NC0026000_Permit Issuance_20151007

NPDES DOCUHENT SCANNIN`: COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0026000
Tabor City WWTP
Document Type:(ermit
Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
October 7, 2015
This docum eint is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the res erse side

a
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Pat McCrory
Governor
Mr. Al Leonard Jr., Town Manager
Town of Tabor City
P.O. Box 655
Tabor City, North Carolina 28463
Dear Mr. Leonard:
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
October 7, 2015
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit Renewal
Permit No. NC0026000
Town of Tabor City WWTP
Columbus County
Facility Class III
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October
15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
No changes were made to the draft permit sent to you on July 15, 2015. The final permit
authorizes the Town of Tabor City to discharge wastewater from Tabor City WWTP to an unnamed
tributary of Grissett Swamp, a class C Swamp water in the Lumber River Basin. The permit
includes discharge limitations/ or monitoring for flow, BOD5, ammonia nitrogen, total suspended
solids (TSS), dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, total residual chlorine, fecal coliform, total
nitrogen, total phosphorus, mercury, copper, and zinc.
As identified previously, the renewal permit contains the following significant changes from
your current permit:
• The requirement to begin reporting discharge monitoring data electronically using the NC
DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) internet application has been added to
your NPDES permit. [See Special Condition A.(5.)]
For information on eDMR, registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account, please
visit the following web page: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/bog/ipu/edmr.
For information on EPA's proposed NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule, please visit the
following web site: http://www2.epa.gov/compliance/proposed-npdes-electronic-reporting-rule.
The Division recognizes that the Town is currently submitting eDMRs. This requirement is
being inserted into all NPDES permits and should be considered a formality.
• Effluent sampling data for total copper and zinc showed reasonable potential to violate NC
Water Quality Standards (WQSs). Copper and zinc are action level parameters and limits are
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

applied in conjunction with toxicity test results. Since this facility is passing its toxicity tests,
limitations for copper and zinc were not put in the permit. However, monitoring was maintained
in the permit at a reduced monitoring frequency of quarterly to coincide with toxicity testing
requirements.
• In accordance with the 2012 Mercury TMDL NPDES Guidance, mercury data from January
2010 through May 2015 was evaluated. In 2014, the annual average mercury concentration was
above both the Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation (WQBEL) of 12 ng/L and the
Technology Based Effluent Limitation (TBEL) of 47 ng/L. Between 2010 and May 2015 the
WQBEL of 12 ng/L was exceeded 13 times and the TBEL was exceeded 2 times. The mercury
limit of 12 ng/L will be maintained in the permit renewal at a sampling frequency of monthly.
This facility has shown significantly high concentrations of mercury in its effluent with 97% of
the 281 samples taken between 2010 and May 2015 greater than 1 ng/L. As a result, a Mercury
Minimization Plan (MMP) requirement has been added to this permit renewal. See section
A.(4.). Please note that the MMP shall be developed within 180 days of the NPDES Permit
Effective Date, and shall be available for inspection on -site. A sample MMP was developed
through a stakeholder review process and has been placed on the Division website for guidance
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/npdes, under Model Mercury Minimization Plan.
The Division suspects the operation and maintenance problems at the WWTP result in poor.
solids removal and solids buildup in the chlorine contact tank. It is likely that the mercury
violations are due to poor plant operations and maintenance. Therefore, as required by EPA in
the Administrative Orders (AO) issued to the Town of Tabor City in 2009, total mercury (as Hg,
measured in ng/L) testing shall be performed for the following wastewater categories: influent,
effluent, and Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) in an aeration chamber. This requirement
is listed in Section A. (1.) of the draft permit and in the MMP special condition A.(4.). The
Town of Tabor City should take mitigative measures to prevent the discharge of mercury and
track the mercury concentrations contained in the plant.
• The Mercury Reopener Special Condition in the existing permit was removed.
• In accordance with an agreement with EPA Region IV, wasteload allocations for ammonia -
nitrogen are based on a summer criterion of 1 mg/L and a winter criterion of 1.8 mg/L. Since
the WWTP is provided no dilution from the receiving stream, the monthly average effluent
limits determined for the Tabor City WWTP are 1 mg/L in the summer and 1.8 mg/L in the
winter. Using a 3:1 ratio the weekly average limits for NH3-N will be 3 mg/L in the summer
and 5.4 mg/L in the winter. These revised ammonia -nitrogen limitations were inserted into the
permit renewal. See section A. (1.). A review of effluent data during the period of 2010 through
2014 shows the WWTP is able to meet these limitations.
• According to the Tabor City WWTP updated components list, the deep -sand tertiary filtration
system has been inactive since 2013. The existing special condition A. (5.) has been removed
from the permit.
• Existing special conditions A. (4.) and A. (6.) have been removed from the permit.
• A Special Condition requiring a Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan has been added
to the permit. No later than 7 months after the effective date of this permit, the Permittee shall
submit to the Division of Water Resources a Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan as
described in special condition A. (6.).

• Some of the wording has changed in Special Condition A. (2.), Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit,
please review each paragraph carefully.
• Special Condition A.(3.) has been modified to include the specific three years in which the
Effluent Pollutant Scans shall be performed (2016, 2017, and 2018). In addition, at the end of
the Special Condition, 2nd species Toxicity Testing Requirements for municipal permit
renewals per Federal Regulations [40 CFR 122.21(j)(5)] have been added.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty
(30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless
such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the
legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Resources or any other Federal, State, or Local governmental permits that may be required.
If you have questions concerning this permit, please contact Yang Song by e-mail
([e-mail]) or phone at [phone].
Sincerely,
ay Zimmer
D,frector, Division of Water Resources
Enclosure: NPDES Permit NC0026000
cc: NPDES Unit
Central Files
Wilmington Regional Office / Water Quality Program
e-copy:
EPA Region IV
Susan Meadows, Aquatic Toxicity Branch
Stephanie Moore, ORC, Tabor City WWTP
Bill Lester, Consulting Engineer, LKC Engineering, PLLC
Bobby Blowe, Project Manager, Municipal Engineering Service Company P.A.

Permit NC0026000
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES)
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Town of Tabor City
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from an outfall located at the
Tabor City Wastewater Treatment Plant
244 US Hwy 701 Bypass N, east of Tabor City
Columbus County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary of Grissett Swamp located within the Lumber
River Basin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions
set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective December 1, 2015.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on.... August 31, 2019.
Signed this day October 7, 2015.
4S. Zimmerm
D ctor, Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 8

Permit NC0026000
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked,
and as of this issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore,
the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit conditions,
requirements, terms, and provisions described herein.
Town of Tabor City
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a 1.1 MGD activated -sludge wastewater treatment facility consisting of:
• a triplex influent pumping station
• Parshall flume
• mechanical bar screen and manual bar screen
• grit remover
• side -stream emergency surge basin (1.7 MGD)
• one extended -aeration activated sludge basin with mechanical surface aerators (low basin)
• one contact stabilization activated sludge basin with mechanical surface aerators (upper basin)
• two (2) secondary clarifiers (may be operated in parallel or in series)
• influent and effluent samplers
• gaseous chlorine / sulfur -dioxide feed system
• chlorine contact basin
• aerated sludge -holding basin
• influent and effluent ultrasonic flow meter, and
• a back-up power generator
located at the Town of Tabor City Wastewater Treatment Plant, 244 US Hwy 701 Bypass N, east of
Tabor City, Columbus County, and
2. Discharge from said treatment facility through Outfall 001 at a specified location (see attached map)
into an unnamed tributary of Grissett Swamp, a waterbody classified as C Swamp within the
Lumber River Basin.
Page 2 of 8

Permit NC0026000
PART I
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge through Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored) by the Perm�ttee ass ecified bel
PARAMETER
..
FLUEN
EF T, LMTS
ow.
MONITORING RE.QMEMENTS ,
Monthly
_ Avera e
Weekly"
Avera a
g
Daily
Maxamuin
Measurement
9. Y,
Fre uenc
Sam ' e
.. T�3'Re
'
S_ a le
� Location?:
Flow
1.1 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (Apr 1- Oct 31) 3
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (Nov. 1-Mar 31) 3
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 3
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
I, E
NH3 as N (April 1- October 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
E
NH3 as N (Nov. 1- March 31)
1.8 mg/L
5.4 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 4
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
1/Day 4
Grab
E
Temperature (°C)
1/Day
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) 5
17 µg/L
3/Week
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily average > 5.0 mg/L
3/Week
Grab
E
pH
> 6.0 and < 9.0 standard units
3/Week
Grab
E
Total Mercury 6
Annual average limit of 12 ng/L 6
1/Month
Grab
E
Total Mercury 7 (ng/L)
1/Month
Grab
I, MLSS 7
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
1/Month
Composite
E
Total Nitrogen (NO2-N + NO3-N +
TKN) (mg/L)
1/Month
Composite
E
Total Copper 8 (µg/L)
1/Quarter
Composite
E
Total Zinc 8 (µg/L)
1/Quarter
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity 9
1/Quarter
Composite
E
Effluent Pollutant Scan 10
Monitor and Report
Footnote 10
Footnote 10
E
Temperature (°C)
Variable 2
Grab
U, D
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
Variable 2
Grab
U, D
1. No later than 270 days from the effective date of this permit, begin submitting discharge monitoring reports electronically using
NC DWR's eDMR application system. See Special Condition A.(5.).
2. I: Influent. E: Effluent. U: approximately 100 feet Upstream of the outfall at U.S. Hwy 701 Bypass. D: approximately 75
yards downstream from the outfall. MLSS: Mixed Liquid Suspended Solids in an aeration basin. The Permittee shall conduct
receiving -stream monitoring 3/week during the months of June, July, August, and September and 1/Week during the rest of
the year.
3. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids_ concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective
influent values (i.e., 85% removal is required).
4. Fecal Coliform - the Permittee shall collect four (4) daily samples (Monday -Thursday). Should flow exceed 1.1 MGD on
Friday, the Permittee shall also sample on Friday - all fecal coliform to be sampled between 09:00 and 14:00 hrs.
5. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) - compliance is required for chlorine or chlorine derivative used for disinfection. The
Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 ug/1 to be in compliance with the permit. However, the
permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory (including field
certified), even if these values fall below 50ug/1.
6. Mercury - Permittee shall report mercury using EPA Test Method 1631E (see A. (4)).
7. Mercury - Permittee shall report mercury using approved EPA test methods (see A. (4)). Influent and MLSS sampling for
mercury shall coincide with effluent sampling for mercury.
8. Metals monitoring shall coincide with Chronic Toxicity testing.
9. Chronic Toxicity (Cerio.daphnia at 90 %); 1/Quarter (March, June, September, and December) [see A. (2.)].
10. See Condition A. (3.) of this permit.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Part I, Page 3 of 8

