NC0081621_Fact Sheet_20210510

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO081621
Permit Writer/Email Contact Cassidy Kurtz, [e-mail]:
Date: May 10, 2021
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑ Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
© Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information:
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Water & Sewer Authority of Cabarrus County/Muddy Creek WWTP
Applicant Address:
6400 Breezy Lane, Concord, NC 28025
Facility Address:
14655 Hopewell Church Road, Midland, NC 28107
Permitted Flow:
0.3 and 1.0 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
Municipal; 97.7% domestic and 2.3% industrial at 0.3 MGD / 99.3%
domestic and 0.7% industrial at 1.0 MGD (based on permitted flows)
Facility Class:
Class II (0.3 MGD) & Class III (1.0 MGD)
Treatment Units:
Bar Screen, Equalization basin, Aeration basins, Aerated sludge holding
tanks, Clarifiers, Tertiary filters and UV Disinfection
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Yes
County:
Cabarrus
Region
Mooresville
Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Water and Sewer Authority
of Cabarrus County (WSACC), herein called WSACC or Permittee, applied for a permit modification for
Muddy Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on April 30, 2018. The Permittee's 5-year NPDES
permit expires on October 31, 2023. The facility services Town of Midland (1463 residents) and operates
Page 1 of 14

a full pretreatment program which was established in 2017 with 1 Significant Industrial User (SIU); tape
polymer facility.
The requested modification includes expansion that will take place by building a new facility with a
permitted flow of 1.0 MGD adjacent to the existing one. The proposed facility will be constructed with two
parallel process trains (0.5 MGD each) consisting of conventional wastewater treatment system utilizing an
activated sludge process followed by enhanced filtration and ultraviolet disinfection (Fig. 1). Once the new
facility is constructed and receives an authorization to operate, the existing facility will be taken offline.
The new facility will have a new outfall (Outfall 002) which will discharge into the same receiving stream,
Rocky River, as the existing outfall 001. The general location of the new outfall will be in the area near 35°
12' 26.38" N and 80° 29' 32.70" W. The required Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA) was included
with the expansion application and will be evaluated for justification of the expansion.
Screening
Clarifier
ge
12
�a
Clarifier
RASIWAS
WAS
Filtration
•
Disinfection
Outfall 002 to
Rocky River
Figure 1. Proposed 1.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Outfall 002
Page 2 of 14

An Authorization to Construct (A to C No. 081621A02) was issued to the Permittee in December 2016 for
expansion from 0.15 MGD to 0.3 MGD. The Division received the Engineer's Certification for such
construction on March 15, 2019. Currently the facility is operating at a permitted flow of 0.3 MGD.
The last USGS stream flow data was obtained in November of 2015 and has been used to calculate the IWC
and other dilution factors in this fact sheet.
2. Receiving Waterbodv Information:
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfalls 001 & 002 — Rocky River
Stream Segment:
13-17
Stream Classification:
C
Drainage Area (mi2):
553 1
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
38.7 1
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
83 1
30Q2 (cfs):
94 1
Average Flow (cfs):
525 1
IWC (% effluent):
1.2% (0.3 MGD) and 3.9% (1.0 MGD)
303(d) listed/parameter:
Yes, the segment is listed in the 2018 303(d) for Copper, Zinc
and Turbidity impairment
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
Yes- State-wide Mercury TMDL implementation.
Subbasin/HUC:
03-07-12; 03040105
USGS Topo Quad:
G 17 NW
1 based on information provided by USGS in 2015
Page 3 of 14

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of September 2015 through October
2019.
Table 3. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Permit
Limit
Flow-
MGD
0.12
0.40
0.06
MA 0.30
BOD summer
mg/L
4.65
39.0
< 2.0
WA 15.0
MA 10.0
BOD winter
mg/L
5.09
46.0
< 2.0
WA 30.0
MA 20.0
TSS
mg/L
6.96
58.8
< 2.5
WA 45.0
MA 30.0
NH3N summer
mg/L
1.92
181.0
< 0.1
WA 12.0
MA 4.0
NH3N winter
mg/L
1.48
25.6
< 0.1
WA 24.0
MA 8.0
DO
mg/L
8.92
13.3
6.2
DA > 5.0
Fecal coliform
#/100 mL
217.34
60,000
< 1.0
(geometric)
WA 400
MA 200
TRC
µg/L
No data reported (UV)
DM 28.0
(< 50
compliance)
Temperature
° C
20.8
31.0
7.0
pH
SU
6.72
8.4
6.0
6.0 < pH
9.0
Hardness
mg/L
66.1
90.2
52.2
MA -Monthly Average, WA -Weekly Average, DM -Daily Maximum, DA=Daily Average
* Facility is operating at the flow of 0.3 MGD as of April 2019
Effluent data for Outfall 002 is not available since the facility has not been constructed yet.
Page 4 of 14

4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions
when model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/1 of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to
verify model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other
instream concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also
Monitoring Coalitions established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in
which case instream monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action: The current permit requires instream monitoring for Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Temperature and
Hardness (only upstream). These parameters are among those collected by the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Association (YPDRBA). Review of the coalition -collected instream data from January 2017 through
December 2018 at stations 8355000 (upstream) and 8385000 (downstream) revealed that the DO standard
of 5.0 mg/L was largely maintained, and there were no significant differences between upstream and
downstream (ANOVA, p > 0.5). The average over the period analyzed indicated that DO was 7.4 mg/L and
7.6 mg/L for upstream and downstream stations, respectively. Temperature values were nearly identical
between upstream and downstream sites with a maximum differential being 0.6 °C, less than the 2.8 °C
temperature standard in NCAC 2B. The upstream hardness data for the period January 2018 through
September 2019 averaged 89.1 mg/L. Tables 4 and 5 summarize the instream data at the upstream and
downstream, respectively. Since the facility established a full pretreatment program in 2017; therefore,
instream monitoring for conductivity will be added to the permit. This draft permit maintains the same
instream monitoring requirements for DO, Temperature and upstream Hardness.
Table 4: Instream monitoring at Upstream Station (8355000)
DO
Temperature
Hardness
mg/L
°C
mg/L
Average
7.4
19.6
89.1
Max
10.0
29.3
115.0
Min
6.0
5.1
55.0
Table 5: Instream monitoring at Downstream Station (8385000)
DO
Temperature
mg/L
°C
Average
7.6
19.6
Max
10.5
29.1
Min
6.2
5.0
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (Y/N): YES
Name of Monitoring Coalition: Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association (YPDRBA)
Page 5 of 14

5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): The facility reported a total of
8 limit violations from January 2015 to December 2019. Broken down by parameter, these include 1 BOD,
1 Fecal Coliform, 4 flow and 2 NH3-N. The BOD exceeded the weekly average in 2017, Fecal coliform
exceeded the weekly geometric mean in 2017, flow exceeded monthly average in 2018 and 2019 and NH3-
N exceeded the weekly average and the monthly average in July 2017. The violations resulted in 4 Notices
of Violation (NOVs) and 4 Notices of Deficiency (NODs).
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results
(past 5 years): Since January 2019, the facility passed 4 of 4 quarterly chronic toxicity tests, as well as all
1 second species chronic toxicity tests.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The last facility inspection conducted
in 2018 reported that the facility was operating properly.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B. 0204(b): NA
Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD= 30 mg/1 for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Ifpermit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: For the flow 0.3 MGD,
Limitations for BOD are based on 1993 QUAL2E model for instream DO protection. No changes are
proposed from the current permit limits.
BOD limitations for 1.0 MGD flow tier will be based on 2007 Speculative limits (based on QUAL2E model)
which was confirmed by a recently updated 2019 QUAL2K model that exists for the Rocky River.
Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/1 (summer) and 1.8 mg/1 (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Page 6 of 14

Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 ug/1) and capped at 28 ug/1 (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/1 are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: No changes in
ammonia nitrogen limits are proposed from the current permit for 0.3 MGD flow.
For 1.0 MGD flow, the ammonia limits will be based on the speculative limits issued to the facility in 2007
(based on QUAL2E model) which were confirmed by a recently updated 2019 QUAL2K model exists for
the Rocky River. Table 6 summarizes the NH3-N limit for each tiered flow.
Table 6. NH3-N Limit
Q=0.3MGD
Q=1.OMGD
Season
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Summer
4.0 mg/L
12.0 mg/L
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
Winter
8.0 mg/L
24.0 mg/L
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of %2 detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between September 2018
and October 2019. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water
quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for this
permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable
water quality standards/criteria: NA
• Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria,
but the maximum predicted concentration was >50% of the allowable concentration: NA
• No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality
standards/criteria and the maximum predicted concentration was <50% of the allowable
concentration: Arsenic, Beryllium, Cadmium, Total Chromium, Copper, Lead, Nickel,
Selenium, Silver and Zinc.
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans were evaluated for
additional pollutants of concern.
Page 7 of 14

o The following parameter(s) will receive a water quality -based effluent limit (WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set, two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration: NA
o The following parameter(s) will receive a monitor -only requirement, since as part of a
limited data set, one sample exceeded the allowable discharge concentration: NA
If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.
Toxicity Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This is a POTW and a chronic WET limit at 1.2% (0.3 MGD)
effluent will continue on a quarterly frequency. In addition, a chronic WET limit at 3.9% (1.0 MGD)
effluent will be added to the permit on a quarterly frequency.
Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year) and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (-2% of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (>1 ng/1) will receive
an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case -by -case basis, depending if mercury is a pollutant
of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed the WQBEL
value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/1) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value of 47 ng/1.
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since the current permit became effective
in January 2019, the Permittee has not submitted mercury data using the EPA low mercury method 1631E.
The current permit requires the Permittee to monitor mercury as part of its three effluent pollutant scans
using EPA test method 1631 E. Such monitoring will be in 2021 and 2022. No changes are proposed from
the current permit.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation
within this permit: NO TMDL for Turbidity for Rocky River in Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: NA
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody: NA
Page 8 of 14

If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with
15ANCAC 2H.0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007Memo: NA
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/1
BOD5/TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg/l for BOD5/TSS for Weekly Average). YES
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Are 85% removal requirements for BOD5/TSS included in the permit? YES
If NO, provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit
must document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105( c)(2). In all
cases, existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is
maintained and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: Muddy Creek WWTP requested an expansion from
0.3 MGD to 1.0 MGD which will take place by building a new facility adjacent to the existing one. An
Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA) was submitted using the Guidance Documents for EAA by the
Division.
Flow Justification and Engineering Alternative Analyses (EAA) for Expansion
Flow Justification: Based on the 20-year projected population, commercial, and industrial growth in Muddy
Creek WWTP service area, total projected wastewater flow will reach 0.53 MGD in the year 2040. In
addition, The Permittee received several requests for new developments that will require additional flow of
about 0.48 MGD. The permittee submitted such requests to the division on September 12, 2019. Moreover,
the permittee has an existing commitment of 0.13 MGD. The Division concurs with such proposed
expansion of total 1.0 MGD. The permit will include flow tiers of 0.3 (outfall 001) and 1.0 MGD (new
facility-outfall 002).
Alternative Analyses:
Evaluation of costs for alternatives were provided for proposed expansion.
1. Connection to an existing WWTP — This alternative requires construction of multiple wastewater
pumping stations and force mains to convey untreated wastewater to Rocky River Regional WWTP
(RRRWWTP). Approximately 12.5 miles of pipelines along the Highway 601 corridor, with 1500
feet of cased crossings is required. Each pump station would require some form of odor control
technology, as well as the respective instrumentation and control and electrical work. However,
RRRWWTP rejected this alternative. The total present value was estimated for $ 25,294,631.
Page 9 of 14

