NC0025496_Fact Sheet_20210805

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NC0025496
Permit Writer / Email Contact Diana Yitbarek / [e-mail]
Date: 8/5/2021
Division/Unit: NC DEQ Division of Water Resources / NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
Fact Sheet Template: Version 1/9/2017
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, three effluent pollutant scans, four 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
Table 1. Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
City of Lincolnton/Lincolnton Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
Applicant Address:
PO Box 617, Lincolnton, NC 28093-0617
Facility Address:
550 Highway 150 Bypass West, Lincolnton, NC 28092
Permitted Discharge Flow:
3.5, 4.5, and 6 0 million gallons per day (MGD)
Facility Type/Waste:
Major Municipal/ 67% Domestic and 33% Industrial'
Facility Class:
Class IV Biological - 15A NCAC 08G .0302
Treatment Units:
Influent lift pump station, automatic bar screening and vortex grit removal
structures, orbital oxidation ditch, four diffused aeration basins, two final
clarifiers, three -channel chlorine contact basins (sodium hypochlorite),
dechlorination chamber (sodium bisulfite), four anaerobic sludge digesters, two
digested sludge storage tanks, sludge drying beds, and backup power generator
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Y
County:
Lincoln
Region:
Mooresville Regional Office (MRO)
1 Percentage based on the permitted industrial flow.
Page 1 of 14

Permitting Action: The City of Lincolnton (City) applied for NPDES permit renewal for Lincolnton WWTP in
February 2020. The WWTP has a design capacity of 6.0 MGD and is currently authorized to discharge 3.5
MGD (up to 4.5 MGD and 6.0 MGD upon request) into South Fork Catawba River, a class WS-IV waters. The
class denotes use as water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing purposes. The average effluent flow
for the past five years was 2.2 MGD. The Lincolnton WWTP (Facility) serves about 10,400 customers within
the City. The Facility currently has an active Pretreatment Program with a Long -Term Monitoring Program
(LTMP). There are two non -categorical significant industrial users (SIUs) and three categorical industrial users
(CIUs) discharging to the system. The Facility permitted industrial flow is 1.15 MGD, and the pretreatment
program will continue to be implemented in accordance with the permit.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
Table 2. Receiving Waterbodv Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 [35°27'02.5"N 81°15'38.8"W]/ South Fork Catawba River
Stream Segment/Assessment
Unit (AU):
11-129-(3.7)
Stream Classification:
WS-Iv
Drainage Area (mi2):
395
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
77
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
140
30Q2 (cfs):
190
Average Flow (cfs):
500
Instream Waste Concentration
(IWC) (% effluent):
6.5 % at 3.5 MGD (7Q10 Summer)
8.3 % at 4.5 MGD (7Q10 Summer)
10.7 % at 6.0 MGD (7Q10 Summer)
2018 303(d) listed/parameter:
No/NA
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
Yes- Mercury Statewide TMDL implemented in 2012
Basin/Sub-basin/ Hydrologic unit
code (HUC):
Catawba River Basin/03-08-35/03050102
USGS Topo Quad/State Grid:
Lincolnton West/F13NE
The South Fork Catawba River Stream Index Number 11-129-(3.7) is not listed on North Carolina's 2010
303(d) list of impaired streams. This river is formed by the confluence of Jacob and Henry Forks in Catawba
County. It flows southerly through Lincoln and Gaston counties before joining the mainstem Catawba River at
Lake Wylie. The river is used extensively as both a drinking water supply and for the assimilation of municipal
and industrial wastewater. The Town of Dallas' Water Treatment Plant is located approximately 13.7 miles
downstream of Lincolnton's discharge point.
Page 2 of 14

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below from September 2016 through September 2020.
Table 3. Effluent Data Summary with permit limits Outfall 001. Parameters listed as in the last permit.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max.
Min.
Permit Limit
Flow
MGD
2.12
12.752
0.62
MA* 3.5 MGD
BOD5
mg/1
6.32
2533
1.9
MA 30.0 mg/I
WA* 45.0 mg/I
Total Suspended
Solids (TSS)
mg/1
8.85
660
2.3
MA 30.0 mg/I
WA 45.0 mg/I
NH3N
mg/1
0.60
15.3
0.1
MA 12 mg/I
WA 35 mg/I
Fecal Coliform
#/100 ml
11.0
(Geomean)
153L
MA 200/100m1
WA 400/100m1
pH
SU
6.9
7.8
6.0
6.0<pH<9.0
Total Residual
Chlorine (TRC)
µg/1
17.8
49.0
10.0
DM* 28.00 pg/I
Temperature
°C
19
30
8
Conductivity
umhos/cm
-337.6
1144.0
107.0
Total Nitrogen (TN)
mg/1
9.6
13.9
4.5
Total Phosphorus
(TP)
m /1
g
1.81
9.2
0.2
Total Silver
µg/1
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Total Antimony
µg/1
10.8
28.0
1.6
Total Cadmium
µg/1
< 0.2
< 1.0
< 2.0
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
µg/1
55.3
< 320.04
1.2
Hardness as CaCO3
µg/1
37.6
94.0
23.8
*MA -Monthly Average, WA -Weekly Average, DM -Daily Maximum, DA=Daily Average.
Table 4. Effluent Data Summary from voluntary sampling Outfall 001 from September 2016 through September
2020.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max.
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
mg/1
7.8
8.3
Color
Admi unit
55
75
Chem. Oxygen Demand
(COD)
m /1
g
96
170
Oil & grease
mg/1
2.4
2.4
2 Maximum flow value recorded on 6/9/2019.
3 Due to heavy rain event on 3/26/21 when only one final clarifier was in service.
4 On 3/21/19, the contract laboratory used a much higher detection level than normal and came back non -detected at <320 ug/I.
Page 3 of 14

Table 5. Effluent Data Summary from expanded effluent pollutant scan Outfall 001 from September 2016 through
September 2020.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max.
Cyanide
µg/1
5.05
6.0
Chromium
µg/1
1.34
6.0
Copper
µg/1
7.7
33.0
Lead
µg/1
9.0
10.0
Zinc
µg/1
64.6
380.05
Selenium
µg/1
9.4
10.0
Total Phenolics
µg/1
9.4
14.0
Mercury
ng/1
3.1
11.4
*See section 6.6 Mercury Statewide Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Evaluation
Sample results for the sampled constituents not included above such as arsenic, beryllium, lead, nickel, and
molybdenum, were less than the method detection limit.
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 total maximum daily load (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).
Instream data summary and instream monitoring proposed for this permit action:
The current permit requires upstream monitoring for hardness. The upstream location is about 4000 feet from
the outfall, at Madison Street. The formerly used downstream location is about 1 mile from the outfall, at
Laboratory Road. There is not recent available instream monitoring data to report. In this permit cycle, per 15
A NCAC 02B.0508, monitoring requirements for instream conductivity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen
are added to the permit.
Hardness: Effluent hardness and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, were added to the
permit in the last permit cycle.
Instream monitoring requirement for fecal coliform, listed under 15 A NCAC 02B.0508, is not included in
this permit cycle per April 22, 2002, Instream Conductivity and Fecal Coliform Monitoring Guidance. This
receiving stream is not class B nor impaired for fecal coliform.
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (Y/N): NO
Name of Monitoring Coalition: NA
5 Suspected laboratory error on 9/12/19. Potential mix-up between the influent and effluent sample analysis.
Page 4 of 14

5. Compliance Summary
From October 2016 to March 2021, the Facility received a total of two Notices of Violation (NOVs) for
exceeding weekly average (WA) limits for fecal coliform and TSS and one Notice of Deficiency (NOD). The
Facility did not receive any Enforcement Cases in this period. The MRO representative, Ori Tuvia, is working
with the Facility to monitor the Facility's compliance performance. The report on limit violations that proceeded
to NOV and NOD were as follows:
• Fecal coliform - 1 WA limit exceedance in 2019 at 1556/100 ml.
• TSS - 1 WA limit exceedance at 63.9 mg/1.
• BOD - 1 WA limit exceedance in 2021.
Summary of the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past 5
years):
The Facility passed eighteen of eighteen quarterly chronic toxicity tests from March 2017 to December 2020
and complied with all four 2nd species WET tests in September 2017, March 2018, June 2019, and December
2020.
Summary of the results from the most recent compliance inspection:
The last inspection conducted in March 2021 reported that the Facility had three of four aeration basins in
service; the 4th aeration basin was used as a digester due to the wet season. One of the clarifiers was out for
repairs. The Facility is equipped with three anaerobic digesters and three storage tanks; one of the digesters was
out of order due to failure in the cover that causes it to tilt. This was noted in the 2019 inspection as well. The
Region recommends repairing it or taking it out to prevent a major failure.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
6.1 Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following stream flows 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
Streamflow values were extracted from the previous fact sheet from 2012 and 2016.
6.2 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.
If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed:
The current permit limits for BOD are secondary TBELs and are based on 40 CFR 133.102. and 15A 2B. 0406.
No changes for BOD limits are proposed for this permit cycle.
Page 5 of 14

6.3 Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of 1.0
mg/1 (summer) and 1.8 mg/1 (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing a
multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection of
aquatic life (17 ug/1) and capped at 28 ug/1 (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values reported
below 50 ug/1 are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The current permit sets
MA and WA limits for ammonia for the three flow tiers, 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD. None of the
ammonia results from the evaluated period exceeded 35 mg/1. The maximum value of ammonia reported was
15.3 mg/1. The WQBELs for ammonia were verified in the WLA calculations for the Facility's specific flow
tiers. The ammonia limits will be the same as the previous permit cycle.
The facility uses chlorination as its primary disinfection, sodium hypochlorite 10%, and does not have post
aeration. The current permit limits TRC at 28 ug/L as a daily maximum for the three flow tiers. Though several
reported TRC values exceeded the 28 ug/L daily maximum limit, the facility is considered compliant with its
permit since all reported values were less than 50 ug/L. The maximum TRC value reported was 49 ug/L. The
TRC limit has been reviewed in the attached WLA and has been found to be protective. No changes are
proposed for TRC.
6.4 Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
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
Y2 detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) stream flows 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.
The RPAs were conducted for permitted flows of 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD with a 7Q 1 OS of 77 cubic
feet per second (cfs) and specific hardness values.
RPAs were conducted on effluent toxicant data collected in the Permittee's 2017 to 2019 effluent pollutant
scans and DMRs. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water quality
standards/criteria. The data set was limited for beryllium, chlorides, total phenolic compounds, chloroform,
chlorodibromomethane. 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:
o 3.5 MGD: Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate6
O 4.5 MGD: Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate6
o 6.0 MGD: Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate6
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate was reported at less than detection, with detection levels ranging from < 1.2
µg/L to < 320 µg/L, in the Effluent Pollutant Scans and discharge monitoring reports (DMRs). Based on the
6 Per potential laboratory detection level error explained on June 9, 2021, City's email, the RPA was performed with whole value, 1/2 value, and zero.
The output remained the same in the three scenarios and a permit limit is granted for Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate in this permit cycle.
Page 6 of 14

RPA, the City's total bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate allowable discharge concentration is 4.8 µg/L for the 3.5
MGD flow tier. DWR's laboratory identifies the target Practical Quantification Limits (PQLs) for bis (2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate as 10 µg/L. 15A NCAC 2B .0505 (e) (4) requires that all test procedures must produce
detection and reporting levels that are below the permit discharge requirements, and all data generated must
be reported to the approved detection level or lower reporting level of the procedure. If no approved methods
can achieve a detection level below the permit discharge requirement (or allowable discharge concentration)
the method with the lowest detection level must be used.
To provide an opportunity for the City to develop an effluent bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate analysis using a
target Practical Quantification Limit (PQL) of 10 µg/L, a 1-year sampling plan has been added to the permit.
See Special Condition A. (8)
To provide an opportunity for the City to develop a plan to assess sources of bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate in
order to come in compliance with the limits in Section A. (1.), a 3-year schedule of compliance has been
added to the permit. See Special Condition A. (9.)
• 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. Still, the
maximum predicted concentration was >50% of the allowable concentration:
o 3.5 MGD: Antimony and silver
o 4.5 MGD: Copper, silver, zinc7, and antimony.
o 6.0 MGD: Copper, silver, zinc7, and antimony.
• 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:
o 3.5 MGD: Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury,
molybdenum, nickel, selenium, zinc, chloroform, and total phenolic compounds.
o 4.5 MGD: Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, molybdenum,
nickel, selenium, chloroform, and total phenolic compounds.
o 6.0 MGD: Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, molybdenum,
nickel, selenium, chloroform, and total phenolic compounds.
These compounds will be monitored in the pretreatment program during this permit cycle: Arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, antimony,
silver, zinc, chlorodibromomethane, and bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate.
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans were evaluated for additional
pollutants of concern.
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:
• 3.5 MGD: NA
• 4.5 MGD: NA
• 6.0 MGD: 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:
• 3.5 MGD: Chlorodibromomethane
• 4.5 MGD: Chlorodibromomethane
• 6.0 MGD: Chlorodibromomethane
Per suspected laboratory error explained on June 9, 2021, City's email, the RPA was performed with 380 ug/I, 219 ug/I, and zero. The output
remained the same in the three scenarios and a monitor -only requirement is granted for zinc in this permit cycle.
Page 7 of 14

RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater are included
as attachments of this Fact Sheet
6.5 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 Major Publicly Owned Treatment Work (POTW), and a
chronic WET limit will continue on a quarterly frequency at Outfall 001 at 6.5 % at 3.5 MGD, 8.3 % at 4.5
MGD, and 10.7 % at 6.0 MGD using Ceriodaphnia dubia.
6.6 Mercury Statewide Total Maximum Daily Load (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 multiple quantifiable levels of mercury (>1 ng/1) received 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
A mercury evaluation was conducted in accordance with the Permitting Guidance developed for the
implementation of the statewide Mercury TMDL to determine the need for a limit. Below find summaries of
compliance mercury data from 2016 to 2020 for 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD.
Table 6. Mercury Effluent Data Summary and Evaluation - 3.5 MGD
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
# of Samples
2
4
4
Mercury Annual Average (ng/l)
2.4
3.1
3.2
4.7
2.1
Mercury Annual Max (ng/1)
3.3
5.9
6.1
11.4
3.1
TBEL, ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
182.3
Table 7. Mercury Effluent Data Summary and Evaluation - 4.5 MGD
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
# of Samples
2
4
-.
Mercury Annual Average (ng/1)
2.4
3.1
3.2
4.7
2.1
Mercury Annual Max (ng/1)
5.9
6.1
11.4
3.1
Page 8 of 14

TBEL, ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
144.5
Table 8. Mercury Effluent Data Summary and Evaluation - 6.0 MGD
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
#of Samples
2
4
4
4
Mercury Annual Average (ng/1)
2.4
3.1
3.2
4.7
2.1
Mercury Annual Max (ng/1)
3.3
5.9
6.1
11.4
3.1
TBEL, ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
111.4
Based on the NC water quality standard of 12 ng/L and the data collected, the water quality -based effluent
limitation (WQBEL) for mercury is 182.3 ng/1, 144.5 ng/1, and 111.4 ng/1 for 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0
MGD, respectively. The technology -based effluent limit (TBEL) is 47 ng/1 for all flow tiers.
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Mercury evaluation results used method
1631E. No annual average mercury concentration exceeded the WQBEL, and no individual mercury sample
exceeded the TBEL. The maximum value reported in this period was 11.4 ng/1. No mercury limit is required,
but the mercury minimization plan (MJ\1P) will continue to be required in this permit cycle because the Facility
is greater than 2.0 MGD and discharged multiple quantifiable levels of mercury (>1 ng/1).
6.7 Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation within
this permit:
The current permit reflects the monthly nutrient (TP and TN (TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N)) monitoring for the
three flow tiers, 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD. No changes are proposed for nutrients. Annual loads for
TN and TP will be revisited when a final nutrient TMDL for the Catawba River Basin is concluded.
Annual nutrient TN and TP loads: The maximum TN and TP annual loads during the evaluated period were
85,232 lb/yr (2020) and 14,820 lb/yr (2020). The Facility is currently operating at a flow limit of 3.5 MGD.
Table 9. Nutrients Effluent Data Summary
Parameter
2017
2018
2019
2020
Annual TN load, Ib/yr
53,219
50,556
61,630
85,232
Annual TP load, Ib/yr
15,931
5,980
9,849
14,820
6.8 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 9 of 14