Permit N00026000
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS PAGE
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. (2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
[15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.]
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to
Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised December 2010, or subsequent versions or
"North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised- December 2010) or subsequent
versions. The tests will be performed during the months of March, June, September and December. These months
signify the first month of each three-month toxicity testing quarter assigned to the facility. Effluent sampling for this
testing must be obtained during representative effluent discharge and shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final
effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the permit
limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months
as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -December
2010) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Monitoring
Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results
and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWR Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1623 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than 30 days after the end
of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all
concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. Total
residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection
of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, the
permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility
name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the
comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required
during the following month. Assessment of toxicity compliance is based on the toxicity testing quarter, which is the three
month time interval that begins on the first day of the month in which toxicity testing is required by this permit and
continues until the final day of the third month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water
Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include
alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid
test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the
month of the initial monitoring.
Part I, Page 4 of 8

Permit NC0026000
A. (3.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
The Permittee shall perform a total of three (3) Effluent Pollutant Scans for all parameters listed below. One scan must be
performed in each of the following years: 2016, 2017 and 2018. The analytical methods shall be in accordance with 40
CFR Part 136 and shall be sufficiently sensitive to determine whether parameters are present in concentrations greater
than applicable standards and criteria. Samples should be collected with one quarterly toxicity test each year, and must
represent seasonal variation [i.e., do not sample in the same quarter every year]. Unless otherwise indicated, metals shall
be analyzed as "total` recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved oxygen
Nitrate/Nitrite
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Oil and grease
Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury (EPA Method 1631E)
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2- dichloroethane
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1, 1-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid -extractable compounds:
P-chloro-m-cresol
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Base -neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-ch,Ioronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Reporting. Test results shall be reported on DWQ Form -A MR-PPA1 (or in a form approved by the Director) by
December 31st of each designated sampling year. The report shall be submitted to the following address: NC
DEQ/DWR/Central Files, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.
Part I, Page 5 of 8

- Permit NC0026000
Additional Toxicity Testing Requirements for Municipal Permit Renewal. Please note that Municipal facilities that
are subject to the Effluent Pollutant Scan requirements listed above are also subject to additional toxicity testing
requirements specified in Federal Regulation 40 CFR 122.21(j)(5). The US EPA requires four (4) toxicity tests for a test
organism other than the test species currently required in this permit. The multiple species tests should be conducted
either quarterly for a 12-month period prior to submittal of the permit renewal application, or four tests performed at least
annually in the four and one half year period prior to the application. These tests shall be performed for acute or chronic
toxicity, whichever is specified in this permit. The multiple species toxicity test results shall be filed with the Aquatic
Toxicology Branch at the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch.
1623 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Contact the Division's Aquatic Toxicology Branch at 919-743-8401 for guidance on conducting the additional toxicity
tests and reporting requirements. Results should also be summarized in Part E (Toxicity Testing Data) of EPA Municipal
Application Form 2A; when submitting the permit renewal application to the NPDES Permitting Unit.
A. (4.) MERCURY MINIMIZATION PLAN (MMP)
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
The Permittee shall develop and implement a mercury minimization plan during this permit term. The MMP shall be
developed within 180 days of the NPDES Permit Effective Date, and shall be available for inspection on -site. A sample
MMP was developed through a stakeholder review process and has been placed on the Division website for guidance
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/npdes, under Model Mercury Minimization Plan). The MMP should place
emphasis on identification of mercury contributors and goals for reduction. Results of NM' implementation shall be
summarized and submitted with the next permit renewal. Performance of the Mercury Minimization Plan will meet the
requirements of the TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) for mercury approved by USEPA on October 12, 2012, unless
and until a Waste Load Allocation specific. to this facility is developed and this NPDES permit is amended to require
further actions to address the Waste Load Allocation.
In addition to mercury effluent monitoring, total mercury (as Hg, measured in ng/L) testing shall be performed at the
Wastewater Treatment Plant influent and on the Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) in an aeration chamber.
Testing shall be performed monthly and all samples (influent, effluent, and MLSS) taken at the same locations for
consistency. Sampling and lab testing procedures shall be consistent with permit requirements and EPA accepted test
methods for testing mercury in wastewater. Testing shall commence within the month that this permit becomes
effective. After three years from the effective date of this permit, if the Permittee has demonstrated consistent
compliance with the mercury limitation, the Permittee may request the Division to review and adjust mercury sampling
requirements. A summary of all mercury sampling results (influent, effluent, MLSS), along with a discussion on the
concentrations documented throughout the plant and the steps taken to reduce mercury in the effluent, shall be included
with the MN? implementation results and submitted with the next permit renewal.
A. (5.) ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
Proposed federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and specify that, if
a state does not establish a system to receive such submittals, then permittees must submit DMRs electronically to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Division anticipates that these regulations will be adopted and is
beginning implementation in late 2013.
NOTE: This special condition supplements or supersedes the following gections within Part II of this permit (Standard
Conditions for NPDES Permits):
Section B. (11.) Signatory Requirements
Section D. (2.) Reporting
Part I, Page 6 of 8

Permit NC0026000
Section D. (6.) Records Retention
Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
1. Reporting [Supersedes Section D. (2.) and Section E. (5.) (a)1
Beginning no later than 270 days from the effective date of this permit, the permittee shall begin reporting discharge
monitoring data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) internet
application.
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each month and submitted
electronically using eDMR. The eDMR system allows permitted facilities to enter monitoring data and submit DMRs
electronically using the internet. Until such time that the state's eDMR application is compliant with EPA's Cross -
Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR), permittees will be required to submit all discharge monitoring
data to the state electronically using eDMR and will be required to complete the eDMR submission by printing, signing,
and submitting one signed original and a copy of the computer printed eDMR to the following address:
NC DEQ / DWR / Information Processing Unit
ATTENTION: Central Files / eDMR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If a permittee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a demonstrated hardship or due to the facility being physically
located in an area where less than 10 percent of the households have broadband access, then a temporary waiver from the
NPDES electronic reporting requirements may be granted and discharge monitoring data may be submitted on paper
DMR forms OVER. 1, 1.1, 2, 3) or alternative forms approved by the Director. Duplicate signed copies shall be submitted
to the mailing address above.
Requests for temporary waivers from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements must be submitted in writing to the
Division for written approval at least sixty (60) days prior to the date the facility would be required under this permit to
begin using eDMR. Temporary waivers shall be valid for twelve (12) months and shall thereupon expire. At such time,
DMRs shall be submitted electronically to the Division unless the permittee re -applies for and is granted a new
temporary waiver by the Division.
Information on eDMR and application for a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements is
found on the following web page:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/bog/ipu/edmr
Regardless of the submission method, the first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the issuance of the
permit or in the case of a new facility, on the last day of the month following the commencement of discharge.
2. Signatory Requirements [Supplements Section B. (11.) (b) and supersedes Section B. (11.) (d)j
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in Part II, Section B. (11.)(a)
or by a duly authorized representative of that person as described in Part II, Section B. (11.)(b). A person, and not a
position, must be delegated signatory authority for eDMR reporting purposes.
For eDMR submissions, the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR user account and login
credentials to access the eDMR system. For more information on North Carolina's eDMR system, registering for eDMR
• and obtaining an eDMR user account, please visit the following web page:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/admin/bog/ipu/edmr
Certification. Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall make the following
certification [40 CFR 122.22]. NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL BE ACCEPTED:
"I cert, 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
Part I, Page 7 of 8

Permit NC0026000
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."
3. Records Retention [Supplements Section D. (6.)1
The permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports, including eDMR submissions. These records or
copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the report. This period may be extended by
request of the Director at any time [40 CFR 122.41].
A. (6.) FACILITY ASSESSMENT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
(a.) By July 1, 2016 (7 months after the effective date of this permit), the Permittee shall submit to the Division
of Water Resources a Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan as described below. The Permittee
shall:
• evaluate the physical and operational condition and performance of the entire treatment facility. The
assessment shall identify deficiencies and operational difficulties in the treatment facility which affect
performance or permit compliance, and identify potential improvements to correct those shortcomings.
Included in the Facility Assessment, the Permittee shall:
o evaluate the adequacy of the entire headworks at average and peak flows.
o evaluate the cause of the hydraulic issue at the upper secondary clarifier (#1).
• develop a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) which includes a strategy for the repair, modification, and/or
replacement of deficiencies in the treatment facility in order that equipment functions as designed and in
order to consistently comply with the effluent limitations of this permit. The CAP shall
o identify corrective actions needed in the headworks structures and establish an effective and reliable
diversion plan to the side -stream surge basin.
o identify actions needed to rehabilitate the upper secondary clarifier (#1) and its connective piping to
function as designed
o identify operational changes or strategies needed to improve facility performance; and
o provide specific dates for completion or implementation of each action.
• submit two (2) copies of Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan to each of the following
addresses:
DWR Wilmington Regional office:
Water Quality Program Supervisor
DWR / Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
DWR Central office:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section/ Compliance and Expedited Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(b.) The Town shall address any comments received from DWR on the Facility Assessment or the CAP within
60 days of receipt. Upon approval of the Facility Assessment and/or the CAP (or any portion of the plans) by
the Division, the report and actions shall become an enforceable part of this Permit.
Part I, Page 8 of 8

Upstream
Monitoring Point
at US HWY-701
9
Town of Tabor City WWTP
Receiving Stream: UT of Grissett Swamp Drainage Basin: Lumber River
Latitude: 34° 08' 56" N Longitude: 78° 51' 26" W
Sub -Basin: 03-07-57 Permitted Flow: 1.1 MGD
8-digit HUC: 03040206 Stream Class: C-Swamp
Tabor City's WWTP
( (Approximate Location)
Outfall 001
(flows east)
North
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Columbus County

