as second class mail in the Town of Morehead City, in said County
and State; that he (she) is authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement;
that the notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy of which is attached here-
to, was published in CARTERET COUNTY NEWS -TIMES on the following
dates: 08/03/2007
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or legal adver-
tisement was published was, at the time of each and every such publication, a news-
paper meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the mean-
ing of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 3rd day of August, 2007
(Si, atu e ► persAn making affidavit)
Sworn and subscribed to before me, this:
3rd day of August, 2007
My commission expires
C)_)&0-01/4, E out ,2)
Notary Public •
July 16, 2011
Public Notice
State of North Carolina
Environmental Management
Commission/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notification of Intent
to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Permit
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of NC
General Statute 143.21, Public law 92-500 and other lawful
standards and regulations, the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission proposes to issue
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the person(s)
listed below effective 45 days from the publish date of this
notice.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit will be
accepted until 30 days after the publish date of this notice.
All comments received prior to that date are considered in
the final determinations regarding the proposed permit. The
Director of the NC Division of Water Quality may decide to
hold a public meeting for the proposed permit should the
Division receive a significant degree of public interest.
Copies of the draft permit and other supporting information
on file used to determine conditions present in the draft
permit are available upon request and payment of the costs
of reproduction. Mail comments and/or requests for
information to the NC Division of Water Quality at the above
address or call Ms. Frances Candelaria [phone],
extension 520 at the Point Source Branch. Please include
the NPDES permit number (attached) in any
communication. Interested persons may also visit the
Division of Water Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. to review information on file.
Tha Tav,r. r of Morehead City, NPDES permit number
NC0026611, has applied for a permit expansion to 2.5 MGD
discharging treated domestic wastewater to Calico Creek, a
class SC -HOW water in the White Oak River Basin. BOD,
Total Residual Chlorine, Total Suspended Solids and
Ammonia are water quality limited parameters. This
discharge may impact future allocations of the receiving
stream.
Bogue Banks Water Corporation (PO Box 4009, Emerald
Isle, NC 28594) has applied for renewal of NPDES permit
NC0083089 for the Bogue Banks WTP in Carteret County.
This permitted facility discharges treated wastewater to
Bogue Sound in the White Oak River Basin. Currently total
residual chlorine is water quality limited. This discharge may
affect future allocations in this portion of the White Oak
River Basin.
Au3
13102343
13549908

PENDER COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public or said County and State, duly
slotted, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths. personally
Amber Nutley
first duly sworn. deposes and says: that he (she) is
Clerk
(Owner. partner, publisher, or other officer or employee
authorized to make this affidavit)
of I-[AMPSTEAD PIJBLISH[NG, LLC, Pender County, NC., engaged in
cation of a newspaper known as Topsail Voice, published, issued. and enter
and class mail in the Town of Hampstead, in said County and State; that I
authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the notice or c
advertisement, a true copy of which is attached hereto, was
in Topsail Voice on the following dates'
August 8, 2007
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or le
tisement was published vas. at the time of each and every such publieatic
paper meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of Section (-
General Statues of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within
ing of Section I -597 of the General Statutes of North Ca • sa.
This 8th day y of Au c ust
� ^�cy^"Jr.
'nature of p
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this
8th
day of
August L 20 0997
My Commission expires:
making affidavit
Notary Public.
September 25, 2011
LEGAL NOTICES
Public Notice
State of North Carolina
Environmental
Management
Commission/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notification of Intent
to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Permit
On the basis of thor-
ough staff review and ap-
plication of NC General
Statute 143.21, Public law
92-500 and other lawful
standards and regulations,
the North Carolina Envi-
ronmental Management
Commission proposes to
issue a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) waste-
water discharge permit to
the person(s) listed below
effective 45 days from the
publish date of this notice.
Written comments re-
garding the proposed per-
mit will be accepted until
30 days after the publish
date of this notice. All
comments received prior
to that date are considered
in the final determinations
regarding the proposed
permit. The Director of the
NC Division of Water
Quality may decide to hold
a public meeting for the
proposed permit should
the Division receive a
significant degree of public
interest.
Copies of the draft per-
mit and other supporting
information on file used
to determine conditions
present in the draft permit
are available upon request
and payment of the costs
of reproduction. Mail com-
ments and/or reouests for
at 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604-1148
between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to
review information on file.
The Town of More-
head City, NPDES permit
number NC0026611, has
applied for a permit ex-
pansion to 2.5 MGD dis-
charging treated domes-
tic wastewater to Calico
Creek, a class SC-HQW
water in the White Oak
River Basin. BOD, Total
Residual Chlorine, Total
Suspended Solids and
Ammonia are water qual-
ity limited parameters
This discharge may im-
pact future allocations of
the receiving stream.
Bogue Banks Water
Corporation (PO Box
4009, Emerald Isle, NC
28594) has applied for
renewal of NPDES per-
mit NC0083089 for the
Bogue Banks WTP in
Carteret County. This
permitted facility dis-
charges treated waste-
water to Bogue Sound in
the White Oak River Ba-
sin. Currently total resid-
ual chlorine is water
quality limited. This dis-
charge may affect future
allocations in this por-
tion of the White Oak
River Basin.
Scientific Water &
Sewerage Corporation,
Aragona Boulevard,
Jacksonville, North Car-
olina 28540 has applied
for renewal of NPDES
permit NC0036226 for
Lauradale Subdivision
WWTP in Onslow Coun-
ty. This permitted farilkv
LEGAL NO'
Notice of Fi
of Applicatio
CAMA Mir
Development
Pursuant to
113A-119(b), T
Topsail Beach,
authorized to isst
permits in Areas
ronmental Conce
by gives NOTICE
July 31, 2007, 1
gram & Jordan
applied for a CAN
to install an eleva
Northeast Corner
home at 2013
Blvd., Topsail Bea
der County, NC.
The application
inspected at the
below. Public ci
received by Auc
2007, will be col
Later comments w
cepted and consic
to the time of per
sion. Project mod
may occur based
ther review ani
ments. Notice of tl-
decision in this m
be provided upor
request.
Jimmy Canady
CAMA Local Permi
for Town of Topsail
820 S. Anderson B
910-328-5841
Notice of Fili
of Application
CAMA Minc
Development P
Pursuant to
113A-119(b), To.
Topsail Beach, a
authorized to issue
permits in Areas

Station #
Location
Latitude
Result Date/Time
P8750000 Upstream
CALICO CRK AT SR 1243 AT MOREHEAD CITY
34.73383 Longitude -76.74269
Result
Remark
Ammonia nitrogen (mg/L)
2004-01-22 15:nn 0.19
2004-02-24 15:nn
2004-03-17 16:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 16:nn
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15
2005-01-31
2005-02-23
2005-03-29
2005-04-25
2005-05-17
2005-06-28
2005-07-25
2005-08-30
2005-09-22
2005-10-25
2005-11-17
15:nn
15:nn
12:nn
16:nn
16:nn
18:nn
16:nn
16:nn
15:nn
14:nn
15:nn
15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 17:nn
Aver
Max
Min
Comment
0.11
0.52
0.24
X2
0.92
0.35
0.23
0.44
0.2
0.62
0.34
0.34
0.4
0.23
0.04
0.63
1.1
0.23
0.42
0.97
0.47
0.26
0.11
0.1
0.2
0.12
0.47
0.35
0.09
0.02 U
0.37
0.22
0.13
0.21
0.21
0.34
1.10
0.02
Result Date/Time I Result I Remark I Comment
Chlorophyll a fluorometric (ug/L)
2004-05-24 15:nn 45 J4
2004-07-22 15:nn 158
2004-10-21 16:nn 5
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15: nn•
2005-02-03 11:nn
Tropical 2005-02-1412:nni
Hurricane 2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
REVISED 2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 15:nn
REVISED
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 17:nn
Aver
Max
Min
Result Date/Time ( Result
4
12
101
58
8
9
9
89
6.
9
15.
4
24
32
9
85
Comment
Conductivity field Limb
2004-01-22 15:nn 1519
2004-02-24 15:nn 478
2004-03-17 16:nn 6722
2004-04-21 16:nn
REVISED 2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn.
SPECIAL 2004-07-22 15:nn
SPECIAL 2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 16:nn
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15:nn
2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2005-05-17 18:nn
2005-06-28 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
REVISED 2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
120
62
16
3
140
35.11
158.00
3
1370 slight _
9235
7014
22134
1701 Tropical
28847 Hurricane_
39998
13187
5636
7242'
3768
1353
3708.
8815 T
19940'
4321
23819 algal
26888algal
2005-09-22 14:nn 10900 Hurricane
2005-10-25 15:nn 24040
2005-11-1715:nn 2429
2006-01-03 16:nn 826
2006-01-24 15:nn 410
1366
2659 algal
8182
3962
514
47293 algal _
47499 algal
17458
2006-09-20 16:nn 5114 algal
2006-12-05 16:nn 1332
2370
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-2616:nn
-
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
Aver
Max
Min
11190.51
47499.00
410