If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H.0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: 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/lfor 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 BODS/TSS included in the permit? YES. The BOD removal rate for the
evaluated period was over 96% and the TSS removal rate was over 95%.
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: NA
9. Antibacksliding Review
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations may
be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL limits,
or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): YES. Monitoring and reporting for
cadmium was removed for 3.5 MGD and 4.5 MGD. Limits for cadmium were removed for 6.0 MGD.
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: Confirmed. Cadmium was removed based on
updated RPA calculations. However, data with the expanded effluent testing will continue to verify this.
10. Monitoring Frequency 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.
Page 10 of 14

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 10. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes for 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD
Parameter
Current Permit Limits
and Monitoring
Frequency
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 3.5 MGD,
4.5 MGD, and 6.0 MGD
Monitor & Report
Continuous
No changes
15A NCAC 2B .0505
The average flow for the past five years
was 2.2 MGD
BOD5
For 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD (All Flows)
MA 30.0 mg/I
WA 45.0 mg/I
Monitor & Report Daily
for All Flows
No changes
TBEL. Secondary treatment
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC 2B
.0406.
TSS
For 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
MA 30.0 mg/I
WA 45.0 mg/I
Monitor & Report Daily
for All Flows
No changes
TBEL. Secondary treatment
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC 2B
.0406.
NH3-N (Summer)
3.5 MGD: 12 mg/I MA
35 mg/I WA
4.5 MGD: 9 mg/I MA
27 mg/I WA
6 MGD: 7 mg/I MA
21mg/IWA
Monitor & Report
3/week for All Flows
No changes
WQBEL based on WLA calculations for
Protection of aquatic life due to
ammonia toxicity.
Fecal coliform
(Geometric Mean)
For 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
MA 200 /100m1
WA 400 /100m1
No changes
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC
2B .0200.
Page 11 of 14

Monitor & Report Daily
for All Flows
pH
For 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
6-9 SU.
Monitor & Report Daily
for All Flows
No changes
WQBEL. State W.Q. standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200
TRC
For 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
DM 28.0 µg/I
Monitor & Report Daily
for All Flows
No changes
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC
2B .0200. The Division considers all
effluent TRC values reported below 50
ug/I to be in compliance with the
permit.
Temperature
Monitor and report
effluent daily for All
Flows
Added requirement for
monitoring and report
instream for All Flows
at a variable**
frequency
15A NCAC 2B.0200 and 15A NCAC
2B.0500
Conductivity
Monitor and report
effluent daily
for All Flows
Added requirement for
monitoring and report
instream for All Flows
at a variable**
frequency
The facility has industrial dischargers
15A NCAC 2B.0500
DO
None
Added requirement for
monitoring and report
effluent daily for All
Flows
Added minimum DO
limit as 5 mg/I
requirement for
monitoring and report
instream at a variable**
frequency
15A NCAC 2B .0500 — Surface Water
Monitoring and Reporting.
15A NCAC 02B .0211(6) — Surface water
limit (class C waters apply to all waters
of the state)
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Monitor and report
monthly
for All Flows
No changes
15A NCAC 2B .0500 — Surface Water
Monitoring and Reporting.
Total Phosphorus (TP)
Monitor and report
monthly
for All Flows
No changes
15A NCAC 2B .0500 — Surface Water
Monitoring and Reporting.
Total Silver
Quarterly monitoring
for All Flows
No changes
Based on results of Reasonable
Potential Analysis (RPA); Predicted Max
>_ 50% of Allowable Cw - Continue
Quarterly Monitoring
State WQ standards, 15A 2B .0200
Page 12 of 14

Total Antimony
Quarterly monitoring for
3.5 MGD and 4.5 MGD
Monthly monitoring for
6.0 MGD with limits:
MA: 52.0 ug/I
DM: 52.0 ug/I
No changes
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
>_ 50% of Allowable Cw
Total Cadmium
Quarterly monitoring for
3.5 MGD and 4.5 MGD
Monthly monitoring for
6.0 MGD with limits:
MA: 5.5 ug/I
DM: 25.2 ug/I
Removed monitoring,
reporting for 3.5 MGD
and 4.5 MGD, and
limits for 6.0 MGD
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
< 50% of Allowable Cw
Total Copper
None
Added quarterly
monitoring for 4.5 MGD
and 6.0 MGD
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
>_ 50% of Allowable Cw
Total Zinc
None
Added quarterly
monitoring for 4.5 MGD
and 6.0 MGD
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
>_ 50% of Allowable Cw
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Quarterly monitoring
for All Flows
Added monthly
monitoring
requirement and limits
3.5 MGD: MA: 4.9 ug/I
4.5 MGD: MA: 3.8 ug/I
6.0 MGD: MA: 3.0 ug/I
Added Special
Condition A. (8) one
year sampling plan.
Added Special
Condition A. (9) three-
year compliance
schedule.
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
>_ 50% of Allowable Cw
6 values > allowable concentration
Chlorodibromomethane
None
Added quarterly
monitoring for
3.5MGD, 4.5 MGD and
6.0 MGD
Based on results of RPA; Predicted Max
>_ Allowable Cw
Total Hardness
Quarterly monitoring
upstream and in
effluent
for All Flows
No changes
Hardness -dependent dissolved metals
water quality standards approved in
2016.
Toxicity Test
Chronic limit:
6.5 % at 3.5 MGD,
8.3 % at 4.5 MGD, and
10.7 % at 6.0 MGD
No changes
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts.
15A NCAC 2B.0200 and 15A NCAC
2B.0500
Page 13 of 14

Effluent Pollutant Scan
Three times per permit
cycle for 3.5 MGD, 4.5
MGD, and 6.0 MGD
Next scans must be
performed in each of
the following years:
2023, 2024, and 2025.
40 CFR parts 423 and 122
Mercury Minimization
Plan (MMP)
MMP
for 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
No changes
Consistent with EPA approved 2012
Statewide Mercury TMDL
Implementation.
Electronic Reporting
Electronic reporting
special condition
for 3.5 MGD, 4.5 MGD,
and 6.0 MGD
Added language for
new electronic
reporting deadline
December 21, 2025
In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Rule 2015 and Rule -Phase 2
Extension
*MA - Monthly Average, WA - Weekly Average, DM - Daily Max.
* * Variable monitoring frequency is defined as follows: samples collected three times per week during June 1 through September 30
and once per week October 1 through May 31.
13. Public Notice Schedule
Permit to Public Notice: June 22, 2021
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.
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Diana
Yitbarek at [phone] or by email at [e-mail].
14. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable)
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): No
If Yes, list changes and their basis below: NA
15. Fact Sheet Attachments (upon request):
1. RPA Sheets Summary for 3.5, 4.5, and 6.0 MGD. Each sheet contains: input information tab, data
analyzed tab, results summary tab, and dissolve to total metals calculation tab.
2. BOD and TSS Removal Rate calculations
3. NH3/TRC/Fecal Waste Load Allocation (WLA) Spreadsheet for 3.5, 4.5, and 6.0 MGD
4. Mercury TMDL Calculations for 3.5, 4.5, and 6.0 MGD
5. Toxicity Summary/WET testing
6. Pretreatment (PT) Summary
7. Monitoring Report Violations Summary
8. Renewal Application Addendums
o Signed Effluent Pollutant Scans
o Addendum Form 2A
o Mercury Minimization Plan (MMP) summary
9. Correspondence
10. NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
11. Compliance Inspection Report
12. Public Water Supply Memo
13. Affidavit
14. NPDES-PT POC's review form
Page 14 of 14

Metal Translator
/95% Confidence Usi
95% Probabilit
NaN
Freshwate
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
0
E
4-
0
d
0
L
a
d
-71
co
J
0
a
O
U
O
C9
E
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
J_
O
7
J
co
7
J
coO
7
J_
7
—I
CDC
E
J
coO
7
J_
7
J
O
7
J_
O
M
J_
O
M
J
co
7
J
co
7
J_
3)
7
J_
0
7
J_
a)
C
J_
O
7
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
J
coO
7
J_
7
J
O
7
J_
O
M
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
O
LJ?
O
340
Q
Z
CO
O
3.2396
905.0818
CO
Q
Z
10.4720
N
N
75.4871
335.2087
Q
Z
CO
LC)
0.2964
125.7052
u
CO
1
2
u
LL
Q
Q
u
u
u
u
u
u
uU_
U_
u
u
u
150
10
LO
Cq
0.5899
O
N
300
117.7325
Q
Z
7.8806
LO
C.
00
a-
2.9416
,H
CO
CO
N
N-
CO
25.0000
Ln
O
O
126.7335
cUp
u'i
0.8
U
U
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
U
U
Z
U
Aquactic Life
Human Health
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Water Supply
U
C
VOA)
Q
U
C
N
Q
E
m
Cadmium
N
U
O
0
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper
Cyanide
Fluoride
Lead
Mercury
E
2
O
Q
o
Nickel
Nickel
E
C
N-
v)
>
C
N
Chloroform
c
E
Q
Chlorodibromomethane
N M 7 u) f- co O O N M 7 u) W N- CO Cr, 0 N vl
2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N
R R R R R R R R R co R R R c R R R R R R R R R R
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
LO
South Fork Catawba River
N
CO
O
(T
N
CO
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
ca
0
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUG Number
Stream Class
❑� Apply WS Hardness WQC
<1<
JIJ
E E
I
(010
"I°)
co
EIE
N I N
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
N
0
0
0)
R
R
0
0
0
J
a
0
O

Effluent Hard: 0 value > 100 mg/L
Effluent Hard Avg = 37.61 mg/L
i COOF-CrNO
• M O1 N O v-
ia; COO crctOIO
0Oh OM>
= MODMhh
O1 O h h O V%
03 ?n 00 MN,-3:
~ y h
2 haaa7g2
,r CU
00 E. o U
• II
U (r)
c i_.
'a Z_
c
O d
U a
in a
`>++ Q N
O
o
3 in
M
10
O
O G 0
a x
x
1))
0') C2
Q
a
re
i 0
a) =
at L
O
• O o CD CD CDL
s oti0000...
N o m O o 0 0 3
O N h Nr 0 O
a)M co h iO Q)
II II II II II I-.
E 4v 4v 4v 4v 4v h
cA
O O O Oa d
og
r
on
d
RECOMMENDED ACTION
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw. All
values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than pollutant scan (PS)
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - All
values in limited dataset reported non -detect - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - All
values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw
Limited dataset. No Monitoring required, other than
PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
See Chromium, Total
See Chromium, Total
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.
Tot Cr value(s) >_ 5 but < Cr VI Allowable Cw
No RP ,Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw No I
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
Tl # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 4,286.5
Chronic (FW): 2,279.0
Max MDL = 10
Chronic (HH): 93- 1.7
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 819.48
- Chronic: 98.76
Max MDL = 20
Acute: 40.843
- Chronic: 8.962
Max MDL = 1
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 3,798.4
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 10,806.9
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 11,410.7
Chronic: 1,7- 88.8
Acute: 201.7
- Chronic: 167.1
kIlowable Cw
Max reported value = 6
Acute: 132.02
Chronic: 119.73
h
C. h
wn
q
O
25.90
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
0.745
NO DETECTS
272.8
C.V. (default)
42.0
C.V. (default)
z
6
'< v N
z 9�
"'
Al
O
O
01
4 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
O
01
1 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
O
O
o
O
Tot Cr value
19 4
01
S11Nn
t)
t)
7bd
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
Chronic Applied Acute
Standard
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
0.5899 FW(7Q10s) 3.2396
250 WS(7Q10s)
(Za0£)V 00£
117.7325 FW(7Q10s) 905.0818
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
7.8806 FW(7Q10s) 10.4720
U V
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
PARAMETER
Arsenic
Arsenic
E
.2
Cadmium
Chlorides
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper
m
0
M
0
a

p
o
o2
73
%.15
O
a
'Monitoring required, other than PS.
No - RP , Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No - RP. All values reported non -detect. Predicted Max
< 50 % of Allowable Cw - No Monitoring required,
other than PS.
Se- e Mercury WQBEL/TBEL evaluation. MMP will
continue to be required in this permit cycle.
No - RP. Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No RP. Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS.
No RP. All values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L - No
Monitoring required other than PS
All values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L. Predicted
Max > 50% of Allowable Cw - continue quarterly
monitoring.
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS
Predic
ted of AllowbleaCwC - ontinue
quarterly monitoring
RP. Limited dataset. Predicted M>_ax Allowable Cw -
Quarterly monitoring required
'No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 277.4
- Chronic: 76.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 951.694
- Chronic: 44.694
Max MDL =10
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 182.3
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 2,431.0
Max MDL = 1
Acute (FW): 4,226.1
Chronic (FW): 565.7
Max MDL =1
Chronic (WS): 379.8
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 706.0
- Chronic: 76.0
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 3.737
Chronic: 0.912
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 1,584.8
- Chronic: 1,925.5
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 5589.954
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 85.08387
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 74.53272
No value > Allowable Cw
I Acute: NO WQS I
O
6.000
NO DETECTS
M
0.5
NO DETECTS
ti
U
V1
6-1
5.0
NO DETECTS
0.500
NO DETECTS
r
75.00000
C.V. (default)
42.84000
75.00000
C.V. (default)
o
a,
-
a,
O
a,
O
a,
O
a,
O
o
-
a,
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
M
o
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
t
t
o?- o?
t
t
t
o?
o?
t
v?
o
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
2.9416 FW(7Q10s) 75.4871
12 FW(7Q10s)
160 WS(7Q10s)
37.2313 FW(7Q10s) 335.2087
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.2964
126.7335 FW(7Q10s) 125.7052
60 WS(Qavg)
5.6 WS(7Q10s)
te
3
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
U
Z
U
Cyanide
y
_1Z
Mercury
Molybdenum
U U
Z
Selenium
G
f/1
U
_
N
Chloroform
>.
CO
E
•_
Q
Chlorodibromomethane

Outfal 1001
Allowable Cw
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)`Phthalate

Date: 6/17/2021
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
ryV
0
V
6
2
F
E
E
E
In accordance with Federal Regul
=Q�
8
8
UI
E E1
o
m?ECl
CEO
U o
E o
E E
.7 Q
O W
rs to PERCS Branch to ma
COMMENTS (identay parame
z
U
8
z
co
8
E
E
E
U
E
E
t
E
E
E
z
E
N
2
N
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
Do NOT enter any data directly into this spreadsheet
L.
co
L.
co
E
0