2. Land application of treated effluent — This alternative requires construction of a WWTP to treat 1.0
MGD to land application standards, spray irrigation system as well as a 30-day storage basin to
store residual water during extended periods of wet weather. In addition, this option needs to secure
nearly 134 acres of land to apply treated wastewater on land. The total present value including
purchasing a nearby 200 acres land was estimated for $ 35,263,575.
3. Water Reuse — this alternative requires construction of a WWTP to treat 1.0 MGD to levels safe
for human contact, pump station, connecting piping to a nearby golf course, a 30-day of water
storage, and equalization basin. The golf course has an established irrigation system and is
approximately 500 acres in size which is larger than the 134 acres required for the land application
alternative. The total present value was estimated for $ 32,781,269.
4. Direct Discharge to Surface Waters — this option requires construction of a WWTP on a separate
area of the existing treatment plant property with the discharge of the treated effluent to Rocky
River. The facility will be designed in such a way that would allow expansion through additional
construction to 1.5 MGD if needed. The total present value was estimated for $ 23,333,557.
5. Combination of Alternatives — Any of the above alternatives except the first alternative would
require the construction of a WWTP to treat 1.12 MGD; therefore, any combination of the above
alternatives is not considered economically feasible since will add extra cost to the project.
The Division concurs with the EAA conclusion that the direct discharge to surface water alternative
is the most environmentally sound alternative selected from all reasonably cost-effective options
(per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2))
A SEPA report is not required for this expansion under current NC regulation.
9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): NO
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: NA
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.0500; 2) NPDES
Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance, Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti -backsliding
prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
The facility requested to modify the monitoring frequency for BOD5, TSS, NH3-N and Fecal Coliform
which was approved in September 2014. The reduced monitoring frequency was evaluated during 2018
NPDES permit renewal and such evaluation resulted in maintaining the reduced monitoring frequencies for
Page 10 of 14

BOD5, TSS, NH3-N and Fecal Coliform for the 0.3 MGD flow tier. However, the permit specified that for
the first six months after expansion to 0.3 MGD, sampling would be 3/week. Sampling reverted to 2/week
after the first six months, starting in October 2019. The reduced monitoring frequency will be re-evaluated
during next permit cycle.
In regards to 1.0 MGD facility, sampling will be conducted in accordance with the 15A NCAC 2B .0500
until the Permittee requests to modify the monitoring frequency and sufficient data is collected to
demonstrate consistent, long-term treatment performance under new conditions. Three years of data will be
needed to demonstrate consistent, long term treatment performance under the new conditions to qualify for
a reduction in sampling.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective
December 21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports
(DMRs) electronically. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional
NPDES reports electronically effective December 21, 2020, EPA extended this deadline from December
21, 2020, to December 21, 2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4, 2021, was extended as
a final regulation change published in the November 2, 2020 Federal Register. This permit contains the
requirements for electronic reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.
12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
Table 7. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes for 0.3 MGD Flow
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 0.3 MGD
No change
15A NCAC 2B .0505
BOD5
Summer:
MA 10.0 mg/1
WA 15.0 mg/1
Winter:
MA 20.0 mg/1
WA 30.0 mg/1
No change
WQBEL. Based on 1993 QUAL2E
model and protection of DO
standard 15A NCAC 02B.
TSS
MA 30.0 mg/1
WA 45.0 mg/1
No change.
TBEL. Secondary treatment
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
2B .0406
NH3-N
Summer.
No change.
WQBEL. Based on 1993 QUAL2E
model and protection of DO
standard 15A NCAC 02B.
MA 4.0 mg/1
WA 12.0 mg/1
Winter:
MA 8.0 mg/1
WA 24.0 mg/1
DO
? 5 mg/1
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B
Fecal Coliform
MA 200 /100m1
WA 400 /100m1
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B
Page 11 of 14

TRC
DM 28 µg/L
No change
WQBEL. Based on protection of
State WQ criteria (WLA). 15A
NCAC 2B
Temperature
Monitor 3/week
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B
pH
6 — 9 SU
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B
Conductivity
No requirement
Add effluent and
instream monitoring
Facility established full pretreatment
program in 2017. WQBEL. State
WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Toxicity Test
Chronic limit, 1.2%
effluent
No change
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
amounts. 15A NCAC 2B.0200 and
15A NCAC 2B.0500
Effluent Pollutant
Scan
Three times per permit
cycle
No change, 2021,
2022
40 CFR 122
Total Hardness
Monitor Quarterly
No change
Hardness -dependent dissolved
metals water quality standards
approved 2016
Electronic
Reporting
required
Updated language for
Phase 2 Extension
In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD — Million gallons per day, MA -Monthly Average, WA — Weekly Average, DM — Daily Max
Table 8. Proposed Permit Conditions for 1.0 MGD flow.
Parameter
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 1.0 MGD
15A NCAC 2B .0505, EAA report and submitted
request from development community
BOD5
Summer:
MA 5.0 mg/L
WA 7.5 mg/L
Winter:
MA 10.0 mg/L
WA 15.0 mg/L
WQBEL. Based on speculative limits of 2007
(QUAL2E model) confirmed by 2019 QUAL2K
model. Protection of DO standard 15A NCAC 2B.
TSS
MA 30.0 mg/L
WA 45.0 mg/L
TBEL. Secondary treatment standards/40 CFR
133 / 15A NCAC 2B .0406
NH3-N
Summer:
MA 1.0 mg/L
WA 3.0 mg/L
Winter:
MA 2.O mg/L
WA 6.0 mg/L
WQBEL. Based on speculative limits of 2007
(QUAL2E model) confirmed by 2019 QUAL2K
model. Protection of DO standard 15A NCAC 2B.
Page 12 of 14

DO
> 5 mg/L
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Fecal Coliform
MA 200 /100mL
WA 400 /100mL
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
TRC
DM 28 µg/L
WQBEL. Based on protection of State WQ
criteria (WLA). 15A NCAC 2B
Temperature
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
pH
6 — 9 SU
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Total Nitrogen
Monitor Monthly
15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Total Phosphorus
Monitor Monthly
15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Conductivity
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B
Toxicity Test at
Chronic limit, 3.9% effluent
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts. 15A
NCAC 2B.0200 and 15A NCAC 2B.0500
Effluent Pollutant
Scan
Three times per permit cycle after
Engineering Certification
40 CFR 122
Total Hardness
Add effluent and upstream Quarterly
Monitoring
Hardness -dependent dissolved metals water
quality standards approved 2016
Electronic
Reporting
Required — Updated language for
Phase 2 Extension
In accordance with EPA Electronic Reporting
Rule 2015.
13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 01/15/2020
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact:
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Cassidy Kurtz at (919) 707 - 3613 or via email at [e-mail].
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): YES
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:
• Per the permittee's comments, the Facility's Components list has been updated on the
Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet and in the Fact Sheet to incorporate the aerated sludge
holding tanks and remove the aerobic digesters.
Page 13 of 14

• Per the permittee's comments, the process flow diagram in the Fact Sheet has been
corrected.
• As the Monitoring Coalition will not be conducting hardness sampling on behalf of the
permittee, the footnote language in Sections A. (1.) and A. (2.) has been updated.
• A notation was made concerning the Electronic Reporting Rule — NPDES Electronic
Reporting Rule — Phase 2 Extension. EPA extended the Phase 2 deadline to December
21, 2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4, 2021, was extended as a final
regulation change published in the November 2, 2020 Federal Register. [See A. (6.)]
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• Dissolved Metals Implementation/Freshwater or Saltwater
• NH3-N and TRC WLA for 0.3 MGD and 1.0 MGD
• Data Summary for Reduced NPDES Permit Monitoring Frequency
• Pretreatment information request form
• WET Testing results
• Compliance Evaluation Report
• Monitoring Report Violations summary sheet
• Muddy Creek WWTP Speculative Limit Review Memorandum
Page 14 of 14

Independent Tribune
Advertising Affidavit
PO Box 968
Hickory, NC 28603
NC DENR/DWQ
ATTN: WREN THEDFORD
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
Account Number
3142720
Date
January 17, 2020
Date Category
Description
Ad Number Ad Size
01/17/2020
Legal Notices
M111CNOIIC
North l]minf mismrilWrmeamlDmredWMOESVaIt
1tlTiliSrdaCads
Weigh, NC I!B!•1i1T
Nola d Mint lo Me a 1l5S Weak: Funk 1102111611 lMla
Crtek
The North Carolina EtrirmmiW hlrmgm ent Ceorissln propose to
Isms a 1WDES rastewaer dsdwge pent to the personal Tsted beim
Witten came regrdmg the proposed permit wit be accepted oral
31 days after the polish date of OM relic. The Meek( of the NC Dik
sin of Water Resources (Ciro ory hold a pubic hearlg staid owe be
ask eii degree of pulic Merest Please rai amends and/or infor-
mation requests to DWB at the ibex address Wrested paws may ds-
It tlr DWR at 512 k Salsbury Stint Raleigh, NC to riven 'Anodise
on 1k. Additional idamaiar m IWDES permits and the colic may be
ford a or webefr Its//dWrgoe/alad/drsiomJw+er-momce
/watr-resamtts-perm tstratente-breMpdesinsteaate/pine
oaken rbycrag(919)10ydi8L TheWater dSeam Margot Cab•
ams Canty has regrsted modification of mat IC0381621 fa Ns Mud-
dy Credo WWTP In Cabams County; ttis permitted &dame Is heated
wastexaer to the Wcty Ever, in the YaddsPee Dee liver Rasa M-
indy BOD, ammonia nitrogen, dssohcd oxygen, fed cdibnq and tall
residual ddorine re weer gudIy 6idM
'disk Fdday, lnary 1T, 21S
Public Notice North Carolina Environmental Management Comm 0000625548
Publisher of
Independent Tribune
Cabarrus County
2 x 26 L
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of Iredell County, North Carolina, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths, 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 copy of which is attached
hereto, was published in the Independent Tribune on the following dates:
01/17/2020
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, or legal advertisement was
published, was a newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications
Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
Assistant Bookkeeper
Newspaper reference: 0000625548
Swom to and subscribed before me, this „� day of 2020
Notary Public
My Commission expires: Mat/ a,7/ �aa
THIS IS NOT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THANK YOU
\
,,,\\\EvA W ROO'��''.
QQ� cc�`
Notary Public
Iredell County =
-, O?TH CARC\.\ ,

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: Qais Banihani, DWR Complex Permitting Branch
FROM: Pam Behm, DWR Modeling and Assessment Branch
SUBJECT: Muddy Creek WWTP Speculative Limit Review
DATE: Sept 3, 2019
CC: Julie Gryzb, Bongghi Hong
The Division of Water Resources (DWR) Modeling and Assessment Branch has completed review of the
Speculative Limits assigned to the Muddy Creek WWTP in 2007 for an expansion to 1 MGD. A recently
updated (2019) Qual2k model exists for the Rocky River, based on an expansion request for Mallard
Creek WRF. The Branch used the updated Rocky River Qual2k model to evaluate the speculative limits.
Note that two sets of scenarios were run: 1) both winter and summer with Mallard Creek WRF at
current 12 MGD; 2) both winter and summer with Mallard Creek WRF at 16 MGD. Values used for the
Muddy Creek WWTP are as follows:
Muddy Creek Scenarios:
Summer
BOD5 — 5 mg/L
NH3 —1 mg/L
Flow —1 MGD
Winter
BOD5 —10 mg/L
NH3 - 2 mg/L
Flow —1 MGD
The following graphs show the relative impact of the expansion on dissolved oxygen levels in Rocky
River. The model results suggest that the limits provided in the 2007 Speculative Limits request are
appropriate.
1

Summer (with Muddy Creek at 1 MGD and Mallard Creek at 12 MGD):
10
9
8
J
E
O 7
4
Rocky River QUAL2K Model Predictions for Proposed Expansion
of Muddy Creek WWTP from 0.3 MGD to 1 MGD
(Summertime, Mallard Creek WRF at 12 MGD)
80 70 60 50 40
River Mile
30
Muddy Creek WWTP at 0.3 MGD
Muddy Creek WWTP at 1 MGD
DO Standard
20
10
Winter (with Muddy Creek at 1 MGD and Mallard Creek at 12 MGD):
10 -
9
.� 8
J
E
O 7
0
4
Rocky River QUAL2K Model Predictions for Proposed Expansion
of Muddy Creek WWTP from 0.3 MGD to 1 MGD
(Wintertime, Mallard Creek WRF at 12 MGD)
Rocky River WWTP
,7
Mallard Creek WRF
2
— Muddy Creek WWTP at 0.3 MGD
— Muddy Creek WWTP at 1 MGD
DO Standard
Monroe WWTP
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
River Mile
0