Aver
Result DateTme
Result
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Remark
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
io/cm @25°C) Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) Fecal coliform MF method (colonies/100mL) pH (SU)
2004-01-2215:nn 12.7 2004-01-2215:nn 420B4,Q1 r 2004-01-22 15:nn 7.3
2004-02-24 15:nn 870 Q1 2004-02-24 15:nn
2004-03-16 12:nn 2300 Q1 SPECIAL 2004-03-17 16:nn
2004-03-17 16:nn 44'01 2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-03-31 13:nn 6600 B3,Q1 SPECIAL 2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-04-19 11:nn 2300'133,01 SPECIAL 2004-06-1516:nn.
2004-04-20 15:nn 1200 Q1 SPECIAL
6.1 Tropical 2004-04-21 16:nn 1800 Q1
5.8 Hurricane 2004-05-24 15:nn 9600 B4,Q1
6.2 2004-06-01 12:nn 6400 B3,Q1
2004-02-24 15:nn 8.3
2004-03-17 16:nn 9.4
2004-04-21 16:nn 8.7 slight
2004-05-24 15:nn 7.1
2004-06-15 16:nn 6.8
2004-07-22 15:nn 11,1
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 16:nn
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15:nn
2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2005-05-17 18: nn
2005-06-28 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 15:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
8.4 2004-06-08 12:nn Z
10,3 2004-06-15 16:nn 130 Q1
13.9 2004-07-22 15:nn 8600'B3,Q1
8 2004-07-26 12:nn 1800 Q1
7.8 2004-09-20 16:nn 2100 B3,Q1
8.6 2004-09-29 12:nn 2300 B3,Q1
6.1 1 2004-10-21 16:nn 140 Q1
3.1 , 2004-11-16 16:nn 2800 01,63
6.1 I, 2004-12-15 15:nn 1600 Q1
12 algal 2005-01-31 15:nn 730 Q1
11.7' algal I 2005-02-23 12:nn 1600; Q1
2.6 Hurricane 2005-03-29 16:nn 670 Q1
6.5 2005-04-25 16:nn 250 B4,Q1
6.9 2005-05-17 18:nn 1000 Q1
7.8 2005-06-28 16:nn 370 B4,Q1
7.4 2005-07-25 16:nn 3100 B3,Q1
9.7 2005-08-30 15:nn 140 Q1
11.8 algal 2005-10-25 15:nn 340 B4,01
7.1 2005-11-17 15:nn 1600 Q1
6.6 2006-01-03 16:nn 1000 Q1
5.9 2006-01-24 15:nn 1000 Q1
10.6 algal 2006-02-16 15:nn 340 B4,Q1
10.6 algal 2006-03-23 17:nn 250 B4,Q1
2006-08-29 15:nn 8.8 2006-04-19 15:nn 550 B4,Q1
2006-09-20 16:nn 9.9 algal 2006-05-31 15:nn 2000 B5,Q1
2006 10 18 16:nn' 6.2 no 2006 06 26 16:nn 2000 B5,Q1
8.3 12
I 10.6, 3200
1 1900
8.30 _ _ 2000 Q1
Max 13.90 580 B3,01
Min 2.60 930 Q1
geomean
Max
Min
948.46
9600.00
12.00!
SPECIAL SPECIAL-
SPECIAL:-
Hurricane
(SPECIAL
! REVISED
REVISED
7.1
7.6
7.7 slight
7.7
-8.1.
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 15:nn
r2004-03-1716:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 16:nn,
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15:nn
2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn 7.9
2004-09-02 16:nn 7.4 Tropical _
2004-09-20 16:nn 7.2 Hurricane
2004-10-21 16:nn
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15:nn
2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2005-05-17 18:nn
2005-06-28 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14: nn
2005-10-25 15:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
Aver
Max
Min
7.5
7.3
7,5
7.5
7.2
7.7
7.6
7.4 ._.�._. 2005-05-17 18:nn
7,4 2005-06-2816:nn
7.4 2005-07-25 16:nn
7.8 algal 2005-08-30 15:nn
7.8, algal 2005-09-22 14:nn
7 Hurricane 2005-10-25 15:nn.
7.5 2005-11-1715:nn
7.5 2006-01-03 16:nn
7.2 2006-01-24 15:nn
7,2 2006-02-16 15:nn
7.5
7.6 algal
7.4
7.5
7.2
8.1 algal
8.1 algal
7.6
7.6 algal .
7,3 no
7,2
7.4
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16: nn
2007-01-03 17:nn
Phosphorus tc
0.09
0.08
1.3
0.32
3.1
1.6
0.06
0.49
0.22
0.48
0.69
0.23
0.3
0.21
0.43
0.56
1.3
0.4
1.1
0.56
0.25
0.41
0.09
0.08
0.25
0.15
0.53
0.56
0.17
0.42
0.9
0,42
0.2
0.12
0.32
7.50 Aver
8.10
7.00
Max
Min
0.53
3.10
0.06

Remark
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
)tal as P (mg/L) Salinity (ppt)
I 2004-01-22 15:nn 0.8
X2
Comment
2004-02-24 15:nn 0.2
2004-03-17 16:nn 3.8
2004-04-21 16:nn _ 0.7 slight
2004-05-24 15:nn 5.2.
Tropical
Hurricane
2004-06-15 16:nn 3.9
2004-07-22 15:nn 13.3
2004-09-02 16:nn 0.9 Tropical
2004-09-20 16:nn 17.8 Hurricane
2004-10-21 16:nn 25.6
2004-11-16 16:nn 7.6
REVISED 2004-12-15 15:nn 3,1
2005-01-31 15:nn 4
REVISED
2005-02-23 12:nn 2.1
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2005-05-17 18:nn
2005-06-28 16:nn'
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 15:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16: nnj
Aver
0.7
2.02,
4.95'
11.911
Result Date/Time
2.4
14.39• algal
16.44 algal
6.2 Hurricane
14.54
1.3
0.431
0.2'
0.72
1.4 algal
4.58
2.1' 0.26
30.98 algal
30.84 algal
..........
10.26
2.81 algal
0.1 no
0.7
1.27
Result
Turbidit
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 15:nn
2004-03-17 16:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn 31
2004-05-24 15:nn 50,
2004-06-15 16:nn - 37
2004-07-22 15:nn 33
2004-09-02 16:nn 29 Tropical
2004-09-20 16:nn 16 Hurricane
2004-10-21 16:nn 12
2004-11-16 16:nn 12
2004-12-15 15:nn 20 REVISED
2005-01-31 15:nn 4.3
Comment
lab NTU
Result Date/Time
2005-02-2312:nn' 12,
2005-03-2916:nn' 20
2005-04-25 16:nn 28
2005-05-17 18:nn 34
2005-06-28 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-10-25 15:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 16:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 17:nn
6.59
Max 30.98
Min 0,10
Aver
Result
Comment Ammo
Water tem perature °C)
2004-01-22 15:nn]
2004-02-24 15:nn1 11
2004-03-1716:nnj 15
2004-04-21 16:nn] 25 slight
2004-05-2415:nni 29.9
2004-06-1516:nn:- 33.9. 2004-07-22 15:nn 31.2
2004-09-02 16:nn 27.6 Tropical
2004-09-20 16:nn i 21.9 Hurricane
2004-10-21 16:nn 21.6
2004-11-16 16:nn 10.6
2004-12-15 15:nn 7
2005-01-31 15:nn8.1
2005-02-23 12:nn 13.7
2005-03-2916:nn' 19.4
2005-04-2516:nnT 21.9,
2005-05-17 18:nn 23.61
26 2005-06-28 16:nn 29.9;
26 2005-07-2516:nn` 28.4'
26 2005-08-30 15:nn 33 algal
12 2005-08-30 15:nn' 33.2' algal
60 2005-09-22 14:nn 26.9, Hurricane
9.7 2005-10-25 15:nn 17.5i_
12 2005-11-1715:nn 18 V
28 2006-01-03 16:nn 14.3,_
8.1 2006-01-2415:nn 14.9
42 2006-02-16 15:nn 16.8
37 REVISED 2006-03-23 17:nn 13.5 algal
27 2006-04-19 15:nn 22.4
23 2006-05-31 15:nn, 291
23, 2006-06-26 16:nnj 25.8
33, 2006-07-19 16:nn 33.1 algal
45 2006-07-19 16:nn 33.2. algal
5.1 2006-08-2915:nn• 31.1
7 2006-09-20 16:nn 30 algal
2006-10-18 16:nn 23.6' no
11.4,
14.71
23.36
Max 60.00
Min 4.30
Aver
21.87
Max 33.90
Min 7.00

2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 16:nn
2004-11-16 16:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 15:nn
2005-02-23 12:nn
2005-03-29 16:nn
2005-04-25 16:nn
2005-05-17 18:nn
2005-06-28 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-3015:nn
2005-09-22 14: n n
2005-10-25 15:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-0316:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 17: n n
Aver
Result Date/Time
Result I Remark Comment, Result Date/Time I Result I Remark
Comment
Nitrate/nitrite NO2 + NO3 as nitrog_en (mg/L) Total Kjeldahl nitrogen TKN as N (mg/L) Total Nitrogen
2004-01-22 15:nn 0.28 2004-01-22 15:nn 0.481 0.76
2004-02-24 15:nn 0.15 2004-02-2415:nn0.51 0.65
2004-03-17 16:nn 6.3 2004-03-17 16:nn 2 8.3
2004-04-21 16:nn 0.08 2004-04-21 16:nn 1.1 1.18
2004-05-24 15:nn X2 2004-05-24 15:nn X2
2004-06-15 16:nn 4.6
2004-07-22 15:nn 3.5
Tropical 2004-09-02 16:nn 1 Tropical
Hurricane 2004-09-20 16:nn 1.2 Hurricane
2004-10-21 16:nn 0.68
w 2004-11-16 16:nn, 1.1
REVISED _ 2004-12-15 15:nn 2.2 REVISED
i--` 2005-01-31 15:nn 0.95
2005-02-23 12:nn 1.2
2005-03-29 16:nn 0.99
T- 2005-04-2516:nrr 1.3
2005-05-17 18:nn 1.8
2005-06-28 16:nn 2.3
2005-07-25 16:nn 1.3
2005-08-3015:nn 1.8
2005-09-2214:nn 1.8
11
2.5,
0.03
1.2
0.12
1.1
0.04 U,P
0.51
0.32
0.08
0.13'
1.1
3.5
0.29
2.8,
0.85
0.46
0.12
0.11
0.12
0.22
0.26
0.73
0.43
0.04
2005-10-25 15:nnL1
2005-11-17 15:nni 1
2006-01-0316:nn' 0.64
2006-01-24 15:nn 0.5
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 17:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
REVISED 2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 16:nn
0.52
1.2
0.14
2006-07-19 16:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 16:nn
0.03
0.1
0.1
1.06
Max 11.00
Min 0.03
2006-10-18 16:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 17:nn
Aver
0.81
0.52
1.8
1.5
0.89
1.4
2.1
1.6
0.69
0.53
1.1
REVISED
15.6
6
1.03
2.4
0.8
2.2
2.24
1.46
1.52
1.07
1.43
2.9
5.8
1.59
4.6
2.65
1.46
1.12
0.75
0.62
1.03
0.78
2.53
1.93
0.93
1.92
3.3
1.74
0.72
0.63
1.2
1.37 Aver 2.42
Max 4.60 Max 15.60
Min 0.48 Min 0.62

Station
Location
Latitude
Result Date/Time
P8800000 Downstream
CALICO CRK AT SR 1176 AT MOREHEAD CITY
34.728 Longitude
Result ( Remark
Ammonia nitrogen
(mg/L)
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 13:nn
2004-03-17 15:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-2415:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-25 15:nnl
2005-05-17 17: nn,
2005-06-28 15:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 15:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 16:nn _
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 15:nn
2006-07-19 15:nn _
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 15:nn
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 16:nn
0.94
0.2
0.06
0.94
0.25
0.02 U
0.02 U
0.72
0.25
0.13
0.24
0.39
0.24
0.89
0.56
0.85
0,37
0.02 U
0.03
0.02 U
0.45 J5
0.22
0.86
0.37
0.23
1.1
0.48
0.52
0.75
0.58
0.02 U
0.03
0.42
0.03
0.44
0.25
-76.731
Comment( Result Date/Time
Result ( Remark ( Comment( Result Date/Time
(').'10%v1^,b�)-41uorometric
(ug/L)
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
Tropical 2005-02-03 11:nn
Hurricane 2005-02-10 10:nn
2005-02-14 11:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 15:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 16:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 15:nn
2006-07-19 15:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 15:nn
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
REVISED 2007-01-03 16:nnl
REVISED
REVISED
31 J4
82
98
5
Result ( Comment
iccu.,,J y field
(umho/cm
T 2004-01-22 15:nn 11964 water very
2004-02-24 13:nn 26337
2004-03-1715:nn 37958
2004-04-21 16:nn19356
2004-05-2415:nni 42289
2004-06-15 16:nn 51481 Algal
2004-06-15 16:nn 50157 Algal
2004-07-22 15:nn 49811
2004-07-22 15:nn; 49990
2004-09-02 16:nn 24009 Tropical
2004-09-20 16:nn 36711 Hurricane
2004-10-2115:nn 41008
2004-11-1615:nn 34911
Revised 2004-11-1615:nn 34440
2004-12-15 15:nn 38657
2004-12-1515:nn 36779
2005-01-31 14:nn 34582
2005-01-31 14:nn 33718
2005-01-31 14:nn 33027
2005-02-23 13:nn 27773
2005-02-23 13:nn 34847
REVISED 2005-03-29 15:nn 18847 algal
2005-04-25 15:nn 31012
REVISED 2005-05-17 17:nn 36675
REVISED 2005-05-17 17:nn 35781
2005-05-17 17:nn 36271
2005-06-2815:nn, 44126
2005-07-25 16:nn 37390
2005-07-25 16:nn 39601
2005-08-30 15:nn 45623 algal
2005-08-30 15:nn 46932 algal
2005-08-30 15:nn 47790 algal
2005-09-22 14:nn 33760 Hurricane
2005-09-22 14:nn 33943 Hurricane
2005-09-22 14:nn 34177 Hurricane
2005-10-25 14:nn 36550
2005-10-25 14:nn 36632
2005-10-25 14:nn 27845
2005-11-17 15:nn 31923
7'SPECIAL
4 SPECIAL
2, SPECIAL
8'
8
36i
12 J5
3
6;
4
5
11
17
38
32
39
74
15
16
3
Aver 0.39 Aver 19.86
Max 1.1 Max 98 Aver 36650.50
Min 0.02 Min 2 Max 51481
Min 11964