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1
Effluent Hardness
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
1 12/8/2016 50.2 50.2
2 3/9/2017 94 94
3 6/8/2017 43.5 43.5
4 9/14/2017 34.1 34.1
5 12/7/2017 29.8 29.8
6 3/8/2018 34.2 34.2
7 6/7/2018 40.3 40.3
8 9/27/2018 25.3 25.3
9 12/20/2018 23.8 23.8
10 3/21/2019 43.9 43.9
11 6/6/2019 34.8 34.8
12 9/12/2019 34.7 34.7
13 12/5/2019 29.5 29.5
14 3/12/2020 30.5 30.5
15 6/11/2020 28.9 28.9
16 9/17/2020 26.4 26.4
17 12/10/2020 24.8 24.8
18 3/11/2021 48.3 48.3
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
10th Per value
Average Value
Max. Value
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
H2
Upstream Hardness
16.1966
37.6111
0.4306
18
25.15 mg/L
37.61 mg/L
94.00 mg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
1 12/8/2016 87.5 87.5
2 3/9/2017 29.4 29.4
3 6/8/2017 19 19
4 9/14/2017 10.6 10.6
5 12/7/2017 15.2 15.2
6 3/8/2018 14.2 14.2
7 6/7/2018 17.4 17.4
8 9/27/2018 7.96 7.96
9 12/20/2018 5.65 5.65
10 3/21/2019 19.6 19.6
11 6/6/2019 17.1 17.1
12 9/12/2019 20.9 20.9
13 12/5/2019 9.13 9.13
14 3/12/2020 14.6 14.6
15 6/11/2020 13.8 13.8
16 9/17/2020 11.8 11.8
17 12/10/2020 10.8 10.8
18 3/11/2021 18.2 18.2
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
10th Per value
Average Value
Max. Value
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
17.9578
19.0467
0.9428
18
8.78 mg/L
19.05 mg/L
87.50 mg/L
-7-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 & Par02
Arsenic
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 10 5 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 10 5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 10 5 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 10 5 n
5 9/14/2017 < 10 5
6 12/7/2017 < 10 5 Mult Factor =
7 3/8/2018 < 10 5 Max. Value
8 6/7/2018 < 10 5 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 10 5
10 12/20/2018 < 10 5
11 3/21/2019 < 10 5
12 6/6/2019 < 10 5
13 9/12/2019 < 10 5
14 12/5/2019 < 10 5
15 3/12/2020 < 10 5
16 6/11/2020 < 10 5
17 9/17/2020 < 10 5
18 12/10/2020 < 10 5
19 3/11/2021 < 10 5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points
= 58
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
19
1.00
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
-8-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par03
Beryllium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/14/2017 < 20 10 Std Dev.
2 12/20/2018 < 1 0.5 Mean
3 3/21/2019 < 1 0.5 C.V. (default)
4 12/10/2020 < 1 0.5 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
Par04
Cadmium
4.7500
2.8750
0.6000
4
2.59
10.00 ug/L
25.90 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 0.2 0.1 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 0.2 0.1 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 0.2 0.1 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 0.2 0.1 n
5 9/14/2017 < 0.2 0.1
6 12/7/2017 < 0.2 0.1 Mult Factor =
7 3/8/2018 < 0.2 0.1 Max. Value
8 6/7/2018 < 0.2 0.1 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 0.2 0.1
10 12/20/2018 < 0.2 0.1
11 3/21/2019 < 0.2 0.1
12 6/6/2019 < 0.2 0.1
13 9/12/2019 < 0.2 0.1
14 12/5/2019 < 0.2 0.1
15 3/12/2020 < 0.2 0.1
16 6/11/2020 < 0.2 0.1
17 9/17/2020 < 0.2 0.1
18 12/10/2020 < 0.2 0.1
19 3/11/2021 < 1 0.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
0.0918
0.1211
0.7581
19
1.49
0.500 ug/L
0.745 ug/L
-9-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par05
Chlorides
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points =
58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 4/4/2018 44 44 Std Dev. N/A
2 Mean 44.0
3 C.V. (default) 0.6000
4 n 1
5
6 Mult Factor = 6.2
7 Max. Value 44.0 mg/L
8 Max. Pred Cw 272.8 mg/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Par06
Use "PASTE SF
Values" then "C
Maximum data
= 58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev. NO DATA
2 Mean NO DATA
3 C.V. NO DATA
4 n 0
5
6 Mult Factor = N/A
7 Max. Value N/A
8 Max. Pred Cw N/A
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
-10-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
'ECIAL.
:O PY" .
points
Par07
Total Phenolic Compounds
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/14/2016 6 6 Std Dev. 3.7815
2 10/5/2016 7 7 Mean 7.4000
3 12/20/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default) 0.6000
4 3/21/2019 14 14 n 5
5 12/10/2020 < 10 5
6 Mult Factor =
ug/L 7 Max. Value
ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points
= 58
3.00
14.0 ug/L
42.0 ug/L
Par10
Use "PASTE SF
Chromium, Total Values" then "C
Maximum data
= 58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 1 1 Std Dev. 1.3074
2 12/8/2016 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.9147
3 3/9/2017 6 6 C.V. 1.4292
4 6/8/2017 < 1 0.5 n 19
5 9/14/2017 < 1 0.5
6 12/7/2017 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor = 1.86
7 3/8/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Value 6.0
8 6/7/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw 11.2
9 9/27/2018 < 1 0.5
10 12/20/2018 < 1 0.5
11 3/21/2019 < 1 0.5
12 6/6/2019 < 1 0.5
13 9/12/2019 < 1 0.5
14 12/5/2019 < 1 0.5
15 3/12/2020 < 1 0.5
16 6/11/2020 < 1 0.5
17 9/17/2020 < 1 0.5
18 12/10/2020 < 1 0.5
19 3/11/2021 2.38 2.38
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-11-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
'ECIAL.
:O PY" .
points
Pall
Copper
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 6 6 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 1 0.5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 26 26 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 9 9 n
5 9/14/2017 2 2
6 12/7/2017 14 14 Mult Factor =
pg/L 7 3/8/2018 11 11 Max. Value
pg/L 8 6/7/2018 10 10 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 33 33
10 12/20/2018 8 8
11 3/21/2019 3 3
12 6/6/2019 < 1 0.5
13 9/12/2019 11 11
14 12/5/2019 < 1 0.5
15 3/12/2020 < 1 0.5
16 6/11/2020 3 3
17 9/17/2020 1 1
18 12/10/2020 3 3
19 3/11/2021 2.89 2.89
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points
= 58
Par12
Cyanide
8.8834
7.6258
1.1649
19
1.73
33.00 ug/L
57.09 ug/L
Use "PASTE SF
Values.' then "C
Maximum data
= 58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 5 5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 12/8/2016 < 5 5 Mean 5.00
3 3/9/2017 < 5 5 C.V. 0.0000
4 6/8/2017 < 5 5 n 19
5 9/14/2017 < 5 5
6 12/7/2017 < 5 5 Mult Factor = 1.00
7 3/8/2018 < 5 5 Max. Value 5.0
8 6/7/2018 < 5 5 Max. Pred Cw 5.0
9 9/27/2018 < 5 5
10 12/20/2018 < 5 5
11 3/21/2019 5 5
12 6/6/2019 < 5 5
13 9/12/2019 < 5 5
14 12/5/2019 < 5 5
15 3/12/2020 < 5 5
16 6/11/2020 5 5
17 9/17/2020 6 5
18 12/10/2020 5 5
19 3/11/2021 < 5 5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-12-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
'ECIAL.
:O PY" .
points
Par14
Lead
Date BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 10.00 5 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 10.00 5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 10.00 5 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 10.00 5 n
5 9/14/2017 < 10.00 5
6 12/7/2017 < 10.00 5 Mult Factor =
ug/L 7 3/8/2018 < 10.00 5 Max. Value
ug/L 8 6/7/2018 < 10.00 5 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 10.00 5
10 12/20/2018 < 10.00 5
11 3/21/2019 < 10.00 5
12 6/6/2019 < 1.00 0.5
13 9/12/2019 < 10.00 5
14 12/5/2019 < 10.00 5
15 3/12/2020 < 10.00 5
16 6/11/2020 < 10.00 5
17 9/17/2020 < 10.00 5
18 12/10/2020 < 10.00 5
19 3/11/2021 < 1.00 0.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
Par15
1.4189
4.5263
0.3135
19
1.20
5.000 ug/L
6.000 ug/L
Date Data
10/5/2016 1.44
12/8/2016 3.3
3/9/2017 5.98
6/8/2017 1.7
9/14/2017 1.86
12/7/2017 3
3/8/2018 6.1
6/7/2018 3.57
9/27/2018 1.31
12/20/2018 2
3/21/2019 3.18
6/6/2019 11.45
9/12/2019 2.13
12/5/2019 2.15
3/12/2020 1.72
6/11/2020 3.06
9/17/2020 2.28
12/10/2020 1.5
3/11/2021 1.24
Use "PASTE SF
Values" then "C
Maximum data
= 58
BDL=1/2DL Results
1.44 Std Dev. 2.4541
3.3 Mean 3.1037
5.98 C.V. 0.7907
1.7 n 19
1.86
3 Mult Factor = 1.51
6.1 Max. Value 11.5
3.57 Max. Pred Cw 17.3
1.31
2
3.18
11.45
2.13
2.15
1.72
3.06
2.28
1.5
1.24
Mercu ry
-13-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
'ECIAL.
:O PY" .
points
Par16
Molybdenum
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 1 0.5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 1 0.5 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 1 0.5 n
5 9/14/2017 < 1 0.5
6 12/7/2017 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor =
ng/L 7 3/8/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Value
ng/L 8 6/7/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 1 0.5
10 12/20/2018 < 1 0.5
11 3/21/2019 < 1 0.5
12 6/6/2019 < 1 0.5
13 9/12/2019 < 1 0.5
14 12/5/2019 < 1 0.5
15 3/12/2020 < 1 0.5
16 6/11/2020 < 1 0.5
17 9/17/2020 < 1 0.5
18 12/10/2020 < 1 0.5
19 3/11/2021 < 1 0.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL. Par17 & Par18
Values" then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points
= 58
Nickel
0.0000
0.5000
0.0000
19
1.00
0.5 ug/L
0.5 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 1 0.5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 1 0.5 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 1 0.5 n
5 9/14/2017 < 1 0.5
6 12/7/2017 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor =
7 3/8/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Value
8 6/7/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 1 0.5
10 12/20/2018 < 1 0.5
11 3/21/2019 < 1 0.5
12 6/6/2019 < 1 0.5
13 9/12/2019 < 1 0.5
14 12/5/2019 < 1 0.5
15 3/12/2020 < 1 0.5
16 6/11/2020 < 1 0.5
17 9/17/2020 < 1 0.5
18 12/10/2020 < 1 0.5
19 3/11/2021 < 1 0.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-14-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Use"PASTE Par19
SPECIAL -Values"
then "COPY" .
Maximum data
points = 58
Selenium
0.0000
0.5000
0.0000
19
1.00
0.5 pg/L
0.5 pg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/5/2016 < 10.00 5 Std Dev.
2 12/8/2016 < 10.00 5 Mean
3 3/9/2017 < 10.00 5 C.V.
4 6/8/2017 < 10.00 5 n
5 9/14/2017 < 10.00 5
6 12/7/2017 < 10.00 5 Mult Factor =
7 3/8/2018 < 10.00 5 Max. Value
8 6/7/2018 < 10.00 5 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 < 10.00 5
10 12/20/2018 < 10.00 5
11 3/21/2019 < 10.00 5
12 6/6/2019 < 10.00 5
13 9/12/2019 < 10.00 5
14 12/5/2019 < 10.00 5
15 3/12/2020 < 10.00 5
16 6/11/2020 < 10.00 5
17 9/17/2020 < 10.00 5
18 12/10/2020 < 10.00 5
19 3/11/2021 < 10.00 5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use"PASTE
SPECIAL -Values
then "COPY" .
Maximum data
points = 58
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
19
1.00
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
Par20
Silver
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/14/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 10/5/2016 < 1 0.5 Mean
3 12/8/2016 < 1 0.5 C.V.
4 3/9/2017 < 1 0.5 n
5 6/8/2017 < 1 0.5
6 9/14/2017 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor =
7 12/7/2017 < 1 0.5 Max. Value
8 3/8/2018 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw
9 6/7/2018 < 1 0.5
10 9/27/2018 < 1 0.5
11 12/20/2018 < 1 0.5
12 3/21/2019 < 1 0.5
13 6/6/2019 < 1 0.5
14 9/12/2019 < 1 0.5
15 12/5/2019 < 1 0.5
16 3/12/2020 < 1 0.5
17 6/11/2020 < 1 0.5
18 9/17/2020 < 1 0.5
19 12/10/2020 < 1 0.5
20 3/11/2021 < 1 0.5
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-15-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Use "PASTE SPECIAL- Par21
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Zinc
0.0000
0.5000
0.0000
20
1.00
0.500 ug/L
0.500 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
1 10/5/2016 27 27
2 12/8/2016 89 89
3 3/9/2017 1 1
4 6/8/2017 94 94
5 9/14/2017 83 83
6 12/7/2017 1 1
7 3/8/2018 56 56
8 6/7/2018 195 195
9 9/27/2018 1 1
10 12/20/2018 1 1
11 3/21/2019 20 20
12 6/6/2019 1 1
13 9/12/2019 380 380
14 12/5/2019 14 14
15 3/12/2020 58 58
16 6/11/2020 86 86
17 9/17/2020 57 57
18 12/10/2020 24 24
19 3/11/2021 40.5 40.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values.' then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
90.4710
64.6579
1.3992
19
1.85
380.0 ug/L
703.0 ug/L
Par22
Chloroform
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
1 9/14/2017 22.5 22.5
2 12/20/2018 10.2 10.2
3 3/21/2019 < 50 25
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-16-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V. (default)
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY" .
Maxim um data points - 58
7.9223
19.2333
0.6000
3
3.00
25.000000 pg/L
75.000000 pg/L
Par23
Antimony
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 9/14/2016 < 10 5 Std Dev.
2 10/5/2016 < 10 5 Mean
3 12/8/2016 < 10 5 C.V.
4 3/9/2017 < 10 5 n
5 6/8/2017 17 17
6 9/14/2017 28 28 Mult Factor =
7 12/7/2017 < 10 5 Max. Value
8 3/8/2018 < 10 5 Max. Pred Cw
9 6/7/2018 < 10 5
10 9/27/2018 < 10 5
11 12/20/2018 < 10 5
12 3/21/2019 < 10 5
13 6/6/2019 < 10 5
14 9/12/2019 < 10 5
15 12/5/2019 < 10 5
16 3/12/2020 < 10 5
17 6/11/2020 < 10 5
18 9/17/2020 < 10 5
19 12/10/2020 < 10 5
20 3/11/2021 1.61 1.61
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -Values" then
"COPY" . Maxim um data points = 58
5.7790
6.5805
0.8782
20
1.53
28.000000 pg/L
42.840000 pg/L
Par24
Date Da
1 9/14/2017
2 12/20/2018 <
3 3/21/2019 <
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-17-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Chlorodibromomethane
to BDL=1/2DL Results
9.92 Std Dev.
2.5 Mean
25 C.V. (default)
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
9.92
5
50
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points - 58
Par25
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate
11.4653
12.4733
0.6000
3
3.00
25.000000 pg/L
75.000000 pg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 12/8/2016 < 11.3 5.65 Std Dev.
2 3/9/2017 3.57 3.57 Mean
3 6/19/2017 < 4.3 2.15 C.V.
4 9/14/2017 < 1.2 0.6 n
5 12/7/2017 < 10.4 5.2
6 12/29/2017 < 5.8 2.9 Mult Factor =
7 3/28/2018 < 5.6 2.8 Max. Value
8 6/8/2018 < 110 55 Max. Pred Cw
9 9/27/2018 5 5
10 12/20/2018 < 5.6 2.8
11 3/21/2019 < 10 5
12 6/6/2019 < 162 81
13 9/12/2019 32.3 32.3
14 12/5/2019 < 16 8
15 3/12/2020 < 32.3 16.15
16 6/19/2020 < 10 5
17 9/17/2020 < 80 40
18 12/10/2020 < 152 76
19 3/11/2021 < 83.3 41.65
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
26.0381
20.5668
1.2660
19
1.78
81.000000 pg/L
144.180000 pg/L
-18-
25496 RPA 3.5, data
6/17/2021

Metal Translator
/95% Confidence Usi
95% Probabilit
NaN
Freshwate
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
0
E
4-
0
d
0
L
a
d
-71
CCI
co
J
0
a
O
U
O
C9
E
co
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
J_
O
7
J
co
7
J
coO
7
J_
7
—IJ
CDC
E
coO
7
J_
7
J
O
7
J_
O
M
J_
O
M
J
co
7
J
co
7
J_
3)
7
J_
0
7
J_
a)
C
J_
O
7
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
J
coO
7
J_
7
J
O
7
J_
O
M
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
O
LJ?
O
340
Q
Z
CO
O
3.2396
905.0818
CO
Q
Z
10.4720
N
N
75.4871
335.2087
Q
Z
CO
0.2964
125.7052
u
CO
1
2
u
LL
Q
Q
u
u
u
u
u
u
uU_
U_
u
u
u
150
10
LO
Cq
0.5899
O
N
300
117.7325
Q
Z
7.8806
LO
C. 0
0
a-
2.9416
,H
CO
CO
N
N-
CO
25.0000
Ln
O
0
126.7335
cUp
u'i
0.8
U
U
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
U
U
Z
U
Aquactic Life
Human Health
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Water Supply
U
C
VOA)
Q
U
C
N
Q
E
m
Cadmium
N
U
O
0
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper
Cyanide
Fluoride
Lead
Mercury
E
2
O
Q
o
Nickel
Nickel
E
C
N—
v)
>
C
N
Chloroform
c
E
Q
Chlorodibromomethane
N el LC)f- co O O N M 7 u) W N- CO 0 0 Cs/)
2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N
R R 030303030303Rica c f0 c c6 R R R R R R R R R R
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
LO
South Fork Catawba River
CO
O
(T
N
CO
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
cc
0
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUG Number
Stream Class
❑� Apply WS Hardness WQC
<1<
JIJ
cnrEE
I
C0IO
"I°)
co
EIE
N I N
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
N
0
0
0)
R
R
0
0
0
J
a
0
O