DEQ / DWR / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Tabor City/ Town of Tabor City WWTP
Applicant Address:
P. O. Box 655 Tabor City, North Carolina 28463
Facility Address:
244 US HWY 701 BYPASS N. Tabor City, NC 28463
Permitted Flow:
1.1 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic
Facility Grade / Permit Status:
Grade III, Major / Renewal
Drainage Basin:
Lumber River Basin
County:
Columbus County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
An unnamed tributary of
Grissett Swamp
Regional Office:
Wilmington
Stream Classification:
C; Swamp
8-digit HUC:
03040206
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Yang Song
Subbasin/ Stream ludo:
03-07-57/ 15-17-1-(5)
Date:
July 1, 2015
Added Addendum:
September 17, 2015
Drainage Area (sq. mi.)
1.0
Lat. 34° 08' 56" Long. 78° I ' 26"
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
0.0
Winter 7Q10 (cfs)
0.0
30Q2 (cfs)
0.0
Average Flow (cfs)
1.0
IWC (%)
100 % @ 1.1 MGD
BACKGROUND
Tabor City Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) serves a population of about 4,429 people. It does not
have a Pretreatment Program and no Significant or Categorical Industrial Facilities were identified in the
renewal application. The Permittee's 5-year NPDES permit expired August 31, 2014 and has been
administratively continued. The application for permit renewal (Form 2A) was received on March 3,
2014.
The Tabor City WWTP is a 1.1 MGD publicly owned treatment works (POTW) utilizing a Grade III
activated sludge wastewater treatment facility to treat domestic wastewater with some wastewaters from
small commercial industry. The WWTP utilizes: a triplex influent pumping station, Parshall flume,
mechanical bar screen, manual bar screen, grit remover, "aerated" sludge holding basin, side -stream
emergency surge basin, one extended -aeration activated sludge basin with mechanical surface aerators
(low basin), one contact stabilization activated sludge basin with mechanical surface aerators (upper
basin), two secondary clarifiers (may be operated in parallel or in series), influent and effluent samplers,
gaseous chlorine / sulfur -dioxide feed system, chlorine contact basin, influent and effluent ultrasonic flow
meter, and a back-up power generator. The Land Application Permit WQ0001936 for the Town of Tabor
City is still valid; however, currently the City uses McGill Environmental Systems to handle dewatered
biosolids from the WWTP for processing at the McGill Sampson Composting Facility under permit
WQ00006816.
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 1

Waste Load Allocation (WLA)
The Division prepared the last WLA model for the receiving stream in June 1994. The permit effluent
limits for BOD5 (5 mg/L in the summer period and 10 mg/L in the winter period) at 1.1 MGD were based
on this WLA.
Current Effluent Characteristics
The Tabor City WWTP's average flow was 0.51 MGD during the calendar year of 2014, which represents
46% of the permitted flow. Monthly average flows ranged from 0.37 to 0.66 MGD.
Table 1. Lists average and maximum effluent data collected from 1/2012 through 12/2014.
Parameter
Flow
BOD5
Total Suspended
Solids
Ammonia
Nitrogen
Total
Nitrogen
Total
Phosphorus
(MGD)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
Average
0.46
2.01 S/2.14 W
4.54
0.19 S/ 0.23 W
20.7
1.7
maximum
3.54
8.3 S/12.5 W
71
5 S/ 4.2 W
34.4
3.63
Limit(MA)
1.1
5S/10W
30
2S/4W
Table 1. (continued
Parameter
Total
Copper
Total Zinc
Total
Mercury
Total Residual
Chlorine
Fecal Coliform
DO
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
(ng/L)
(µg/L)
(#/100m1)
(mg/L)
Average
6.5
31.8
19.1
24.9
143.9
8.09
maximum
13
81
2320
49
16000
4.8 (min.)
Limit
12 (WA)
17 (DM)
200/100 ml (MA)
Note: MA - Monthly Average; WA - Weekly Average; DM - Daily Maximum
EVALUATION OF COMPLIANCE DATA
DMR Review
Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) have been reviewed for the period of January 2010 through
December 2014. The facility had multiple permit limit violations for mercury, total residual chlorine,
fecal coliform, and ammonia -nitrogen. See Table 2 for details.
Table 2. Tabor City WWTP Limit Violations 2010 — Ma v 2015
Permit Parameter
Violation Times
Violation Dates
Mercury, Weekly Average
13
2010:
2012:
2014:
2015:
02/06,
12/08
01/18,
05/09,
02/20,
05/24,
05/16
02/27,
10/11,
03/06
10/18,
10/25,
12/20
Total Residual Chlorine,
Daily Maximum
4
2010:
09/29,
10/04,
12/20,
12/21
Fecal Coliform, Weekly
Average (Geometric Mean)
2
2013:
07/27,
08/03
Nitrogen, Ammonia Total,
Monthly Average
1
2010:
12/31
Mercury
On October 15, 2009, EPA issued an Administrative Order to the Town of Tabor City requiring them to
develop a Mercury Minimization Plan and to come into compliance with effluent limits by July 31, 2010.
In the following years, compliance with the mercury limitation improved with no violations in 2011, one
in 2012, and none in 2013. The Division approved the removal of the UV equipment in June 2013, but it
was noted during inspections on 7/17/14 and 8/7/14 that the equipment was still in place. This is
significant since Tabor City WWTP attributed all three of the mercury limit violations that occurred in
Oct. 2014 to bulb breakage in the UV system. No explanations were offered by the Town for the other
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 2

three exceedances noted in 2014. The mercury concentrations reported for these three weekly average
violations are as follows: 1/18/14, 14.8 ng/L; 5/24/14, 14.7 ng/L; 12/20/14, 2320 ng/L. These
exceedances are very high and the violations continued after the UV system was removed in Nov. 2014
and replaced with chlorine disinfection. In 2015, two mercury weekly average violations were reported as
follows: 5/9/15, 38.1 ng/L; 5/16/15, 14.3 ng/L.
Total Residual Chlorine
It should also be noted that Tabor City WWTP was on EPA's watch list for total residual chlorine
violations in 2010. However, the Permittee has been in compliance with its total residual chlorine limit
since Jan. 2011.
Fecal Coliform and ammonia -nitrogen
The exceedance of the fecal coliform weekly average limit in July 2013 was reported as due to solids
buildup in the contact chamber. The violation of the ammonia -nitrogen monthly average in Dec. 2010
was stated as being caused by unusually cold temperatures.
Inspections
The WiRO conducted three (3) routine compliance inspections with two (2) additional follow-up
compliance inspections since the existing permit was issued on March 1, 2010. These inspections found
the facility to be marginal or unreliable. The inspections performed in July and Aug. of 2014 listed
numerous operation and maintenance issues. See Table 3 for details.
Table 3. Issues from WiRO Staff Resort
Operation
a.
Diversion to the side -stream surge basin of high flows
b.
Operational issues in clarifier 1 (upper train)
c.
Aeration for aerated sludge holding basin is not adequate
d.
Sampling protocol is questionable
Maintenance
a.
Solids build-up in chlorine contact chamber
b.
Sludge hauling records
c.
No annual performance reports
d.
No collection system evaluation reports and inadequate quarterly reports
Existing permit special conditions
Special condition A.(4.) required the submittal of a Headworks/Pump Station Evaluation, within 90 days
of the 2010 permit's effective date. It appears no submittal was received from the Town on this matter.
Special condition A.(5.) required the Permittee to bring the Tertiary Sand Filters online within 90 days of
the 2010 permit's effective date. The filtration system has been inactive since 2013.
Special condition A. (6.) required the submittal of a Sewer Collection System Evaluation and
Remediation Plan along with Quarterly Progress reports. The Town of Tabor City claims an Evaluation
was submitted but the Regional Office has no record of receiving such an Evaluation. In addition, the
Regional staffs have stated that the Quarterly Progress reports are insufficient. Upon further
investigation, the initial phase of a Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Study was performed by Hobbs, Upchurch
& Associates (titled: Inflow and Infiltration Analysis, 1/4/13) for the Town of Tabor City; however, the
evaluation did not include gathering data to determine high priority areas and it did not establish a
rehabilitation plan to remedy the surge problems. A Complex Enforcement case has been developed by
the Central and Regional Office Staff to address violations and hopefully initiate actions needed to
remedy issues outlined above.
Note, that in May 2012, due to a heavy rain, 3,600 gallons of untreated sewerage escaped from a manhole
near the end of Burns Street in Tabor City during a six -hour period.
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 3

Toxicity Testing
Since January 2010 the facility has passed 23 of 25 chronic toxicity tests and 3 of 4 fathead minnow
second species tests.
EVALUATION OF INSTREAM DATA
Instream monitoring data from January 2012 through December 2014 was reviewed. The facility samples
temperature and dissolved oxygen upstream and downstream of its discharge. Upstream and downstream
samples showed no temperature increase that exceeded the 2.8 °C water quality standard. The discharge
did not appear to have any impact on temperature. Due to swampy conditions, there were 153 upstream
samples and 64 downstream samples showing DO concentrations below the minimum instantaneous
value of 4 mg/l. Among the 64 downstream low DO values, 58 occasions coincide with low DO values
upstream. Additionally, the WWTP had no permit limitation violations for DO and BOD5 during the
period of 2011 through 2014. It appears that the WWTP discharge had minimal impact on downstream
DO. See attachment titled Tabor City WWTP Upstream and Downstream Monitoring Summary.
REASONABLE POTENTIAL (RP) ANALYSIS AND EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCANS
The Division conducted EPA -recommended analyses to determine the reasonable potential for toxicants
to be discharged by this facility, based on DMR data from January 2012 through December 2014.
Reasonable potential analyses were conducted for copper and zinc. See attached RPA results and data.
• Copper and Zinc — the maximum predicted values for total copper and total zinc demonstrated a
reasonable potential to exceed both the chronic and acute allowable concentrations. Both
parameters have action level standards and are reviewed in . conjunction with toxicity testing
results. The facility has passed 23 of 25 toxicity tests since January 2010; therefore, no limits for
copper and zinc were added but monitoring was maintained in the permit with the monitoring
frequency reduced to quarterly.
Effluent pollutant scans were performed in the 3' quarter of 2011, the 4' quarter of 2012, and the 4th
quarter of 2013. Data from these three annual effluent pollutant scans was evaluated and chloroform,
dichlorobromomethane, and total phenolic compounds were detected in addition to copper and zinc. None
of the metals detected were greater than the concentrations analyzed in the RPA discussed above.
Chloroform and dichlorobromomethane were detected at levels less than the HH standard. Total phenolic
compounds were detected at a level less than the NC Aesthetic WQS.
AMMONIA -NITROGEN
In accordance with an agreement with EPA Region IV, wasteload allocations for ammonia -nitrogen are
based on a summer criterion of 1 mg/L and a winter criterion of 1.8 mg/L. Since the WWTP is provided
no dilution from the receiving stream, the monthly average effluent limits determined for the Tabor City
WWTP are 1 mg/L in the summer and 1.8 mg/L in the winter. Using a 3:1 ratio the weekly average limits
for NH3-N will be 3 mg/L in the summer and 5.4 mg/L in the winter. These revised ammonia -nitrogen
limitations were inserted into the permit renewal. A review of effluent data during the period of 2010
through 2014 shows the WWTP is able to meet these limitations.
MERCURY TMDL EVALUATION
In accordance with the 2012 Mercury TMDL NPDES Guidance, mercury data from January 2010 through
May 2015 was evaluated. In 2014, the annual average mercury concentration was above both the Water
Quality Based Effluent Limitation (WQBEL) of 12 ng/L and the Technology Based Effluent Limitation
(TBEL) of 47 ng/L. See Table 4. Between 2010 and May 2015 the WQBEL of 12 ng/L was exceeded 13
times and the TBEL was exceeded 2 times. The mercury limit of 12 ng/L will be maintained in the permit
renewal at a sampling frequency of monthly.
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 4