Result Date/Time Result I Comment' Result Date/Time
s,,J' .Loxygen
(mg/L)
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 13:nn
2004-03-17 15:nn.
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15
2004-06-15
2004-07-22
2004-07-22
2004-09-02
2004-09-20
2004-10-21
2004-11-16
2004-11-16
2004-12-15
2004-12-15
2005-01-31
2005-01-31
2005-01-31
2005-02-23
2005-02-23
2005-03-29
2005-04-25
2005-05-17
2005-05-17
2005-05-17
2005-06-28
2005-07-25
2005-07-25
2005-08-30
2005-08-30
2005-08-30
2005-09-22
2005-09-22
2005-09-22
2005-10-25
2005-10-25
2005-10-25
2005-11-17
Aver
16:nn
16:nn
15:nn
15:nn
16:nn.
16:nn
15:nn
15:nn
15:nn
15:nn
15:nn
14:nn
14:nn
14:nn
13:nn
13:nn
15:nn
15:nn
17:nn
17:nn
17:nn
15:nn
16:nn
16:nn
15:nn
15:nn
15:nn
14:nn
14:nn
14:nn
14:nn
14:nn
14:nn
15:nn
Max
Min
11.2 water very
9.1
7.8.
4.3
7.3
14.4 Algal
15.7 Algal
14.5
13.6
4.7Tropical
7.7 Hurricane
7.2.
10.8
10.7
13.6
13.5
14.5
14.5
14.3
10.4
9.9
9.9 algal
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.3
6.6
9.3
10.8
8.1 algal
9.2 algal
10 algal
4.2 Hurricane
4.2 Hurricane
4.2 Hurricane
7.3
7.5'
7.2
6.5
9,17
15.70
4.20
Result I Remark I Comment! Result Date/Time I Result
l ,ue MF method
• '" (colonies/100
2004-01-22 15:nn 60,Q1
2004-02-24 13:nn 930 Q1
2004-03-09 12:nn 120 Q1
2004-03-16 12:nn 3400 B3,Q1
2004-03-17 15:nn
25 Q1
2004-03-31 12:nn 490 B4,Q1
2004-04-19 10:nn 73 Q1
2004-04-20 14:nn 310 B4,Q1
2004-04-21 16:nn 300 B4,Q1
2004-05-24 15:nn 67 Q1
2004-06-01 11:nn� 620 B4,Q1
2004-06-08 11:nnZ
2004-06-15 16:nn, 1 B2,Q1
2004-07-22 15:nnj 31 Q1
2004-07-26 12:nnl 17 Q1
2004-09-20 16:nn 32 Q1
2004-09-29 11: n n 130 Q1
2004-10-21 15:nn 19 Q1
2004-11-1615:nnj 130 Q1
2004-12-15 15:nn 59 B4,Q1
2005-01-31 14:nn, 1 B2,Q1
2005-02-23 13:nnj 160 Q1
2005-03-29 15:nn 190 B4,Q1
2005-04-2515:nn 54'01
2005-05-17 17:nn 36 Q1
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 13:nn
SPECIAL 2004-03-17 15:nn 7.8
SPECIAL 2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
SPECIAL 2004-06-15 16:nn
SPECIAL 2004-06-15 16:nn
SPECIAL 2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-0216:nn
SPECIAL 2004-09-20 16:nn
SPECIAL 2004-10-21 15:nn:
2004-11-16 15:nn1 7.9
2004-11-16 15:nn
SPECIAL 2004-12-15 15:nn
Hurricane 2004-12-15 15:nn
SPECIAL 2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-06-2815:nn' 13,Q1
2005-07-25 16:nnj 130 Q1
2005-08-30 15:nn 8iQ1
2005-10-25 14:nn 320 B4,Q1
2005-11-17 15:nn 900 Q1
2006-01-03 15:nn 1000 Q1
2006-01-24 15:nn 670 Q1
2006-02-16 15:nn 70 B4,Q1
2006-03-23 16:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 15:nn
2006-07-19 15:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
geomean
Max
Min
22Q1
51'Q1
74, B4,Q1
2000i B5,Q1
1 Q1
31'Q1
79.17
3400.00
1.00
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-25 15:nn
2005-05-17 17: nni
2005-05-17 17:nn
2005-05-17 17:nn'
2005-06-28 15:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn'
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
Aver
Max
Min
Comment' Result Date/Time
Result
total as P
pH (SU) (mg/L)
7.5 water very 2004-01-22 15:nn
7.5 2004-02-2413:nn'
2004-03-17 15:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
7.5
7.8
8.3 Algal
8.4 Algal
8.3
8.2.
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
7 2 Tropical
7.6 Hurricane
7.7i
8
8.1'
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.1J
7.8
7,7
7.7 algal
7,5.
7.6
7.6
7.61
8
7.9,
7,9'
8.1 algal
8.1 algal
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-25 15:nn
2005-05-17 17:nn
2005-06-28 15:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 15:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 16:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 15:nn
2006-07-19 15:nn
8.1 algal__ 2006-08-29 15:nn
7.4 Hurricane 2006-09-20 15:nn
7.4 Hurricane
7.4 Hurricane
7.9
7,9
7.7
7.6
7.82
8.40
7.20
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 16:nn
Aver
Max
Min
1
0.34
0.11
1.2
0.84
0.34
0.45
0.31
0.25
0.13
0.32
0.38
0.22
0.79
0.49'
1
0.29
0.19
0.53
0.16
0.28
0.13
0.65
0.33
0.2
0.84
0.54
0.57
0.91
0.73
0.15
0.3
0.3
0.14
0.31
0.27
0.44
1.20
0.11

Remark
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Remark
Comment
Salinity (ppt)
2004-01-22 15:nn 6.9:water very
2004-02-24 13:nn 16.1
( 2004-03-17 15:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
Tropical
Hurricane
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
1 2004-11-1615:nn
2004-12-1515:nn
2004-12-1515:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
J5u
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
Revised 2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-2515:nn
2005-05-17 17: nn
} 2005-05-1717:nn
2005-05-17 17: nn
2005-06-28 15:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
REVISED 2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
REVISED 2005-08-30 15:nn
REVISED 2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
Aver
24.1 _
11.5
27.2
32.9 Algal
33.9 Algal
32.8
32.7
14.5,Tropical
23.2 Hurricane
26.3
21.6
22
24.5
23.3
21.1
20.7
21.7
21.9
17
11.2 algal
19.25
22.58
22.92
23.21
28.53
25.3
23.7
30.57 algal
31.2 algal
29.62 algal
21.16 Hurricane
21.45 Hurricane
21.29 Hurricane
17.09
22.92
Max 33.90
Min 6.90
Turbidity
lab (NTU)
2004-01-22 15:nn; 60
2004-02-24 13:nn! 24
2004-03-1715:nn; 6.2
2004-04-21 16:nn! 50
2004-05-24 15:nnl 40
2004-06-15 16:nn, 28
2004-07-2215:nn; 24
2004-09-02 16:nnl 50 Tropical
2004-09-20 16:nn 26 Hurricane
2004-10-21 15:nn 9
2004-11-1615:nn 6
2004-12-15 15:nn 7.6
2005-01-31 14:nn 3.7.
2005-02-03 11:nn 39,SPECIAL
2005-02-23 13:nn 13.
2005-03-29 15:nn 17
2005-04-2515:nn 55
2005-05-17 17:nn 20
2005-06-28 15:nn; 12
2005-07-25 16:nn, 26
2005-08-3015:nn! 17
2005-10-25 14:nn 7.7
2005-11-17 15:nn 32
2006-01-03 15:nn 27
2006-01-24 15:nn 23
2006-02-16 15:nn 35
2006-03-23 16:nn 13
2006-04-19 15:nn 35•
2006-05-31 15:nn: 24'
2006-06-2615:nn 33
2006-07-19 15:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 15:nn
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 16:nn
Aver
11
17
18
18
12
7.5
23.52
Max 60.00
Min 3.70
temperatu
re (°C)
2004-01-22 15:nn 11
2004-02-24 13:nn 10
2004-03-17 15:nn 13
2004-04-2116:nnT- 26,5,
2004-05-24 15:nn 30.8
2004-06-15 16:nn-
32.4
2004-06-15 16:nn'
2004-07-22 15:nn -
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn'
2004-11-16 15:nnl-
2004-11-1615:nn 11.1.
water very
Algal
33 Algal
32.9
32.7
29.1 Tropical
21.8 Hurricane
21.6
10.9
2004-12-15 15:nn 6.3
2004-12-15 15:nn 5.8
2005-01-31 14:nn 6.5'
2005-01-31 14:nn 6.5
2005-01-31 14:nn _ 6.6
2005-02-23 13:nn _ 12.2
2005-02-23 13:nn 13,6'
2005-03-29 15:nn 19.4 algal
2005-04-25 15:nn _ 18.4
2005-05-17 17:nn 24.6
2005-05-17 17:nn 24.
2005-05-17 17:nn 24.4
2005-06-28 15:nn 30.2
2005-07-2516:nn 31.8
2005-07-25 16:nn 32,2
2005-08-30 15:nn 32.7 algal -
2005-08-30 15:nnt 32 algal
2005-08-30 15:nn 31,1 algal
2005-09-22 14:nn_ 28.6 Hurricane
2005-09-22 14:nn 28.6 Hurricane
2005-09-22 14:nn 28.7 Hurricane
2005-10-2514:nnL 17.6
2005-10-25 14:nn 17.6
2005-10-25 14:nn17.6i
2005-11-17 15:nn1 18.3
Aver
21.34
Max 33.00
Min 5.80