Effluent Hard: 0 value > 100 mg/L
Effluent Hard Avg = 37.61 mg/L
(22 IOOCCD10a- W
01 et O O et
O MOC1OIh
(a Net 0Io0
a- O h O GO >
(/) N CO IO a- IO —
= h O et et h
co M h O M N
~ y h
r"CU
oo E. o U
II
U (�
c F,
MS Z_
c
O d
U a
In
p N
O
o
in
M
O
O G U
a X
x
1))
a) c2
Q
a
Ce
i 0
a) =
L
cc O
LL
O O O O L
s Or-OOOO.,
N O m O o 0 0 3
N h N an O O
Lt CDac0h OQ)
(...7 u� u� u� u� u� h
cA
v d a 8 8 .3 N Q' bA
O O O O.
3aaaaMa
og
r
RECOMMENDED ACTION
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw. All
values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than pollutant scan (PS)
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - All
values in limited dataset reported non -detect - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
76 RP, Predicted 1ZZ < 50 % of Allowable Cw - AI I
values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw
Limited dataset. No Monitoring required, other than
PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
See Chromium, Total
See Chromium, Total
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.
Tot Cr value(s) >_ 5 but < Cr VI Allowable Cw
Predicted Max >_ 50 % of Allowable Cw - Quarterly
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
Tl # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 3,409.5
Chronic (FW): 1,805.9
Max MDL =10____ ____
Chronic (HH): 726.8
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 651.82
- Chronic: 78.26
Max MDL = 20
Acute: 32.487
- Chronic: 7.102
Max MDL = 1
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 3,009.9
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 8,472.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 9,076.1
Chronic: 1,417.4
Acute: 160.4
- Chronic: 132.4
kIlowable Cw
Max reported value = 6
Acute: 105.01
Chronic: 94.88
h
O E.
krn
q
O
25.90
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
0.745
NO DETECTS
272.8
C.V. (default)
42.0
C.V. (default)
z
6
'< v N
z 9-,
"'
Al
O
O
4 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
O
1 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
O
o
Tot Cr value
19 4
slum
t t
t
t
t
t
7bd
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
Chronic Applied Acute
Standard
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
0.5899 FW(7Q10s) 3.2396
250 WS(7Q10s)
(Za0£)V 00£
117.7325 FW(7Q10s) 905.0818
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
7.8806 FW(7Q10s) 10.4720
w
a.
U V
0
z
z
z
z
z
0
z
PARAMETER
Arsenic
Arsenic
E
.2
Cadmium
Chlorides
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper

'monitoring required
No RP , Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No - RP. All values reported non -detect. Predicted Max
< 50% of Allowable Cw - No Monitoring required,
other than PS.
Se- e Mercury WQBEL/TBEL evaluation. MMP will
continue to be required in this permit cycle.
No - RP. Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No RP. Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS.
No RP. All values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L.
Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS
All values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L, but
Predicted Max > 50% of Allowable Cw - Continue
quarterly monitoring using method with lowest PQL
Predicted Max >_ 50% of Allowable Cw - Quarterly
monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS
Predic
ted of AllowbleaCwC - ontinue
quarterly monitoring
RP. Limited dataset. Predicted M>_ax Allowable Cw -
Quarterly monitoring required
INo value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 220.6
- Chronic: 60.2
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 756.981
- Chronic: 35.415
Max MDL=10
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 144.5
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 1,926.3
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 3,361.5
Chronic (FW): 448.2
No value > Allowable Cw
Chronic (WS): 301.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 561.6
- Chronic: 60.2
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 2.972
Chronic: 0.722
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 1,260.6
- Chronic: 1,525.8
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 4361.075
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 67.42079
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 58.14767
No value > Allowable Cw
I Acute: NO WQS I
,n
6.000
NO DETECTS
M
--,
^"
ci
,-.
5.0
NO DETECTS
0.500
NO DETECTS
o
O
r
75.00000
C.V. (default)
42.84000
75.00000
C.V. (default)
a.
O
a,
a,
—
a,
—
a,
o
a,
o
o
a,
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
M
o
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
t
t
o?- o?
t
t
t
o?
o?
t
v?
o
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
2.9416 FW(7Q10s) 75.4871
12 FW(7Q10s)
160 WS(7Q10s)
37.2313 FW(7Q10s) 335.2087
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.2964
126.7335 FW(7Q10s) 125.7052
60 WS(Qavg)
5.6 WS(7Q10s)
a
3
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
U
Z
U
Cyanide
y
_1Z
Mercury
Molybdenum
U U
Z
Selenium
G
6
U
_E
N
Chloroform
T
=
O
E.
Q
Chlorodibromomethane
O
0
a

Outfal 1001
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate

Date: 6/17/2021
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
ryV
0
V
6
2
F
E
E
E
In accordance with Federal Regul
=Q�
8
8
UI
E E1
o
m?ECl
CEO
U o
E o
E E
27 Q
12
O W
rs to PERCS Branch to ma
COMMENTS (identay parame
z
U
8
z
co
8
E
E
E
U
E
E
t
E
E
E
z
E
N
2
a
N
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
Do NOT enter any data directly into this spreadsheet
L.
co
L.
co
E
0

Metal Translator
/95% Confidence Usi
95% Probabilit
NaN
Freshwate
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
0
E
4-
0
d
.-
2
a
CD
CCI
J
0
a
O
0
u)
O
E
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
J_
O
7
J
co
7
J
co
7
J_
O
7
-I
CDC
G
J
O)
7
J_
O)
7
J
0
7
J_
0
1
J_
0
1
J
0
7
J
cc
7
J_
O)
7
J_
O
7
J_
a)
C
J_
O
7
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
J
coO
7
J_
7
J
coO
7
J_
1
J_
O
1
J_
O
1
O
LJ?
O
340
Q
Z
LC)
(0
3.2396
905.0818
CO
Q
Z
10.4720
N
N
75.4871
335.2087
Q
Z
O
LC)
0.2964
125.7052
u
CO
1
2
uLL
Q
Q
u
u
u
u
u
u
uU_
U_
u
u
u
150
10
LO
CO
0.5899
O
N
300
117.7325
Q
Z
7.8806
LO
00
0
a-
2.9416
.-
CO
CO
N
N-
CO
25.0000
c)
O
126.7335
8
u'i
0.8
U
U
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
0
Z
0
Z
C.)
Z
C.)
Z
0
Z
U
U
Z
U
Aquactic Life
Human Health
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Aquatic Life
Water Supply
Water Supply
Water Supply
U
C
Q
U
c
Q
E
m
Cadmium
N
.c
0
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper
Cyanide
Fluoride
Lead
Mercury
E
2
O
o
Nickel
Nickel
E
c
v)
>
c
Chloroform
c
E
Q
Chlorodibromomethane
N M 7 u7 f- co O O N M 7 u7 W N- W Cr) 0 N M
2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N
R R R R R R R R t6 c cacao) c6 R R R R R R R R R R
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
Lincolnton WWTP
>
NC0025496
South Fork Catawba River
O
O
O
N
CO
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
cc
0
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUG Number
Stream Class
❑� Apply WS Hardness WQC
0)
<1<
JIJ
E E
�I(0
(010
"I°)
co
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
N
0
0
0)
R
N
0
0
0
J
a
0
O

Effluent Hard: 0 value > 100 mg/L
i 01
a- 1.0 OOD CCD
_ • O O1 a-
• 'Cr
CCD O M
) O
• NON COO OND V)
a- w Ti:
11: I
I II II II II
r Cai U
P.
00 H.:,o o U
to Lo U U U
II
U (�
d
"0 Z_
c o
O d
U a
u) a
`�+ Q N
O
o
3 in
o
CO D M
St
O
O G U
a x
_
in
a) ii
Q
a l6
Ce
i U
a) =
co co t)
LL
O O O O L
s oti0000.....
N o m O o 0 0 3
O N N.Nr a) 0 O
Li a) CD CO h O Q)
11 11 11 11 11 , I-.
Q u� u� u� u� u� h
v 8 8 .3 N Q'd oA
O O O Oa
og
r
Effluent Hard Avg = 37.61 mg/L
I.£
on
RECOMMENDED ACTION
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw. All
values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than pollutant scan (PS)
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - All
values in limited dataset reported non -detect - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
76 RP, Predicted 1ZZ < 50 % of Allowable Cw - AI I
values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L - No Monitoring
required, other than PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw
Limited dataset. No Monitoring required, other than
PS.
No - RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
See Chromium, Total
See Chromium, Total
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.
Tot Cr value(s) >_ 5 but < Cr VI Allowable Cw
FrLIcieTFv17x >_ 50 % of Allowable Cw - Quarterly
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
Tl # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 2,642.1
Chronic (FW): 1,391.9
Max MDL = 10
Chronic (HH): 54- 7.6
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 505.11
- Chronic: 60.32
Max MDL = 20
Acute: 25.175
- Chronic: 5.474
Max MDL = 1
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 2,319.9
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 6,429.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 7,033.4
Chronic: 1,0- 92.5
Acute: 124.3
- Chronic: 102.1
kIlowable Cw
Max reported value = 6
Acute: 81.38
Chronic: 73.13
h
O h
krn
q
O
25.90
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
0.745
NO DETECTS
272.8
C.V. (default)
42.0
C.V. (default)
z
6
.< v N
z 9-,
"'
Al
O
0
4 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
0
01
1 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
0
O
0
O
Tot Cr value
19 4
01
slum
t t
t
t
t
t
7bd
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
Chronic Applied Acute
Standard
150 FW(7010s) 340
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
0.5899 FW(7Q10s) 3.2396
250 WS(7Q10s)
(Za0£)V 00£
117.7325 FW(7Q10s) 905.0818
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
7.8806 FW(7Q10s) 10.4720
w
a.
U V
0
z
z
z
z
z
0
z
PARAMETER
Arsenic
Arsenic
E
.2
Cadmium
Chlorides
Total Phenolic Compounds
Chromium III
Chromium VI
Chromium, Total
Copper
M
a

'Monitoring required
No - RP , Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No - RP. All values reported non -detect. Predicted Max
< 50% of Allowable Cw - No Monitoring required,
other than PS.
Se- e Mercury WQBEL/TBEL evaluation. MMP will
continue to be required in this permit cycle.
No - RP. Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required, other than PS.
No RP. Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS.
No RP. All values reported non -detect < 10 ug/L - No
Monitoring required other than PS
All values reported non -detect < 1 ug/L, but
Predicted Max > 50% of Allowable Cw - Continue
quarterly monitoring using method with lowest PQL
No RP, Predicted Max > 50% of Allowable Cw -
Quarterly monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required other than PS
Predicted Max >_ 50 % of Allowable CwC - ontinue
monthly monitoring with limit
RP. Limited dataset. Predicted M>_ax Allowable Cw -
Quarterly monitoring required
INo value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 171.0
- Chronic: 46.4
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 586.608
- Chronic: 27.297
Max MDL=10
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 111.4
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 1,484.7
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 2,604.9
Chronic (FW): 345.5
No value > Allowable Cw
Chronic (WS): 232.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 435.2
- Chronic: 46.4
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 2.303
Chronic: 0.557
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 976.9
- Chronic: 1,176.0
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 3285.806
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 51.96559
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
- Chronic: 43 81075
No value > Allowable Cw
I Acute: NO WQS I
6.000
NO DETECTS
M
5.0
NO DETECTS
0.500
NO DETECTS
o
r
75.00000
C.V. (default)
42.84000
75.00000
C.V. (default)
O
a,
a,
—
a,
—
a,
o
a,
o
o
a,
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
M
o
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
t
t
o?- o?
t
t
t
o?
o?
t
v?
o
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
2.9416 FW(7Q10s) 75.4871
12 FW(7Q10s)
160 WS(7Q10s)
37.2313 FW(7Q10s) 335.2087
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.2964
126.7335 FW(7Q10s) 125.7052
60 WS(Qavg)
5.6 WS(7Q10s)
a
3
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
U
Z
U
Cyanide
y
J
Mercury
Molybdenum
U U
Z Z
Selenium
G
6
U
_E
N
Chloroform
>.
=
O
E.
Q
Chlorodibromomethane

Allowable Cw
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)`Phthalate

Date: 6/17/2021
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
ryV
0
V
6
2
F
E
E
E
In accordance with Federal Regul
=Q�
8
8
8
UI
E
o
m?ECl
CEO
U o
E o
E E
Q Q
O W
rs to PERCS Branch to ma
COMMENTS (identay parame
z
z
U
8
z
co
8
E
E
E
U
E
E
t
E
E
E
z
E
N
z
N
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
Do NOT enter any data directly into this spreadsheet
L.
co
L.
co
E
0

%-1
N
0
N
0
N
LA
Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
r.
cc
cc
00 N T -1 N N T -1 c-1 N O 4 N m Cr CO %-I l0 00 00 I, Ln N 00 Ln Lf1
c-I l0 c-I 00 l0 N c-1 l0 l0 m N 4 O 4 4 c-1 N CO c-1 m l0 Ln Ol l0
N Ln 00 N N N 00 oo l0 l0 l0 m 00 Ol 00 00 Ol Ol 00 Ol Ol
Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol col Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol 00 00
al
Ol al -1
s Ol Ol Ol al cI l W
JD
0 ,7>• =
(0 o_ , an a)
2 Q a
Q a)
October-19
November-19
December-19
January-20
February-20
0
N o
N
S O O O o oN N
N N N N
c10 Q- 2 , E -a
7 a) °
2 Q -, an —, = a u
Q a) O
V)
November-20
December-20
January-21
c-I c-I c-I
N N N
5.7 co c
a
2
m 01 4 c 1 00 01 4 N O c 1 N CO Ln n O Ln I N m CO l0 O h o l0 h co
N Ln N co 4 N 01 m l0 O co h o Ln m N 00 O L) T -1 r-1 Ol Ln O m 4 4
0. 00 n 4 Ln 4 N N h: n n n W l0 h: n l0 4 4 l0 00 h: 00 h: l0 n n l0 l0 4
Ol Ol Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol
D L N N N 00
oo
i `� c0-I c�-I i 00 00 i 0000c-1 . I c�-I
i i i i i 71 00 00 00 71 i i
_a a) s i a) s `� a)
E -aE Eco co co c E E co ( a) co co
CO CO
(1) p o " Q Q aa)) p ° a) Li < aQi p ° Li
c„ z o c„ z o c„
C
Overall TSS removal rate
0
r.
cc
cc
t
C
0
l0 c I m O N m 4 m . 1 4 00 00 I 00 N 4 oo Ol 4 c I c I
Ln N l0 4 L) l0 W N N O N oo n I N l0 N Ln O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I� n 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 1� 00 00 00 00 Ol 00 00 00 1� l0 n O N
Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol col Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol
Ol
CI Ol c'
Ol Ol Ol CI c N
c-I c-I ci l I
JD
= c >. E
(0 Q- = tin a)
Q iQ a
a)
October-19
November-19
December-19
January-20
February-20
0
N o
0 0 0 0 o ON - N
a)
N N fV N a)
E co c = E o
a) O
V)
November-20
December-20
January-21
01 N O c 1 Ol Ln r-1 N Ln Ol 4 m l0 Ln % -1 l0 in m Cr) Ln m O 01 O 01 N N 00 Ln
l0 N cI N l0 N m N m O 01 O %-1 N n Ol O cI Ol l0 4 n n l0 n n Ln m Cr O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
W Ol Ol W I� n l0 Ln 00 Ol W Ol Ol W 00 W W h: l0 n W 00 W l0 Ln n n l0 l0 l0
m Ol Ol Ol m Ol m Ol Ol m m Ol Ol m Ol m m Ol Ol m m Ol m m Ol m m Ol Ol Ol
L 0 n n 00
ia) a) j, ' r�-1 c�-1 c�-1 r�-1 Cr/i a) T-5 CO CO 00 00 07'0 N a) a) j, i`
E o E E i" 'Q c= o E E i s 'Q CO c E o E E
a u (0 Q 2-,—,= a u> u Q 2 a u> u
a) p Li Q a) p o a) Li < a) p o—' Li
V) z 0 c„ z 0 cn
C
Overall CBOD removal rate

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: City of Lincolnton/Lincolnton Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
PermitNo. NC0025496
Prepared By: Diana Yitbarek
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
3.5
77
140
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. (ug/I)
Maintain limit at 28 ug/I
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Maintain 200/100 ml MA limit
77
3.5
5.425
17.0
0
6.58
258
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 12.0 mg/I
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
15.19 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 12.0 mg/I
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
77
3.5
5.425
1.0
0.22
6.58
12.1
140
3.5
5.425
1.8
0.22
3.73
42.6
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: City of Lincolnton/Lincolnton Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
PermitNo. NC0025496
Prepared By: Diana Yitbarek
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
4.5
77
140
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. (ug/I)
Maintain limit at 28 ug/I
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Maintain 200/100 ml MA limit
77
4.5
6.975
17.0
0
8.31
205
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 9.0 mg/I
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
12.04 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 9.0 mg/I
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
77
4.5
6.975
1.0
0.22
8.31
9.6
140
4.5
6.975
1.8
0.22
4.75
33.5
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: City of Lincolnton/Lincolnton Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
PermitNo. NC0025496
Prepared By: Diana Yitbarek
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
6
77
140
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. (ug/I)
Maintain limit at 28 ug/I
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Maintain 200/100 ml MA limit
77
6
9.3
17.0
0
10.78
158
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 7.0 mg/I
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
9.28 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Maintain limit at 7.0 mg/I
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
77
6
9.3
1.0
0.22
10.78
7.5
140
6
9.3
1.8
0.22
6.23
25.6
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