This facility has shown significantly high concentrations of mercury in its effluent with 97% of the 281
samples taken between 2010 and May 2015 greater than 1 ng/L. As a result, a Mercury Minimization Plan
(MMP) requirement has been added to this permit renewal. See section A.(4.). Please note that the MMP
shall be developed within 180 days of the NPDES Permit Effective Date, and shall be available for
inspection on -site. A sample MMP was developed through a stakeholder review process and has been
placed on the Division website for guidance (http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/npdes, under Model
Mercury Minimization Plan.
The Division suspects the operation and maintenance problems at the WWTP result in poor solids
removal and solids buildup in the chlorine contact tank. It is likely that the mercury violations are due to
poor plant operations and maintenance. Therefore, as required by EPA in the Administrative Orders (AO)
issued to the Town of Tabor City in 2009, total mercury (as Hg, measured in ng/L) testing shall be
performed for the following wastewater categories: influent, effluent, and Mixed Liquor Suspended
Solids (MLSS) in an aeration chamber. This requirement is listed in Section A. (1.) of the draft permit and
in the MMP special condition A.(4.). The Town of Tabor City should take mitigative measures to prevent
the discharge of mercury and track the mercury concentrations contained in the plant.
Table 4. Tabor City WWTP Mercury Effluent Concentrations 2010-2015
Town of Tabor City WWTP/ NC0026000
Mercury Data Statistics (Method 1631E)
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
# of Samples
53
52
52
53
54
21
Annual Average, ng/L
5.8
2.9
2.7
2.1
51.6
4.9
Maximum Value, ng/L
19.1
9.01
25.1
7.17
2320
38.1
TBEL, ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
12.0
BASIS FOR PERMIT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITS
RATIONALE FOR LIMITATION
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Flow
1.1 MGI)
15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.
BOD, 5 day, 20°C
(Apr 1 - Oct 31)
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
WLA Model in 1994
BOD, 5 day, 20°C
(Nov. 1 - Mar 31)
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
WLA Model in 1994
"Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0406 for
Municipal Wastewaters
NH3 as N
(April 1 -October 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
WLA Calculation
NH3 as N
(Nov. 1-March 31)
1.8 mg/L
5.4 mg/L
WLA Calculation
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211
Temperature (°C)
Monitor and report - effluent
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
17 ug/L
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211
Dissolved Oxygen
Dai y average > 5.0 mg/L
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211
Fact Sheet - Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 5

pH
> 6.0 and < 9.0 standard units
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211
Total Mercury
Annual average limit of 12 ng/L
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211 and 2012
Statewide Mercury TMDL
Total Phosphorus (mg/L)
Monitor and report — effluent
15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq.
Total Nitrogen (NO2-N + NO3-
N + TKN) (mg/L)
Monitor and report — effluent
15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq.
Total Copper (ng/L)
Monitor and report — effluent
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211, RPA
Total Zinc (µg/L)
Monitor and report— effluent
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 02B .0211, RPA
Chronic Toxicity Testing at 90%
Monitor and report — effluent
15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.
Effluent Pollutant Scan
Monitor and report— effluent
G.S. 143-215.1(b)
Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen
Upstream and downstream monitoring
15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
The following permit changes are proposed for this permit renewal:
1. Addition of electronic DMR requirement.
2. Removal of special conditions of A. (3.), A. (4.), A. (5.) and A. (6.) in permit.
3. Reduced monitoring frequency requirements for copper, and zinc to quarterly.
4. Reduced monitoring frequency requirement for effluent mercury to monthly.
5. Addition of monthly monitoring requirements for influent and MLSS mercury.
6. Modification of ammonia -nitrogen effluent limits on monthly average and weekly average.
7. Addition of Mercury Minimization Plan special condition.
8. Addition of Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan special condition.
9. Addition of revised Effluent Pollutant scan specifying three years of sampling and 2nd species
testing requirements.
10. Addition of revised Chronic Toxicity testing language.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: July 22, 2015 (estimate)
Permit Scheduled to Issue: September 7, 2015 (estimate)
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Yang Song at [phone] or by email at [e-mail].
NAME:
DATE: / O / 6 /
COMMENTS
No official comments were received from EPA Region IV or the FRO — Water Quality Program.
ADDENDUM TO FACT SHEET (SEPTEMBER 16, 2015)
A meeting between Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A. (Michael McAllister etc.) and NC
DEQ/DWR Wastewater Branch (Julie Grzyb etc.) was held on August 6, 2015. Mr. Michael McAllister
stated that Municipal Engineering was working with Tabor City to solve their operation and maintenance
issues. It was told that Tabor City is planning to have a full hydraulic analysis on their facility, which
could contribute to the special condition of Facility Assessment and Corrective Action Plan. Meanwhile,
Municipal Engineering is preparing funding applications for Town of Tabor City.
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 6

In the meeting, Municipal Engineering expressed concerns about the requirements and actual workload of
MMP. The Division staffs explained the requirements and necessity of MMP for Tabor City WWTP. A
summary of influent mercury sampling results from October 2014 to January 2015 was provided by the
Division. This report showed several high mercury concentration samples from dentist office manhole as
well as Atlantic Printing manhole. In addition, the Division showed the willingness to further discuss
MMP implementation. However, no formal comments were received from Tabor City or Municipal
Engineering before the public notice due date.
Fact Sheet — Tabor City 2015 Renewal
NPDES Permit NC0026000
Page 7

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
NORTH CAROLINA
Cumberland County
Public Notice
North Carolina Enrimm11rcntai
h lallaeelnelll Commission(
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Sen•fix Center
Raleigh. NC 27699.1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Pennit
The North Carolina Environmental Man-
aeernlent Collmmisiorl prOpOSC21 11 issue a
NPDES wastewater duclu r_re permit to
the personas) listed Mow. Written c-um-
IllcncS regarding do Imposed pwlluit will
he accepted until :(1 days after the Publish
date of this notice. The Dinetor of the NC
Division of Water Rew,ur cs (DWR) may
hold a public bearing should there be a
significant degree of public interest. Please
road comments and/or information re-
yucsts to DWR at the abmnc lo nr-
c tcd Persons mar visit the DWR at 512 N.
Salisbury Street. tiLaki b. NC to review in-
formation on file. Additional information
on NPDES permits and this notice may he
found to ter wehnite:
btlp:llpporta I.ncdenr.org/wcb/wq/sw pips/it
pdcdcakndar, or by calling (919) 6117-
6 04.
The Aran of Tabor City requested rnrcw al
of permit NC002f)00 for Tabir City WN-FP
in Columba, County: this permitted t5s-
charge is mratld dorrrestic wastewater to
:in UT of Grissett Swamp in tic Lluulcr
River Basin.
7/20 4546672
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and state, duly
commissioned and authorized to administer oaths, affirmations, etc.,
personally appeared. CINDY O. MCNAIR
Who, being duly sworn or affirmed, according to law, doth depose and say
that he/she is LEGAL SECRETARY
of THE FAYETTEVILLE PUBLISHING COMPANY, a corporation organized
and doing business under the Laws of the State of North Carolina, and
publishing a newspaper known as the FAYETTEVILLE OBSERVER, in the
City of Fayetteville, County and State aforesaid, and that as such he/she
makes this affidavit; that he/she is familiar with the books, files and
business of said Corporation and by reference to the files of said publication
the attached advertisement of CL Legal Line
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE A NPDES-TOWN OF TABOR CITY
of NC DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
was inserted in the aforesaid newspaper in space, and on dates as follows:
7/20/2015
and at the time of such publication The Fayetteville Observer was a
newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications prescribed by
Sec. No. 1-597 G.S. of N.C.
The above is correctly copied from the books and files of the aforesaid
corporation and publication.
LEGAL SECRETARY
Title
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Sworn or affirmed to, and subscribed before me, this 21 day
of July, A.D., 2015.
In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my
official seal, the day and year aforesaid.
Ac44-LOciLfb,54.
Pamela H. Walters, Notary Public
My commission expires 5th day of December, 2015.
MAIL TO: NC DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-00001617
0004546672

IWC Calculations
Facility: Town of Tabor City
NC0026000
Prepared By: Yang Song
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
1.1
0
0
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. (ugll)
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
0
1.1
1.705
17.0
0
100.00
17
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. (mgll)
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.00 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (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); capped at 35 mg/I
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis); capped at 35 mg/I
4. BAT for Minor Domestics: 2 mg/I (summer) and 4 mg/I (winter)
5. BAT for Major Municipals: 1 mg/I (year-round)
0
1.1
1.705
1.0
0.22
100.00
1.0
0
1.1
1.705
1.8
0.22
100.00
1.8
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)
NPDES Server/Current Versions/WLA; TB 1/16/2009

Town of Tabor City WWTP
NC0026000
Qw (MGD) = 1.10
IQ10S(cfs)= 0.00
7Q I OS (cfs) = 0.00
7QIOW (cfs)= 0.00
30Q2 (cfs) = 0.00
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 1.00
Receiving Stream: UT of Grissett Swamp
2014 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
WWTP/WTP Class: Class III
IWC @ IQIOS = 100.00%
IWC @ 7Q IOS = 100.00%
IWC @ 7QIOW = 100.00%
IWC @ 30Q2 = 100.00%
IWC @ QA = 63.03%
Stream Class: C
Outfall 001
Qw = 1.1 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS & CRITERIA (2)
PQL
UNITS
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS / Applied %z FAV /
Chronic Standard Acute
ri # Det.
Max Pred
Cw
39.0
Default C.V.
Allowable Cw
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
300 A
ug/L
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
Acute: NO WQS
_ _____ _ _____-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_____-__
Chronic: 300.0
No value > Allowable ('w
Copper(AL)
NC
7 FW 7.3
ug/L
40 38
14.0
Acute: 7.3
_ _-___ _____
Chronic: 7.0
12 value(s) > Allowable ('w
_ _ _ _____ ___ _ _ ______
RP for AL(Cu,Zn,Ag,Fe,CI) - apply Quarterly
Monitoring in conjunction with TOX Test
Zinc(AL)
NC
50 FW 67
ug/l,
40 40
86.7
Acute: 67.0
_ _ _-_ _ ___
Chronic: 50.0
3 value(s) > Allowable ('w
_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __________
RP for AL(Cu,Zn,Ag,Fe,CI) - apply Quarterly
Monitoring In conjunction with TOX Test
Chloroform
C
170 Illl
µg/1.
3 3
n_-
Note: < 9
i.;,,,,,ttl data act
24.1
I )elault ('. V.
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _-___ _ _
Chronic: 269.71
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP,Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Dichlorobromomethane
C
17 HH
µg/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
12.69000
Default C.V.
Acute: NO WQS
- _ _ _-___ _ ___
Chronic: 26.97067
No value > Allowable ('w
_ _ _ _ ___ _______ ____
No RP,Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 1 of 1
NC0026000-RPA, rpa
7/13/2015