Summer (with Muddy Creek at 1 MGD and Mallard Creek at 16 MGD):
10
9
8
ea
E
O 7
6
5
Rocky River QUAL2K Model Predictions for Proposed Expansion
of Muddy Creek WWTP from 0.3 MGD to 1 MGD
(Summertime, Mallard Creek WRF at 16 MGD)
Ma
4
80 70 60
a
0
0
8
1.
—Muddy Creek WWTP at 0.3 MGD
—Muddy Creek WWTP at 1 MGD
DO Standard
ha-
50 40 30 20 10 0
River Mile
Winter (with Muddy Creek at 1 MGD and Mallard Creek WRF at 16 MGD):
10
9
8
J
ea
E
0 7
6
5
4
Rocky River QUAL2K Model Predictions for Proposed Expansion
of Muddy Creek WWTP from 0.3 MGD to 1 MGD
(Wintertime, Mallard Creek WRF at 16 MGD)
Muddy Creek WWTP at 0.3 MGD
Muddy Creek WWTP at 1 MGD
DO Standard
80 70 60 50 40
River Mile
30 20
10 0

Permit No. NC0081621
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard (WQS) Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6, 2016, with some exceptions. Therefore, metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6, 2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards - as
approved.
Table 1. NC Dissolved Metals Water Quality Standards/Aquatic Life Protection
Parameter
Acute FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Acute SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Arsenic
340
150
69
36
Beryllium
65
6.5
---
---
Cadmium
Calculation
Calculation
40
8.8
Chromium III
Calculation
Calculation
---
---
Chromium VI
16
11
1100
50
Copper
Calculation
Calculation
4.8
3.1
Lead
Calculation
Calculation
210
8.1
Nickel
Calculation
Calculation
74
8.2
Silver
Calculation
0.06
1.9
0.1
Zinc
Calculation
Calculation
90
81
Table 1 Notes:
1. FW= Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
2. Calculation = Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
2B.0200 (e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/1 for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2. Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness -Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph (11)(d)
Metal
NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium, Acute
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} • e^{0.9151 [In hardness]-3.1485}
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} • e^{0.9151[ln hardness]-3.6236}
Cadmium, Chronic
WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} • e^{0.7998[ln hardness]-4.4451}
Chromium III, Acute
WER*0.316 • e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}
Chromium III, Chronic
WER*0.860 • e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}
Copper, Acute
WER*0.960 • e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700}
Copper, Chronic
WER*0.960 • e^ {0.8545 [In hardness]-1.702}
Lead, Acute
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[In hardness]-1.460}
Lead, Chronic
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[In hardness]-4.705}
Nickel, Acute
WER*0.998 • e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}
Nickel, Chronic
WER*0.997 • e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NC0081621
Silver, Acute
WER*0.85 - e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59}
Silver, Chronic
Not applicable
Zinc, Acute
WER*0.978 - e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
Zinc, Chronic
WER*0.986 . e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness -dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness -based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream (upstream) hardness
and so must be calculated case -by -case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge -specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal (more on that
below), but it is also possible to consider case -specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WQBELs for Hardness -Dependent Metals - Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations, based on applicable
standards and the critical low -flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value (chronic or acute), the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard, which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present (i.e. consistently below
detection level), then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
1. To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness -dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q10 (the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1Q10 using the formula 1Q10 = 0.843 (s7Q10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site -specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness -dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge, the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream) hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values, upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available, the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L (CaCO3 or (Ca + Mg)) Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L, respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness -dependent metal showing reasonable
potential, the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site -specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NC0081621
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
= (Permitted Flow, cfs *Avg. Effluent Hardness, mg/L) + (s7Q10, cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness, mg/L)
(Permitted Flow, cfs + s7Q10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the 1Q10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal, using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients (DPCs) or site -specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the "Fraction Dissolved" converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in -stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-B-96-007, June 1996) and the
equation:
Cdiss = 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [SS('+a>] [10-6] }
Where:
ss = in -stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1], minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a = constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness -dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient (or
site -specific translator) to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases, where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist (ie. silver), the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals. For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca = (s7Q10 + Qw) (Cwqs) — (s7Q10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca = allowable effluent concentration (µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs = NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria (µg/L or mg/L)
Cb = background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw = permitted effluent flow (cfs, match s7Q10)
s7Q 10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
1Q10 = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0081621
QA = used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2 = used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application (40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations, the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit (Total allowable
concentration) is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate, permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10, 2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
8. The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure, total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases, the projected maximum concentration (95th %) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness -dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter
Value
Comments (Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness (mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or (Ca+Mg)]
66.1
Average from DMRs
October 2016 to July 2019
Average Upstream Hardness (mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or (Ca+Mg)]
89.15
Average from DMRs
October 2016 to July 2019
7Q10 summer (cfs)
38.7
2015 USGS stream flow data
1Q10 (cfs)
31.8
Calculated from 7Q10 summer
Permitted Flow (MGD)
0.3 and 1.0
NPDES files, BIMS
Date: 01/03/2020
Permit Writer: Qais Banihani
Page 4 of 4

tal Translators
/95% Confidence U
95% Probabilit
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
a
E
v
a
d
.72
C
J
C7
0-
a)
ca
O
C.�
IT
a
E
Z
K IF HQW OR ORW W
U
J
7:
M
C7
r
U
11
R
w
U
c
a)
z
V)
1
b
C.)
N
O O
W 15
0. a
)0
u-
0
z
J
0)
1r.
1-
co
7
LL
-J
Z
cr
J
01
0
C7
CJ
Q Q
U
0
a
0
c
0
zl
0
M
0
p
n
E
0
U
0
To
0
r_l
rn
'Cr
C❑
50
v
N
n
CO
N
CO
ch
U
z
U
OS
cr
Chromium III
0 0)
O
LL
U
z
J
7
a
Chromium VI
0)
z
LL
z
U
z
412
J
V
Chromium, Total
CO
Cr)
0)
N
ri
N
U
z
- J
4)
a
0
0
0 0 • O O Co • OD
01 O 0 N M 10 CO Ir CO Cs Cs
0N
CO CO CO 15 W CO CO CO CO CO W O) CO CO CO CO R W CO CO
0. 0. 0. a 0. a O. 0. a a a a 0. a a a a 0_ 0. a
NPDES Permit
10
O
0
O
M
0
HUC Number
Stream Clas
U
oO
r- o .9
u�
M OMO 10))
to
Combined Hardness Acute
5-
0
'o
0
J
0
0
fi
0
w
U
7 O
a N
C
-
0
O
N
O
a❑)
0
N
I6
V
O.
rnI
O
NI
rn
E
0
I
N
CO _
of
Y
a)
`1
0
T
v
2
<I
d

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
TT
mNN
111111
O N N O N N
m N 6
2
so =
° m>
nm3
>0
2Sgi
22
ONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNtNVNNNNNNN
O
NNNNNNNN NNnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNnnnnn NNNinnnn
N lV tV N N (J lV lV N lJ [V N cV N lV lV N N [V N N fV N N N lV lV lV lV N N tV (V (V Cl lV 01 lV M 01 lV lV lV N lV N Cl Cl N N N N N N N lV Cl N
OVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
B
m gm LV LV mg gs gV gY gV gV vV g v,
yam m
-NmRNmr"'-NmVN°" (NV ON mO WV O 4q �p NmV O NNNNN FPINNNtgIM eNl t�[4mmMmmVVVQ�000QpVOjNNNbNNNh
E E E
mODP= S W W
gEggErgEgEE
-NmON""'-Nm V N brmONNNNN NNHNNM gP42AMNMM$ V4U SW4'4448G22Z2M N
144
m �
i>>
9= mg›
R
J�Nbmmr rNm mmrmN�v ar Nv,ma v,AmNA�Nm�m
�bommoo.m NrN-rm-�m cock,-. io�nn a600� .pp
�b bm rrrrmrmrmOmNN mb rbbNb hNhbbbmrp �inN
m mmmbbmNnnnmAAA rrDnro�mmmhNmmbrmAm�NmNNNumINmNbmOblro
bbbmmmrrr _ OOO�
��'ROOOO�WDOOOD�O��ONOOOOO�����o�mN�N�yO�N�N�00N
-NmaNmrmO0.-NmaNmrmmNNN4NNNrvNNm unm$nwwmwc.74;14 ° 4448i'nnmuaiumiumiurin

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
E
E
V
E
in
" 8
8Ac >m
KN� 7 c ;f2
JNN�(1 N Nb V�bNNNNb NN wanvaN NNNNNN N NNN VV�� 8V�8V1 VVa�nt� bb VVI1NNNN
O N N N N N N N N ry N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N� N N N��� N N N N N N
N N n N n N <V n N (V N n n N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n lV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N N N N N N
aVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
1414mmt4 wwwwwwwwwwwm
oE0000000000oggE^I^o�
��mmg,W0 c”ww oo wcc o gQvv4 Q000Q 000�g-SPg
s��1ga� g�e aaa ��������g��
-"""" W0-NW"" ON N w,Nt�OIN�62
°'NNN `RINNN� .`a�xiMMMmna<`����av°�NNNNN
6-6
'a
m
R�'in�U c
N N
II m V
> m
222
0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n n N N N N
0
m
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
9
a V V V V V v V V V V V V V v V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V v V V V V V V v V V V V v V V v V V V V V V V v V V v V V
ww
W W OWO pp OO OO W W W w W W W W W W W W W O WO
m w N N N m N W N N g g N E N N N N N@ H N N N gj gj N N w N N N N N N N N F.N N N N N N N N N N N p N N N N
-""' l-m ,o-NmaNmnm N NNNNNNNNmwm2nnnwnneaev44 034Voilo VNi V"'inui l°a°nlmil
V
T>a
go. gii
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 8 N N N N N N R N N N N N N N N N N N n N g
N N N N N N N n N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N VI N N
fV [V fV fV N N N N N lV [V N tV lV tV cl cV [V N tV tV N N lV (V tV tV fV N N lV N tV [V [V N C1 fV N N N [V N N (V (V N N N (V [V [V tV N N N CI N
a V v v v V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
mmmmwwwwwwWWwwwwwmWWWwwWwWwwWwWwwWWWWWWwWwwwmw
00000000000000000O0O0O0O0O0000000000O OO OOOOOO O
NNN�V NNNNNN �V NNNN�V NNNNNN(�lN NN`NNNN�`1NN�`lNNtV NNNNCV NNNIV N NN
RR `adoPINEa11� 11111WIMIIINOI a �INIMIo!
-Nm<NmnmWo-NWallonmWN 7ARANRMQQ$gmngiwwwnwe'ae`&4WW:7avYwi v,vNi2SVNi V8VV,in

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
4-4
o1F,
o ">a
M N M M N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N M N M N N M N N N N N N N N M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N �� N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N t t V V t V[ V[ V c V
N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M M N M M N N N N N N N N N N M M
lV N [V N N N [V N (V N N (V N (V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N lV lV fV lV IV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N fV
VVVVVVVVVVV VVVV VVVVVVVVV VVVVVV VVVVVV VVVVVVVVVVV V VVVVVVVVVV
m m m m m m m m W W W W W W W W 0,61 01 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
O O O OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N��� �� o ^ LV �� N R N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
oe��aooa N .-�a�aa�a�s
Waa-
Wa�"appbb�
-NM V N"' W O.- NM O" W NNNtMV N NNNNN8 W P42�� W mM V <OO$VV V M.;;V2238Erz2
N N g
oitrid
u.8
m>a
J I�Nm Nl� W�NN�N INN mm N V WIN W �� M m V NmNmm W MmON1�Nm W MmmNN1�mNOro
G I�51�MmN (VVOoI<Mt�NfVN N MMRNMMV<MMVI Vf VfVblph m�4hmm I�h m
m N � v v M e M M n (V lV lV N N M N a M c�i O (V of ni V V ai ni N ill Vi O �c m f- I. � m N N of ro m
V V
OO W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
O :: LV O O :V N Rj N N N W N N N W N g l N N Q i N N N O W W W O N g 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N N
�m_� aaa m� a aa�E--m;,g-aINUW
agg
-NMONmi ",-"MVNmnm N NNnnNNNR'8g223,"a. `$M^Mn$a`a"73W444MV,1m3in18mn