Lincolnton WWTP/NC0025496
• U
•
ct
(21
Acji
N
O cr
N cI O
O N cr.)
N
Ol
O
N
m
N
00
O
N
N
m
N
O
N
c-I
0
N
N
N
O
m
m
N
m
N
00
# of Samples
J
OA
J
W
CO
J
00
J
W
CO

Lincolnton WWTP/NC0025496
• U
•
ct
(21
Acji
N
O cr
N cI O
O N m
m
N
00
O
N
N
m
N
O
N
c-I
0
N
N
N
O
m
m
N
# of Samples
J
OA
J
W
CO
J
00
J
W
CO

Lincolnton WWTP/NC0025496
• U
•
ct
(21
Acji
N
O cr
N cI O
O N cr.)
N
Ol
O
N
m
N
00
O
N
N
m
N
O
N
c-I
0
N
N
N
O
m
m
N
# of Samples
J
0.0
J
W
CO
J
00
J
W
CO

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
V
0
V
0
Mar Jun Sep Dec
O
2
0
U1
r-1
O
N
n
C Q
O E
0
J O
0
z
NC0085588/001
Lincolnton WTP
0
C
Chr Monit:
0
N
0
CO
C
00
z
D_ D_ O_
CO m
0 0 0 0 0
V
0
V
0
0,
Mar Jun Sep Dec
NC0025496/001
Lincolnton WWTP
0'
IWC: 11.0
7Q10: 77.0
chr lim: 6% (3.5MGD)
z
LL
CO m
0 0 0 0
V
0
V
0
0,
Jan Apr Jul Oct
County: Avery
NC0039446/001
Linville Resorts, Inc.
IWC: 10.0
NonComp: Single
Chr Lim: 10%
0a
1 d
z
z
LL
V
0
VI
0
Jan Apr Jul Oct
m
V
C
ro
f0
O
2
0
.Ft°
0
NC0005177/001
7Q10: 0.27
Chr Lim: 78%
CO
0
O
Ol
cu
m
0 n n
2
O O
0 0 =
_ = O
O O O O
O O O O
Q A A A A
z
L
V
0
VI
0
0,
Mar Jun Sep Dec
NC0020231/001
Louisburg WWTP
0'
0-
0
7Q10: 14.0
NonComp: Single
chr lim: 13%
LD
0
O
c
M
C
w
co
LL
CO m O
0 0 0 0
Page 66 of 117
Legend: P= Fathead minnow (Pimphales promelas), H=No Flow (facility is active), s = Split test between Certified Labs

Pretreatment Program Info Database
for Program Name Lincolnton
WWTP Name City of Lincolnton
Program Approval Date
Pretreatment Status
Region
County
NPDES Number
NPDES Effective Date
NPDES Expire Date
POTW is Primary WWTP
Design Flow mgd
WWTP SIU's
WWTP CIU's 3
5
date Inactive
08/12/1983
Full
MRO
Lincoln
NC0025496
11/01/2016
07/31/2020
TRUE
6.0000
Program SIUs
Program ClUs
printed on: 5/20/2021
Stream Information
7Q10 Flow cfs / mgd
1Q10 Flow cfs / mgd
Stream Classification
IWC%at7Q1010.76
77 / 49.74
62.97 / 40.70
WS-IV
Basin Number CTB35
Receiving Stream Name SOUTH FORK CATAWBA
Last PAR Rec 02/19/2021
Current Fiscal
Year PCI Done
Last Audit on 09/05/2019
Design mgd is SIU permitted
Is I
3
Date Next Due
Date Received by DWR
Date Approved
Adopt Date Required
Date Adopted
HWA
06/01/2022
05/08/2017
08/03/2017
19.17
PAR Due Date03/01/2022
Audit Year Nex123/24
Permitted SIU flow (mgd) [Pt_SIU) 1.15
mercury
1631
required
yes
LTMP) IWS
10/01/2024
03/30/2022
12/29/2016
03/30/2017
09/30/2019
01/17/2020
SUO
10/02/2013
10/07/2013
07/10/2014
ERP
12/06/2019
02/05/2020
e-
Info in this Box from Pt Contacts
PT_Pro
g.Prime
Formal Name
Phonel
ext
Fax
Date Date Date
Attended Attended Attended
HWA Wksp IUP Wksp PAR Wksp
Mr. Robert Pearson I II(704) 736-8970 I 1(704) 736-8979 II I I
mearsona,lincolntonnc.ora (Director of Public Works/Utilities PO Box 617
28092
Mr. Don Burkey, Jr. I II(704) 736-8960
1 1(704) 732-6137 II 4/13/2005 I 11/25/2001 I
dburkevn,lincolntonnc.ora
WWTP Superintendent PO Box 617
28092
Mr. Daniel Perry (Pr1m 11704-736-8960
1 1704-732-6137 II 1/19/2017 15/17/2016 11/21/2015 I
dnerrvn,lincolntonnc.ora
Pretreatment Coordinator PO Box 617
28092
Pretreatment Related NOVs from DWQ
5/15/2012
10/8/2012
5/13/2013
5/12/2014
7/11/2014
6/5/2015
NOD-2012-PC-0030 Notice of Deficiency: Sampling data
NOV-2012-PC-0342 Failure to take appropriate
NOV-2013-PC-0176 Failure to submit PAR
NOV-2014-PC-0105 Failure to take appropriate
NOV-2014-PC-0148 Failure to submit HWA
NOD-2015-PC-0129 Failure to take enforcement per
DWR Central Office Contact
DWR Regional Contact
Diana Yitbarek
'Wes Bell
J

N
0
co
O
O
0
0
Q
0
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
0
0)
is
0
E
a)
O
d
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam(
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
H
2
J
LL
O ct
H Q
zW
2
PARAMETER
LOCATION
Proceed to NOD
a)
0
z
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
a) rn E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
N -O N -O • -O • -O • -O -O -O -O -O E -O • -O • -O • -O -O D-O D
E E E E E E E E • E w Ea) Ea) Ea) Ea) E a)
>-co >-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co 'x-co
Q a) Q w co cu co cu a) w co w co w co w co w co w co w co w co w co w co w co
>, >, 2 2 2 2 2 2 ow 2 ow 2 ow ▪ 2 2 2 2 2 2
X Y X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X
a�• w a�• w —w —w —w —w —w —w =w =w =w =w —w —w —w —w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O In ( • O) N- N- a0 O • L() r-
6j N • N V M N O 0 (O M • N- N W L()
cc-) M cc-)O N M (() M
✓ uo
V N ruo -
N N N- L() O N N W
6j M M M M M V c) M N N M Voo
oo
N Lo co co co co co co co co co co co co co co
✓ V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0) rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn CS) CS) CS) CS) CS) CS) rn
E E
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N a) a) a) N a)
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a)
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
in N in in in N in in in in in in in in in in
O co O O co co co co co co co co co co
N N _ _
O I- N W In 0 \ N in- I- O) 0 \
N N 0 0 7 N N N N N 7 N N V O 0
N M O) O) co) O) O) O) O) O) 0 O 0
0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
U U D D D D D D D D D D D D D D
0 0 0 0 N a) • a) • a) • a) • a) • a) • N • N N • N N N N
0:_ :_ 2' Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_
O (6 O (6
N +�. N +tt a3 11111111111
3a3 a3a3OOOOFF FFNN Na)CC CcO `O `O `O `O
s • s • s • s • s • s • s • s • s s s s s s
O 0 U U U U U U U U UU U UU U
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
c a) c c c c c c c c c c c c c c
a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a)
— • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — • — —
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 w
J
J
Q
LL
H
z O O co co co co co co co co co co co co co co
O O O co co co co co co co co co co co co co 0
O co co co co co co co co co co co co co(O
z H N - N
E ce O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
O 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (NI
2 W N M O) co) O) O) O) O) O) O) O O 0
O c O O O O O O O O O 0
2

N
0
O
N
as
0
O
Q
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: NC0025496 MRs Betweei 9 - 2016 and 4 - 2021
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Facility Name: %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
H
2
J
LL
O ct
H Q
Z W
2
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E a) E a) E a) E a) E a) E a) EFL.) E W E W E W E W E W E G)
'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O 'x -O
as as as as W as as as W as W as as as as as as as m CU m CU m CU m CUasasas as
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >., x> x> x> x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x
W .( w .( w .( w .( W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .( w .( w .( w .( w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O V I� O CO N N N CO N
O O �,.) W I— O lf) W I� lf) W
CO V co CO M In M
O N N Nco
co
M V N oci
N V coM V N M V
O
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0) 0) 0) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co N
O) M V lf) O 0 V M O M M V N- O) CO N-
N (7) (7) O co — (7)— — (7) (7) 7 7
N M CO co V V V V N co
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
—
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(7T T T T T T T T T T T T T T (7
a) N N as N N N N N N N N N N N a)
_
To (6 To (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 To (6 (6
F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N N ai ai N ai N N N N N N N N ai N
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0
Z F
O
E 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a
Z UJ N M M M V V V V LC) LC)
O ceO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
2

N
0
co
O
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
0
O
is
U
E
a)
O
d
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
0
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E W E W E(D E W E W E W E W E W E W EFp EFp EFp EFp
'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x 'a 'x 'a 'x 'a
as ( ( ( W( a)( a)( a)( a)( a)( ( ( (o CD COCD (o CD COCD
a)a)CD
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x > x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x
W .( w .( w .( w .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( w .( w .( w .( w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(3) 0) 0) 0) N- (0 V N- (0 V 0) (3) (3)
I� O W N 0 W (0
(0 (0 (0 N N N
M (0 L() V (0 M M M
V M V M V M M M M M C) M V M M M
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0) 0) 0) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
in in in co in in in co in in in in in in in N
N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N-
M O \ N O 0 N V
N N co co O O O 7 N N N co
N-
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m To
(77 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ()
a) N N as N N N N N N N N N N N a)
_
To (6 To (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 To (6 (6
F2 F2 F2 F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 r- I.--Z F
E ce o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Z W u) in in in (o (o (o (o (o (o (o (o N- N- N- N-
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
2

N
0
O
N
as
0
0
Q
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: NC0025496 MRs Betweei 9 - 2016 and 4 - 2021
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Facility Name: %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E W E W Ew E W E W E W E W E W E W E W E W E W E G)
'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O 'X -O
as as as as as as as as W as as as as as CD as as m m W CO W m W CO Wasasas WCUCD
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >., x> x> x> x> x> x> x >, x >, x >, x >, xEs as as as as Es Es Es Es Es Es Es as as as as
O) (O O) N- V co V co O) O) co V
N M N O I— O M N N N- N M (O I—
l() V (0 N V N N- (0 M V N V
M co O L() co co LC) (p I— co O co
co co co co
O W W W W W CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn rn rn Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
in in in co in in in co in in in in in in in N
00 V (n (0 (0
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
-
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(7T T T T T T T T T T T T T T (7
a) N N as N N N N N N N N N N N a)
_
TO (6 TO (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 TO (6 (6
F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Z F
ce O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0
0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Z W N- N- N- N- N- co co co co co co co co co co
0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
2

N
0
O
N
as
0
O
Q
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E EEEEEE
E E E Ea)E W E E W E W E W E W E W E W E a E W E W E G)
'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x 'a 'x 'a 'x 'a
(o cc) W cc) W cc) W cc) W ( W( W( W( W( ( ( (o a) (o a) (o a) (o a)a) a)a)W
>, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X >, X
( w .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W .( W
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
co (O O O co.
V O co co I-- co
O M cococoN V I— N V O V O O
co(f) N V (O (n M N
O) co O) O) O) O (0 V I— N V N
co N N N CO co co co co co co co
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn rn rn CO CO CO CO CO CO CO rn rn rn rn rn rn
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co
I� N (0 W O) M V In O I� O) O 7
7r co
O O O O N O O O 7 7 7 N
Co O) O) O) O) O) O O O O O O O 0
O O O O O O
To m m m m m m m m m m m m m m To
(77 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ()
a) N N 4) N N N N N N N N N N N a)
CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC
To (6 To (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 To (6 (6
F2 F2 F2 F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ".
a) a) a) C C C C C C C C C C C C C
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 r- r- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N- N-
Z F
E 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Z W ao 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 o 0 0 0 0 0
2

N
0
O
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: NC0025496 MRs Betweei 9 - 2016 and 4 - 2021
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Facility Name: %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E W E W Ew E W E W E W E W E W E W El El Eli; E
'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x -D
as co co co as co as co as co as as as co as co co co m CU (0 CU m CU (0 CUasasas as
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x> x> x> x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x
cTsW .( W .( W .( W .( W .E W .E W .E W .E W .Es W .Es W .� W .( w .( w .( w .( w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O M V O CO
O I� O 4
CO CO V V CO N
O N O) LC) O N O O) (.0M M N M M M M M N M
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn 0) 0) 0) 0) rn rn
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Lo Lo Lo N LC) LC) LC) N LC) LC) LC) LC) LC) LC) LC) LC)
I,- I,- I,- I,- I,- I,- I,- I,- I,- CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
vu) I- a o) a o) co N- v co u)
N 0 0 0 0 7 7 N N 7N N 0 0 0
N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(77 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 (7
U) N N 4) N N N N N N N N N N N U)
CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC
To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To
F2 F2 F2 F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
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 O O O O O O O
I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- I-- W W W W W W W
O 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0

N
0
co
O
N
as
0
O
Q
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: NC0025496 MRs Betweei 9 - 2016 and 4 - 2021
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Facility Name: %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E a) E a) E a) E a) E a) E a) EFL.) E W E W E W E W E W E G)
'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x -D
as as as as W as as as W as as as as as as as as as m W m W m W m Wasasas as
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, xEs as as as as Es Es Es Es Es Es Es as as as as
O) O) V I— N-
N N (0 O O
V V
I� O N- M N- co
O r Ln O r r O
M Ln N-
M O O O M CO N M V O
M V V M M M M M M M M M M V V M
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn rn rn rn rn rn 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L() L()
co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co
(O (O V O) In N O) O. N- In V O O N CO
N N 7. N N N CON N CO co V CO CO CO (O N- co O 0) as O) O.
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
—
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(7T T T T T T T T T T T T T T (7
a) N N as N N N N N N N N N N N a)
_
To (6 To (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 To (6 (6
F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N N ai ai N ai N N N N N N N N ai N
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
F
co co co co co co co co co co co co co co co O
0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Z W N N CO CO V O O O O N- co co co as as O
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
2

N
0
co
O
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: NC0025496 MRs Betweei 9 - 2016 and 4 - 2021
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Facility Name: %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E E W E W Ew E W E W E W E W E W E W ii
E W E W E W E G)
'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x -D
m as as as W as W as W as W co W as W as as as m CU (0 CU m CU (0 CUa)WW a)WW
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x > x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x
W .( w .( w .( w .( W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .� W .( w .( w .( w .( w
Fs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O rn rn v rn
N- N r N- O
(O (O CO I� M V
N (3) CO O I— lf) O) N co N- O O
M co coV V co co co co N V
O W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
in in in in in in in in in in in in in in co in
co co co co co co co co co co co co rn rn rn rn
l() co co co ) M V I- 0 \ I- W W O N
0 0 O — 7 N N N N O 7
CV CV CV CV CV N N V V
O O O O
—
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(77 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 (7
U) N N 4) N N N N N N N N N N N (1)
CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC CC
To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To
F2 F2 F2 F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai ai
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
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 O O O O O O O
co co co co co co co co co co co co (3) (3) (3) (3)
O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N V V
— — O O O O