Result Date/Time
Result
Remark
Comment
Result Date/Time
Result
Remark
Comment
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 13:nn
2004-03-17 15:nn.
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
2004-09-02 16:nn
2004-09-20 16:nn
2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-25 15:nn
2005-05-17 17:nn
2005-06-28 15:nn
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
2005-09-22 14:nn,
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 15:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 16:nn
2006-04-19 15:nn
2006-05-31 15:nn
2006-06-26 15:nn
2006-07-19 15:nn
2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 15:nn
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 16:nn
Aver
ite NO2 +
NO3 as
3.8
1.2
0 26
4.2
1.4
0.04 U,P
0.26
1.3
0.33
0.16
0.12
0.56
0.41
2.2
0.96
3.3
0.56
0.06
0.66
0.1 U,P
0.33 J5
0.12
1.8,
0.6
0.35
2.7
1.8
1.5
2.3
1.1
0.02
0.14
0.52
0.12
0.89
0.63
2004-01-22 15:nn
2004-02-24 13:nn
2004-03-17 15:nn
2004-04-21 16:nn
2004-05-24 15:nn
2004-06-15 16:nn
2004-07-22 15:nn
Tropical 2004-09-02 16:nn
Hurricane 2004-09-20 16:nn
I- 2004-10-21 15:nn
2004-11-16 15:nn
2004-12-15 15:nn
2005-01-31 14:nn
2005-02-23 13:nn
2005-03-29 15:nn
2005-04-25 15:nn
1 Kjeldahl
nitrogen
2.1
0.85
0.43{
2005-05-17 17:nn
2005-06-28 15:nn,
2005-07-25 16:nn
2005-08-30 15:nn
Revised - 2005-09-22 14:nn
2005-10-25 14:nn
2005-11-17 15:nn
2006-01-03 15:nn
2006-01-24 15:nn
2006-02-16 15:nn
2006-03-23 16:nn
_ 2006-04-19 15:nn
REVISED 2006-05-31 15:nn
_ 2006-06-26 15:nn
REVISED 2006-07-19 15:nn
REVISED:-2006-08-29 15:nn
2006-09-20 15:nn
2006-10-18 15:nn
2006-12-05 16:nn
2007-01-03 16:nn
1.02
Max 4.20
Min 0.02
Aver
2.3
1.6
1.8
1.7
2
0.94
0.55
0.69
Tropical
Hurricane
0.88
0.76
2
1.5;
2.1
1.2
0.66
1.6
0.75
1 J 5
0.64
1.8
1.2
0.73
1.8
1.2
1.5
2.2
2
0.64
1.1
Revised
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
1.1
0.661 (-
0.72
5.9
2.05
0.69
6.5
3
1.84
1.96
3.3
1.27
0.71
0.81
1.44
1.17
4.2
2.46
5.4
1.76
0.72
2.26
0.85
1.33
0.76
3.6
1.8
1.08
4,5
3
3
4.5
3.1
0.66
1.24
1.62
0.78
1.99
1.35
1.27 Aver 2.29
Max 2.30 Max 6.50
Min 0.43 Min 0.66

rn
7
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
rn r
CH L-a
r`
rn
N
CO to r` 0)
N N N N
— 4— Upstream
- - Downstream

DO
Upstream
—� downstream
CO LC) r•- 0) r- CO tf) r- Q) CO If) f- Q) CO tf) 1- Q)
N N N N N C) CO CO CO CO

3.5
3
2.5
Total Phosphorus
2
a,
E
1.5
1
0.5
0
N N N N N M C') 2
�- Ustream
--- Downstream

18
16
14
12
10
E
Total Nitrogen
u) r 0) .-co r In n O) CO In
N ▪ N CVCV N C) CO CO
—*—Upstream
--II—Downstream

•
13 (D1
curt, mar� - � vvkrY, m a539r
s-Av Cfpir)S6-C;t0A- A.P
at,LJ comf l� b.a, )-.., g
Y
tb*-bc P 61_ -
,�O2.�' � a,L 8042,uv- Plan - 6
beto;AC /310-A, 0/CU
3+0,(rn
,eAp 'Do
Cho
AP-v"
16 Je e_cAS
CO (‘
J
bin f o oo o 0
_,Q,Kpr-61L4005

a4,
\s....) i. —(1)✓'i'�_
3.2 Use upport Assessment Summary
All surface waters in the state are assigned a classification appropriate to the best -intended use of
that water. Waters are regularly assessed by DWQ to determine how well they are meeting their
best -intended use. In subbasin 03-05-03, use support was assigned for (1) fish consumption, (2)
aquatic life, (3) recreation, and (4) shellfish harvesting, as noted below. For more information
about use supp 4 rt methodology, refer to Appendix IV.
(1) All waters re Impaired on an evaluated basis in the fish consumption category because of a
fish consumpti n advise that applies to the entire state. More information on fish consumption
use support ca be found in Chapter 7.
(2) Waters were assessed for supporting aquatic life using one benthic macroinvertebrate
sampling and seven ambient monitoring stations. Refer to the 2005 White Oak River Basinwide
Assessment Report at http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us/Basinwide/WOA2005.pdf and Appendix I
for more information on monitoring.
(3) Waters wee assessed for supporting recreation activities based on the DEH recreation
monitoring pr gram detailed in Chapter 7.
(4) Criteria fo making use support determinations for the shellfish harvesting category were
based on Divi ion of Environmental Health Sanitary Survey (DEH SS) growing area
classifications The problem parameter for all shellfish waters is the potential for exceeding the
fecal coliform standards. Differences in acreage estimates between basin cycles are not just
related to changes in water quality. Changes in acreage are related to more refined methods of
estimating acreages, changes in growing area classifications, extension of closure areas as a
result of addit oval boat slips associated with marinas, and to changes in use support
methodology. efer to Figure 8 to identify growing area locations within this subbasin.
Waters in the ollowing sections are identified by an assessment unit number (AU#). This
number is use to track defined segments in the water quality assessment database, list 303(d)
Impaired waters, and is used to identify waters throughout the basin plan. The AU# is a subset
of the DWQ index number (classification identification number). A letter attached to the end of
the AU# indiciates that the assessment is smaller than the DWQ index segment. No letter
indicates that e AU# and the DWQ index segment are the same. Table 18 contains a summary
of use suppo ratings by category in subbasin 03-05-03; detailed use support information about
specific AU# and shellfish growing areas follows.
108
Chapter 3- White Oak River Basin 03-05-03

Table 18 Summary of Use Support Ratings by Category in Subbasin 03-05-03
Use Support
Rating
Aquatic Life
Recreation
Shellfish Harvesting
Freshwater
Saltwater
Freshwater
Saltwater
Freshwater
Saltwater
Monitored Waters
Supporting
0
5,847.9 ac
11.2 mi
17,764.7 ac
0
19,357.1 ac
lm aired*
p
0
140.2 ac (2%)
0
8 ac (.04%)
0
5.2 mi (100%)
14,510.3 ac (43%)
Not Rated
15.1 mi
0
0
140.2 ac
0
Total
15.1 mi
5,988.1 ac
11.2 mi
17,912.9 ac
0
5.2 mi
33,867.4 ac
Unmonitored Waters
Not Rated
0
166.3 ac
0
0.8 mi
0
0
No Data
54.1 mi
5.2 mi
28,291 ac
58 mi
4.4 mi
16,532.5 ac
0
0
Total
54.1 mi
5.2 mi
28,457.3 ac
58 mi
• 5.2 mi
16,532.5 ac
0
0
Totals
All Waters*
' 69.2 mi
5.2 mi
34,445.4 ac
69 mi
5.2 mi
34,445.4
0
5.2 mi
33,867.4 ac
* The noted percent Impaired is the percent of monitored miles/acres only.
3.3 Status and Recommendations for Previously and Newly Impaired
Waters
The following waters were either identified as Impaired in the previous basin plan (2001) or are
newly Impaired based on recent data. If previously identified as Impaired, the water will either
remain on the state's 3.0.3_(d) list or will be delisted based on recent data showing water quality
improvements. If the water is newly Impaired, it will likely be placed on the 2008 303(d) list.
The current status and recommendations for addressing these waters are presented below, and
each is identified by an assessment unit number (AU#).
For the Impaired Class SA waters presented below, refer to Chapter 7 for more information and
recommendations on shellfish harvesting use support and DEH SS growing area classifications.
Refer to Figure 7 for a map of subbasin 03-05-03 and Figure 8 to identify growing area locations
in this subbasin. If the entire Class SA water is located within more than one growing area it is
noted in the corresponding growing area table.
Chapter 3— White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-03 109

Back Sound [
U# 21-35-(0.5)d]
Back Sound from DEH closed area at mouth of Taylor Creek around Pivers Island (50.9 acres),
is Impaired for shellfish harvesting. This portion of Back Sound is classified by DEH SS as
prohibited in growing area E-5 due to potential fecal coliform bacteria levels. An additional
303.6 acres (AU# 21-35-(0.5)a) is classified as approved and considered Supporting shellfish
harvesting. This same AU is also Supporting in the aquatic life category due to no criteria
exceeded at si4 PA35. Additional areas of Back Sound are within subbasin 03-05-04 and are
discussed in CIiapter 4. Back Sound, AU# 21-35-(0.5)d, will remain on the state's 303(d) list of
Impaired wate s.
3.3.7 Impaiijed Freshwater and Non -Shellfish Harvesting Waters
The following aters were either identified as Impaired in the previous basin plan (2001) or are
newly Impaire based on recent data (Table 25). If previously identified as Impaired, the water
will either re in on the state's 303(d) list or will be delisted based on recent data showing water
quality improvements. If the water is newly Impaired, it will likely be placed on the 2008 303(d)
list. The curre t status and recommendations for addressing these waters are presented below,
and each is identified by an assessment unit number (AU#).
Table 25 Summary of Currently Impaired Freshwater and Non -Shellfish Harvesting Waters
in Subbasin 03-05-03
Class SB/SC Water
Assessment Unit #
Aquatic Life
Recreation
Fish Consumption
Calico Creek
21-32
I
I
I
I= Impaired
Calico Creek [AU# 21-32]
2001 Status
Calico Creek was not rated during the previous basin cycle, although studies in 1999 indicated
water quality impacts from urban nonpoint sources as well as the Morehead City WWTP. The
creek has experienced water quality problems over the years, including elevated fecal coliform
bacteria and nutrient levels, algae blooms and u tmg isso ve oxygen level fluctuations
(DEM 1977, 1981, 1988, and DWQ 2001). Dye studies have indicated that retention time in the
creek is several tidal cycles and that effluent from the WWTP is continuously distributed
� throughout the majority of the reach of the creek (DEM 1977, 1981).
Current Status
Calico Creek, from source to Newport River (the mouth of Calico Creek is defined as beginning
at a point of land on the north shore at latitude 34 43' 46" and longitude 76 43' 07" thence across
.4) the creek) (140.2 acres), is Impaired in the aquatic life category due to exceeding turbidity
standards in 39 percent of samples and low DO in 17 percent of samples at site PA24, and
turbidity excee an3 percent of samples at_site_PA25. Both sites PA24 and PA25 also had
hi. c lorop yll a levels (75 and 57 percent respectively), but samples did not meet the
eria o 1 samples for use support assessment for this parameter. Calico Creek is
also Impairer in the recreation category because fecal coliform bacteria standards were exceeded
in 5 samples .f 200 colonies/100 ml in a 30 day time period. Calico Creek will be added to the
state's 2008_ 03(d) list of Impaired waters. Calico Creek is poorly flushed due to tidal
122
Chapter 3- White Oak River Basin 03-05-03