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
JQ W Q W W M VV�� VV nN � mN M W ONO vIQNM� W rn Mm n V�D rnMmt7O
�Vrb:Nm M V b I�b V M m Qn MM� ai r m:—IrinT8 W V �i aMO ,FMntm+i CW9QFmm
O
m
Q m Q m m MW M W W W M N N m n W m b m M W N N N n N n N N�m M M W M M VV��
s
0
yy, M m m M m m oom rn rn rn W OW rn W rn m rn rn W W ppW OOW W p rnp O WO W m '° W W W W W W m W W m m � WV W � WV{ WV W
O d N m O N Q O N N a N N r@ @ N a 0 g N N a N a N a N N N N N c9N N N (y O O N N N 3 N t3 g
-NMQM""''-NMQ ""c9NNNQ. N'RnARmMgNM 82?:Trc`3S"d' W°?E,5,A2A'$28r6N
m
H
a"
INV MI
0ami
II
m U
m , �
LL>a
O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
ao0
M N M M M N M M N N M N b N M m m m m m m m m m W W m W m m W W W V7 m m m him m m m m m m m m m N m m m m W m
lV N N lV lV N fV N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N lV N N N N lV N N N N N N lV (V lJ N N lV fV fV fV lV fV lV lV N N lV N lV lV [V N
0 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V
Ipmnnnnnnpp� o mMmmMmmmm pm_pmWWWWWWppW WWpW �WWWWWWrnrnrnWWW
-NMamMn=WW-NMamMnWmNNryNNNNNNNm m83mmMmmv'cavS�`�nv vvvrniGvNivmiVES6-n
yyyy o0 0
Y1N�m � m
n m U
ige
m j 221
N N N N N N N N N m N N N N N N N N N N lV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0
a7
m m m m m m m F m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
0 V V vV V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VV V V V V V V V VV V V V V
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W O M W W W W W W W W W M W W W W W W W W W M M W M M M M M M M M M M M W M M M M M M
NN N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0
�M�a � �=;aaSS `;«oaaWa,irJog a.fOOai6m0�Wm�m nn�aowa0madzaaaa
-N MQm Mn W W O-NMQm Wn W W O NNNN NNNNNm,71P1[2i[�2,9,%mNea V e�see�e8Vim2NNNN2
E.8
m
@=,JimwgArmmmmmmmmmmmN'"NNNNNN
NNE............
m
n m m m N W m m m m m W W m m m m N m m m m m m m m
iV N N N N N M N N N N [V NNNN [V N N N N N N N N N N N
��WVV M M m M OM_O W W OO M ooW W M ggW O WO
�� O N a� N� N� a� W` N�� O� n N N a i N 0 0 0 a
oQiaaiima;�elamaaaimii=aiaaaiiil
-01mam""0-c4"0"W NNNNnNNNNNM
QNNMMMMMMMM

C.i 412
'a O
-a O
2 Z
RECOMMENDED ACTION
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
Allowable Cw
Max Pred Cw
0
I Go
•• II
;02Iv2
No detects. All values < 2.5 ug/L
V
ton
[V W
O
Go
I8
la
to
IZi
O
CO
O
00
O
00
N
Go
O
CO
r
N
00
s1INn
4
4
1
lOd
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
U
Go
G
2
U
7
M
Go
a
0
0-
n
01
Go
0
co
Lel
co
0,
N
O
Go
en
M
0
W
o.
U C)
C)
Z
Z
Z
U
Z
0
PARAMETER
E
m
E
U
Chromium, Total
`W
ao.
W
J

V IS r Il4 I
Q r IAO LT, O 0
A h CO o
TO __ CO a- N CO
c 3 r IS a 0
1 = r r 0 0 0 U
_~ of II II II II II
l9 4 v] Do3 N Q zs
+-' 0000apiU
t` 1U o
y CO U U U
IICD
I,
V CO
C 1—
a Z
a 0
�a
ea
MI 0a
p
.11
.c g
O
a;342IC in
o
L r
Ci a
Q o
co
O. D
O:
s. W
r >
as ie
.0O O O o 0 0 Y
O aO h00 Lc;0
CO cl 1 O M co co ri W IN c[
LL II II II II II II
0 w w w w w
OOcooa'c
N O U
A
)
rn
00
Q
RECOMMENDED ACTION
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
Allowable Cw
A
No detects. All values < 5 ug/L except one < 10 ug/L
0
o Iz z
ti
•U
00
In
0
N
go
00
s.uNn
lbd
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
'0 'd
m A
c
V)
O
U
0
0
CV
c
0
Z
V
z
0
a
0
N
M
U
z
PARAMETER
0)
N
N

Date: 1/7/2020
■,
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
k:-
1111
i p
!�5$
lip
!|!—
!|■f
!
7■
)k
7777
!|
|![[
1
9
|1
!
;0A!l;q qm
;- ',0
--V RI)8 /
�f*k §/■m
§
Is
7
f
}
,
D
(i{|\§z4.kr
,='!�
104lg kl=t
!.°!/3Aƒ}a;6
k
2

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Muddy Creek WWTP
NC0081621
001
1.000
Rocky River
03040105
❑ Apply WS Hardness WQC
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q1Ow (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
1Q1Os (cfs)
38.70
83.00
94.00
525.00
31.80
Effluent Hardness
66.1 mg/L (Avg)
Upstream Hardness
89.15 mg/L (Avg)
Combined Hardness Chronic
88.26 mg/L
Combined Hardness Acute
88.07 mg/L
Data Source(s)
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Name
WQS
Type Chronic Modifier
Acute
PQL Units
Arsenic
Aquactic Life
C
150
FW
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Human Health
Water Supply
C
10
HH/WS
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Life
NC
6.5
FW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Life
NC
1.5294
FW
9.7166
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
4 Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
330.7932
FW
2538.6753
ug/L
Chromium VI
Aquatic Life
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aquatic Life
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
23.1563
FW
34.3027
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Aquatic Life
NC
1,800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
11.9416
FW
305.7448
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
108.2330
FW
972.7499
pg/L
Nickel
Water Supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
56
ug/L
Silver
Aquatic Life
NC
0.06
FW
2.5856
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
369.0239
FW
365.3845
ug/L
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, input
1/7/2020

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Hi
Use' PASTE SPECIAL
Values'then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 50
H2
Use PASTE SPECIAL
Values'. then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
Par01 & Par02
Use' PASTE SPECIAL.
Values'then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 50
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
Arsenic
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
10/11/2016
60.1
60.1
Std Dev.
8.7006
1
1/10/2018
89.2
89.2
Std Dev.
14.9869
1
9/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Std Dev.
0.1641
2
10/18/2016
68.5
68.5
Mean 66.1021
2
2/27/2018
92.8
92.8
Mean 89.1455
2
9/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mean 1.2716
3
11/9/2016
67.6
67.6
C.V. 0.1316
3
4/10/2018
79.2
79.2
C.V. 0.1681
3
9/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
C.V. 0.1291
4
11/15/2016
62.8
62.8
n 47
4
4/12/2018
89
89
n 11
4
9/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
n 58
5
12/6/2016
64.6
64.6
10th Per value 56.76 mg/L
5
5/8/2018
88.2
88.2
10th Per value 79.20 mg/L
5
10/2/2018
<
2.5
1.25
6
12/8/2016
69.7
69.7
Average Value 66.10 mg/L
6
6/19/2018
96.5
96.5
Average Value 89.15 mg/L
6
10/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mult Factor = 1.00
7
1/10/2017
68.1
68.1
Max. Value 90.20 mg/L
7
7/12/2018
95.7
95.7
Max. Value 115.00 mg/L
7
10/9/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8
1/12/2017
57
57
8
10/9/2018
80
80
8
10/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L
9
2/7/2017
72.7
72.7
9
3/7/2019
55
55
9
11/1/2018
<
5
2.5
10
2/9/2017
73.5
73.5
10
5/30/2019
100
100
10
11/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
11
3/8/2017
75.6
75.6
11
9/25/2019
115
115
11
11/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
12
3/10/2017
68
68
12
12
11/19/2018
<
2.5
1.25
13
4/11/2017
72.8
72.8
13
13
12/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
14
4/13/2017
75.1
75.1
14
14
12/18/2018
<
2.5
1.25
15
5/9/2017
71.9
71.9
15
15
12/21/2018
<
2.5
1.25
16
6/8/2017
72
72
16
16
12/27/2018
<
2.5
1.25
17
7/11/2017
67.6
67.6
17
17
1/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
18
8/1/2017
74.6
74.6
18
18
1/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
19
9/7/2017
65.9
65.9
19
19
1/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
20
10/9/2017
70.7
70.7
20
20
1/15/2019
<
2.5
1.25
21
10/11/2017
88.9
88.9
21
21
1/17/2019
<
2.5
1.25
22
11/2/2017
90.2
90.2
22
22
2/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
23
11/9/2017
61.1
61.1
23
23
2/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
24
12/5/2017
57.4
57.4
24
24
2/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
25
12/7/2017
57.8
57.8
25
25
2/14/2019
<
2.5
1.25
26
1/2/2018
60
60
26
26
2/19/2019
<
2.5
1.25
27
2/1/2018
83.9
83.9
27
27
3/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2018
68.6
68.6
28
28
3/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
29
4/5/2018
70.4
70.4
29
29
3/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
30
5/8/2018
60.7
60.7
30
30
3/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
31
6/5/2018
71.7
71.7
31
31
4/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
32
7/10/2018
63.8
63.8
32
32
4/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
33
8/7/2018
61.5
61.5
33
33
4/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
34
9/13/2018
52.2
52.2
34
34
4/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
35
10/11/2018
62.4
62.4
35
35
5/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
36
11/13/2018
58
58
36
36
5/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
37
12/13/2018
52.4
52.4
37
37
5/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
38
1/10/2019
57.4
57.4
38
38
5/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
39
2/12/2019
56.7
56.7
39
39
6/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
40
3/7/2019
53.8
53.8
40
40
6/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
41
4/23/2019
67.5
67.5
41
41
6/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
42
5/8/2019
58.7
58.7
42
42
6/11/2019
<
2.5
1.25
43
6/4/2019
61
61
43
43
7/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
44
7/9/2019
69.2
69.2
44
44
7/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
45
8/1/2019
56.8
56.8
45
45
7/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
46
9/3/2019
71.1
71.1
46
46
7/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
47
10/8/2019
54.8
54.8
47
47
8/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
48
48
48
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
49
49
49
8/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
50
50
50
8/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
51
51
51
9/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
52
52
52
9/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
53
53
53
9/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
54
54
54
9/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
55
55
55
10/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
56
56
56
10/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
57
57
57
10/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
58
58
58
10/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, data
1/7/2020