N
0
O
N
as
0
O
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
H
2
J
LL
O ct
H Q
2 W
2
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E E E Ea) Ea) Ea) Ea) Ea) Ea) EFL.) E W E W E W E W E W E G)
'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x -0 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x - 'x -D
>, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, x >, xFs as as as as Fs Fs Fs Fs Fs Fs Fs as as as as
(O (O CO (O I� O N M O O O M N-
oi
M M M N ! N M N M
6) 6) N O) V M L() N O O) (O O) In O
N N M N V M M M M V N M M M V M
CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
co) rn rn rn rn rn 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
a) a) a) N N N N N N N N N N N N 4)
a) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 4)
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
(c) (c) N N N L N N (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) N
a) o) o) o) o) o) o) O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N
(f) (O I- W Lb- (O O) (O M V I- (O co (O
CDCDN CDN N N CO
V V V V N N N M I� O) N N
o o O O — — — O O O O O O
To m m To m m m m m m m m m m m m
(77 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ()
a) N N 4) N N N N N N N N N N N a)
_
To (6 To (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 (6 To (6 (6
F2 F2 F2 F F F F F F F F F F F F F
N N ai ai N ai N N N N N N N N ai N
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_c L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ". ".
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
(9 6) 6) O) O) O) O) O) O O O O O O O O O
Z H N N N N N N N N N
E ce O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
I— a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 W V V V V N N N M V N— N— N— () N N
OF:t CD
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2

N
0
co
O
N
as
0
O
Q
N
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Violation Action: %
Subbasin: %
Param Nam( %
Major Minor:
REGION: Mooresville
COUNTY: Lincoln
FACILITY: City of Lincolnton - Lincolnton WWTP
NC0025496
F
5
W
a
Limit Violation
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
O
H
2
J
a_ W
O D
I— CO
za
D W
2
FREQUENCY
PARAMETER
LOCATION
Proceed to NOV
Proceed to NOV
a) a)
c c
O 0
z z
a)
a)
a)
• 0) 0) 0)
U
N a) a) a) a) N a)
E a) < a) < a) < a)
T T _T
a) X Y CD
X Y 0 _c 0
w cow cow c W T
2
a)
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
N
W N • tri
N N N 0
0
W
0) (.0 0) Q W
(0 O) co L() J D
(0 CO cci —1(0 • COM J
Q
0
u W
— — — O D
O 0) 0) 0) 7
�_ E E E z a
U
Y Y Y Y z
a) a) a) a) W
W
X • X X X CC
In In In N LL
z
0) 0 O
N N N H F
I� Q Q
O N M d ❑
N M M �
O O 0 0
c c c c
a) a) a) a)
W W W W
W W W W
J
J
Q
LL
H
D O - 0 - 0 - 0
O O 0 0 0
O 0
_ _
Z H O N N N
E ce O O 0 0
O 0 N N N N
H d 1 1 1 1
Z W N M COO O O O O
2
Monitoring Violation
PARAMETER
LOCATION
CO • O 0
CO W m W
c c
• O C O
< • 0 < 0
O a3 0 a3
z U z
Parameter Missing
Parameter Missing
o o
u u
O 0
c c
n n
a a a)) a a a))
> >
Annual Pollutant Scan [126
an [126
F ( E
a) a)
E • E
as as
o_ d o_
Proceed to NOD
Frequency Violation
a)
W
VIOLATION ACTION
VIOLATION TYPE
H
2
J
a_ W
O c
I— CO
za
D W
2
PARAMETER
LOCATION
J
J
LL
c H
O O
o 0

Attachment A —Request for Missing Information
Table 2. EPA Application Form 2A Missing Information
40 CFR
122.21(j)(1)
1.1
Email address of facility contact
[e-mail]
1.2
Applicant email address
[e-mail]
1.3
Email address of the organization transporting the discharge for treatment prior to discharge
N/A
1.4
Email address of the organization receiving the discharge for treatment prior to discharge
N/A
1.5
Do you intend to request or renew one or more of the variances authorized at 40 CFR 122.21(n)? (Check all that apply. Consult
with your NPDES permitting authority to determine what information needs to be submitted and when.)
Discharges into marine waters (CWA Section ❑ Water quality related effluent limitation (CWA
301(h)) Section 302(b)(2))
EA/ Not applicable
1.6
Email address of contractor responsible for operational or maintenance aspects of the treatment works
N/A
40 CFR
122.21(j)(6)
1.7
Indicate the number of SIUs and NSCIUs
that discharge to the POTW.
Number of SIUs
Number of CIUs
2
3
40 CFR
122.22(a) and (d)
1.8
Certification Statement
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance
with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my
inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name (print or type first and last name)
Official title
Donald Berkey Jr.
ORC 1 Superintendent WWTP
Signature42k
Date signed
&2')
1--
5.6-2021

NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Model Mercury Minimization Plan
Background
The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources
(DENR), has issued a statewide total maximum daily load (TMDL) for mercury. The TMDL responds to
a statewide fish consumption advisory for mercury. The TMDL calls for a 67% reduction in mercury
levels from the year 2002 baseline mercury loading. The ultimate goal of the TMDL is to ensure safe -
levels of mercury in fish throughout North Carolina for human consumption.
As explained in the TMDL, 98 percent of mercury in North Carolina waters comes from atmospheric
sources — the vast majority of which are located outside of the State. Under the Clean Water Act,
atmospheric deposition of mercury into surface waters is regarded as a nonpoint source. Minor amounts
of mercury are discharged directly into surface waters by industrial and municipal point sources as a
group. Specifically, the TMDL determined that point sources contribute less than two (2) percent of the
annual mercury loadings to State waters. The TMDL allocates two percent of the statewide allowable
loadings collectively to the point source sector. This does not mean that an individual discharger may not
have significant levels of mercury in its discharge in terms of local water quality considerations. While
we expect such instances to be rare based upon the Department's review of statewide mercury data,
dischargers with higher mercury loadings will be expected to implement more aggressive mercury
controls.
Notably, unlike any other source, local governments actually reduce mercury loadings in the environment
by first filtering mercury out in the treatment of public drinking water (particularly where the source of
raw drinking water is surface water) and then a second time when wastewater is treated.
In order to implement the two percent point source sector wasteload allocation, the Department has
developed a point source permitting strategy which is located at http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/modeling-assessment/special-studies/mercury-tmdl. The Environmental Management
Commission has approved both the TMDL and the Permitting Strategy. The permitting strategy calls for
certain point sources to develop and implement mercury minimization plans (MMPs). For POTWs, an
MMP will be required if the facility has (1) a permitted design capacity of more than two million gallons
per day and (2) mercury at quantifiable levels in their effluent. MMPs feature best management practices
and have been implemented successfully in numerous states around the country. The attached document
is the City of Lincolnton's MMP.
Typically, MMPs focus on pretreatment controls — a local government's interaction with non -domestic
users of its sewer system as well as outreach to the public at large regarding the proper use and disposal of
household products containing mercury.
The MMP approach is intended as a reasonable, low-cost approach toward making some progress toward
managing the two percent loading statewide from point sources. Mercury treatment and even testing is

very expensive and does not make sense to reduce a small part of the already insignificant two percent
overall point source annual loading to State waters.

City of Lincolnton Wastewater Treatment Plant
MERCURY MINIMIZATION PLAN
February 17, 2017
SECTION I - PURPOSE
The purpose of this Mercury Minimization Plan ("MMP") is to describe best management practices
through which the City of Lincolnton WWTP will seek to reduce the amount of mercury discharged into
its system and, ultimately, to the environment. The MMP compiles mercury reduction -related efforts to -
date and potential future action items. It is designed to be a working document to help guide the City of
Lincolnton in its efforts to control mercury loadings discharged into its Publicly -Owned Treatment Works
(POTW) by users of the sewer system. Such a reduction in loadings to the sewer system should translate
to a reduction in the amount of mercury which is discharged from the treatment plant. The management
practices summarized below may also help control some of the mercury reaching our storm sewer system
as well.
SECTION II — FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The City of Lincolnton operates a publicly owned treatment works (POTW), including a collection
system and wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), that serves the City, and Industrial Users inside the
County.
This Wastewater system is permitted to treat 6.0 MGD and break/removes organic waste through an
Activated Sludge process. Our facility utilizes a three -step removal process inclusive of preliminary,
primary and secondary treatment systems.
Our Preliminary Treatment begins when the wastewater enters our plant from various locations
throughout the City and County's Industrial Users. The wastewater is received at the Main Lift Station
where debris is grind into smaller pieces using a huge grinder. The pumps lift the water from the Main
Lift and the wastewater is further processed for additional removal of debris and grit. The grit is removed
using a Vortex Removal System and dumped onto a belt for disposal. .
Primary treatment begins when the wastewater travels from preliminary system to the Oxidation Ditch.
This begins the first of two biological phases. The Oxidation Ditch has inner and outer rings which aids in
breaking down organic matter. The wastewater enters the outer ring and mixes with microorganisms. The
mixture of wastewater and microorganisms travels to the inner rings and is further mixed with rotating
disc, which are located around the orbital. The microorganism undergoes further breakdown as the
wastewater flows to the Aeration Basins. Blowers are used to sustain a comfortable level of oxygen for
the survival of the microorganism. The Aeration Basins allows microorganisms to clean the water by
consuming the waste and sending less organic matter to the Secondary Clarifiers. This process aids in
BOD, COD, Phosphorus, and Ammonia removals.
Our last treatment is called, Secondary Treatment. This occurs when the water travels from the Aeration
Basins and splits off into one of two Secondary Clarifiers where additional settling occurs. The solids
either returns to the Oxidation Ditch to restart another cycle of organic matter breakdown, or the solids
goes to the Diffused Air Flotation Unit for sludge removal. The wastewater leaves the Secondary via
notch weirs, prevents bypass of floatables, thus increasing Effluent quality, and travels to the Contact

Chambers for disinfection prior to discharge. After proper disinfection, the water is discharged into the
South Fork River.
The City of Lincolnton's Wastewater Treatment Plant is not designed to remove mercury, but does use
the 1631 method of collection to monitor mercury levels. Incidental mercury removal occurs through
typical municipal treatment with trace levels of mercury (and other metals) ending up in solids removed
from the raw wastewater.
Mercury is not used in the treatment processes at the WWTP. Mercury may be introduced into the sewer
system through a variety of sources, such as from industrial users, laboratories, and other businesses.
Residual deposits of mercury are also possible in the sewer system from historic practices. Finally, trace
amounts from household products and atmospheric deposition (both wet and dry) contribute to sewer
system mercury loadings.
While there is typically some mercury contributed to public sewer systems statewide, it is usually in
minute quantities and comprises a tiny portion of the already insignificant statewide loading for all point
sources - just two percent of the annual mercury loadings to all State waters.

SECTION III — PROGRAM PLAN
A. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL NON -DOMESTIC SOURCES CONTRIBUTING
MERCURY TO THE POTW
Within 24 months from the NPDES required 180-day period for development of an MMP, the City of
Lincolnton will evaluate available information to assess the potential for non -domestic users of the sewer
system to contribute mercury to the system. The information to be reviewed may include: (1) POTW
influent and effluent mercury data and trends; (2) industrial user permits and associated mercury
monitoring data; (3) Toxics Release Inventory (TRI); (4) state hazardous site registry and the National
Priority List relating to mercury contamination; and (5) historical records of industrial sites which have
contributed mercury loadings to the sewer system.
The City of Lincolnton will also survey and evaluate the following common sources of mercury in its
service area: (1) dentist offices; (2) hospitals; (3) laboratories; (4) auto recyclers; and (5) other potential
sources of mercury based on existing information. The City of Lincolnton began surveying dentist offices
October 2015, and has identified offices in need of proper disposal of mercury fillings (amalgam).
The City of Lincolnton will request that industrial users review mercury concentrations in high -volume
process chemicals and demonstrate that the mercury concentrations are below industry average. The City
of Lincolnton will request that alternative sources for chemicals be explored if the mercury levels are
determined to be significantly higher than would normally be expected.
The evaluation of potential non -domestic sources of mercury to the sewer system will be updated every
five years, as warranted by prior sampling results and any additional new potentially significant sources to
the system.
B. ADDITIONAL CONTROL MEASURES
This MMP identifies reasonable and cost-effective control measures to minimize mercury being
discharged into the POTW. Below is a listing of initial BMPs for this POTW.
Pollution Prevention
Substances used at the WWTP will be evaluated to determine if they contain mercury or mercury -based
compounds. Any such chemicals will be evaluated for substitution with non -mercury -containing
substances.
Housekeeping, Spill Control and Collection, and Education
The City of Lincolnton WWTP will develop procedures to minimize the possibility of any spill or release
at the WWTP involving mercury containing substances. City of Lincolnton WWTP will add mercury
identification and proper disposal to ongoing and future operator training procedures.
Public Outreach
The City of Lincolnton will make available educational information regarding sources of household
mercury and appropriate use/disposal practices. This information will be posted on the City of
Lincolnton's website and copies will be made available at Public Works. The availability of this
information will be ongoing on the website and updated for changes. The City of Lincolnton will also

facilitate public awareness regarding community collection points for mercury -containing products from
residents/customers for proper disposal. Periodic reminders of such collection programs will be provided
as part of the City of Lincolnton's ongoing public outreach.
Laboratory Practice
The City of Lincolnton WWTP operates a laboratory for purposes of complying with state and federal
monitoring and sampling requirements. The laboratory is a potential source of small quantities of
mercury -containing compounds. Laboratory employees will be trained in the proper handling and
disposal of these materials. The laboratories have also replaced mercury thermometers with non -mercury
thermometers, whenever practical.
A Mercury Spill Kit is available on site in the laboratory for incidental mercury spills.
C. TRACKING AND MONITORING
In order to assess the implementation of the control measures, the City of Lincolnton proposes to
undertake the following evaluations beginning after the first full year that this MMP is implemented:
1. Survey annually at least ten percent (10%) of any non -domestic users identified as
possible significant sources of mercury to the POTW;
2. Track the implementation of the programs outlined above;
3. Monitor influent mercury at least annually. Require significant non -domestic sources of
mercury to monitor periodically, as warranted; and
4. Measure effluent mercury as required by the NPDES permit.
These efforts will allow the City of Lincolnton to establish a baseline of influent and effluent mercury
levels to assist in identifying any trends in mercury contributions from domestic and non -domestic users
of the sewer system. This baseline will be tracked annually.
SECTION IV — IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTROL MEASURES
The City of Lincolnton WWTP monitors mercury levels on all industrial users. Ninety-nine percent of our
industrial users, lab results are non- detectable. The other one percent has a minute/trace amount. At this
time, the City of Lincolnton does not see a need for implementation of mercury limits for our industrial
users. The pretreatment department continues to monitor our Influent mercury levels for potential
elevations. The City will remain vigilant towards environmental concerns with regards to increase
mercury levels.
The City of Lincolnton will implement the control measures summarized in Section III over the permit
term and will update this MMP as warranted.
SECTION V - REPORTING
A summary of the MMP activities will be submitted as part of the NPDES permit renewal process.