influences and any additional inputs of nutrients or BOD may increase the potential for adverse
water quality impacts.
Calico Creek is the receiving water for the Morehead City WWTP discharge, which is currently
permitted at 1.7 MGD. Historically the WWTP has operated very close to their permitted
capacity and fo nearly a decade DWQ has strongly encouraged the town to examine non -
discharge alte atives for treated wastewater disposal. A DWQ modeling evaluation determined
that the main i pacts from the WWTP on dissolved oxygen levels in Calico Creek are from
oxygen-consu mg waste (CBOD, NH3 and SOD) and point source nutrient loading (DWQ
1990).
The Town was placed under statutory moratorium in April 1999, after analysis showed the plant
to be operatin at 93 percent of its design capacity. DWQ staff worked with the Town allowing
it to extend its collection system with construction of new sewer lines while under the
moratorium. Iowever, the moratorium was reinstated in September 2002 because the Town was
making little p ogress toward satisfying the moratorium requirements. The Town was awarded a
$2,000,000 Clan Water Grant, as well as $1,000,000 loan in 2000, to rehabilitate outdated sewer
hen % This rehabilitation project was recently com.l- ed and is expected to reduce extraneous
flow to the collection system by 200,000 GPD. I EP, the WWTP flow exceeded the monthly
average limit nine out of twelve months despite these improvements to the collection system.
DWQ inspections of the WWTP have detected solids in the effluent and noted on -going
problems with poor settling characteristics in the clarifiers. Inspection of the plant in early
February 2005 indicated that corrective action by the WWTP has improved solids accumulation
in the clarifiers.
DWQ conduc ed "An Examination of Fecal Coliform, Nutrients and Their Response Variables in
Calico Creek, Carteret County, North Carolina" (March 2005) that documents impacts to Calico
Creek. Reten on time within the creek is several tida cyc es as evidenced by previous DWQ
dye studies th t detected dye in the upper reaches of the creek for over 36 hours. While WWTP
data is referred to as `upstream' and `downstream' this tidal mixing results in continual
distribution of flow and pollutants. Although the creek is not DWQ classified as Class SA water,
the creek is classified as "Prohibited/Restricted" for shellfish harvesting by DEH and is
considered permanently closed to shellfish harvesting (DEH 2000). Until recently, use support
had not been assessed because Calico Creek did not meet sampling criteria to assess the State
standard for fecal coliform (five samples over a 30-day period). However, instream fecal
coliform monitoring required by the Morehead City NPDES permit and further sampling by
DWQ has proivided sufficient data with adequate monitoring frequency to list Calico Creek as
Impaired due to exceeding fecal coliform bacteria standards.
Elevated fecal coliform levels are widespread throughout the Calico Creek watershed and are
from a variety of sources including Morehead City WWTP effluent, wildlife, pets and failing
septic tanks. The water quality standard for fecal coliform is 200 colonies/100 ml. Instream
sampling conducted by the WWTP has revealed extremely high levels of fecal coliform bacteria,
ranging from estimates of greater than 70,000 colonies/100 ml at the upstream site to greater than
47,000 colonies /100 ml at the downstream site. The WWTP laboratory reported values were
estimated as `I`greater than" when sample dilutions were not sufficient to accurately count the
bacterial colonies. This also results in possible underreporting of bacterial concentrations in that
a value reported as "greater than 600" could actually have represented a count of substantially
�(,000�
Chapter 3— White Oak River Subbasin 3-05-03 123

higher concentrations. The DWQ laboratory section, as well as regional staff, have made
recommendations for the WWTP to use more appropriate dilutions. This would provide greater
accuracy in calculating the geometric mean as well as a more precise evaluation of whether or
not the plant is meeting its permit requirements.
Chemical data indicate that the WWTP contributes to nutrient loading, particularly at low tide
when instream waste concentration is highest (DWQ 2001). Average nutrient levels in the
WWTP efflue between2002 and 2005 were 2.1 mg/1 for NH3, 12.2 mg/1 for Total N, and 2.3
mg/1 for Total . Two ambient stations were established at the narrows (station P8750000) and
near the mout (station P8800000) by DWQ on Calico Creek in 2002. Chlorophyll a data, a
measurement of nutrient loading, were not collected monthly at these stations until 2004. In
addition, phyt4lankton were collected and seven algal blooms were documented near the mouth
and two near the narrows between February 2003 and September 2004 (DWQ 2004). Algal
blooms may have been documented more frequently had chlorophyll a and phytoplankton been
sampled monthly and not only in response to elevated DO.
2007 Recommendations
DWQ and the Town have been discussing expansion of the WWTP from 1.7 MGD to 2.5 MGD,
the construction of a new 2.5 MGD treatment facility at the existing WWTP site. The
upgrade will include an oxidation ditch design, which incorporates a combination of anaerobic
and aerobic zones within the treatment plant to accomplish total nitrogen removal. The plant
will also have the capability to remove phosphorus. Fecal coliform and nutrient loadings are the
primary threats to water quality in Calico Creek. The following recommendations are offered to
ensure that the existing and designated uses of the water body are protected and restored:
•Adore frequent monitoring will be required and stricter effluent limits will be effective;
old and new criteria are listed in Table 26. Construction should be completed in two
years; while the plants permit renewal date is July 2007.
Table 26 Old and New Effluent Limits
Parameter
Effluent Limits
Monthly Average Weekly Average
Old New Old New
BOD (summer) 20 mg/1 5 mg/1 30 mg/1 7.5 mg/1
BOD (winter) 30 mg/1 10 mg/1 45 mg/1 15 mg/1
Total1t�Suspended Solids 30 mg/1 10 mg/1 45 mg/1 15 mg/1
NH3 as N (summer) none 1 mg/1 none 3 mg/1
NH3 as N (winter) none 2 mg/1 none 6 mg/1
Dissolved Oxygen Daily average not less than 5.0 mg/I (old)
Daily average not less than 6.0 mg/I (new)
Fecal Coliform 86/100 ml 14/100 ml 172/100 ml 28/100 ml
• Any existing and future discharge permits should be modified to require limits that
include a stringent daily maximum for fecal coliform._ Proposed speculative limits for
Morehead City WWTP for fecal coliform include a weekly geometric mean of 28/100m1
that vjould still allow for potential discharge of excessive levels of fecal coliform
bacteria. Without a daily maximum limit, the monitoring requirement frequency of three
124 Chapter 3- White Oak River Basin 03-05-03

— mITAi rcn%- c2j(wilk sy„
times per week wouldallow_the discharge of 20,000 colonies/100m1 on one day, if the
other two observations within that same week were 1 colony/100m1 each.
• The proposed WWTP is capable of total nitrogen removal, as well as removal of
phosphorus. The data strongly indicate that nutrient over -enrichment is a problem in the
creek and appropriate limits should be set for both total nitrogen and total phosphorus,
per 15A NCAC 02B.0224(1)(b) which states that "where nutrient over enrichment is
projected to be a concern, appropriate effluent limitations shall be set for phosphorous or
nitrogen, or both."
• Eventu41 removal of the Morehead City discharge in favor of a non -discharge system is
strongly recommended. Operating under stricter discharge limits will facilitate future
transition to non -discharge alternatives.
• The local government is encouraged to adopt and apply stringent policies to prevent
and/or ontrol nonpoint source pollution (i.e., stricter sedimentation and erosion control,
create r enhance vegetated and forested buffers, site development that maximizes green
spaces nd conservation of natural areas, etc.).
• Local public education and participation initiatives on stormwater best management
practic s, proper application of fertilizers and pesticides, and management of pet waste
are str ugly encouraged.
• Moreh ad City should consider stronger ordinances to control stormwater runoff to
Calico Creek, including the development of a Phase II stormwater program.
Morehead City recently received DWQ authorization and was awarded contracts to construct a
$15M state of the art tertiary replacement WWTP that will have the capability of removing
nitrogen and piosphorus using ultraviolet technology for bacteria removal. The plant will be
capable of producing a Class A sludge product andLreuse quality effluent, which is proposed to
be used for irr gation purposes at two City parks (combined acreage of close to 25 acres) in close
proximity to the WWTP, The City recently applied for a CWMTF to construct Phase 1 of its
proposed ejuse distribution system (i.e. elevated tank and lines), which will distribute the reuse
effluent for irrigation use to private properties and public facilities, including a golf course and
multiple school sites and parks, located along an approximately five mile area from the WWTP.
The City has also had discussions with NCCF regarding extending this distribution system on a
regional basis to a large tract of land that NCCF is attempting to acquire well outside the City's
jurisdiction. This tract could handle much larger quantities of reuse quality effluent for
irrigation, thin moving the City towards its goal of eventually eliminating the discharge of the
WWTP effluent into Calico Creek.
3.4 Status and Recommendations for Waters with Noted Impacts
Based on D Q's most recent use support methodologies, the surface waters discussed in this
section are n Impaired, except for fish consumption. However, notable water quality problems
and concerns ere documented for these waters during this assessment. Attention and resources
should be foe sed on these waters to prevent additional degradation and facilitate water quality
improvement . DWQ will notify local agencies of these water quality concerns and work with
them to conduct further assessments and to locate sources of water quality protection funding.
Additionally, education on local water quality issues and voluntary actions are useful tools to
prevent water quality problems and to promote restoration efforts. The current status and
f
Chapter 3— White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-03 125