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par03
Use' PASTE SPECIAL
Values'then"COPY".
Maximum data points
= 50
Par04
Use' PASTE SPECIAL
Values'. then"COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
Pdr10
Use' PASTE SPECIAL.
Values'then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 50
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium, Total
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
9/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Std Dev.
0.1641
1
9/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
9/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Std Dev.
0.1641
2
9/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mean 1.2716
2
9/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mean 1.2500
2
9/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mean 1.2716
3
9/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
C.V. 0.1291
3
9/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
C.V. 0.0000
3
9/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
C.V. 0.1291
4
9/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
n 58
4
9/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
n 58
4
9/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
n 58
5
10/2/2018
<
2.5
1.25
5
10/2/2018
<
2.5
1.25
5
10/2/2018
<
2.5
1.25
6
10/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mult Factor= 1.00
6
10/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mull Factor= 1.00
6
10/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Mult Factor= 1.00
7
10/9/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Value 2.50 ug/L
7
10/9/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Value 1.250 ug/L
7
10/9/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Value 2.5 pg/L
8
10/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw 2.50 ug/L
8
10/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw 1.250 ug/L
8
10/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw 2.5 pg/L
9
11/1/2018
<
5
2.5
9
11/1/2018
<
2.5
1.25
9
11/1/2018
<
5
2.5
10
11/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
10
11/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
10
11/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
11
11/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
11
11/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
11
11/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
12
11/19/2018
<
2.5
1.25
12
11/19/2018
<
2.5
1.25
12
11/19/2018
<
2.5
1.25
13
12/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
13
12/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
13
12/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
14
12/18/2018
<
2.5
1.25
14
12/18/2018
<
2.5
1.25
14
12/18/2018
<
2.5
1.25
15
12/21/2018
<
2.5
1.25
15
12/21/2018
<
2.5
1.25
15
12/21/2018
<
2.5
1.25
16
12/27/2018
<
2.5
1.25
16
12/27/2018
<
2.5
1.25
16
12/27/2018
<
2.5
1.25
17
1/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
17
1/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
17
1/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
18
1/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
18
1/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
18
1/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
19
1/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
19
1/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
19
1/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
20
1/15/2019
<
2.5
1.25
20
1/15/2019
<
2.5
1.25
20
1/15/2019
<
2.5
1.25
21
1/17/2019
<
2.5
1.25
21
1/17/2019
<
2.5
1.25
21
1/17/2019
<
2.5
1.25
22
2/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
22
2/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
22
2/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
23
2/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
23
2/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
23
2/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
24
2/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
24
2/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
24
2/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
25
2/14/2019
<
2.5
1.25
25
2/14/2019
<
2.5
1.25
25
2/14/2019
<
2.5
1.25
26
2/19/2019
<
2.5
1.25
26
2/19/2019
<
2.5
1.25
26
2/19/2019
<
2.5
1.25
27
3/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
27
3/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
27
3/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
29
3/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
29
3/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
29
3/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
30
3/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
30
3/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
30
3/12/2019
<
2.5
1.25
31
4/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
31
4/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
31
4/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
32
4/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
32
4/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
32
4/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
33
4/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
33
4/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
33
4/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
34
4/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
34
4/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
34
4/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
35
5/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
35
5/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
35
5/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
36
5/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
36
5/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
36
5/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
37
5/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
37
5/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
37
5/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
38
5/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
38
5/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
38
5/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
39
6/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
39
6/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
39
6/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
40
6/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
40
6/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
40
6/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
41
6/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
41
6/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
41
6/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
42
6/11/2019
<
2.5
1.25
42
6/11/2019
<
2.5
1.25
42
6/11/2019
<
2.5
1.25
43
7/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
43
7/1/2019
2.5
1.25
43
7/1/2019
2.5
1.25
44
7/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
44
7/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
44
7/2/2019
2.5
1.25
45
7/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
45
7/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
45
7/3/2019
2.5
1.25
46
7/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
46
7/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
46
7/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
47
8/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
47
8/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
47
8/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
48
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
48
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
48
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
49
8/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
49
8/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
49
8/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
50
8/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
50
8/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
50
8/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
51
9/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
51
9/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
51
9/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
52
9/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
52
9/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
52
9/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
53
9/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
53
9/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
53
9/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
54
9/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
54
9/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
54
9/10/2019
<
2.5
1.25
55
10/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
55
10/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
55
10/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
56
10/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
56
10/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
56
10/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
57
10/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
57
10/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
57
10/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
58
10/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
58
10/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
58
10/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, data
1/7/2020

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Pall
Copper
Use' PASTE SPECIAL
Values'then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 50
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/4/2018 7.7 7.7 Std Dev. 2.6701
2 9/11/2018 8.2 8.2 Mean 5.2784
3 9/13/2018 11.8 11.8 C.V. 0.5058
4 9/20/2018 3.2 3.2 n 58
5 10/2/2018 6.7 6.7
6 10/4/2018 5.9 5.9 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 10/9/2018 9.1 9.1 Max. Value 11.80 ug/L
8 10/11/2018 10.2 10.2 Max. Pred Cw 11.80 ug/L
9 11/1/2018 < 5 2.5
10 11/6/2018 4.1 4.1
11 11/13/2018 4.5 4.5
12 11/19/2018 3.7 3.7
13 12/6/2018 4.2 4.2
14 12/18/2018 3.9 3.9
15 12/21/2018 3.6 3.6
16 12/27/2018 5.8 5.8
17 1/3/2019 2.8 2.8
18 1/8/2019 2.5 1.25
19 1/10/2019 2.5 1.25
20 1/15/2019 2.5 1.25
21 1/17/2019 2.6 2.6
22 2/5/2019 3 3
23 2/7/2019 2.5 2.5
24 2/12/2019 4 4
25 2/14/2019 3.9 3.9
26 2/19/2019 3.7 3.7
27 3/5/2019 4.2 4.2
28 3/6/2019 2.9 2.9
29 3/7/2019 3.1 3.1
30 3/12/2019 3.1 3.1
31 4/2/2019 4.3 4.3
32 4/4/2019 4.1 4.1
33 4/9/2019 3.6 3.6
34 4/10/2019 3.4 3.4
35 5/1/2019 5.2 5.2
36 5/2/2019 5.6 5.6
37 5f7/2019 5.2 5.2
38 5/8/2019 4.8 4.8
39 6/4/2019 6.8 6.8
40 6/5/2019 6.9 6.9
41 6/6/2019 7.3 7.3
42 6/11/2019 8 8
43 7/1/2019 6.4 6.4
44 7/2/2019 6.2 6.2
45 7/3/2019 5.7 5.7
46 7/9/2019 8.2 8.2
47 8/1/2019 8.8 8.8
48 8/6/2019 9 9
49 8/7/2019 7.3 7.3
50 8/8/2019 7.8 7.8
51 9/3/2019 3.6 3.6
52 9/5/2019 2.5 1.25
53 9/6/2019 2.5 1.25
54 9/10/2019 3.7 3.7
55 10/1/2019 6.8 6.8
56 10/2/2019 8.5 8.5
57 10/3/2019 10 10
58 10/8/2019 11.8 11.8
Par14
Lead
Use' PASTE SPECIAL
Values'. then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
Date BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/4/2018 < 2.5 1.25 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 9/11/2018 < 2.5 1.25 Mean 1.2500
3 9/13/2018 < 2.5 1.25 C.V. 0.0000
4 9/20/2018 < 2.5 1.25 n 58
5 10/2/2018 < 2.5 1.25
6 10/4/2018 < 2.5 1.25 Mull Factor= 1.00
7 10/9/2018 < 2.5 1.25 Max. Value 1.250 ug/L
8 10/11/2018 < 2.5 1.25 Max. Pred Cw 1.250 ug/L
9 11/1/2018 < 2.5 1.25
10 11/6/2018 < 2.5 1.25
11 11/13/2018 < 2.5 1.25
12 11/19/2018 < 2.5 1.25
13 12/6/2018 < 2.5 1.25
14 12/18/2018 < 2.5 1.25
15 12/21/2018 < 2.5 1.25
16 12/27/2018 < 2.5 1.25
17 1/3/2019 < 2.5 1.25
18 1/8/2019 < 2.5 1.25
19 1/10/2019 < 2.5 1.25
20 1/15/2019 < 2.5 1.25
21 1/17/2019 < 2.5 1.25
22 2/5/2019 < 2.5 1.25
23 2/7/2019 < 2.5 1.25
24 2/12/2019 < 2.5 1.25
25 2/14/2019 < 2.5 1.25
26 2/19/2019 < 2.5 1.25
27 3/5/2019 < 2.5 1.25
28 3/6/2019 < 2.5 1.25
29 3/7/2019 < 2.5 1.25
30 3/12/2019 < 2.5 1.25
31 4/2/2019 < 2.5 1.25
32 4/4/2019 < 2.5 1.25
33 4/9/2019 < 2.5 1.25
34 4/10/2019 < 2.5 1.25
35 5/1/2019 < 2.5 1.25
36 5/2/2019 < 2.5 1.25
37 5/7/2019 < 2.5 1.25
38 5/8/2019 < 2.5 1.25
39 6/4/2019 < 2.5 1.25
40 6/5/2019 < 2.5 1.25
41 6/6/2019 < 2.5 1.25
42 6/11/2019 < 2.5 1.25
43 7/1/2019 < 2.5 1.25
44 7/2/2019 < 2.5 1.25
45 7/3/2019 < 2.5 1.25
46 7/9/2019 < 2.5 1.25
47 8/1/2019 < 2.5 1.25
48 8/6/2019 < 2.5 1.25
49 8/7/2019 < 2.5 1.25
50 8/8/2019 < 2.5 1.25
51 9/3/2019 < 2.5 1.25
52 9/5/2019 < 2.5 1.25
53 9/6/2019 < 2.5 1.25
54 9/10/2019 < 2.5 1.25
55 10/1/2019 < 2.5 1.25
56 10/2/2019 < 2.5 1.25
57 10/3/2019 < 2.5 1.25
58 10/8/2019 < 2.5 1.25
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, data
1/7/2020