CITY OF LINCOLNTON
Mercury Minimization Plan (MMP) Info:
• Implemented a Full Pretreatment Program — August 12, 1983
• Implemented a MMP — February 17, 2017
• Updated Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) to reflect the MMP — February 5, 2020
MMP Implementation Summary:
• Public outreach and education (brochures, flyers, Inter -local Jurisdiction Agreement
(IJA) with Lincoln County)
• Yearly training with WWTP staff concerning mercury
• Implemented a collection and disposal policy for the community for proper disposal
of mercury containing equipment (i.e. Replace mercury thermometers with non -
mercury based thermometer)
• Surveyed and Inspection of dental and other related medical facilities (i.e. Dental
dischargers per EPA and state guidance [surveyed 16 facilities — 2 are no longer in
service as of October 2020])
• Monitor and report lab. analysis of every industrial user (per LTMP and permit
requirements)
• Monitor and report lab. analysis of WWTP Influent and Effluent (per LTMP and
permit requirements)
June 3, 2021
DP

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Month September
Year 2017
Facility Name City of Lincolnton ORC Donald Burkey
Date of sampling 9/14/2017 Phone [phone]
City of Lincolnton WWTP Lab (NC# 153) / Prism Lab Inc (NC#402) / Blue Ridge
Analytical Laboratory Labs (NC#275) / Crowders Creek Lab (NC #210)/Summit Envr (NC#631)
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number
of
samples
Ammonia (as N)
Composite
SM4500NH3D1997
0.1
0.3
mg/1
1
Dissolved oxygen
Grab
HACH 10360-2011
rev 1.2 (LDO)(AQ)
0.1
7.1
mg/1
1
Nitrate/Nitrite
Composite
SM4500-NO3 F
0.5
5.4
mg/1
1
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Composite
EPA351.2
1.0
3.2
mg/1
1
Total Phosphorus
Composite
SM4500-P F
0.25
1.8
mg/1
1
Total dissolved solids
Composite
SM2540C
1.0
830
mg/1
1
Hardness
Composite
2340B 1997
0.03
34.1
mg/1
1
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Grab
SM4500CLG2000
10
22
ug/1
1
Oil and grease
Grab
5520B2001
1
1.4
mg/1
1
Metals (total recoverable), cyanide
and total
phenols
Antimony
Composite
200.7 1994
0.01
0.028
mg/L
1
Arsenic
Composite
200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/L
1
Beryllium
Composite
200.7 1994
0.02
<0.02
mg/L
1
Cadmium
Composite
200.7 1994
0.0002
<0.0002
mg/L
1
Chromium
Composite
200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/L
1
Copper
Composite
200.7 1994
0.001
0.002
mg/L
1
Lead
Composite
200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/L
1
Mercury
Composite
EPA 1631E
0.3
1.86
ng/1
1
Nickel
Composite
200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/L
1
Selenium
Composite
200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/L
1
Silver
Composite
200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/L
1
Thallium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.02
<0.02
mg/L
1
Zinc
Composite
200.7 1994
0.001
0.083
mg/L
1
Cyanide
Grab
4500-CN E 1
0.005
<0.005
mg/L
1
Total phenolic compounds
Grab
420.1 1978
0.005
0.005
mg/L
1
Volatile organic compounds
Acrolein
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1
Acrylonitrile
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/I
1
Benzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Bromoform
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Carbon tetrachloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Chlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Chlorodibromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
9.92
ug/1
1
Chloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
10
<10
ug/1
1
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Grab
EPA 624
10
<10
ug/1
1
Chloroform
Grab
EPA 624
5
22.5
ug/1
1
Dichlorobromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1.,1-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,2-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 1

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Month September
Year 2017
Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number
of
samples
Volatile organic compounds (Cont.)
1,1-dichloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,2-dichloropropane
Grab
EPA 624
5
_ <5
ug/1
1
1,3-dichloropropylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Ethylbenzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Methyl bromide
Grab
EPA 624
10
<10
ug/1
1
Methyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
10
<10
ug/1
1
Methylene chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Tetrachloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Toluene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Trichloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Vinyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
2
<2
ug/1
1
Acid -extractable compounds
P-chloro-m-creso
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2-chlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,4-dichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,4-dimethylphenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,4-dinitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0059
<0.0059
mg/1
1
2-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
4-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Pentachlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0059
<0.0059
mg/1
1
Phenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
0.00181
mg/1
1
Base -neutral compounds
Acenaphthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Acenaphthylene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Benzidine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Benzo(a)anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Benzo(a)pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2-chloronaphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 2

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Month September
Year 2017
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number
of
samples
Base -neutral compounds (coat )
Chrysene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
nag/1
1
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
1,3-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
1,4-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Diethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Dimethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0047
<0.0047
mg/1
1
Fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Fluorene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Hexachlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Hexachloroethane
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Isophorone
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Naphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Nitrobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Phenanthrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
1,2,4,-trichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
Dibenzofuran
Grab
EPA 625
0.0012
<0.0012
mg/1
1
m 85p Cresol
Grab
EPA 625
0.0047
<0.0047
mg/1
1
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance
with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of
the person or persons who managed the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information
submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Auth
Signature
10�3///7
Date
ame
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 3

Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Month. December
Year. 2018
Facility: Name City of Lincolnton
Date of sampling- December 20, 2018
ORC Donald Burkey
Phone [phone]
Analytical Laboratory: Blue Ridge Labs (NC #275)/ City of Lincolnton WWTP Lab (NC #153)
Crowders Creek Lab (NC #210)/ Summit Environmental (NC #631)
anlete
ti Method
140:
Ammonia (as N)
Composite
SM4500NH3D 1997-2011
0.2
<0.2
mg/1
1
Chlorine (total residual, TRC
Grab
SM4500CLG-20 11
10
31
ug/1
Hach 10360-2011
Dissolved Oxygen
Grab
rev 1.2 (LDO) (AQ)
0.1
8.32
Nitrite plus Nitrate Total (as N
Composite
SM 194500-N
0.08
2.72
mg/1
mg/1
1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Composite
SM 194500-N
0.5
4.76
mg/1
1
Oil and Grease
Grab
5520B 2001
1
1.2
Total Phosphorus
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.02
0.675
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
Total Dissolved Solids
Composite
2540C 1997
1
145
mg/1
1
Hardness
rec
Composite
2340B 1997 0.03 23.8 mg/1
Antimony
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
Arsenic
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
1
Beryllium
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Cadmium
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.0002
<0.0002
mg/1
1
Chromium
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Copper
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
0.008
mg/1
1
Lead
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
1
Mercury (Method 1631E)
Composite
EPA1631E
1
2
ng/1
1
Nickel
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Selenium
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
1
Silver
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Thallium
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Zinc
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
1
Cyanide
Grab
4500-CN-E 1
0.005
<0.005
mg/1
1
Total phenolic compounds
Grab
420.1
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
vo1atilri
c com
Acrolein
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/
Acrylonitrile
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
<5
<5
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
Grab
EPA 624
10
<10
ug/1
1
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
10.2
<5
ug/1
ug/1
1
1
1,1-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,2-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Trans- 1,2-dichloroethylene
1, 1-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
1
1
1
1
Ethylbenzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 1

Permit No.0 C o° Lj C (O
Outfall t
Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Monthn.Q 3L
Year a. o
Methyl Bromide
Methyl Chloride
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
<5
ug/1
ug/1
1
1
Methylene Chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
Trichloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
1
ug/1
ug/1
ug/1
1
1
1
1
1
Vinyl Chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
<5
ug/1
1
actabie;com
P-chloro-m-creso
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
1
2,4-dinitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0278
<0.0278
mg/1
1
2-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0278
<0.0278
mg/1
1
Phenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
2 , 4 , 6-trichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Rase-neutral-compow
Acenaphthene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
1
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
2-chloronaphthalene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1,4-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Grab
Grab
EPA 625.1
EPA 625.1
0.0056
0.0056
<0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
mg/1
1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 2

Permit No. IN L 01).-c'i.fi
Outfall 001
Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Month 0,2 c-
Year Sj
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0222
<0.0222
mg/1
1
Fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Fluorene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Hexachlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Hexachloroethane
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Nitrobenzene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
1,2,4,-trichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.0056
<0.0056
mg/1
1
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who
managed the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and
imprisonment for knowing violations."
Signature
lhi ilg
Date
Form - DMR- PPA- 1 Page 3

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Month MARCH
Year 2019
Facility Name City of Lincolnton VNNTP oxc Donald A. Burkey Jr.
Date of sampling: 03/21/2019 Phone [phone]
Analytical Laboratory: Blue Ridge Labs (NC #275) City of Lincolnton WWTP Lab (NC #153) Summit Environmental (NC8831) Crowders Creek Lab (NC #210)
-.
Faremete[ - .
Parameter,-'
Code; .>
3emgte;
719pe' .
,-� r-
Aualytieai;Method
�. Q nt5tatloa Level.
-
:-'"uamp'f#t3ie#}t1R
...:
-D`aits ofMeasarement
Ammonia (as N)
C0610
Composite
SM4500NH3D 1997-2011
0.2
0-3
mg/1
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
50060
Grab
SM4500CLG-2011
10
<10
ug/1
Hach 10360-2011
Dissolved Oxygen
00300
Grab
Rev 1.2(LDO) (AQ)
0.1
7.94
mg/1
Nitrite plus Nitrate Total (as N)
00630
Composite
SM194500-N
0.08
3.23
mg/1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
00625
Composite
SM194500-N
0.5
5.46
mg/1
Oil and Grease
00556
Grab
5520B 2001
1
3.6
mg/1
Total Phosphorus
C0665
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.02
1.41
mg/1
Total Dissolved Solids
70295
Composite
2540C 1997
1
128
mg/1
Hardness
00900
Composite
2340B 1997
0.03
43.9
mg/1
ldetals (fot af're2bve,�a6le�jr cpaacde.an$
i totes
Antimony
01097
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
Arsenic
01002
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
Beryllium
01012
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
Cadmium
01027
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.0002
<0.00002
mg/1
Chromium
01034
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
Copper
01042
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
0.003
mg/1
Lead
01051
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
Mercury (Method 1631E)
COMER
Composite
EPA 1631E
3.18
1
ng/1
Nickel
01067
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
Selenium
01147
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.01
<0.01
mg/1
Silver
01077
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
Thallium
01059
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
<0.001
mg/1
Zinc
01092
Composite
EPA 200.7 1994
0.001
0.02
mg/1
Cyanide
00720
Grab
4500-CN-E 1
0.005
<0.005
mg/1
Total phenolic compounds
32730
Grab
420.1
0.01
0.014
mg/1
Voia'ti 6 oi<gauirconnpoYWde .
. - _
_ . _ -
Acrolein
,
34210
Grab
EPA 624
500
,500
ug/I
Acrylonitrile
34215
Grab
EPA 624
500
<500
ug/1
Benzene
34030
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Bromoform
32104
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Carbon Tetrachloride
32102
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Chlorobenzene
34301
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Chlorodibromomethane
34306
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Chloroethane
85811
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
34576
Grab
EPA 624
100
<100
ug/1
Chloroform
32106
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/I
Dichlorobromomethane
32101
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,1-dichloroethane
34496
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,2-dichloroethane
32103
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
34546
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,1-dichloroethylene
34501
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,2-dichloropropane
34541
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,3-dichloropropylene
77163
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Ethylbenzene
34371
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Methyl Bromide -
34413
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Methyl Chloride
34418
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/I
Methylene Chloride
34423
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
81549
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Tetrachloroethylene
34475
Grab
EPA 624 .
50
<50
ug/1
Toluene
34010
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1,1,1-trichloroethane
34506
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
1, 1,2-trichloroethane
34511
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/I
Trichloroethylene
39180
Grab
EPA 624
50
<50
ug/1
Grab-
EPA-624
-__ -_--. 50 __
_ ___.__ <50--..----_.___-_._
ug/1
Vinyl-Chlu,ide
39-17r5-
P-ebloro-m-creso 34452
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
2-chlorophenol 34586
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
2,4-dichlorophenol 34601
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
2,4-dimethylphenol 34606
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
4,6-diniiro-o-cresol 34657
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.28
<0.28
mg/1
2,4-dinitrophenol 34616
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.32
<0.32
mg/1
2-nitrophenol 34591
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
4-nitrophenol 34646
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.16
<0.16
mg/I
Pentachlorophenol 39032
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.1
<0.01
mg/I
Phenol 34694
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
2,4,6-trichlorophenol 34621
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 1

Permit No. NC0025496
Outfall 001
Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Month MARCH
Year 2019
Pgcame(btr
#ode
Bo,
lia8dgticaZMet 4d
aantta�lon7e+ret
Saatl cl4
p
Uieiisofihxe asucemeatr
Baas-nepi +ait edmpoiftikds _ . , r _. ,
, .,.
�0.02
Acenaphthene
34205
Grab
EPA 625.1
<0.02
mg/1
Acenaphthylene -
34200
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Antbracene
CO220
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Benzidine
39120
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.34
<0.34
mg/1
Benzo(a)anthracene
34526
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Benzo(a)pyrene
34247
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
3,4 benzofluoranthene
34230
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Benzo(gbi)perylene
34521
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.06
<0.06
mg/1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
34242
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
34278
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
34273
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
tag/1
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
34283
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
39100
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.32
<0.32
mg/1
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
34636
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
- <0.02
mg/1
Butyl benzyl phthalate
34292
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.04
<0.04
mg/1
2-chloronaphthalene
34581
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
34641
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Chrysene
34320
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Di-n-butyl phthalate
39110
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Di-n-octyl phthalate
34596
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.12
<0.12
mg/1
Drbenzo(a,h)anthracene
34556
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
1,2-dichlorobenzene
34536
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
1,3-dichlorobenzene
34566
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
1,4-dichlorobenzene
34571
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
34631
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.24
<0.24
mg/1
Diethyl phthalate
34336
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Dimethyl phthalate
34341
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
2,4-dinitrotoluene
34611
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
2,6-dinitrotoluene
C0626
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
34346
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.08
<0.08
mg/I
Fluoranthene
C0376
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Fluorene
34381
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Hexachlorobenzene
C0700
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Hexorhlorobutadiene
39702
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
34386
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.24
<0.24
mg/1
Hexachloroethane
34396
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
34403
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.056
<0.056
mg/1
Isophorone
34408
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Naphthalene -
34696
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Nitrobenzene
34447
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
34428
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
N-nitrosodimethylamine
34438
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
34433
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Phenanthrene
34461
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
Pyrene
34469
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/I
1,2,4,-trichlorobenzene
34551
Grab
EPA 625.1
0.02
<0.02
mg/1
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the
information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who managed the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Auth
Signature
�I-3o- 19
7
Date
Form - DMR- PPA-1
Page 2

[External] Lincolnton WWTP, NPDES Permit # NC0025496
Donald Burkey <[e-mail]>
Fri 4/30/2021 13:07
To: Yitbarek, Diana <[e-mail]>
�l 3 attachments (11 MB)
Lincolnton WWTP Annual Pollutant Scan Sept 2017.pdf; Lincolnton WWTP Annual Pollutant Scan Dec 2018.pdf; Lincolnton
WWTP Annual Pollutant Scan March 2019.pdf;
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment
to Report Spam.
Diana,
I am supplying some of the information that you had requested for our NPDES Permit Renewal. I have
attached the 2017, 2018 and 2019 Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scans to this email. I will be
submitting more of the requested information in separate emails, as our system has a hard time
sending multiple attachments. Please let me know if you have any questions about the information
provided. Also, this is my new email address for the City of Lincolnton.
Thank you,
Donald A. Burkey, Jr., Superintendent
City of Lincolnton
Waste Water Treatment Plant
P.O. Box 617
608 W. Hwy 150 Bypass
Lincolnton, NC 28093
Phone: [phone]
Fax : [phone]
L,Lincolnton Logo 2017 jpg
From: Yitbarek, Diana[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2021 1:46 PM

To: Donald A. Burkey
Cc: Basinger, Corey
Subject: NC0025496, Lincolnton WWTP, City of Lincolnton, Lincoln County, MRO
Good afternoon, Dear Donald Burkey
I am the assigned permit writer for the subject line facility. I look forward to working with you to
complete this permit renewal. Thanks for submitting the February 10, 2020, NPDES permit
application. I will appreciate your support with some additional/revised information:
1. Please submit the signed Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scans for 2017, 2018, and 2019.
2. Please complete this form to meet the latest application requirements for the updated
application form 2A.
3. Please provide coordinates for the outfall, upstream, and downstream location points
(approximate coordinates to the actual location from an online map would suffice).
a. The current outfall coordinate in the permit (35°26134"N 81°15139"W) and the
coordinate in the permit application renewal (35°26'26"N 81°16144"W) appears to be
off. The application package included a map depicting the outfall (pg. 56). Would it be
ok if we update the coordinate to 35°27'02.5"N 81°15'38.8"W? Would this be closer to
the actual location?
4. If there are additional pollutants with certified methods to be reported, please submit this
Chemical Addendum.
Please provide this information by May 7, 2021. If you need more time, please let me know.
Thanks for your continued cooperation with the NPDES program and your work protecting public
health and the environment.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
-Diana
Diana Yitbarek
Engineer
T: [phone] M: [phone]
[e-mail]
NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
NC Department of Environmental Quality/ Division of Water Resources
Mailing: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Physical: 512 N. Salisbury Street, Rm. 925T, Raleigh, NC 27604-1170
*Please check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your requests by phone or email. We can
also be available via Microsoft Teams if requested. Thanks for your patience and stay safe.
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Re: [External] Lincolnton WWTP Outfall Coordinates
Yitbarek, Diana <[e-mail]>
Wed 5/5/2021 11:00
To: Donald Burkey <[e-mail]>
Bcc: Montebello, Michael J <[e-mail]>
Thank you, Donald. I will update the outfall coordinate in the permit as 35°27'02.5"N 81°15'38.8"W.
Regarding the downstream coordinate: The permit only requires upstream hardness, but the fact
sheet mentioned color monitoring in one upstream and two downstream locations. The Facility has
followed what was required in the permit. I will do some digging on this and update you if there are
any changes to the upstream and downstream monitoring based on the regulations.
Is the facility part of a monitoring coalition program or a river association?
-Diana
Diana Yitbarek
Engineer
T: [phone]
[e-mail]
NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
NC Department of Environmental Quality/ Division of Water Resources
Mailing: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Physical: 512 N. Salisbury Street, Rm. 925T, Raleigh, NC 27604-1170
„OWnnIt l al Em.rannFMrl+l 041A11Y
*Please check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your requests by phone or email. We can
also be available via Microsoft Teams if requested. Thanks for your patience and stay safe.
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Donald Burkey <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 14:12
To: Yitbarek, Diana <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Lincolnton WWTP Outfall Coordinates
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment
to Report Spam.
Diana,
I have attached a photo of our WWTP Outfall and a picture of the coordinates taken from an iPhone
standing about 25 feet from the outfall entering the South Fork River. Your suggested coordinates
were dead on.
We will be taking similar photos at our upstream and downstream locations. However, we currently do
not do any downstream sampling. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Donald A. Burkey, Jr., Superintendent
City of Lincolnton
Waste Water Treatment Plant
P.O. Box 617
608 W. Hwy 150 Bypass
Lincolnton, NC 28093
Phone: [phone]
Fax : [phone]
,Lincolnton Logo 2017 jpg