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
7
Total Phenolic Compounds
Date Data BDL=I/2DL Results
1 9/22/2011 12 12 Std Dev.
2 1/13/2013 < 10 5 Mean
3 12/10/2013 13 13 C.V. (default)
4 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
9
Copper (AL)
4.3589
10.0000
0.6000
3
3.00
13.0 ug/L
39.0 uglL
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/3/2012 10 10 Std Dev.
2 1/17/2012 9 9 Mean
3 2/6/2012 7 7 C.V.
4 2/20/2012 8 8 n
5 3/5/2012 12 12
6 3/19/2012 8 8 Mult Factor =
7 4/2/2012 9 9 Max. Value
8 5/7/2012 9 9 Max. Pred Cw
9 5/21/2012 9 9
10 6/7/2012 0 ERR
11 7/9/2012 < 10 5
12 8/8/2012 0 ERR
13 9/12/2012 < 10 5
14 10/3/2012 13 13
15 11/7/2012 13 13
16 12/5/2012 6 6
17 1/9/2013 5 5
18 2/6/2013 3 3
19 3/4/2013 8 8
20 4/3/2013 3 3
21 5/8/2013 5 5
22 6/5/2013 4 4
23 7/10/2013 3 3
24 8/7/2013 5 5
25 9/4/2013 5 5
26 10/9/2013 7 7
27 11/6/2013 9 9
28 12/4/2013 3 3
29 1/8/2014 7 7
30 2/5/2014 6 6
31 3/5/2014 4 4
32 4/9/2014 4 4
33 5/7/2014 5 5
34 6/4/2014 5 5
35 7/9/2014 7 7
36 8/6/2014 6 6
37 9/8/2014 4 4
38 10/6/2014 4 4
39 11/10/2014 7 7
40 12/8/2014 6 6
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
2.6786
6.5263
0.4104
38
1.08
13.0 ug/L
14.0 ug/L
- 2 -
NC0026000-RPA, data
7/13/2015

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
18
Zinc (AL)
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/3/2012 31 31 Std Dev.
2 1/17/2012 32 32 Mean
3 2/6/2012 27 27 C.V.
4 2/20/2012 29 29 n
5 3/5/2012 31 31
6 3/19/2012 22 22 Mult Factor =
7 4/2/2012 25 25 Max. Value
8 5/7/2012 23 23 Max. Pred Cw
9 5/21/2012 20 20
10 6/7/2012 21 21
11 7/9/2012 33 33
12 8/8/2012 21 21
13 9/12/2012 24 24
14 10/3/2012 31 31
15 11/7/2012 50 50
16 12/5/2012 39 39
17 1/9/2013 21 21
18 2/6/2013 31 31
19 3/4/2013 34 34
20 4/3/2013 22 22
21 5/8/2013 30 30
22 6/5/2013 34 34
23 7/10/2013 0 ERR
24 8/7/2013 40 40
25 9/4/2013 42 42
26 10/9/2013 44 44
27 11/6/2013 54 54
28 12/4/2013 37 37
29 1/8/2014 29 29
30 2/5/2014 35 35
31 3/5/2014 23 23
32 4/9/2014 30 30
33 5/7/2014 27 27
34 6/4/2014 81 81
35 7/9/2014 52 52
36 8/6/2014 28 28
37 9/8/2014 22 22
38 10/6/2014 24 24
39 11/10/2014 38 38
40 12/8/2014 34 34
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
19
Chloroform
11.7847
32.5897
0.3616
39
1.07
81.0 ug/L
86.7 ug/L
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
1 9/12/2011 6.84 6.84 Std Dev.
2 12/6/2012 8.03 8.03 Mean
3 12/10/2013 8.03 8.03 C.V. (default)
4 n
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
Use"PASTE SPECIAL.
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
0.6870
7.6333
0.6000
3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 8.030000 pg/L
Max. Pred Cw 24.090000 pg/L
NC0026000-RPA, data
- 3 - 7/13/2015

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
20
Dichlorobromomethane
1
2
3
4
5
6
Date Data
9/12/2011 2.2
12/6/2012 4.23
12/10/2013 4.23
Use"PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY"
Maximum data points = 58
BDL=112DL Results
2.2 Std Dev. 1.1720
4.23 Mean 3.5533
4.23 C.V. (default) 0.6000
n 3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 4.230000 pg/L
Max. Pred Cw 12.690000 pg/L
4
NC0026000-RPA, data
7/13/2015

7/13/15 WQS = 12 ng/L
Facility Name Town of Tabor City WWTP/ NC0026000
/Permit No. :
Total Mercury 1631E PQL = 0.5 ng/L
Date Modifier Data Entry Value
9.87
7.35
9.32
5.82
15.4
9.92
16.2
19.1
13.2
4.68
2.82
3.64
3.25
3.42
2.13
1.18
1.29
1.94
1.83
2.43
3.89
1.63
2.99
1.31
2.35
2.33
4.45
1/7/2010 9.87
1/11/2010 7.35
1/19/2010 9.32
1/26/2010 5.82
2/2/2010 15.4
2/10/2010 9.92
2/19/2010 16.2
2/22/2010 19.1
3/3/2010 13.2
3/8/2010 4.68
3/15/2010 2.82
3/22/2010 3.64
3/30/2010 3.25
4/5/2010 3.42
4/13/2010 2.13
4/19/2010 1.18
4/27/2010 1.29
5/3/2010 1.94
5/10/2010 1.83
5/17/2010 2.43
5/24/2010 3.89
6/2/2010 1.63
6/7/2010 2.99
6/14/2010 1.31
6/21/2010 2,35
6/28/2010 2.33
7/6/2010 4.45
MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION V:2013-6
FALSE
No MMP Required
7Q10s = 0.000 cfs
Permitted Flow = 1.100
WQBEL = 12.00
TBEL= 47
ng/L
ng/L

7/12/2010 5.44
7/19/2010 7.46
7/26/2010 2.9
8/2/2010 3.09
8/9/2010 3.41
8/16/2010 4.25
8/23/2010 6.02
8/30/2010 8.07
9/7/2010 5.53
9/13/2010 3.73
9/20/2010 4.1
9/28/2010 6.63
9/30/2010 8.07
10/5/2010 10.9
10/11/2010 6.27
10/18/2010 8.27
10/25/2010 9.37
11/1/2010 5.41
11/8/2010 7.73
11/15/2010 7.72
11/22/2010 6.62
11/30/2010 5.38
12/6/2010 8.82
12/13/2010 1.41
12/20/2010 2.72
12/28/2010 4.78
1/3/2011 1.53
1/11/2011 4.83
1/18/2011 3.17
1/24/2011 3.82
2/1/2011 1.91
2/8/2011 2.54
2/15/2011 2.59
2/21/2011 2.16
5.44
7.46
2.9
3.09
3.41
4.25
6.02
8.07
5.53
3.73
4.1
6.63
8.07
10.9
6.27
8.27
9.37
5.41
7.73
7.72
6.62
5.38
8.82
1.41
2.72
4.78
1.53
4.83
3.17
3.82
1.91
2.54
2.59
2.16
5.8 ng/L - Annual Average for 2010

2/28/2011
3/7/2011
3/14/2011
3/21/2011
3/28/2011
4/4/2011
4/11/2011
4/18/2011
4/25/2011
5/2/2011
5/9/2011
5/16/2011
5/23/2011
5/31/2011
6/6/2011
6/13/2011
6/20/2011
6/27/2011
7/5/2011
7/11/2011
7/18/2011
7/25/2011
8/1/2011
8/8/2011
8/15/2011
8/22/2011
8/29/2011
9/6/2011
9/13/2011
9/19/2011
9/26/2011
10/4/2011
10/10/2011
10/17/2011
4.27
4.82
5.52
9.01
7.11
3.55
5.48
6.89
3.22
2.5
1
3.74
3.35
2.97
2.92
4.1
2.11
2.31
3.65
2.31
2.29
1.84
2.92
2.24
2.81
6.12
5.3
1.48
1.15
1.35
2.13
2.01
1
1
4.27
4.82
5.52
9.01
7.11
3.55
5.48
6.89
3.22
2.5
1
3.74
3.35
2.97
2.92
4.1
2.11
2.31
3.65
2.31
2.29
1.84
2.92
2.24
2.81
6.12
5.3
1.48
1.15
1.35
2.13
2.01
0.5
0.5

10/24/2011
11/1/2011
11/7/2011
11/15/2011
11/21/2011
11/28/2011
12/8/2011
12/12/2011
12/21/2011
12/27/2011
1/5/2012
1/12/2012
1/17/2012
1/23/2012
1/30/2012
2/6/2012
2/13/2012
2/20/2012
2/28/2012
3/7/2012
3/12/2012
3/20/2012
3/29/2012
4/5/2012
4/13/2012
4/17/2012
4/26/2012
5/3/2012
5/9/2012
5/17/2012
5/24/2012
6/1/2012
6/6/2012
6/11/2012
1.08
1.21
2.36
2.38
1
4.32
1
1.66
1.03
1
2.33
2.58
1.36
1.14
1
1
1.7
1.13
1.06
2.17
2.29
2.2
2.52
1.63
3.8
5.92
2.05
1.45
2.22
2.14
2.03
3.76
2.42
3.07
1.08
1.21
2.36
2.38
0.5
4.32
1
1.66
1.03
0.5
2.33
2.58
1.36
1.14
1
1
1.7
1.13
1.06
2.17
2.29
2.2
2.52
1.63
3.8
5.92
2.05
1.45
2.22
2.14
2.03
3.76
2.42
3.07
2.9 ng/L - Annual Average for 2011