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Pdr17 & Paf18
Use "PASTE SPEc4
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
Par19
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Values.' then ..COPY' .
points
= 50
Par20
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values' then "COPY" .
data poi.
= 58
Pdr21
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Values.' then ..COPY' .
Maximum data points
= 50
Nickel
Selenium
SilverMaximum
Silverdata
Zinc
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
9/4/2018
2.6
2.6
Std Dev.
1.1371
1
9/4/2018
<
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.3283
1
7/5/2016
<
2.5
1.25
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
9/4/2018
76.4
76.4
Std Dev.
39.1122
2
9/11/2018
2.8
2.8
Mean 2.2293
2
9/11/2018
<
5
2.5
Mean 2.5431
2
7/7/2016
<
2.5
1.25
Mean 1.2500
2
9/11/2018
66.8
66.8
Mean 84.5431
3
9/13/2018
2.7
2.7
C.V. 0.5101
3
9/13/2018
<
5
2.5
C.V. 0.1291
3
9/6/2016
<
2.5
1.25
C.V. 0.0000
3
9/13/2018
67.4
67.4
C.V. 0.4626
4
9/20/2018 <
2.5
1.25
n 58
4
9/20/2018
<
5
2.5
n 58
4
9/8/2016
<
2.5
1.25
n 58
4
9/20/2018
35
35
n 58
5
10/2/2018 <
2.5
1.25
5
10/2/2018
<
5
2.5
5
9/13/2016
2.5
1.25
5
10/2/2018
62.5
62.5
6
10/4/2018
2.5
1.25
Mult Factor= 1.00
6
10/4/2018
<
5
2.5
Mult Factor= 1.00
6
9/15/2016
2.5
1.25
Mull Factor= 1.00
6
10/4/2018
49.6
49.6
Mult Factor= 1.00
7
10/9/2018
3.2
3.2
Max. Value 5.0 pg/L
7
10/9/2018
<
5
2.5
Max. Value 5.0 ug/L
7
11/7/2016
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Value 1.250 ug/L
7
10/9/2018
82.3
82.3
Max. Value 234.0 ug/L
8
10/11/2018
2.9
2.9
Max. Pred Cw 5.0 pg/L
8
10/11/2018
<
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw 5.0 ug/L
8
11/9/2016
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw 1.250 ug/L
8
10/11/2018
77.9
77.9
Max. Pred Cw 234.0 ug/L
9
11/1/2018 <
5
2.5
9
11/1/2018
<
10
5
9
11/15/2016
<
2.5
1.25
9
11/1/2018
62.9
62.9
10
11/6/2018 <
2.5
1.25
10
11/6/2018
<
5
2.5
10
1/24/2017
<
2.5
1.25
10
11/6/2018
41.9
41.9
11
11/13/2018 <
2.5
1.25
11
11/13/2018
<
5
2.5
11
1/26/2017
<
2.5
1.25
11
11/13/2018
62.3
62.3
12
11/19/2018 <
2.5
1.25
12
11/19/2018
<
5
2.5
12
3/14/2017
<
2.5
1.25
12
11/19/2018
56.2
56.2
13
12/6/2018 <
2.5
1.25
13
12/6/2018
<
5
2.5
13
3/21/2017
<
2.5
1.25
13
12/6/2018
51.2
51.2
14
12/18/2018 <
2.5
1.25
14
12/18/2018
<
5
2.5
14
7/11/2017
<
2.5
1.25
14
12/18/2018
40.6
40.6
15
12/21/2018 <
2.5
1.25
15
12/21/2018
<
5
2.5
15
11/7/2017
<
.5
1.25
15
12/21/2018
37
37
16
12/27/2018 <
2.5
1.25
16
12/27/2018
<
5
2.5
16
11/9/2017
<
2.5
1.25
16
12/27/2018
57.9
57.9
17
1/3/2019 <
2.5
1.25
17
1/3/2019
<
5
2.5
17
11/14/2017
<
2.5
1.25
17
1/3/2019
51
51
18
1/8/2019 <
2.5
1.25
18
1/8/2019
<
5
2.5
18
1/2/2018
<
2.5
1.25
18
1/8/2019
49.6
49.6
19
1/10/2019 <
2.5
1.25
19
1/10/2019
<
5
2.5
19
1/4/2018
<
2.5
1.25
19
1/10/2019
43.5
43.5
20
1/15/2019
2.5
1.25
20
1/15/2019
<
5
2.5
20
2/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
20
1/15/2019
57.8
57.8
21
1/17/2019
2.5
1.25
21
1/17/2019
<
5
2.5
21
2/15/2018
<
2.5
1.25
21
1/17/2019
70.6
70.6
22
2/5/2019
2.5
1.25
22
2/5/2019
<
5
2.5
22
3/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
22
2/5/2019
85.9
85.9
23
2/7/2019
2.5
1.25
23
2/7/2019
<
5
2.5
23
3/13/2018
<
2.5
1.25
23
2/7/2019
84.2
84.2
24
2/12/2019 <
2.5
1.25
24
2/12/2019
<
5
2.5
24
3/15/2018
<
2.5
1.25
24
2/12/2019
125
125
25
2/14/2019 <
2.5
1.25
25
2/14/2019
<
5
2.5
25
3/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
25
2/14/2019
123
123
26
2/19/2019 <
2.5
1.25
26
2/19/2019
<
5
2.5
26
5/1/2018
<
2.5
1.25
26
2/19/2019
93.7
93.7
27
3/5/2019 <
2.5
1.25
27
3/5/2019
<
5
2.5
27
5/10/2018
<
2.5
1.25
27
3/5/2019
70.2
70.2
28
3/6/2019 <
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2019
<
5
2.5
28
5/17/2018
<
2.5
1.25
28
3/6/2019
58.1
58.1
29
3/7/2019 <
2.5
1.25
29
3/7/2019
<
5
2.5
29
7/5/2018
2.5
1.25
29
3/7/2019
61.7
61.7
30
3/12/2019
2.5
1.25
30
3/12/2019
<
5
2.5
30
7/10/2018
<
2.5
1.25
30
3/12/2019
74.2
74.2
31
4/2/2019
4.9
4.9
31
4/2/2019
<
5
2.5
31
9/20/2018
<
2.5
1.25
31
4/2/2019
145
145
32
4/4/2019
2.5
1.25
32
4/4/2019
<
5
2.5
32
10/9/2018
<
2.5
1.25
32
4/4/2019
126
126
33
4/9/2019
2.5
1.25
33
4/9/2019
<
5
2.5
33
10/11/2018
<
2.5
1.25
33
4/9/2019
103
103
34
4/10/2019
3
3
34
4/10/2019
<
5
2.5
34
11/1/2018
<
2.5
1.25
34
4/10/2019
74.6
74.6
35
5/1/2019
3.1
3.1
35
5/1/2019
<
5
2.5
35
11/6/2018
<
2.5
1.25
35
5/1/2019
126
126
36
5/2/2019
3.6
3.6
36
5/2/2019
<
5
2.5
36
2/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
36
5/2/2019
143
143
37
5/7/2019
3.5
3.5
37
5/7/2019
<
5
2.5
37
2/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
37
5/7/2019
128
128
38
5/8/2019
3.1
3.1
38
5/8/2019
<
5
2.5
38
3/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
38
5/8/2019
101
101
39
6/4/2019
3.3
3.3
39
6/4/2019
<
5
2.5
39
3/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
39
6/4/2019
97.6
97.6
40
6/5/2019
3.2
3.2
40
6/5/2019
<
5
2.5
40
3/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
40
6/5/2019
96
96
41
6/6/2019
3.3
3.3
41
6/6/2019
<
5
2.5
41
5/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
41
6/6/2019
97
97
42
6/11/2019
3.6
3.6
42
6/11/2019
<
5
2.5
42
5/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
42
6/11/2019
125
125
43
7/1/2019
2.5
2.5
43
7/1/2019
<
5
2.5
43
6/4/2019
<
2.5
1.25
43
7/1/2019
96.4
96.4
44
7/2/2019
y 2.5
2.5
44
7/2/2019
<
5
2.5
44
6/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
44
7/2/2019
86.2
86.2
45
7/3/2019 <
2.5
1.25
45
7/3/2019
<
5
2.5
45
6/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
45
7/3/2019
74.6
74.6
46
7/9/2019
3
3
46
7/9/2019
<
5
2.5
46
6/11/2019
<
2.5
1.25
46
7/9/2019
170
170
47
8/1/2019
2.8
2.8
47
8/1/2019
<
5
2.5
47
7/1/2019
<
2.5
1.25
47
8/1/2019
72.8
72.8
48
8/6/2019
3.2
3.2
48
8/6/2019
<
5
2.5
48
7/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
48
8/6/2019
79.9
79.9
49
8/7/2019
2.5
2.5
49
8/7/2019
<
5
2.5
49
7/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
49
8/7/2019
66.3
66.3
50
8/8/2019
2.7
2.7
50
8/8/2019
<
5
2.5
50
7/9/2019
<
2.5
1.25
50
8/8/2019
71.6
71.6
51
9/3/2019 <
2.5
1.25
51
9/3/2019
<
5
2.5
51
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
51
9/3/2019
35.7
35.7
52
9/5/2019 <
2.5
1.25
52
9/5/2019
<
5
2.5
52
8/7/2019
<
2.5
1.25
52
9/5/2019
39.7
39.7
53
9/6/2019 <
2.5
1.25
53
9/6/2019
<
5
2.5
53
8/8/2019
<
2.5
1.25
53
9/6/2019
46.4
46.4
54
9/10/2019
3.3
3.3
54
9/10/2019
<
5
2.5
54
9/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
54
9/10/2019
119
119
55
10/1/2019
3.9
3.9
55
10/1/2019
<
5
2.5
55
9/5/2019
<
2.5
1.25
55
10/1/2019
81.3
81.3
56
10/2/2019
4.9
4.9
56
10/2/2019
<
5
2.5
56
9/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
56
10/2/2019
183
183
57
10/3/2019
5
5
57
10/3/2019
<
5
2.5
57
10/2/2019
<
2.5
1.25
57
10/3/2019
234
234
58
10/8/2019
4.2
4.2
58
10/8/2019
<
5
2.5
58
10/3/2019
<
2.5
1.25
58
10/8/2019
108
108
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, data
1/7/2020

Muddy Creek WWTP
NC0081621
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) = 1.0000
1Q1OS (cfs) = 31.80
7Q1OS (cfs) = 38.70
7Q1OW (cfs) = 83.00
30Q2 (cfs) = 94.00
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 525.00
Receiving Stream: Rocky River HUC 03040105
WWTP/WTP Class: Ill
IWC% @ 1Q1OS = 4.647676162
IWC% @ 7Q1OS = 3.850931677
IWC% @ 7Q1OW = 1.833234772
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 1.622187336
IW%C @ QA = 0.294369006
Stream Class: C
Outfall 001
Qw = 1 MGD
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 88.07 mg/L
Chronic = 88.26 mg/L
PARAMETER
TYPE
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
J
a
F
D
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Chronic
Applied
Standard
Acute
n
# Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
Arsenic
C
C
150
10
FW(7Q10s)
HIH/WS(Qavg)
340
ug/L
ug/L
58
0
2.5
NO DETECTS
Acute (FW): 7,315.5
_ _
Chronic(FW):---3,895.2_ ------------------------------
Max MDL = 5 _ _ _ _
Chronic (IIH): 3,397.1
Max MDL = 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No detects. All values < 2.5 ug/L except one < 5 ug/L
Beryllium
NC
6.5
FW(7Q10s)
65
ug/L
58
0
2.50
NO DETECTS
Acute: 1,398.55
Chronic: 168.79
Max MDL = 5
No detects. All values < 2.5 ug/L except one < 5 ug/L
Cadmium
NC
1.5294
FW(7Q10s)
9.7166
ug/L
58
0
1.250
NO DETECTS
Acute: 209.063
Chronic: 39.71E
Max MDL = 2.5
No detects. All values < 2.5 ug/L
Chromium III
NC
330.7932
FW(7Q10s)
2538.6753
µg/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: 54,622.5
------------------------------
Chromium VI
NC
11
FW(7Q10s)
16
µg/L
0
0
N/A
Acute: 344.3
-- Chronic: ---- 285.6-------------------------------
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
58
0
2.5
NO DETECTS
Max reported value = 2.5
Max MDL = 5
a: No monitoring required if all Total Chromium
samples are < 5 pg/L or Pred. max for Total Cr is <
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
Copper
NC
23.1563
FW(7Q10s)
34.3027
ug/L
58
52
11.80
Acute: 738.06
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 601.32
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP,Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Lead
NC
11.9416
FW(7Q10s)
305.7448
ug/L
58
0
1.250
NO DETECTS
Acute: 6,578.444
Chronic: 310.09E
Max MDL = 2.5
No detects. All values < 2.5 ug/L
Nickel
Nickel
NC
NC
108.2330
25.0000
FW(7Q10s)
WS(7Q10s)
972.7499
µg/L
Pea,
58
27
5.0
Acute (FW): 20,929.8
_ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic(FW):---2,810.E -
No_ value > Allowable C_w__
Chronic(WS): 649.2
No value > Allowable Cw
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 7 of 9
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, rpa
1/7/2020

Muddy Creek WWTP
NC0081621 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) = 1.0000
1Q10S (cfs) = 31.80
7Q1OS (cfs) = 38.70
7Q1OW (cfs) = 83.00
30Q2 (cfs) = 94.00
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 525.00
Receiving Stream: Rocky River HUC 03040105
WWTP/WTP Class: III
IWC% @ 1Q10S = 4.647676162
IWC% @ 7Q1OS = 3.850931677
IWC% @ 7Q1OW = 1.833234772
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 1.622187336
IW%C @ QA = 0.294369006
Stream Class: C
Outfall 001
Qw = 1 MGD
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 88.07 mg/L
Chronic = 88.26 mg/L
PARAMETER
TYPE
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
—1H
m
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Chronic
Applied
Standard
Acute
11
# Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Selenium
NC
5
FW(7Q10s)
56
ug/L
58
0
5.0
NO DETECTS
Acute: 1,204.9
_ ________________________
Chronic: 129.8
Max MDL = 10
No detects. All values < 5 ug/L except one < 10 ug/L
Silver
NC
0.06
FW(7010s1
2.5856
ue/L
58
0
1.250
NO DETECTS
Acute: 55.632
-- _ _ ----_ _ -------------------------------
Chronic: 1.558
Max MDL = 2.5
No detect. All values < 2.5 ug/L. Permittee shall
sample to lower reporting level (1 ug/L)
Zinc
NC
369.0239
FW(7Q10s)
365.3845
ug/L
58
58
234.0
Acute: 7,861.7
Chronic: 9,582.7
No value> Allowable Cw
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 8 of 9
RPA_Muddy Creek_81621_1 mgd_2019_Updated Dec 19 2019, rpa
1/7/2020