Permit No. NC0025496
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*{1.1366724ln hardness](0.041838)} - e^{0.9151 [ln hardness]-3.1485}
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER*{1.1366724ln hardness](0.041838)} - e^{0.9151[ln hardness]-3.6236}
Cadmium, Chronic
WER*{1.1016724ln 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[ln hardness]-1.702}
Lead, Acute
WER*{1.462034ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-1.460}
Lead, Chronic
WER*{1.462034ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[ln 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. NC0025496
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 2of4

Permit No. NC0025496
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/
(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 + { LKPoI �SS(1+a)l r 1 0-6l }
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)
s7Q10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q10 may be incorporated as applicable:
1Q10 = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0025496
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)]
37.61
Data provided in DMRs
Average Upstream Hardness (mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or (Ca+Mg)]
19.5
Data provided in DMRs
7Q10 summer (cfs)
77.0
NPDES Files
1Q10 (cfs)
62.97
Calculated in RPA
Permitted Flow (MGD)
3.5
NPDES permit application
Date: 5/20/2021
Permit Writer: Diana Yitbarek
Page 4 of 4

United States Environmental Protection Agency
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction
1 IN I
211I1111
Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection
2[ I 3 I NC0025496 111 121 21/03/23 117
Type
181 I
II 111111111
Inspector Fac Type
191 g I 2011
111111111 II 1111111 I I II I
66
11 1
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA Reserved
67I1.0 I 7° I4 I 71 IN I 72 I N I 73I I 174 I 751
I 1 1
I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Lincolnton WWTP
550 W Hwy 150 Bypass
Lincolnton NC 28092
Entry Time/Date
09:20AM 21/03/23
Permit Effective Date
16/11/01
Exit Time/Date
11:OOAM 21/03/23
Permit Expiration Date
20/07/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
Donald A Burkey/ORC/704-736-8960/
Other Facility Data
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Stephen H Peeler,PO Box 617 Lincolnton NC 280930617/Public Works
Director/704-736-8940/7047368959 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenar Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Progran Sludge Handling Dispo: Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate
Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and
OriATuvia
Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Date
4/1/2021
(—DocuSigned by:
DWR/MRO WQ/704-663-1699/
CC-
BB057A2DE017498_
Signature of Ma rAdflliftviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Andrew Pitn r A44444`' N P4415M/R/MRO WQ/704-663-1699 Ext.2180/ 4.1.21
F161FB69A2D84A3...
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page# 1

NPDES yr/mo/day
31 NC0025496 111 121 21/03/23
I17
Inspection Type
18 [j
1
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page# 2

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new • ❑ ❑ ❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? • ❑ ❑ ❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit? ❑ • ❑ ❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The subject permit expired on 7/31/2020, renwall application has been submitted .The City
implements an approved Industrial Pretreatment Program.
Record Keeping
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ DE
• ❑ DO
• ❑ OD
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ OD
• ❑ ❑ ❑
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operatc • ❑ ❑ ❑
on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification' • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? ❑ ❑ ❑ •
Comment: The records reviewed during the inspection were organized and well maintained. DMRs,
COCs, ORC visitation logs, bench sheets, and calibration logs, were reviewed for
December 2020.
Laboratory Yes No NA NE
Page# 3

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Laboratory
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
# Is the facility using a contract lab?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
Comment: Influent and effluent analyses (including field parameters) are performed under the City's
on -site certified laboratory (#153). Due to Covid-19 the laboratory instruments were not
inspected.The laboratory instrumentation used for field analyses appeared to be properly
calibrated and documented. The following commercial laboratories (NC certified) have been
contracted to provide analytical support:Prism Labs (COD, total nitrogen, total
phosphorusBlue Ridge Labs (metals, cyanide, Oil and Grease, Phenols, Bis-Phalte,
HardnessTwo Rivers Utilities: Low level mercury)Meritech: toxicity pollutant scan
Influent Sampling
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
Is sample collected above side streams?
Is proper volume collected?
Is the tubing clean?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
Yes No NA NE
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The subject permit requires influent composite BOD and TSS samples. The facility staff
perform and document monthly aliquot verifications
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? • ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees • ❑ ❑ ❑
Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type • ❑ ❑ ❑
representative)?
Comment: The subject permit requires composite and grab effluent samples. The facility staff perform
and document monthly aliquot verifications on the sampler used for daily sampling
Page# 4

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, anc • ❑ ❑ ❑
sampling location)?
Comment:
Operations & Maintenance
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The facility appeared to be adequately treating wastewater at the time of the inspection. The
facility staff incorporate a comprehensive process control program with all measurements
being properly documented and maintained on-site.The facility is equipped with a SCADA
system to assist the staff with the operation of the treatment units/processes. The audible
and visual alarms are tested (and documented) on a monthly basis.
Pump Station - Influent
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
Is the wet well free of excessive grease?
Are all pumps present?
Are all pumps operable?
Are float controls operable?
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
Yes No NA NE
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The influent passes through a muffin monster prior to entering the wet well. at the time of the
inspection 4/5 of pump were in service.
Flow Measurement - Influent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Yes No NA NE
❑•❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ED
Comment: The flow meter is calibrated annually and was last calibrated on 4/15/2020 by Clearwater,
Inc
Bar Screens
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
Yes No NA NE
•
Page# 5

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
Is the unit in good condition?
Yes No NA NE
•
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The bar screenings are disposed into an open dumpster equipped with a drain plug.
Grit Removal
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
Comment:
Screenings and grit are disposed at the County Landfill.
Oxidation Ditches
Are the aerators operational?
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
Is the DO level acceptable?
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/I)
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
•
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
Aeration Basins Yes No NA NE
Mode of operation Ext. Air
Type of aeration system Diffused
Is the basin free of dead spots? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are surface aerators and mixers operational? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the diffusers operational? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Aeration Basins
Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
Is the DO level acceptable?
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/I)
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ El El El
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Three of four aeration basins were in service. The 4th was used has a digester due to long
wet season.
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/ of the sidewall depth)
Comment: one of the two clarfiers was out for repaires.
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Are pumps in place?
Are pumps operational?
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Effluent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The flow meter is calibrated annually and was last calibrated on 4/15/2020 by Clearwater,
Inc
Page# 7

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Disinfection -Liquid
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
(Sodium Hypochlorite) Is pump feed system operational?
Is bulk storage tank containment area adequate? (free of leaks/open drains)
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
Is there chlorine residual prior to de -chlorination?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
De -chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ? Liquid
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)? ❑ ❑ • ❑
Is storage appropriate for cylinders? ❑ ❑ • ❑
# Is de -chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the tablets the proper size and type? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Aqueous sodium bisulfite is used for dechlorination.
Are tablet de -chlorinators operational? ❑ ❑ • ❑
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Chemical Feed
Is containment adequate?
Is storage adequate?
Are backup pumps available?
Is the site free of excessive leaking?
Comment:
Effluent Pipe
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
Page# 8

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Anaerobic Digester
Type of operation:
Is the capacity adequate?
# Is gas stored on site?
Is the digester(s) free of tilting covers?
Is the gas burner operational?
Is the digester heated?
Is the temperature maintained constantly?
Is tankage available for properly waste sludge?
Yes No NA NE
Floating cover
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The facility is equipped with three anaerobic digesters and three storage tanks. One of the
digesters was out of order due to a tilting cover that made the cover come out of the
brackets. The tilting cover could cause a catastrophic failure to the structure and need to
either be repaired or taken out, this was noted on the previous inspection (5/30/2019).
Solids Handling Equipment
Is the equipment operational?
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
Is storage adequate?
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
❑ ❑ ❑ •
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Waste activated sludge (WAS ) is thickened by a DAF unit prior to being pumped to the
anaerobic digesters.
Drying Beds
Is there adequate drying bed space?
Is the sludge distribution on drying beds appropriate?
Are the drying beds free of vegetation?
# Is the site free of dry sludge remaining in beds?
Is the site free of stockpiled sludge?
Is the filtrate from sludge drying beds returned to the front of the plant?
# Is the sludge disposed of through county landfill?
# Is the sludge land applied?
(Vacuum filters) Is polymer mixing adequate?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ • ❑
❑ ❑ • ❑
Page# 9

Permit: NC0025496
Inspection Date: 03/23/2021
Owner - Facility: Lincolnton WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Drying Beds Yes No NA NE
Comment: Land application is the primary disposal of the bio-solids; however, drying beds are used
during emergency situations when wet weather prevents land application (drying beds were
being used at the time of the inspection). The drying bed sections currently being used
appeared to be well maintained
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
IN ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ El El El
• ❑ ❑ •
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The facility is equipped with two backup generators. Both generators are tested monthly (nol
under load) and serviced twice per year by a contracted company. The contracted company
tests the generators under load during each servicing event
Page# 10

ROY COOPER
Governor
JOHN NICHOLSON
Interim Secretary
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
MEMORANDUM
To:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
June 22, 2021
Clinton Cook
NC DEQ / DWR / Public Water Supply
Mooresville Regional Office
From: Diana Yitbarek
NC DEQ / DWR / Municipal Permitting Unit
Subject: Review of Draft NPDES Permit NC0025496
Lincolnton WWTP
Outfall 001 [35°27'02.5"N 81°15'38.8"W]/ South Fork Catawba River
Lincoln County
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the draft permit and return this form by
July 22, 2021. If you have any questions on the draft permit, please contact me at 919-707-9130 or via
e-mail [[e-mail]].
RESPONSE: (Check one)
X
§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
Concur with the issuance of this permit provided the facility is operated and maintained properly,
the stated effluent limits are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not contravene the
designated water quality standards.
Concurs with issuance of the above permit, provided the following conditions are met: *
* I have no appreciable expertise in implementation of the Clean Water Act requirements and have
minimal understanding of the information provided. As a result, I have no basis for opposing the
permit.
Opposes the issuance of the above permit, based on reasons stated below, or attached:
aha!a_Signature:' v Date: July 22, 2021
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality 1 Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

LINCOLN TIMES -NEWS
P.O. Box 40
Lincolnton, North Carolina 28093-0040
Telephone [phone]
I, Jerry Leedy, Publisher of the Lincoln Times -News, do hereby acknowledge that the
attached advertisement was published in the Lincoln Times -News on the following
Dates: J ne 25, 2021
This is the 25th of June, 2021.
WITNESS
.. J 17.1g Efif.l
My Commission Expires: 05/19/2022 Copy

Public Notice
North Carolina Environmental Managemen
ComissonINPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDI
Wastewater Permit NC0025496 Ci
of Lineolnton WWTP and NC00845
Lince1n County WTP The North Carolit
Environmental Management Commissic
proposes to issue a NPDES wastewat
discharge permit to the person(s) listed belo'
Written comments regarding the propost
permit will be accepted until 30 days after ti
publish date of this notice. The Director i
the NC Division of Water Resources (DWI
may hold a public hearing should there be
significant degree of public interest. Plea
mail comments and/or information requests i
DWR at the above address. Interested persor
may visit the DWR at 512 N. Salisbury Stec
Raleigh, NC 27604 to review infonnati.c
on file. Additional information on NPDE
permits and this notice may be found on of
website: http://deq.nc.gov/about/division,
w ater-res ourc es/water-resources-permit!
wastewater-branch/npdes-wastewater/public
notices,or by calling [phone]. The Cit
of Lincolnton (P.O. Box 617, Lincolnton, NI
28093) has requested renewal of the NPDE
Permit NC0025496 for its Wastewate
Treatment Plant in Lincoln County. Thi
permitted facility discharges treated domesti
and pretreated industrial wastewater t
South Fork Catawba River in the Catawb
River Basin. Ammonia, biochemical oxyge
demand, bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, pH, tots
residual chlorine, and total suspended solid
are water quality limited parameters in th
permit. This discharge may affect futur
allocations in this segment of the South Fora
Catawba River. Lincoln County [115 V
Main Street] has requested renewal of permi
NC0084573 for its WTP in Lincoln County
This permitted facility discharges filte
backwash and sludge supertenant wastewate
to Lake Norman (Little Creek Arm) in thi
Catawba River Basin. Currently total residua
chlorine and total suspended solids parameter
are water quality limited. This discharge ma}
affect future allocations in this segment o
Lake Norman.
IT: lone 25, 2021

NPDES/Aquifer Protection Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART:
PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER you get this form
back from Pretreatment Staff:
Check all that apply
Notify Pretreatment staff if LTMP/STMP data we
Date
5/24/2021
municipal renewal
X
said should be on DMRs is not really there, so we
Requestor
Diana Yitbarek
new industries
can get it for you (or NOV POTW).
Facility Name
Lincolnton WWTP
WWTP expansion
- Notify Pretreatment staff if you want us to keep a
Permit Number
NC0025496
Speculative limits
specific POC in LTMP/STMP so you will have data
for
Region
Mooresville
stream reclass.
next permit renewal.
- Email Pretreatment staff draft permit, fact sheet,
Basin
Catawba
outfall relocation
RPA.
7Q1 0 change
- Send Pretreatment paper copy of permit (w/o
other
NPDES boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet.
other
Email RPA if changes.
check
applicable Pretreatment staff:
Other Comments to Pretreatment STaff:
BRD, CPF, CTB, FRB, TAR
The WWTP has a design capacity of 6.0 MGD and is currently authorized to
discharge 3.5 MGD (up to 4.5 MGD and 6.0 MGD upon request) into South Fork
CHO, HIW, LTN, LUM, NES, NEW, ROA, YAD
Catawba River, a class WS-IV waters. This Facility also two non -categorical
significant industrial users (SIUs) and three categorical industrial users (ClUs) in
their The Town has long-term
pretreatment program. a monitoring plan (LTMP).
The average industrial flow discharged by the SIUs is 1.15 MGD. Bis (2-Ethylhexyl)
Phthalate and Dichlorobromomethane are new parameters with limit/monitoring
PERMIT
WRITER 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
_
X
3) facility has SIUs and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV" if program still under development)
X
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
_
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
Flow, MGD
Permitted
Actual
Time period for Actual
LTMP time frame:
Industrial
1.15
1.15
2017
Most recent:
3/30/2017
Uncontrollable
n/a
1.51
2017
Next Cycle:
3/30/2022
POC in LTMP/
STMP
Parameter of
Concern (POC)
Check List
POC due to
NPDES/
Permit Limit
Required by
EPA
Required
by 503
Sludge""
POC due
to SIU"""
POTW POC
(Explain
below)""""
STMP
Effluent
Freq
LTMP
Effluent
Freq
BOD
NI
Q
/
TSS
NI
Q
Q = Quarterly
NH3
NI
Q
M = Monthly
Arsenic
Q
Cadmium
NI
Q
Chromium
NI
NI
NI
Q
Copper
NI
NI
NI
Q
Cyanide
NI
Q
Is all data on DMRs?
Lead
\I
NI
NI
Q
Yes
NI
Mercury
NI
Q
NO (attach data)
Molybdenum
NI
Q
Nickel
NI
Q
Silver
NI
Q
Selenium
NI
Q
Zinc
NI
Q
Is data in spreadsheet?
TN
NI
Q
YES
NI
TP
NI
Q
NO
Oil and grease
NI
Antimony
NI
NI
Q
Hardness
NI
Q
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) f
NI
Added in this permit cycle
Dichlorobromomet
NI
Added in this permit cycle
"Always in the LTMP/STMP ** Only in LTMP/STMP if sludge land 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 concern to POTW
PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART:
Comments to Permit Writer(ex.. explanation of any POCs: info you have on IU related investigations into NPDES problems):
Bis (2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate and Dichlorobromomethane will be added to the LTMP and HWAs.
25496 NPDES_PT.request.form.July2020
Revised: July 24, 2007