6/21/2012
6/28/2012
7/5/2012
7/10/2012
7/18/2012
7/23/2012
7/31/2012
8/6/2012
8/13/2012
8/23/2012
8/27/2012
9/6/2012
9/13/2012
9/20/2012
9/25/2012
10/2/2012
10/8/2012
10/18/2012
10/23/2012
10/29/2012
11/8/2012
11/15/2012
11/21/2012
11/27/2012
12/5/2012
12/11/2012
12/17/2012
12/26/2012
1/3/2013
1/7/2013
1/14/2013
1/22/2013
1/28/2013
2/4/2013
1.48
1.88
1
2.79
1.44
1.26
1.86
1.2
1.8
1.9
1.1
6.65
1.25
1.85
1.87
1.48
1.21
3.86
2.64
2.61
4.22
3.98
3.69
3.67
25.1
1.06
1.44
1.7
2.91
2.75
3.7
2.34
1
1
1.48
1.88
0.5
2.79
1.44
1.26
1.86
1.2
1.8
1.9
1.1
6.65
1.25
1.85
1.87
1.48
1.21
3.86
2.64
2.61
4.22
3.98
3.69
3.67
25.1
1.06
1.44
1.7
2.91
2.75
3.7
2.34
1
0.5
2.7 ng/L - Annual Average for 2012

2/11/2013
2/18/2013
2/25/2013
3/5/2013
3/11/2013
3/18/2013
3/25/2013
4/1/2013
4/8/2013
4/16/2013
4/22/2013
4/29/2013
5/6/2013
5/13/2013
5/20/2013
5/28/2013
6/3/2013
6/10/2013
6/17/2013
6/24/2013
7/1/2013
7/8/2013
7/15/2013
7/23/2013
7/29/2013
8/5/2013
8/12/2013
8/19/2013
8/26/2013
9/3/2013
9/9/2013
9/17/2013
9/24/2013
9/30/2013
1.43
1.34
3.27
2.01
2.35
1.32
2.54
1.76
1.3
1.31
2.1
2.34
2.23
2.28
1.35
1.19
1.65
3.18
1.44
1.66
1.38
1.33
7.17
1.29
1
1
1.7
1.55
2.66
1.46
1.5
7.08
1.92
1.84
1.43
1.34
3.27
2.01
2.35
1.32
2.54
1.76
1.3
1.31
2.1
2.34
2.23
2.28
1.35
1.19
1.65
3.18
1.44
1.66
1.38
1.33
7.17
1.29
0.5
1
1.7
1.55
2.66
1.46
1.5
7.08
1.92
1.84

10/7/2013 1.04
10/14/2013 1.9
10/21/2013 1.02
10/28/2013 1.89
11/4/2013 1.23
11/11/2013 2.11
11/18/2013 3.57
11/25/2013 1.42
12/2/2013 1.87
12/9/2013 1.16
12/16/2013 2.68
12/23/2013 2.04
12/30/2013 3.25
1/7/2014 4.17
1/13/2014 14.8
1/22/2014 4.19
1/27/2014 9.53
2/3/2014 3.64
2/13/2014 4.19
2/17/2014 4.09
2/24/2014 3.86
3/3/2014 3.17
3/10/2014 1.96
3/17/2014 1.39
3/26/2014 2.27
3/31/2014 2
4/8/2014 3.39
4/15/2014 1.28
4/21/2014 2.12
4/28/2014 6.1
5/5/2014 1,2
5/12/2014 1.1
5/19/2014 14.7
5/27/2014 1.37
1.04
1.9
1.02
1.89
1.23
2.11
3.57
1.42
1.87
1.16
2.68
2.04
3.25
4.17
14.8
4.19
9.53
3.64
4.19
4.09
3.86
3.17
1.96
1.39
2.27
2
3.39
1.28
2.12
6.1
1.2
1.1
14.7
1.37
2.1 ng/L - Annual Average for 2013

6/5/2014
6/10/2014
6/19/2014
6/27/2014
7/1/2014
7/9/2014
7/17/2014
7/24/2014
7/28/2014
8/7/2014
8/14/2014
8/20/2014
8/25/2014
9/2/2014
9/11/2014
9/15/2014
9/25/2014
10/2/2014
10/8/2014
10/15/2014
10/20/2014
10/24/2014
10/29/2014
10/31/2014
11/7/2014
11/13/2014
11/20/2014
11/26/2014
12/4/2014
12/8/2014
12/15/2014
12/22/2014
12/29/2014
1/5/2015
2.17
1.6
1.05
1
1.77
1.18
1
1.3
1.79
2.84
1.54
2.29
4.99
4.1
2.97
2.16
8.56
2.62
21.6
250
21.8
5.04
2.64
1.29
3.27
5.86
2.23
3.72
6,78
3.17
2320
2.17
1
2.58
2.17
1.6
1.05
0.5
1.77
1.18
0.5
1.3
1.79
2.84
1.54
2.29
4.99
4.1
2.97
2.16
8.56
2.62
21.6
250
21.8
5.04
2.64
1.29
3.27
5.86
2.23
3.72
6.78
3.17
2320
2.17
1
2.58
WQBEL< 51.6 ng/L - Annual Average for 2014

1/15/2015
1/21/2015
1/28/2015
2/2/2015
2/9/2015
2/20/2015
2/25/2015
3/3/2015
3/10/2015
3/16/2015
3/25/2015
3/31/2015
4/6/2015
4/14/2015
4/22/2015
4/27/2015
5/4/2015
5/12/2015
5/19/2015
5/26/2015
2.05
3.66
1.34
2.42
1
1.62
2.69
2.77
2.5
1.87
2
3.61
1
1.61
6.7
4.66
38.1
14.3
4.78
2.38
2.05
3.66
1.34
2.42
0.5
1.62
2.69
2.77
2.5
1.87
2
3.61
1
1.61
6.7
4.66
38.1
14.3
4.78
2.38
4.9 ng/L - Annual Average for 2015

Tabor City WWTP Upstream and
DO/mg/L Date US DS Difference
1/3/2012 4.5 4.3 0.2
1/9/2012 5.1 4.5 0.6
1/17/2012 10.3 4.6 5.7
1/23/2012 5 3.9 1.1
1/30/2012 4.5 3.7 0.8
2/6/2012 4 4.2 -0.2
2/15/2012 3.9 3.8 0.1
2/20/2012 5.7 5.7 0
2/27/2012 5.6 6.1 -0.5
3/5/2012 5.2 5.2 0
3/12/2012 3.4 4.9 -1.5
3/19/2012 2.2 2.9 -0.7
3/26/2012 2.7 3.5 -0.8
4/2/2012 2 2.8 -0.8
4/9/2012 2.7 4.6 -1.9
4/18/2012 3.9 4.6 -0.7
4/23/2012 3.3 5.5 -2.2
4/30/2012 1.7 2.7 -1
5/7/2012 0.7 3.1 -2.4
5/14/2012 3.9 2.5 1.4
5/21/2012 2.5 3.6 -1.1
5/29/2012 1.4 3.6 -2.2
6/5/2012 2 2.5 -0.5
6/6/2012 2.3 3.5 -1.2
6/7/2012 1.9 4.4 -2.5
6/11/2012 1.2 2.3 -1.1
6/12/2012 1.8 2.4 -0.6
6/13/2012 2.1 2.6 -0.5
6/18/2012 2.3 2.7 -0.4
6/19/2012 1.8 1.8 0
6/20/2012 2.9 3.8 -0.9
6/25/2012 2.7 3.1 -0.4
6/26/2012 1.7 2.8 -1.1
6/27/2012 2.2 3.1 -0.9
6/28/2012 1.6 4.3 -2.7
7/2/2012 2 4.8 -2.8
7/3/2012 1.9 3.2 -1.3
7/5/2012 1.9 4.2 -2.3
7/9/2012 2 3 -1
7/10/2012 2.2 3.6 -1.4
7/11/2012 2.1 3.1 -1
7/16/2012 1.1 4.2 -3.1
7/17/2012 1.2 3.6 -2.4
7/18/2012 0.8 3.1 -2.3
7/23/2012 1.2 3.8 -2.6
7/24/2012 0.7 4.5 -3.8
7/25/2012 1 4.8 -3.8
7/30/2012 1.8 5.3 -3.5
7/31/2012 1 5.3 -4.3
8/1/2012 2 5.3 -3.3
8/6/2012 1.7 4.9 -3.2
8/7/2012 1.1 3.8 -2.7
8/9/2012 1.7 2.8 ,.;1.:1 .
Downstream Monitoring Summary
Temp/degree c Date US DS Difference
1/3/2012 6 7 1 US:upstream
1/9/2012 9 10 1 DS:downstream
1/17/2012 9 9 0
1/23/2012 11 11 0
1/30/2012 9 11 2
2/6/2012 12 12 0
2/15/2012 12 12 0
2/20/2012 10 11 1
2/27/2012 11 12 1
3/5/2012 11 12 1
3/12/2012 12 13 1
3/19/2012 17 18 1
3/26/2012 17 18 1
4/2/2012 19 19 0
4/9/2012 16 16 0
4/18/2012 20 19 -1
4/23/2012 18 18 0
4/30/2012 21 21 0
5/7/2012 22 22 0
5/14/2012 20 20 0
5/21/2012 20 19 -1
5/29/2012 26 24 -2
6/5/2012 22 23 1
6/6/2012 20 22 2
6/7/2012 20 21 1
6/11/2012 21 23 2
6/12/2012 21 22 1
6/13/2012 22 22 0
6/18/2012 22 22 0
6/19/2012 22 23 1
6/20/2012 23 24 1
6/25/2012 23 24 1
6/26/2012 25 24 -1
6/27/2012 24 23 -1
6/28/2012 22 22 0
7/2/2012 23 23 0
7/3/2012 26 26 0
7/5/2012 25 25 0
7/9/2012 28 28 0
7/10/2012 27 27 0
7/11/2012 26 26 0
7/16/2012 26 26 0
7/17/2012 26 26 0
7/18/2012 26 26 0
7/23/2012 26 26 0
7/24/2012 26 26 0
7/25/2012 27 27 0
7/30/2012 27 27 0
7/31/2012 26 27 1
8/1/2012 25 26 1
8/6/2012 26 27 1
8/7/2012 27 26 -1
8/9/2012 25 26 1•.,;�; ; .;;