recommendatio s for addressing these waters are presented below, and each is identified by an
AU#. Refer to Section 1.1 for more information about AU#. Nonpoint source program agency
contacts are lis ed in Appendix III.
3.4.1 Taylor
Taylor Creek i
Inc (NC00007:
suspended soli
Creek [AU#21-34]
Not Rated on an evaluated basis in the aquatic life category. Beaufort Fisheries,
8) had significant violations of biological oxygen demand (BOD) and total
is (TSS) permit limits, and the Town of Beaufort WWTP (NC0021831) had
significant violations of fecal coliform, total suspended solids and DO permit limits during the
last two years of the assessment period. The NPDES compliance process will be used to address
the significant 2termit violations noted above.
uring December 2001 investigators observed dead and dying fish in the Taylor's creek adjacent
to the Beaufor
juvenile floun
the public boa
along with or
discharge. Nw
of the plant. T
into Taylor's
plant. After c
waterfront. The majority of fish were reported as juvenile pinfish with a few
er and mullet. Dead and dying spot, mullet, and flounder were also observed at
ramp near Beaufort Fisheries. Investigators reported an oil sheen on the surface
nic material. Beaufort Fisheries was subsequently investigated for an illegal
serous leaks from the menhaden holding vats were discovered upon investigation
e leaking material, consisting of fish oil, fats, and blood emitted a large plume
reek. Water samples were taken from above and below the Beaufort Fisheries
unts were made it was estimated that 161,783 fish were killed.
3.5 Local Initiatives for Subbasin 03-05-03
North Carolina Coastal Federation (NCCF) Land Acquisition
Land acquisition projects in this subbasin through NCCF total 118 acres and include Hoop Pole
Creek in At tic Beach, Emerald Isle Woods in Emerald Isle, and Sugarloaf Island in Morehead
City. NCCF i investigating the possibility of the acquisition of conservation easements on
about 7,000 a res of land north of the Newport River to protect water quality in the Newport and
preserve fore ed habitat. This is a high priority in the oyster action plan.
Other water q
ality improvement activities undertaken by NCCF include:
• NCCF has partnered on four stormwater projects in this basin, located at Emerald Isle
Wood (2001), Morehead City Visitor's Center (2004), Carteret Community College
(2006 , and Hoop Pole Creek (2007).
• Livin Shoreline Projects provide shoreline stabilization while also restoring wetland
habitat area and providing a stormwater buffer. Living shorelines projects in this subbasin
are lo?ated at the NC Maritime Museum in Beaufort (2001), Duke University Marine Lab
in Beaufort (2002), NC Aquarium at Pine Knoll Shores (2002), and four private locations
in Morehead City, Beaufort, Pine Knoll Shores, and Salter Path.
• Oyster habitat area has been restored through NCCF at Hoop Pole Creek in Atlantic
Beac Four distinct oyster reef areas have been restored through different projects from
1998- 006. These projects also included educational opportunities for local students and
resea ch opportunities for local universities.
126
Chapter 3- White Oak River Basin 03-05-03

Recommendations in the May 07 WOK basin plan for Calico Creek ...
ubject: Recommendations in the May 07 WOK basin plan for Calico Creek (Morehead City WWTP discharge)
From: Linda Willis <Li [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 13:21:57 -0400
To: [e-mail]
C: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
Not sure if you all
is to have
nutrient limitation
Calico Creek. The 1
Darlene Kuchen had
limitations recomen
limits for Town of
Thanks!
3.3.7 Impaired Fres
The following water
newly Impaired base
will either remain
quality improvement
list. The current s
and each is identif
Table 25 Summary of
in Subbasin 03-05-0
Class SB/SC Water
Calico Creek 21-32
T Impaire
Calico Creek LAU
2001 Status
Calico Creek was n
water quality impa
creek has experien
bacteria and nutri
(DEM 1977, 1981, 1
creek is several t
throughout the ma)
Current Status
Calico Creek, from source to Newport River (the mouth of Calico Creek is defined as beginning
at a point of land on the north shore at latitude 34 43' 46" and longitude 76 43' 07" thence across
the creek) (140.2 acres), is Impaired in the aquatic life category due to exceeding turbidity
standards in 39 percent of samples and low DO in 17 percent of samples at site PA24, and
turbidity exceedan es in 35 percent of samples at site PA25. Both sites PA24 and PA25 also had
high chlorophyll a�levels (75 and 57 percent respectively), but samples did not meet the
minimum criteria of 10 samples for use support assessment for this parameter. Calico Creek is
also Impaired in the recreation category because fecal coliform bacteria standards were exceeded
in 5 samples of 200 colonies/100 ml in a 30 day time period. Calico Creek will be added to the
state's 2008 303(d list of Impaired waters. Calico Creek is poorly flushed due to tidal
Chapter 3- White O k River Subbasin 03-05-03 123
influences and any additional inputs of nutrients or BOD may increase the potential for adverse
water quality impacts.
Calico Creek is the receiving water for the Morehead City WWTP discharge, which is currently
permitted at 1.7 MGD. Historically the WWTP has operated very close to their permitted
capacity and for nearly a decade DWQ has strongly encouraged the town to examine nondischarge
alternatives for treated wastewater disposal. A DWQ modeling evaluation determined
that the main imparts from the WWTP on dissolved oxygen levels in Calico Creek are from
oxygen -consuming wste (CBOD, NH3 and SOD) and point source nutrient loading (DWQ
1990).
The Town was placed under statutory moratorium in April 1999, after analysis showed the plant
to be operating at 93 percent of its design capacity. DWQ staff worked with the Town allowing
it to extend its collection system with construction of new sewer lines while under the
moratorium. However, the moratorium was reinstated in September 2002 because the Town was
making little progress toward satisfying the moratorium requirements. The Town was awarded a
$2,000,000 Clean W ter Grant, as well as $1,000,000 loan in 2000, to rehabilitate outdated sewer
lines. This rehabilitation project was recently completed and is expected to reduce extraneous
flow to the collection system by 200,000 GPD. In 2003, the WWTP flow exceeded the monthly
average limit nine out of twelve months despite these improvements to the collection system.
DWQ inspections of the WWTP have detected solids in the effluent and noted on -going
problems with poor settling characteristics in the clarifiers. Inspection of the plant in early
February 2005 indicated that corrective action by the WWTP has improved solids accumulation
in the clarifiers.
DWQ conducted "An Examination of Fecal Coliform, Nutrients and Their Response Variables in
Calico Creek, Carteret County, North Carolina" (March 2005) that documents impacts to Calico
Creek. Retention time within the creek is several tidal cycles as evidenced by previous DWQ
dye studies that detected dye in the upper reaches of the creek for over 36 hours. While WWTP
data is referred to as `upstream' and 'downstream' this tidal mixing results in continual
distribution of flow and pollutants. Although the creek is not DWQ classified as Class SA water,
the creek is classified as "Prohibited/Restricted" for shellfish harvesting by DEH and is
considered permanently closed to shellfish harvesting (DEH 2000). Until recently, use support
have seen the new WOK plan, it's out dated May 07 on the website. Town of Morehead City
imposed based on the results of the special study conducted by Stephanie Garrett on
st I heard
een given Gil's blessing on including nutrient limitations. . thus the nutrient
ations in the WOK. . so just wanted to remind the permitting unit to include nutrient
orehead.
water and Non -Shellfish Harvesting Waters
were either identified as Impaired in the previous basin plan (2001) or are
on recent data (Table 25). If previously identified as Impaired, the water
n the state's 303(d) list or will be delisted based on recent data showing water
. If the water is newly Impaired, it will likely be placed on the 2008 303(d)
atus and recommendations for addressing these waters are presented below,
red by an assessment unit number (AU#).
Currently Impaired Freshwater and Non -Shellfish Harvesting Waters
sessment Unit # Aquatic Life Recreation Fish Consumption
I I
-321
rated during the previous basin cycle, although studies in 1999 indicated
s from urban nonpoint sources as well as the Morehead City WWTP. The
ed water quality problems over the years, including elevated fecal coliform
t levels, algae blooms and resulting dissolved oxygen level fluctuations
88, and DWQ 2001). Dye studies have indicated that retention time in the
dal cycles and that effluent from the WWTP is continuously distributed
rity of the reach of the creek (DEM 1977, 1981).
1 of 3
7/13/2007 2:14 PM

Recommendations in the May 07 WOK basin plan for Calico Creek ...
had not been assessed because Calico Creek did not meet sampling criteria to assess the State
• standard for fecal coliform (five samples over a 30-day period). However, instream fecal
coliform monitoring equired by the Morehead City NPDES permit and further sampling by
DWQ has provided su ficient data with adequate monitoring frequency to list Calico Creek as
Impaired due to exc eding fecal coliform bacteria standards.
Elevated fecal coli orm levels are widespread throughout the Calico Creek watershed and are
from a variety of sources including Morehead City WWTP effluent, wildlife, pets and failing
septic tanks. The water quality standard for fecal coliform is 200 colonies/100 ml. Instream
sampling conducted by the WWTP has revealed extremely high levels of fecal coliform bacteria,
ranging from estimates of greater than 70,000 colonies/100 ml at the upstream site to greater than
47,000 colonies /10ml at the downstream site. The WWTP laboratory reported values were
estimated as "great r than" when sample dilutions were not sufficient to accurately count the
bacterial colonies. This also results in possible underreporting of bacterial concentrations in that
a value reported as "greater than 600" could actually have represented a count of substantially
124 Chapter 3- Whit- Oak River Basin 03-05-03
higher concentratio s. The DWQ laboratory section, as well as regional staff, have made
recommendations for the WWTP to use more appropriate dilutions. This would provide greater
accuracy in calcula ing the geometric mean as well as a more precise evaluation of whether or
not the plant is me ting its permit requirements.
Chemical data indic-te that the WWTP contributes to nutrient loading, particularly at low tide
when instream waste concentration is highest (DWQ 2001). Average nutrient levels in the
WWTP effluent between 2002 and 2005 were 2.1 mg/1 for NH3, 12.2 mg/1 for Total N, and 2.3
mg/1 for Total P. o ambient stations were established at the narrows (station P8750000) and
near the mouth (sta ion P8800000) by DWQ on Calico Creek in 2002. Chlorophyll a data, a
measurement of nutr ent loading, were not collected monthly at these stations until 2004. In
addition, phytoplan ton were collected and seven algal blooms were documented near the mouth
and two near the na rows between February 2003 and September 2004 (DWQ 2004). Algal
blooms may have bee documented more frequently had chlorophyll a and phytoplankton been
sampled monthly and not only in response to elevated DO.
2007 Recommendation-
DWQ and the Town ha e been discussing expansion of the WWTP from 1.7 MGD to 2.5 MGD,
with the constructi•n of a new 2.5 MGD treatment facility at the existing WWTP site. The
upgrade will includ- an oxidation ditch design, which incorporates a combination of anaerobic
and aerobic zones within the treatment plant to accomplish total nitrogen removal. The plant
will also have the apability to remove phosphorus. Fecal coliform and nutrient loadings are the
primary threats to ater quality in Calico Creek. The following recommendations are offered to
ensure that the exi ting and designated uses of the water body are protected and restored:
• More frequent monitoring will be required and stricter effluent limits will be effective;
old and new criteri= are listed in Table 26. Construction should be completed in two
years; while the plis permit renewal date is July 2007.
Table 26 Old and Neia Effluent Limits
Effluent Limits
Parameter Monthly Average Weekly Average
Old New Old New
BOD (summer) 20 mg/1 5 mg/1 30 mg/1 7.5 mg/1
BOD (winter) 30 mg/1 10 mg/1 45 mg/1 15 mg/1
Total Suspended Solids 30 mg/1 10 mg/1 45 mg/1 15 mg/1
NH3 as N (summer) one 1 mg/1 none 3 mg/1
NH3 as N (winter) one 2 mg/1 none 6 mg/1
Dissolved Oxygen Daily average not less than 5.0 mg/1 (old)
Daily average not less than 6.0 mg/1 (new)
Fecal Coliform 86/100 ml 14/100 ml 172/100 ml 28/100 ml
• Any existing and future discharge permits should be modified to require limits that
include a stringer daily maximum for fecal coliform. Proposed speculative limits for
Morehead City WWTP for fecal coliform include a weekly geometric mean of 28/100m1
that would still allow for potential discharge of excessive levels of fecal coliform
bacteria. Without a daily maximum limit, the monitoring requirement frequency of three
Chapter 3- White Oak River Subbasin 03-05-03 125
times per week would allow the discharge of 20,000 colonies/100m1 on one day, if the
other two observat ons within that same week were 1 colony/10om1 each.
• The proposed WWTP is capable of total nitrogen removal, as well as removal of
phosphorus. The data strongly indicate that nutrient over -enrichment is a problem in the
creek and appropriate limits should be set for both total nitrogen and total phosphorus,
per 15A NCAC 02B.0224(1)(b) which states that "where nutrient over enrichment is
projected to be a Concern, appropriate effluent limitations shall be set for phosphorous or
nitrogen, or both.
• Eventual removaliof the Morehead City discharge in favor of a non -discharge system is
strongly recommended. Operating under stricter discharge limits will facilitate future
transition to non- ischarge alternatives.
• The local gover ent is encouraged to adopt and apply stringent policies to prevent
and/or control non oint source pollution (i.e., stricter sedimentation and erosion control,
create or enhance egetated and forested buffers, site development that maximizes green
spaces and consery tion of natural areas, etc.).
• Local public education and participation initiatives on stormwater best management
practices, proper application of fertilizers and pesticides, and management of pet waste
are strongly encouraged.
• Morehead City should consider stronger ordinances to control stormwater runoff to
Calico Creek, including the development of a Phase II stormwater program.
Morehead City receiitly received DWQ authorization and was awarded contracts to construct a
$15M state of the art tertiary replacement WWTP that will have the capability of removing
nitrogen and phosphorus using ultraviolet technology for bacteria removal. The plant will be
capable of producing a Class A sludge product and reuse quality effluent, which is proposed to
2 of 3
7/13/2007 2:14 PM