Date: 1/7/2020
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
Do NOT enter any data directly into this spreadsheet.
Enter data onto "Table 1" under the Input Sheet and enter
"Effluent Hardness" under the Data Sheet.
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.45 (c ), permits are, have and
must be written as total metals.
This calculator has been inserted into the RPA to calculate Total
Metal allowable allocations once Table 1 has been completed
(Input Sheet) and Effluent hardness has been entered (Data
Sheet).
1) Following the spreadsheet from left to right. First
the allowable allocations for the dissolved metals will
appear for all the metals listed once Table 1 is complete and
effluent hardness entered. Use a default value of 25 mg/L if
no hardness data is available. Second, the
Dissolved Metal allocations are divided by the Translators to
determine the Total Metals that can be allocated to the
Permittee. These Total Metals values are automatically
inserted into Table 2 and are the allowable Total Metal
allocations determined for the Permittee prior to allowing
for dilution. See Input sheet Table 2. The final acute and
chronic values shown under the RPA sheet are the Total
Metal values listed in Table 2 divided by the acute and
chronic IWC, respectively.
2) The Translators used in the freshwater RPA are the Partition
Coefficients published by US EPA in 1984. They are TSS
dependent equations and can be found listed with the WQS
hardness dependent equations under the sheet labeled
Equations. A fixed TSS value of 10 mg/L is used to calculate
the Translator values.
3) Pretreatment Facilities - PERCS will need a copy of the
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator spreadsheet and the
RPA sheet along with the Final Permit. Pretreatment
Facilities are required to renew their Headwords Analysis
after renewal of their permits. Since all their metal
allocations are likely to change PERCS needs to see any new
metal permit limits and the allowable allocations for the
dissolved metals to assess Maximum Allowable Headworks
Loading )MAHL) numbers for each metal based on the
Combined Hardness values used in the permit writers RPA
calculations.
4) For Cadmium, Lead, Nickel, Chromium and Beryllium, if all
the effluent sampling data for the last three to five years
shows the pollutant at concentrations less than the Practical
Quantitative Level )PQL), it is not likely a limit or monitoring
will be put in the permit. However, if the estimated NPDES
permit limit is less than the Practical Quantitative Limit
(particularly, Cadmium and Lead) and the pollutant is
believed to be present, to assess compliance with the new
standards and for future permit limit development,
monitoring for the pollutant will be required. If the facility is
monitoring for the pollutant in its Pretreatment LTMP, no
monitoring is needed in the permit.
5) For monitoring and compliance purposes if Total Chromium
FACILITY: Muddy Creek WWTP Outfall 001
NPDES PERMIT: N00081621
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
In accordance with Federal Regulations, permit limitations must be written as Total Metals per 40 CFR 122.45(c)
PARAMETER
Cadmium (d)
Cd -Trout streams
Chromium III (d)(h)
Chromium VI (d)
Chromium, Total (t)
Copper (d)(h)
Lead (d)(h)
Nickel (d)(h)
Ni - WS streams (t)
Silver (d)(h,acute)
Zinc (d)(h)
Receiving
Stream
SUMMer
7010 (CFS
8.7000
Receiving
Stream
summer 7010
(MGD)
Rec. Stream
1010
[MGDI
M1EMEMMTIM
NPDES
Flow Limit
MGD
0000
Total Suspended
Sdids
-Fixed Value-
(mg/L)
Combined
Hardness
chronic
(mg/L)
88.258
Combined
Hardness
Acute
(mg/L)
88.074
Instream
Wastewater
Concentration
(Chronic)
3.8509
Instream
Wastewater
Concentration
(Acute)
Upstream
Hardness
Average (mg/L)
Effluent
Hardness
Average
(mg/L)
89.1454545 66.10213
Upstream Hard Avg (mg/L) = 89.14545
EFF Hard Avg (mg/L) = 66.10213
Dissolved Metals Criteria
after applying hardness
equation
Chronic
fug/Il
0.39
0.39
67
11
8.0
2.20
47
0.06
106
Acute
fug/11
2.45
MI 1.53
513
16
11.9
56
421
2.59
105
US EPA
Translators- using
Default Partition
Coefficients
(streams)
0.252
0.252
0.202
1.000
0.348
0.184
0.432
1.000
0.288
Total Metal Criteria Total Metal =
Dissolved Metal -Translator
Chronic
Acute
fug/11
1.53
1.53
330.79
11.00
N/A
23.16
11.94
108.23
fug/11
9.72
6.04
2538.68
16.00
N/A
34.30
305.74
972.75
25 N/A
0.06 2.59
369.02 365.38
Beryllium
Arsenic (d)
6.5
150
65
340
1.000
1.000
6.5
150
65
340
COMMENTS (identify parameters to PERCS Branch to maintain in facilitys LTMP/STMP):
d) = dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 026.0211 for more information.
h) = hardness -dependent dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
t) = based upon measurement of total reooveable metal. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
The Human Health standard for Nickel in Water Supply Streams is 25 mg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.
The Human Health standard for Arsenic is 10 pg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.
ACAH 88.07448
ACCH 88.25807

NPDES/Aquifer Protection Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART:
Date of Request
Requestor
Facility Name
Permit Number
Region
Basin
9/19/2019
Qais Banihani
Muddy Creek WWTP
NC0081621
MRO
Yadkin
Check all that
municipal renewal
new industries
WWTP expansion
Speculative limits
stream reclass.
outfall relocation
7Q10 change
other
other
PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER you pet this form back
app ly from PERCS:
Notify PERCS if LTMP/STMP data we said should be
on DMRs is not really there, so we can get it for you
(or NOV POTW).
- Notify PERCS if you want us to keep a specific POC
in LTMP/STMP so you will have data for next permit
renewal.
- Email PERCS draft permit, fact sheet, RPA.
- Send PERCS paper copy of permit (w/o NPDES
boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet. Email RPA if
changes.
check applicable PERCS staff:
BRD, CPF, CTB, FRB, TAR - Sarah Bass (807-6310)
CHO, HIW, LTN, LUM, NES, NEW, ROA, YAD
- Monit Hassan (807-6314)
Other Comments to PERCS:
L
PERCS PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
3) facility has Sills and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV" if program still under development)
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
v
Flow, MGD
Industrial()
Uncontrollable
Permitted
Actual
Timejeriod fo Actual
STMP time frame:
001
C •
[.
Most recent:
n/a
Next Cycle:
POC due to
NPDES/ Non-
Disch Permit
Limit
Required by
EPA*
Required
by 503
Sludge**
POC due
to SIU***
POTW POC
(Explain
below)****
STMP
Effluent
Freq
LTMP
Effluent
Freq
POC in LTMPI
STMP
Parameter of
Concern (POC)
Check List
BOD
,/
ve-----
4
Q
`�
TSS
4
Q
Q = Quarterly
-
NH3
J
.-----
4
Q M
arsenic
4
Q M
J
Cadmium
J
4
Q M
J
Chromium
J
4
Q M
J
Copper
J
„-----
4
Q M
Cyanide
4
Q M
Is all data on DMRs?
J
Lead
v`
4
Q M
YES
----Mercury
4
Q M
NO (attach data)
Molybdenum
4
Q M
J
Nickel
J
4
Q M
Silver
4
Q M
Selenium
4
Q M
1.1
Zinc
J
4
Q M
Is data in spreadsheet?
Total Nitrogen
4
Q M
YES (email to writer)
Phosphorus
4
Q M
NO
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
*Always in the LTMP/STMP ** Only in LTMP/STMP if sludge and app or composte (dif POCs for incinerators)
* Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW **** Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concem to POTW
Comments to Permit Writer (ex.. explanation of any POCs. info you have on IU related investi ations into NPDES Droblems):
M tkeldy Gr*X wurp hv5 dniL 5L 4(► hi iip-t, Ik{ rh Corp), pan - c'
PERC NPDES_Pretreatment.requestform.MuddyCreek WWTP
Revised: July 24, 2007

2018 NC Category 5 Assessments "303(d) List" Final
Rocky Subbasin
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
M
u
N
rr-I
M
From Anderson Creek to Lanes Creek
Previous AU Number 13-17c
Length or Area
U
Classification
Parameter of Interest
v v
Ln Ln sr)
> 10% and < 90% conf
Exceeding Criteria
Copper (7 µg/I, AL, FW)
> 10% and < 90% conf
Exceeding Criteria
Turbidity (50 NTU, AL, FW miles)
> 10% and >90 conf
Exceeding Criteria
a)
0)
4)
0)
0)
0_
v
L
0
CU
CU
UL
C
L (B
N
OC p
• L
u �
O O
E
v
t
E
O
Li -
Previous AU Number
N
2
Ll
H
c
01
N
Length or Area
U
Classification
C
0
ro
Ln
a)
Ln
Copper Dissolved Chronic (varies, AL, FW)
Exceeding Criteria
Turbidity (50 NTU, AL, FW miles)
> 10% and >90 conf
Exceeding Criteria
South Fork Crooked Creek
From source to SR 1515
Previous AU Number
ro
N
0
00
c
CU
J
Classification C
Parameter of Interest
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW)
Exceeding Criteria
Lf)
Fish Community (Nar, AL, FW)
Exceeding Criteria
South Fork Crooked Creek
13-17-20-2b
CU
Q)
UL
4- )
0
0
U
0
L.f)
Ln
cc
N
E
O
L
LL
Previous AU Number
Classification C
Parameter of Interest
Ln
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW)
Exceeding Criteria
Page 260 of 262
2018 NC Category 5 Assessments "303(d) List" Approved by EPA May 22,2019

NH3ITRC WLA Calculations
Facility: Muddy Creek WWTP
PermitNo. NC0081621
Prepared By: Qais Banihani
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 0.3
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 38.7
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 83
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (),
c9.3 eag 1L
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
38.7 s7Q10 (CFS)
0.3 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.465 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
1.19 IWC (%)
1432 Allowable Conc. (mg/ )
1011+ ia h-7!e Oil
38.7
0.3
0.465
1.0
0.22
1.19
QuAaE -5 jI L
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
84.23 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
tmi-I i, b-,1ed on
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/I, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
83
0.3
0.465
1.8
0.22
0.56
283.8
qur�aE� g m51�
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

NH3ITRC WLA Calculations
Facility: Muddy Creek WWTP
PermitNo. NC0081621
Prepared By: Qais Banihani
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
1
38.7
83
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc.g(ug/l) Ca?
1
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
38.7 s7Q10 (CFS)
1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1.55 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
3.85 IWC (%)
441 AI owable CQnc. (mg/I)
j aG°�
38.7
1
1.55
1.0
0.22
3.85
S?ee, 20 1
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
25.97 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
.*t- Ir h7 $ or\ Zo01
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/I, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
83
1
1.55
1.8
0.22
1.83
)eC. �im$6 a mjIlr
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

}
8 86'6'6' 8 R 8 8 k
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
7 ( ( ( ( ( ( 7 1 1
285 701,- - - .. §
■,■-■ -•]9!
{\�)3i|(!8!;!s
c ®|8,l2;�!!!(!(»#t8
!°!!-`#(!«Evly!«;$§F
!\!- 2 ! ! ! |`!
k 3 3 3 3 k\) 3)
10
4 4 # # # # # #
i • 3
8
3
• -
▪ , 0 PP
c
,
k • 8 8 8 8§ 8 8!
m ;
2/
1
§
�
E)E, f j I , !
r()aa88. aar r ig
ka! a5 LEaELEalaEal!I!!
a
AON Ol Peeooid
fd8 'umloy ON
-13
111111
00000
NOLLOV NOLLtl1OIA
snuege3 :A.Nf1O3
,taooy :N0I93M
a
|
|z�
\F
!(
I
kk
/®
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
2