8/13/2012 1.3 3.6 -2.3
8/14/2012 1.2 2.9 -1.7
8/15/2012 1 3.2 -2.2
8/20/2012 0.9 3.5 -2.6
8/21/2012 1 2.9 -1.9
8/22/2012 1.2 3.2 -2
8/27/2012 1.7 4.2 -2.5
8/28/2012 1.2 3.1 -1.9
8/29/2012 3.3 3.6 -0.3
9/4/2012 1.2 3.9 -2.7
9/5/2012 0.8 3.2 -2.4
9/6/2012 0.9 3 -2.1
9/10/2012 1.2 3.7 -2.5
9/11/2012 1 4 -3
9/12/2012 0.9 3.3 -2.4
9/13/2012 1.1 2.9 -1.8
9/17/2012 1.4 4.5 -3.1
9/18/2012 1.4 3.8 -2.4
9/19/2012 1.7 4.1 -2.4
9/24/2012 3.5 6.2 -2.7
9/25/2012 3 7.2 -4.2
9/26/2012 2.6 7.7 -5.1
10/1/2012 2.8 6.9 -4.1
10/9/2012 3.9 5.6 -1.7
10/15/2012 2 6 -4
10/22/2012 5 6.8 -1.8
10/29/2012 4.9 6.3 -1.4
11/7/2012 5.4 6.3 -0.9
11/15/2012 5.9 6.8 -0.9
11/19/2012 4.1 6.1 -2
11/26/2012 5.2 6.8 -1.6
12/7/2012 5.3 7.1 -1.8
12/14/2012 5 6.9 -1.9
12/19/2012 5.2 5.3 -0.1
12/26/2012 5.7 6.3 -0.6
1/4/2013 7.7 9.6 -1.9
1/8/2013 7.8 8.6 -0.8
1/14/2013 6 9 -3
1/22/2013 8.7 9.2 -0.5
1/29/2013 7.2 9.9 -2.7
2/5/2013 8.8 9 -0.2
2/13/2013 8.9 8.8 0.1
2/20/2013 8 8.7 -0.7
2/27/2013 6.3 4.8 1.5
3/7/2013 8.9 9.7 -0.8
3/13/2013 7.9 9.9 -2
3/20/2013 5 7.2 -2.2
3/26/2013 5.9 7 -1.1
4/1/2013 5.9 6.3 -0.4
4/8/2013 6.1 7.3 -1.2
4/19/2013 5.4 6.6 -1.2
4/24/2013 4.9 7.1 -2.2
4/30/2013 5.2 7.9 -2.7
5/10/2013 5.2 6.6., -1.4
5/15/2013 4.9 7.30 -2.4
8/13/2012 26 26 0
8/14/2012 25 26 1
8/15/2012 26 26 0
8/20/2012 26 26 0
8/21/2012 26 25 -1
8/22/2012 26 25 -1
8/27/2012 26 25 -1
8/28/2012 25 26 1
8/29/2012 25 26 1
9/4/2012 26 26 0
9/5/2012 25 26 1
9/6/2012 25 26 1
9/10/2012 25 25 0
9/11/2012 25 25 0
9/12/2012 25 25 0
9/13/2012 25 25 0
9/17/2012 24 24 0
9/18/2012 24 24 0
9/19/2012 24 25 1
9/24/2012 21 22 1
9/25/2012 21 22 1
9/26/2012 21 23 2
10/1/2012 22 22 0
10/9/2012 18 20 2
10/15/2012 18 19 1
10/22/2012 17 17 0
10/29/2012 17 17 0
11/7/2012 12 12 0
11/15/2012 12 12 0
11/19/2012 12 12 0
11/26/2012 10 11 1
12/7/2012 14 14 0
12/14/2012 13 13 0
12/19/2012 14 13 -1
12/26/2012 13 13 0
1/4/2013 10 10 0
1/8/2013 7 8 1
1/14/2013 12 12 0
1/22/2013 11 11 0
1/29/2013 11 11 0
2/5/2013 10 10 0
2/13/2013 10 10 0
2/20/2013 11 11 0
2/27/2013 12 12 0
3/7/2013 12 12 0
3/13/2013 13 13 0
3/20/2013 13 13 0
3/26/2013 13 13 0
4/1/2013 16 16 0
4/8/2013 16 16 0
4/19/2013 18 18 0
4/24/2013 18 18 0
4/30/2013 17 17 0
5/10/2013 19 19 0
5/15/2013 19 19 0

5/23/2013 4 7 -3
5/31/2013 5.1 6 -0.9
6/3/2013 3.1 4.8 -1.7
6/4/2013 2.9 3.9 -1
6/5/2013 2.7 4.2 -1.5
6/6/2013 3.6 5.1 -1.5
6/10/2013 3 6 -3
6/12/2013 2.6 4 -1.4
6/14/2013 2.4 3.9 -1.5
6/17/2013 2.8 4.1 -1.3
6/18/2013 2 4 -2
6/20/2013 2.2 4.1 -1.9
6/24/2013 2 3.9 -1.9
6/25/2013 3.1 4.1 -1
6/26/2013 3.6 4.6 -1
7/1/2013 3.8 4.4 -0.6
7/2/2013 3 5.3 -2.3
7/3/2013 4.2 4.9 -0.7
7/8/2013 3.2 5.2 -2
7/9/2013 3.1 4.8 -1.7
7/10/2013 2.8 5.4 -2.6
7/15/2013 3 4.9 -1.9
7/16/2013 3.8 5.7 -1.9
7/17/2013 2.7 5 -2.3
7/18/2013 2.5 5 -2.5
7/22/2013 2.3 2.1 0.2
7/23/2013 2.7 4 -1.3
7/24/2013 3 2.9 0.1
7/29/2013 4.8 3.5 1.3
7/30/2013 5.2 4.1 1.1
7/31/2013 4.9 3.4 1.5
8/5/2013 2.1 4.6 -2.5
8/6/2013 4 4.8 -0.8
8/7/2013 3.8 5.1 -1.3
8/12/2013 3.6 4.4 -0.8
8/13/2013 3.1 4 -0.9
8/14/2013 3.5 3.8 -0.3
8/19/2013 3.7 4.3 -0.6
8/20/2013 3.1 3.9 -0.8
8/21/2013 3 4.3 -1.3
8/26/2013 2 4.2 -2.2
8/27/2013 2.3 4.7 -2.4
8/28/2013 1.9 4 -2.1
9/3/2013 1.9 4.2 -2.3
9/4/2013 1.7 4 -2.3
9/5/2013 2.2 3.9 -1.7
9/9/2013 2.2 4.1 -1.9
9/10/2013 2 4.7 -2.7
9/12/2013 2 4 -2
9/17/2013 2.6 4.2 -1.6
9/18/2013 2 4 -2
9/20/2013 1 4.2 -3.2
9/23/2013 2.2 4.7 -2.5
9/24/2013 2.9 4.9 _ -2
9/26/2013 3:2 3.5 % -0.3
5/23/2013 21 21 0
5/31/2013 21 21 0
6/3/2013 25 24 -1
6/4/2013 25 25 0
6/5/2013 24 25 1
6/6/2013 23 24 1
6/10/2013 23 24 1
6/12/2013 23 24 1
6/14/2013 23 24 1
6/17/2013 24 24 0
6/18/2013 24 24 0
6/20/2013 24 24 0
6/24/2013 25 25 0
6/25/2013 24 24 0
6/26/2013 24 24 0
7/1/2013 25 25 0
7/2/2013 24 25 1
7/3/2013 24 24 0
7/8/2013 25 25 0
7/9/2013 25 25 0
7/10/2013 26 26 0
7/15/2013 26 26 0
7/16/2013 26 26 0
7/17/2013 26 26 0
7/18/2013 26 26 0
7/22/2013 23 25 2
7/23/2013 25 26 1
7/24/2013 25 27 2
7/29/2013 26 26 0
7/30/2013 26 26 0
7/31/2013 26 26 0
8/5/2013 27 26 -1
8/6/2013 25 25 0
8/7/2013 25 25 0
8/12/2013 26 26 0
8/13/2013 28 28 0
8/14/2013 28 28 0
8/19/2013 27 27 0
8/20/2013 26 27 1
8/21/2013 26 26 0
8/26/2013 26 27 1
8/27/2013 25 25 0
8/28/2013 25 25 0
9/3/2013 25 26 1
9/4/2013 26 26 0
9/5/2013 26 26 0
9/9/2013 25 25 0
9/10/2013 25 25 0
9/12/2013 26 25 -1
9/17/2013 24 23 -1
9/18/2013 23 23 0
9/20/2013 23 23 0
9/23/2013 23 23 0
9/24/2013 21 21_ 0
9/26/2013 " 20 20 . 0

10/1/2013 3.1 5.6 -2,5 10/1/2013 23 22 -1
10/8/2013 2.1 5 -2.9 10/8/2013 23 22 -1
10/15/2013 3.7 6.8 -3.1 10/15/2013 20 21 1
10/22/2013 5.2 6.9 -1.7 10/22/2013 19 20 1
10/29/2013 5.7 4.1 1.6 10/29/2013 18 18 0
11/4/2013 4.6 6.7 -2.1 11/4/2013 18 18 0
11/12/2013 4.2 6 -1.8 11/12/2013 14 15 1
11/19/2013 5.9 6 -0.1 11/19/2013 15 15 0
11/26/2013 5 7.3 -2.3 11/26/2013 13 13 0
12/3/2013 6.2 7.3 -1.1 12/3/2013 12 13 1
12/9/2013 6.9 8 -1.1 12/9/2013 13 14 1
12/16/2013 5.9 7.7 -1.8 12/16/2013 14 15 1
12/23/2013 4.4 7 -2.6 12/23/2013 16 15 -1
12/30/2013 6 6.2 -0.2 12/30/2013 15 13 -2
1/6/2014 4.7 6.8 -2.1 1/6/2014 15 16 1
1/13/2014 5.1 6.6 -1.5 1/13/2014 13 14 1
1/22/2014 5.9 7.2 -1.3 1/22/2014 12 13 1
1/27/2014 6 8 -2 1/27/2014 9 10 1
2/6/2014 6.4 8.1 -1.7 2/6/2014 11 12 1
2/13/2014 6.9 9.2 -2.3 2/13/2014 11 11 0
2/17/2014 7.8 8.7 -0.9 2/17/2014 9 9 0
2/26/2014 6 8.1 -2.1 2/26/2014 12 12 0
3/3/2014 5.6 8.7 -3.1 3/3/2014 13 13 0
3/11/2014 6 7.3 -1.3 3/11/2014 13 13 0
3/19/2014 6.9 8 -1.1 3/19/2014 14 13 -1
3/24/2014 6 7.9 -1.9 3/24/2014 13 13 0
4/3/2014 4.1 6.2 -2.1 4/3/2014 15 14 -1
4/9/2014 5.2 7 -1.8 4/9/2014 15 15 0
4/16/2014 4.9 6 -1.1 4/16/2014 16 15 -1
4/21/2014 5.5 7 -1.5 4/21/2014 14 15 1
4/28/2014 4.6 6.3 -1.7 4/28/2014 18 19 1
5/6/2014 3 6.9 -3.9 5/6/2014 22 22 0
5/14/2014 3.2 6 -2.8 5/14/2014 24 23 -1
5/21/2014 3.5 5.4 -1.9 5/21/2014 20 20 0
5/28/2014 2.9 5 -2,1 5/28/2014 23 24 1
6/2/2014 7.4 7.7 -0.3 6/2/2014 23 24 1
6/3/2014 6.7 7 -0.3 6/3/2014 23 23 0
6/4/2014 5.8 7.4 -1.6 6/4/2014 23 24 1
6/9/2014 4.9 7.2 -2.3 6/9/2014 24 24 0
6/10/2014 3.9 6.9 -3 6/10/2014 24 24 0
6/11/2014 4.3 5.9 -1.6 6/11/2014 25 25 0
6/16/2014 4 6 -2 6/16/2014 26 26 0
6/17/2014 4 7.1 -3.1 6/17/2014 27 26 -1
6/19/2014 3.7 7 -3.3 6/19/2014 27 27 0
6/23/2014 5.3 7.6 -2.3 6/23/2014 27 27 0
6/24/2014 4.9 6.9 -2 6/24/2014 27 27 0
6/25/2014 4.9 7.1 -2.2 6/25/2014 27 27 0
6/30/2014 5.1 7 -1.9 6/30/2014 27 27 0
7/1/2014 5.8 6.5 -0.7 7/1/2014 27 27 0
7/2/2014 4.8 7 -2.2 7/2/2014 27 27 0
7/7/2014 4.1 6.4 -2.3 7/7/2014 28 28 0
7/8/2014 4.7 6.9 -2.2 7/8/2014 28 28 0
7/9/2014 5.1 5.8 -0.7 7/9/2014 28 28 0
7/14/2014_, 4:9, 6.7 -1.8 7/14/2014. 29 29 0
7/15/201.4'9 1381 7.1 -2.1 7/15/20T4•i' 29 -281 -1