Recommendations in the May 07 WOK basin plan for Calico Creek ...
-be used for irrigation purposes at two City parks (combined acreage of close to 25 acres) in close
• proximity to the WWTP. The City recently applied for a CWMTF to construct Phase 1 of its
proposed reuse distribution system (i.e. elevated tank and lines), which will distribute the reuse
effluent for irrigation use to private properties and public facilities, including a golf course and
multiple school site and parks, located along an approximately five mile area from the WWTP.
The City has also ha discussions with NCCF regarding extending this distribution system on a
regional basis to a arge tract of land that NCCF is attempting to acquire well outside the City's
jurisdiction. This tract could handle much larger quantities of reuse quality effluent for
irrigation, thus moving the City towards its goal of eventually eliminating the discharge of the
WWTP effluent into Calico Creek.
--
Linda Willis <lin [e-mail]>
Environmental Engine r I
Surface Water Protecti n Section
Division Of Water Qu ity
3 of 3
7/13/2007 2:14 PM

To: NPDES Permitting Unit
Surface Water Protection Section
Attention: Gil Vinzani/Teresa Rodriguez
Date: May 11, 2007
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Carteret
Permit No.: NC0026611
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address:
Facility N e: Town of Morehead City
Physical ddress: 1000 Treatment Plant Road, Morehead City NC 28557
Mailing Address: 706 Arendell Street, Morehead City NC 28557
2. Date of Investigation: March 6, 2007
MAY 2 5 9fl^'
3. Report Prepared by: Linda Willis
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
Name: Carl Dangerfield
Title: ORC
Telephone: [phone]
5. Directions to Site: From Arendell Street in Morehead City, travel North on Crab Point Road
(NCSR 1176) across Calico Street. Turn left on Loop Road (NCSR 1179) and travel
approximately 0.5 miles and turn left on Treatment Plant Road.
6. Discharge Point (List for all discharge points):
The facility has one (1) discharge point:
• Outfall 001
Latitude: 34° 43' 53" Longitude: 76° 44' 11"
U.S.G.S. Quad No: I 32 NW U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Beaufort
Topography (relationship to flood plain included):
8' AMSL
8. Location of nearest dwelling: within 500 feet
1

9 Receiving sitream or affected surface waters:
a) Classif cation: Calico Creek Class SC, HWQ, PNA
b) River asin and Subbasin No.: White Oak Basin 030503
c) Descri a receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
Tidal P 'mary Nursery Area creek, tributary to SA water within 1.5 miles. Downstream uses
are pri ary recreation, boating, fishing and taking of shellfish.
Excerpts taken from the White Oak Basin Plan comments concerning Calico Creek:
Calico Creek [AU# 21-32]
2001 Status
Calico Creek was not rated during the previous basin cycle, although studies in 1999 indicated
water quality impacts from urban nonpoint sources as well as the Morehead City WWTP. The
creek has exp rienced water quality problems over the years, including elevated Fecal Coli form
bacteria and n trient levels, algae blooms and resulting dissolved oxygen level fluctuations
(DEM 1977, 981, 1988, and DWQ 2001). Dye studies have indicated that retention time in the
creek is sever 1 tidal cycles and that effluent from the WWTP is continuously distributed
throughout th majority of the reach of the creek (DEM 1977, 1981).
Current Status
Calico Creek, from source to Newport River (the mouth of Calico Creek is defined as beginning
at a point of land on the north shore at latitude 34 43' 46" and longitude 76 43' 07" thence across
the creek)142 acres), is Impaired in the aquatic life category due to turbidityexceedances in
( ) P q g rY
39 percent of amples and low DO in 17 percent of samples at site PA24, and turbidity
exceedances i 35 percent of samples at site PA25. Both sites PA24 and PA25 also had high
chlorophyll a evels (75 and 57 percent respectively), but samples did not meet the minimum
criteria of 10 !amples for use support assessment for this parameter. Calico Creek is also
impaired in a recreation category due to exceedances of the Fecal Coliform bacteria standard of
200 colonies/ 00 ml in 5 samples in 30 days. Calico Creek will be added to the state's 2008
303(d) list of Impaired waters. Calico Creek is poorly flushed due to tidal influences and any
additional inputs of nutrients or BOD may increase the potential for adverse water quality
impacts.
Calico Creek 's the receiving water for the Morehead City WWTP discharge, which is currently
permitted at 1.7 MGD. Historically the WWTP has operated very close to their permitted
capacity and or nearly a decade the Division has strongly encouraged the town to examine non -
discharge alternatives for treated wastewater disposal. A DWQ modeling evaluation determined
that the main impacts from the WWTP on dissolved oxygen levels in Calico Creek are from
oxygen -consuming waste (CBOD, NH3 and SOD) and point source nutrient loading (DWQ
1990).
The Town was placed under statutory moratorium in April 1999, after analysis showed the plant
to be operati g at 93 percent of its design capacity. DWQ staff worked with the Town, allowing
2

it to extend its collection system with construction of new sewer lines while under the
moratorium. Iowever, the moratorium was reinstated in September 2002 because the Town was
making little piogress toward satisfying the moratorium requirements. The Town was awarded a
$2,000,000 Clan Water Grant, as well as $1,000,000loan in 2000 to rehabilitate outdated sewer
lines. This rehbilitation project was recently completed and is expected to reduce extraneous
flow to the col ection system by 200,000 GPD. In 2003, the WWTP flow exceeded the monthly
average limit a out of twelve months despite these improvements to the collection system.
DWQ inspecti ns of the WWTP have detected solids in the effluent and noted on -going
problems with poor settling characteristics in the clarifiers. A recent inspection of the plant in
early February 2005 indicated that corrective action by the WWTP has improved solids
accumulation ' the clarifiers.
DWQ conductd "An Examination of Fecal Coliform, Nutrients and the Response Variables in
Calico Creek, arteret County, North Carolina" (March 2005) that documents impacts to Calico
Creek. Retent on time within the creek is several tidal cycles as evidenced by previous DWQ
dye studies th t detected dye in the upper reaches of the creek for over 36 hours. While WWTP
data is referre to as `upstream' and `downstream', this tidal mixing results in continual
distribution o flow and pollutants. Although the creek is not DWQ classified as a Class SA
water, the cre is classified as "Prohibited/Restricted" for shellfishing by DEH and is considered
permanently c osed to shellfish harvesting (DEH 2000). Until recently, use support had not been
assessed because Calico Creek did not meet sampling criteria to assess the State standard for
Fecal Colifo (five samples over a 30-day period). However, instream Fecal Coliform
monitoring re uired by the Morehead City NPDES permit and further sampling by DWQ has
provided sufficient data with adequate monitoring frequency.
Elevated Fecal
from a variety
septic tanks. I
Fecal Coliforn
upstream site 1
Coliform levels are widespread throughout the Calico Creek watershed and are
of sources including Morehead City WWTP effluent, wildlife, pets and failing
nstream sampling conducted by the WWTP has revealed extremely high levels of
i bacteria, ranging from estimates of greater than 70,000 colonies/100 ml at the
o greater than 47,000 colonies /100 ml at the downstream site. The water quality
standard for Fecal Coliform is 200 colonies/100 ml. Because of these extremely high levels,
more appropriate dilutions were recommended by DWQ staff to the WWTP operators, which
would likely Have resulted in much higher levels.
Chemical data indicate that the WWTP contributes to nutrient loading; particularly at low tide
when in stream waste concentration is highest (DWQ 2001). Average nutrient levels in the
WWTP effluent between 2002 and 2005 were 2.1 mg/1 for NH3, 12.2 mg/1 for Total N, and 2.3
mg/1 for Tota P. DWQ established two ambient stations on Calico Creek beginning in 2002 at
Station P875 000 ("the narrows") and Station P8800000 ("near the mouth"). Chlorophyll a,
data, a measurement of nutrient loading, was not collected monthly until 2004. In addition,
phytoplankton was collected and seven algal blooms were documented near the mouth and two
near the narrows between February 2003 and September 2004 (DWQ 2004). Algal blooms may
have been documented more frequently had chlorophyll a and phytoplankton been sampled
monthly and of only in response to elevated DO.
3