a}ea lenowaa 008 Ileaan0
E
N N
„ r v o2 „.— o O m r„D —
a m c= �� • - cSu m m o o• cQ
c ,i12aL 3 3 c 3 c▪ ; m �• fl wa m 3 3 a 3 N; rfl '- E f - 0._
n of N
N -, i- -4 F� V ▪ ▪ V V V �-' f+ -s 1� • 0101O1Q�1F-+N00 I--+ F-+ �! N V VV I--+ , Ol Fa O O O
V V V Q1 01 al
SL-aagwaaaa
SI-aaquaanoN
03 V V ▪ V 00 00 00 V 00 • 00 • 00 V • V 1r • ▪ CO • 00 03 CO 00 00 • 00 CO • V 00 V • 00 V • V ▪ 01
C./1 A O iD ID A A i0 O1 is i— O bo in A iD en in is ▪ i.0 iD A bo O in O in
l0 In V Cn Q1 Ul O W N W V O O1 O CO (1 N CO 00 O CO W W CO 00 W W lD A O
Tl `
D 0 of
acQ c - E-a 0 - c
c = Cu -q c
to CD • S o�
rt N ,
O O O O O 0 N O
O
6T-Jagwaaaa
6T-JagwanoN
V) O • c ` „
fD
E-
0 m
oallc0 c -0 0CU = -I c
c
CEO Fa O O • CD CCD CEO
CD
6T-Menuer
gI-aagwaaaa
8Z-JagwanoN
N
00
(D
00
1�
00
Co 1D CD CD Co lD (o CO CD CD CD CO (D CO 1D lD CD (o CD O
V al V V 00 00 00 00 00 00 Cn CO V V 00 00 00 00 V CO
00 00 P O1 i-+ V bo in in W O Co N Co N N 01 W
00 Cn O1 O 0 N N N W O1 O1 (n V 00 CD LID 01 F-+ CO
0
73
0
a}eJ lenowaa OSSJ IleJan0
E
LI-Jagwaaaa
LT-aagwanoN
m cum
c` E - 0 a
7 01 =. -1 c Lj
V V v 4
✓ VFa
V
9i-aagwaaaa
9I-JagwanoN
a
!D N
- a c
7 N = n c
0l 01 Ql Owl
01
Si-aagwaaaa
SI-JagW3AON
(D CO CD lD CD CD CD Co CD CD (D CO lO CD CO CD CD l0 CO Co CO CD (D CD CO CD CD lD Co CO
V V al 01 CO CO V CO 00 00 00 (n (n 00 V CO V CO 00 CO CO V 00 00 V 00 01 (n 01
W O1 • N V O
00 IQ FL.) • 01 V (n (�J1 O N (n ▪ l0 00 (n 01 V 0 0 01 1-� N 00 W 00 0▪ 1
E D 0 -'
z Oj A = c
3
O ▪ O 03
O N
0 0
6I-Jagwaaaa
6T-JagwanoN
D tDw
00 C c a� 0 a c
7 Oj a c
, N fa 11-1-% ' 1 ,
u" l0 CD CD Co 1-+
lD (I)
gi-aagwaaaa
gti-JagwanoN
N
CD
no"0 C D
b rD c c
7
E
>s 3 y CD
00 00 000 -
00
00
(D CO CD CD (D Co CO (D LO 1D 1.0 l0 CO (D CO lD CO (D lD (D
01 00 V V 00 V V V 00 Cn 00 V 00 V CO V V al 00
Cn O V In O �! to lD N CO F� N N lD N O 0 00 iv
00 O1 O A 0 W V N W O F-+ 01 (J1 V (D 0 al
0
IZ9T800DN
d1MM laaa7 ItPPnW
N
0
0

N
O
V O N A
©
F+
N
W
£O-SO-LtOZ
LZ-ZO-8IOZ
DO Concentration (mg/L)
00
5
F�•1
rr
cp
0
cp
i-1-�
0
cp
l 1
cD

Temperature °C
tli
W
W

V
co
A
Hardness (mg/L)
W W W
t0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0
N 0 o O b O O b 0
N
N
0
V
I.
N
W
I.
N
0
W
V
A
N
O
N
O
F+
00
V
ID
O
F+
00
1
O
N
V
N
0
F.
00
N
o,
N
0
N
1.0
N
I
i
Ul
N
O
F+
to
00
N
W
N
0
W
W
N
N
0
F+
l0
•
•
•
•
Upstream Hardness - Muddy Creek WWTP

03 a
tQ
CO
11/
"
94 O
Mcri
151-1
a'•
tr,
e
o (7.2.
K.
o 70
0-
* a a
e 'tea}. -v
� �G y
ea
r#
12,
dl
O1
tD
• Fps • -
co
a
co
id
,'
m
1
co
o-
2
12)
0
..a
LD
1.1
t11
MOAN
Z
8
0o
N
S
1.00/LZ91800)1
LOO/Lz9 L800)I
ka
0
n
rr,
4
fp
01
rti
VI
mi n n n
n ro atro 5
a ▪ --I
n..
▪ 0 V CU V1 VI
7n
G
4
✓ f� V t
a
z
C
4
4
i
0
sal MaN pp\
fit

• Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: 02/14/19
Facility: MUDDY CREEK WWTP
NPD1 S#•:; NC0.08102' P i rP :
Laboratory Performing Teat: MERITECH LABS, INC;..;. � ^ m
mom°
Signature o€ Oper( Responsible Charge.' - m _
Signature of�Laboratory -Supervisor * moSED: -2.83% Reduction *
001 County: CABARRUS
Work Order:
MAIL ORIGINAL TO:
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia
Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Teat
Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Water Quality
N.C. DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
CONTROL ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (D)ead
19
23
18
19
23
19
23
22
19
22
22
18
Effluent %: 0.6%
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (D)ead
pH
Control
Treatment 2
D.O.
23
18
20
19
24
21
25
23
16 21
24
20
L
Chronic Test Results
Calculated t = -0.591
Tabular t = 2.508
% Reduction = -2.83
% Mortality
Avg.Reprod. T
0.00
Control
20.58
Control
0.00
Treatment
2
21.17
Treatment
2
Control CV
10.033%
% control orgs
producing 3rd
brood
100%
PASS FAIL
X
Check One
1st sample 1st sample 2nd sample
8.05
8.08
8.00
8.09
8.18
8.09
8.02
8.16
s s s
t e t e t e
a n a n a n
✓ d r d r d
t t t
1st sample let sample 2nd sample
Control 7.58
7.49
Treatment 2 7.52
7.59
7.59
7.53
7.55
.60
7.87 7.16
7.85 7.12.
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as %, combining replicates
Complete This For Either Test
Test Start Date: 02/06/19
Collection (Start) Date
Sample 1: 02/04/19 Sample 2: 02/06/19
Sample Type/Duration 2nd
1st P/F
Grab Comp. Duration D
I S S
Sample 1 X 24.1 hrs L A A
U M M
Sample 2 X 23.9 hrs T P P
Hardness(m6/1)
Spec. Cond.(pmhos)
Chlorine(mg/1)
Sample temp. at receipt(°C)
I
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Concentration
Mortality
LC50
95% Confidence Limits
--
Method of Determination
Moving Average _ Probit _
Spearman Karber .__. Other
48
183 650
<0.1
645
<0.1
1.1
1.1
)
Note: Please
Complete This
Section Also
start/end start/end
Control
High
Conc.
pH D.O.
Organism Tested: Ceriodaphnia dubia Duration(hrs):
Copied from DWQ form AT-1 (3/87) rev. 11/95 (DUBIA ver. 4.41)

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: 07/24/19
Facility: WSACC - MUDDY CREEK WWTP NPDES#: NC0081621 Pipe#: 001 County: CABARRUS
Laboratory Performing Test: R & A LABORATORIES, INC.
X
Sign o - perator. in Responsible Charge
,aboratory Supervisor
Comments: Final Effluent
* PASSED: 1.09% Reduction *
Work Order: 69531-01 Environmental Sciences Branch
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Div. of Environmental Management
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
1621 Mail Service Ctr
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia
Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Chronic Test Results
Calculated t = 0.432
Tabular. t = 2.508
CONTROL ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 % Reduction = 1.09
(f Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (D)ead
23
21
23 24
22
23
25
22
24
21
23
25
Effluent %; 1.2%
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (D)ead
pH
22
23
21
24
22
24
21
25
22
23
21
25
F
% Mortality
Avg.Reprod.
0.00
Control
23.00
Control
2
0.00
Treatment
2
22.75
Treatment
Control CV
5.863%
% control orgs
producing 3rd
brood
100%
lst sample lst sample 2nd sample
Control. 6.97 7.05
Treatment 2 6.97 7.06
5
t e
a n
✓ d
t
1st sample
D.U. ---
Control. 8.6 8.4
Treatment: 2 8.6 8.4
6.96
7.04
6.96
7.05
8
t
a
r
t
1st
8.6
8.6
e
n
i d
sample
8.3
8.3
6.95
7.03
6.95
7.04
8
t e
a n
✓ d
t
2nd sample
8.6 8.4
8.6 8.4
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as %, combining replicates
PASS FAIL
Check One
Complete This For Either Test
Test Start Date: 07/17/19
Collection (Start) Date
Sample 1: 07/15/19 Sample 2: 07/17/19
Sample Type/Duration
Sample 1
Sample 2
Grab
Comp.
Duration
23.8 hrs
X
23.8 hrs
2nd
1st P/F
D
I S S
L A A
U M M
T P P
Hardness(mg/1)
Spec. Cond. (pmhos )
Chlorine(mg/1)
Sample temp. at receipt(°C)(
% sk
% $
Concentration
Mortality
start/end
Control
High
Conc.
pH
LC50 = % Method of Determination
95% Confi.d'ence-himits Moving Average Probit
% -- % Spearman Kerber. _ Other
48
190
790
0.01
832
0.03
3.0
2.6
1
Note: Please
Complete This
Section Also
Organism Tested: Ceriodaphnia dubia
Duration(hrs):
Copied from DEM form AT-1. (3/87) rev. 11/95 (DUBIA ver. 4.32)
start/end
D.O.

Effluen
T Lxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50
{1
Facility: WSACC - MUDDY CREEK WWTP
FILE COPY
Date: 04/17/19
NPDES#: N00081621 Pipe#: 001. County: CABARRUS
Laboratory PerCormin9 Test: R & A LABORATORIES, INC.
x
in Respons $I Charge
'TirnaY�aboratory Supervisor
Comments: Final Effluent
65369-01
* PASSED: 1.45t Reduction *
Work Order: 65201-01
MAIL ORIGINAL TO:
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia
Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test
CONTROL ORGANISMS
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive,(D)ead
Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Environmental Management
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
1621 Mai]. Service Ctr
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
21
23
25
22
23
24
25
21
Effluent %: 1.2t
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (D)ead
PH
1st sample
Control
Treatment 2
D.O.
Control
Treatment 2
2 3 4
5 6 7
25
22
22
23
L L
8 9 10 11 12
25
21
22
23
22
21
23
24
25
21
I,
22
23
L'
Chronic Test Results
Calculated t = 0.561
Tabular t = 2.508
t Reduction = 1.45
% Mortality
Avg.Reprod.
0.00
Control
23.00
Control
0.00
Treatment
2
22.67
Treatment
2
Control CV
6.422t
% control orgs
producing 3rd
brood
100t
PASS FAIL
6.94
7.02
6.94
7.03
8
t e
a n
r d
t
1st sample
8.6
8.4
8.6
8.4
1st sample
6.97
7.05
6.97
7.06
s
t e'
a n
✓ d
1st • sample
2nd sample
6.96
7.04
6.96
7.05
s
t
a
r
t
2nd sample
6.6 8.4
8.6 8.4
e
n
d
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as W, combining replicates
Complete This For Either Test
Test Start Date: 04/10/19
Collection (Start) Date
Sample 1: 04/08/19 Sample 2: 04/10/19
Sample Type/Duration
Sample 1
Sample 2
Grab
Comp.
Duration
X
23.9 hrs
24.1 hrs
Hardness(mg/1)
Spec. Cond.(pmhos)
Chlorine(mg/1)
Sample temp. at receipt(°C)L
1 1 1I 1 1 1 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Concentration
Mortality
LC50 =
95% Confidence Limits
1 --
Method of Determination
Moving Average Probit
Spearman Karber ` Other
start/end
pH
Organism Tested: Ceriodaphnia dubia
Duration(hrs):
Copied from DEM form AT-1 (3/87) rev. 11/95 (DUBTA ver. 4.32)
D
I
L
U
T
48
2nd
1st P/F
S S
A A
M M
P P
190
529
0.02
522
0.. 0 4
i
3.7
3.5
Note: Please
Complete This
Section Also
Control
High
Conc.
start/end
D.O.

rl
0
0
r\-I
N
O
ci
00
0
0
0
Z
d
a)
a)
U
al 0 0 0 0 U
A A A T >
-0 'O "a -0 '0
U
i7dPF (Pass
U
O
c-I
0
N
00
0
0
c\-I
N
O
c-I
W
0
0
0
Z
0_
27IMeritech, Inc.
a
7/ 15/2019 I Fth 7 d ChV l >4.8( P
27IMeritech, Inc.
U
27IMeritech, Inc.
U
0
0
c\-I
N
O
r-1
00
0
0
0
Z
a
a)
a)
0
0
c\-I
N
O
ci
00
0
0
0
Z
d
a)
a)