4
2006 Recommendations
The Division afid the Town have been discussing expansion of the WWTP from 1.7 MGD to 2.5
MGD, with the construction of a new 2.5 MGD treatment facility at the existing WWTP site.
Construction is scheduled for completion by June 2007, and will include an oxidation ditch
design, which incorporates a combination of anaerobic and aerobic zones within the treatment
plant to accomplish total nitrogen removal. The plant will also have the capability to remove
phosphorus vi chemical feed equipment.
It is the reco endation of DWQ, based on the data collected and reviewed for this summary
report; Fecal oliform and nutrient loadings are the primary threats to water quality in Calico
Creek. The fl wing recommendations are offered to ensure that the existing and designated uses
of the water b dy are protected and restored:
• Any existi g and future discharge permits should be modified to require limits that include a
stringent d '1 maximum for Fecal Coliform. Proposed speculative limits for Morehead City
WWTP fo Fecal Coliform include a weekly geometric mean of 28/100m1 that would still
allow for otential discharge of excessive levels of Fecal Coliform bacteria. Without a daily
maximum limit, the monitoring requirement frequency of three times per week would allow
the discharge of 20,000 colonies/100m1 on one day, if the other two observations within that
same week were 1 colony/100m1 each.
• The proposed WWTP is capable of total nitrogen removal, as well as removal of phosphorus
via chemical feed. The data strongly indicate that nutrient over -enrichment is a problem in
the creek and appropriate limits should be set for both total nitrogen and total phosphorus, per
15A NCACC 02B.022 4(1)(b}.
• Calico Creek is a designated PNA, and therefore classified as HQW. In accordance with 15A
NCAC 02B.0224(1)(b), effluent limits for total suspended solids (TSS) should be 10 mg/1.
Eventual removal of the Morehead City discharge in favor of a non -discharge system is
strongly recommended. Operating under stricter discharge limits will facilitate future
transition to non -discharge alternatives.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1) Volume of wastewater to be permitted:
As per permit application:
• Outfa11001-1.7 MGD
2) What is the current permitted flow limit?
• Outfail 001-1.7 MGD
3) Actual treatment capacity of the current facility?
1.7 MGD
4

4
a
4) Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to Construct issued in the
previous two years:
A to C No 026611A01 issued by the Division on November 3, 2006 for the upgrade of the
existing P
capacity w
DIP force
capability
meter, aer
210,000 g
secondary
chlorinatio
sludge re
sludge de
lime sludg
5) Please
p Station No. 10 with 2 x 1,850 gpm variable speed pumps, a 10,000 gallon
t well, standby power generation, replacement of exiting 10" DIP force main with 12'
ain, existing 1.7 MGD WWTP to be replaced with a 2.5 MGD WWTP with the
f producing reuse quality effluent consisting of new headworks with influent flow
ed grit removal, dual oxidation ditches (total volume of 3,125,000) including two
llon anoxic reactors, rotors, mixers, and mixed liquor recycle pumps; 2 x 70 foot
larifiers, two (2) 12.5' x 48' tertiary traveling bridge filter, dual channel liquid
dechlorination/post aeration system, two (2) 45' diameter sludge digesters with dual
pumps, sludge wasting pump and standby power for class A sludge production,
atering system with belt press and polymer feed system, sludge drying facility or a
stabilization/pasteurization system
• r 'vide a descri i tion o existin • or substantiall constructed wastewater treatment
facilities:
Mechanical Bar Screen, grit removal system, influent flow meter, dual primary clarifiers, dual
trickling fiters, dual secondary clarifiers, dual chlorine contact chamber, post aeration chamber,
effluent flow meter, two aerobic digesters, twelve sludge drying beds.
6) Please pr vide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: Please see
description of proposed system in Part II.4.
7) Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: chlorine
8) Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
Residuals
handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
The facility utilizes Synagro Southeast Inc., under Permit No. WQ0006017.
Compliance history for this facility within the past permit cycle is as follows:
The facility has had a history of permit limitation violations for primarily flow, although
BOD-5 dy, DOL and Fecal Coliform exceedances have occurred. See attached NPDES
Permit Violation Summary for details.
9) Treatment plant classification: Type: Biological Trickling Filters
Class: Class 3
10) SIC Code(s): 4952
5

PART IV - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
(municipals only) involved?
A $3.1 million CWMTF grant was applied for and money secured to complete Phase I that was
to include a reuse component to eliminate up to 60,000 gpd of wastewater to the Town of
Morehead P. The town received grant monies from CG&L to purchase a 30,000 gpd
package pl t to eliminate 30,000 gpd of wastewater from the Town of Morehead City's WWTP
at Treatme t Drive. Effluent from the package plant was supposed to be applied to a 15 acre
soccer fiel and a 5 acre field next to the package plant on 25th street. To date, the City is
sending w tewater untreated through the package plant and pumping it over to the City's
WWTP on Treatment Drive. The package plant is not being utilized nor has been for a long
period of tune. Recently a WiRO representative has requested investigation into the reason why
the grant given by CG&L would be used in this manner. To date the City has not made good on
it's proms a to eliminate 60,000 gpd of wastewater to the wastewater treatment plant on
Treatment Drive by using a portion of the effluent for reuse, nor are they operating the package
plant and isposing of the effluent by way of spray irrigation. Furthermore, CWMTF monies
were sou t for the upgrade to their facility whereby the application identifying reuse
components. WiRO has requested an inquiry by the appropriate grantors to ensure the proposal
made by ,e City to secure the grants is being used accordingly and the environment is able to
benefit from the monies granted.
2. Special m nitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
N/A
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates:
N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation:
N/A
5. Other Special Items:
N/A
PART V - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Please include a TSS limitation of 10 mg/L upon permit renewal for both the 1.7 MGD flow and the
2.5 MGD flow limitation pages due to the fact that Calico Creek is a Primary Nursery Area classified
by Marine Filsheries. Please include total nutrient limits in the expanded flow limitations page.
Nutrient over -enrichment has not only been a projected concern, but an identified concern based
upon the studies conducted by DWQ (see Part I. 9. c. above). While increasing the discharge to
Calico Creel was not an option WiRO agreed with, the City has at least proposed reuse options to
lessen the impact and build a facility with heightened treatment capabilities to reduce the pollutant
loading to Calico Creek. Unless the Division imposes more restrictive limitations in line with the
treatment capabilities that will be provided when the facility expands, the Division has not taken the
6

a f
appropriate steps to ensure every protective measure for the receiving stream is being utilized or
exercised. With proper operation, a BNR plant can meet TN limits of 5 mg/L. TP limits of 2 mg/L
can be easily achieved when using chemical addition. A BNR plant can also be operated like any
other conventional biological system by not utilizing the BNR capabilities provided. The result is
simply conversion of ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen with the same nutrient loading to the
receiving stream. To Calico Creek, this is quite detrimental. At some point the Division must be
willing to impdse nutrient limitations when BNR technologies are provided. The Town of Morehead
City is proposing to build a state of the art BNR plant to help lessen the impacts of obtaining the
additional flow that the Division reluctantly granted.
Provided no s gnificant adverse public comment is received, the Wilmington Regional Office
recommends reissuance of NPDES Permit No. NC0026611 in accordance with the White Oak River
Basin plan permitting strategy (see Part I. 9. c. above), Enterococci Bacteria Standard for Coastal
Waters (Memorandum dated July 28, 2006) and in accordance with the Procedures for Assignment
of Water Quality Standards (15A NCAC 2B.0224). The Wilmington Regional Office also requests
that the recom_nendations provided herein are considered in the reissuance of this permit.
t
Sign e of Report Preparer
Date
�4-'-f- S //( / p 7
Water Quality Regional Supervisor Date
cc: WiRO NPDES Permit File Carteret NC0026611
Central Files — DWQ/NPDES
Linda Willis - WiRO
7

a
DEMUS L. THOMPSON, Mayor Pro-Tem
Council 706 Arendell Street
GEORGE W. BALLOU Morehead City, North Carolina 28557-4234
PAUL W. CORDOVA TEL [phone]
DAVID HORTON FAX [phone]
JOHN F. NELSON www.townofmorehead.com
MOREHEAD CITY
January 10, 2007
NORTH CAROLINA
Mrs. C lyn Bryant
NCDE WQ/Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Subject:
Permit Renewal
Dear Mrs. Bryant,
GERALD A. JONES, JR., Mayor
R. RANDY MARTIN
City Manager
Enclosed is The Town of Morehead City's permit renewal application for
the 1.7 MGD wastewater treatment plant, NC0026611. There have been no
changes to the facility since the issuance of the last permit that expires on
July 31, 2007.
Our sludge management program consists of aerobic digestion, drying beds,
and land application. The permit number is WQ0006018 and is under the
direction of SynaGro South.
Please feel free to contact me at 252-726-6237 if you have any questions or
need additional information.
Sincerely,
Carl Dangerfield
WWTP Supervisor/ORC
Town 7`f Morehead City
ADA/EOE/P Equal Opportunity Employee Provider

isBco
Morehaa 1 C 'gin,
Digesters
Primary Clarifier.;
F'dr,•
Grr Remover
The average person produces 100-170 gallons of
wastewater per day. The averages household produces
3,000-5,000 gallons of wastewater per month. The
wastewater entering the treatment plant is 99.9% water
and only 0.1% solid waste. The purpose of a wastewater
treatment plant is to remove the waste from the water
and reduce the threat to public health.
The Morehead City Wastewater Treatment Plant
has a maximum capacity of 3,000,000 gallons per day. It
has a permitted capacity of 1,700,000 gallons per day.
The permitted capacity is the maximum amount of water
that can be released by the plant legally, The NPDES
permit regulates the amount of water released by a treat-
ment plant and the chemical conditions of that water.
The water coming into the plant (influent) under-
goes pretreatment in the GRIT REMOVER. The grit re-
mover takes out the heavy coarse material (sand, gravel,
egg shells, seeds, etc.), aerates and freshens the
wastewater. A flow -measuring device is located at the
point to record the volume and rate of flow of water enter-
ing the plant. The water then flows to a SPLITTER BOX
which divides the flow between two PRIMARY CLARI-
FIERS. In a primary clarifier the water undergoes primary
treatment. The clarifier allows oil, grease, and other light
materials to float to the water's surface and be removed
by a skimmer arm. The insoluble materials settle to the
bottom and are pumped to the DIGESTERS. The water
then flows to the TRICKLING FILTERS where it under-
goes secondary treatment.
Secondary treatment is a biological process
whereby millions of micro-organisms consume and stabi-
lize the organic material in the water. The slime on the
Recirculation
3uilding
Chlorine
Contact
Chamber 1
Bioso ids Drying Beds
Contact
Chamber 2
trickling filter media is produced by the micro-
organisms as they feed and grow. From the trickling
filters, the water flows into the SECONDARY CLARI-
FIERS. Insoluble material and anything that has
sloughed off the media is allowed to settle in these
clarifiers and is pumped to the digesters.
The last stop for the water before it leaves the
plant is the CHLORINE CONTACT CHAMBERS. Here
chlorine gas is added as a disinfectant before the the
treated water (effluent) is discharged into the receiving
stream. One ton cylinders of chlorine gas and the nec-
essary chlorination equipment are located at the
CHLORINE ROOM. Pumps which recirculate water
through the trickling filters and sludge pumps which
carry biosolids to the digesters are located in the RE-
CIRCULATION BUILDING.
The biosolids pumped from the bottom of the
clarifiers is deposited in the DIGESTERS. The materi-
als in the biosolids are further broken down by micro-
organisms. The "digested" biosolids contain materials
which cannot be decomposed any further. This mate-
rial is spread on BIOSOLIDS DRYING BEDS. Here it
is allowed to dry before it is placed in a storage build-
ing. It will eventually be spread on a farmers' fields as
fertilizer.
All treatment processes are monitored in the
wastewater laboratory. Samples of influent and efflu-
ent water are collected daily and brought there for
analysis. Shop buildings contain spare parts, tools and
other equipment necessary for maintenance and repair
of all plant equipment. The primary objective is to
keep the plant running efficiently.