7/17/2014 3.7 5.4 -1.7
7/22/2014 4.8 6.1 -1.3
7/23/2014 4 6.9 -2.9
7/24/2014 3,2 5.4 -2.2
7/28/2014 3 6 -3
7/29/2014 3.3 5.2 -1.9
7/30/2014 3.1 5 -1.9
8/5/2014 3.4 5.1 -1.7
8/6/2014 4.2 5.1 -0.9
8/7/2014 5.6 4 1.6
8/11/2014 4.1 5.2 -1.1
8/12/2014 4 6.1 -2.1
8/13/2014 3 5.9 -2.9
8/18/2014 3.7 5.1 -1.4
8/19/2014 3.5 5 -1.5
8/20/2014 3 5.7 -2.7
8/25/2014 3.1 6 -2.9
8/26/2014 3.8 4.8 -1
8/27/2014 3.3 5.3 -2
9/2/2014 2.8 3.1 -0.3
9/3/2014 3.1 2.9 0.2
9/4/2014 2.6 3.4 -0.8
9/9/2014 3.2 3.8 -0.6
9/10/2014 2.8 4.1 -1.3
9/11/2014 3.3 5.3 -2
9/15/2014 2.8 6 -3.2
9/16/2014 3.1 5.3 -2.2
9/17/2014 2.8 5.9 -3.1
9/22/2014 3.3 4.8 -1.5
9/23/2014 3.9 6.2 -2.3
9/24/2014 4.6 7.2 -2.6
9/29/2014 4.4 5.8 -1.4
9/30/2014 3.9 6.1 -2.2
10/2/2014 4 4.9 -0.9
10/7/2014 4 5.1 -1.1
10/13/2014 3.8 4.9 -1.1
10/21/2014 6.7 6.4 0.3
10/27/2014 6.9 5.9 1
11/3/2014 7.8 8.1 -0.3
11/11/2014 5.9 6.5 -0.6
11/17/2014 7.4 6.6 0.8
11/24/2014 6.5 4.5 2
12/2/2014 5.4 4.9 0.5
12/9/2014 3.9 3.3 0.6
12/15/2014 4.1 3.8 0.3
12/22/2014 4.8 4.5 0.3
12/29/2014 4.5 2.8 1.7
# Lower than 153 64
winter 4
58 out of 64 downstream DO lower than 4
mg/L (instantaneous standard) are in
conjunction with upstream low DO conditions
7/17/2014 27 27 0
7/22/2014 27 27 0
7/23/2014 26 27 1
7/24/2014 27 27 0
7/28/2014 27 27 0
7/29/2014 27 28 1
7/30/2014 27 28 1
8/5/2014 24 24 0
8/6/2014 25 25 0
8/7/2014 25 25 0
8/11/2014 26 26 0
8/12/2014 27 26 -1
8/13/2014 27 26 -1
8/18/2014 27 27 0
8/19/2014 26 26 0
8/20/2014 26 27 1
8/25/2014 26 26 0
8/26/2014 26 26 0
8/27/2014 27 27 0
9/2/2014 26 26 0
9/3/2014 26 26 0
9/4/2014 27 27 0
9/9/2014 26 27 1
9/10/2014 26 26 0
9/11/2014 26 27 1
9/15/2014 26 27 1
9/16/2014 26 27 1
9/17/2014 26 27 1
9/22/2014 25 26 1
9/23/2014 25 25 0
9/24/2014 24 24 0
9/29/2014 21 22 1
9/30/2014 21 21 0
10/2/2014 23 22 -1
10/7/2014 23 23 0
10/13/2014 23 23 0
10/21/2014 18 19 1
10/27/2014 16 16 0
11/3/2014 11 12 1
11/11/2014 16 16 0
11/17/2014 13 13 0
11/24/2014 16 16 0
12/2/2014 11 13 2
12/9/2014 10 10 0
12/15/2014 9 10 1
12/22/2014 9 10 1
12/29/2014 15 15 0
0
Go

License No. C-0281
—N CIVIL/SANITARY/ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS ' �� �� SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
SITE PLANNING/SUBDIVISIONS / SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEERING (SUE) N.—
June 17, 2015
/
Mr. Al. J. Leonard, Jr.
Town Manager
Town of Tabor City
P.O. Drawer 655
Tabor City, NC 28463
RE: Tabor City WWTP
Preliminary Condition Evaluation
Dear Al,
Thank you again for taking the time to meet with Jimmy, Bobby and myself to discuss the condition and
potential funding available to correct several issues at your waste treatment facility. The following
findings are based on our discussion with you and Mr. Tom Tharrington with NCDENR Wilmington
Regional Office and our observations while touring the facility. Municipal Engineering Services Co.
(MESCO) has not performed a detailed hydraulic analysis of the facility.
General Comments
\ //
\ Based on our walk through, my conversation with Mr. Tharrington and review of the various Notice of
Violations (NOV) we were given, it would appear the facility is poorly maintained. We recognize
qualified licensed operators are in short supply however, many of the action item comments from
NCDENR do not require a licensed operator to address. We question if it would be more cost effective to
devote a Town staff member to the facility for at least two to three hours per day to perform routine
procedures such as washing down the clarifier weirs, sludge wasting, etc. An Operator in Responsible
Charge (ORC) will still need to be utilized to prepare the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) sampling,
etc. We also suggest the Town explore the possibility of finding a contract operator based at a closer
location.
Influent Pump Station/Headworks/Equalization (EQ) Basin
During our visit I noticed the influent wastewater appears to contain a significant amount of fibrous
material. I would encourage the Town to address this issue at its source through your Sewer Use
Ordinance and Pre -Treatment program. While I realize enforcement of the pre-treatment program can
be a little onerous because industries will often threaten job losses or loss of tax revenue because of the
additional burden it places on the industry. However, it is an option available to you to help the Town
avoid the costs associated with the disposal of these solids.
The influent EQ basin is great for controlling peak flow events, but they are also a place to accumulate
influent solids (i.e. fibers, grit, etc.) thereby creating a maintenance headache for the Town. Again much
PO Box 97, Garner, North Carolina 27529 [phone] PO Box 349, Boone. NC 28607 [phone]

Tabor City WWTP
June 17, 2015
Page 2
of the solids issue can be addressed through the Pre -Treatment program and an aggressive
inflow/infiltration (1/1) monitoring and rehabilitation of the Town's collection system. Since the diversion
to the influent EQ basin requires the action of the operator, we recommend the installation of a valve
with a motorized actuator. The valve can be opened and closed based on either high water level or flow
volume. Some type of recording device will be required to allow the ORC to keep a log of when the flow
is diverted and for how long.
Judging from the amount of fibrous material and grit visible in several of the treatment units, it would
appear the influent screen and grit system is either by-passed or not working properly. Additional
evaluation is needed to determine the extent of repairs and/or modifications needed. However, we
have included the cost to replace the grit removal system; since it would appear from our preliminary
investigation a new system may be needed.
Aeration Basins
We understand the facility primarily operates only one of the aeration basins, but does allow some
influent and sufficient activated sludge return to maintain the biology within the seldom used basin.
Generally provided there is sufficient influent flow, it is more advantageous to run each treatment train
in parallel on a continuous basis.
Based on our conversations, there are issues with both treatment trains. The upper train has a hydraulic
issue between the clarifier and aeration basin effluent of unknown origin. The lower train utilizes a
shallow depth clarifier of which this report will discuss later on.
As stated earlier, we have not performed a full hydraulic analysis on the facility to determine the extent
of the issue. However in the meantime perhaps the best way to understand what is happening between
these treatment units is to simply excavate and expose the piping.
Clarifiers
During our site visit we noticed significant pin -flock, and considerable algae accumulated along the scum
baffle and effluent weirs. The scum beach was also clogged. These items can be addressed by simple
daily maintenance which includes washing down these components daily or at least every other day at a
minimum.
We understand that one of the clarifiers has a side water depth (SWD) of 8-feet. It has been our
experience that clarifiers with a SWD of less than 12-feet, it is difficult to consistently maintain the
sludge blanket within the tank, especially during peak flows. Based on the solids which have
accumulated in the chlorine contact basin it appears the solids are washing through on a regular basis.
Our recommendation is to replace the clarifier with a unit that is properly sized with a SWD of 13-feet
with a overflow rate of approximately 400 gal/ft2/day based on average daily flow and 1000 gal/ft2/day
at peak flow.
Backwash
Shoe
PLC
Control
System
Disks
Backwash
Solids Pump
Drive
Motor
Effluent
Port
Influent
Waif
Solids Collection
MandOIC
Backwash Valve
Filters
We understand the filters which were installed during the last
upgrade at the facility have never worked properly, and attempts
were made to replace the filter media; however the media
"bound" up in fairly short order due to the excessive solids. We
have insufficient information to determine why this particular
filter was chosen for this application. However, it is our opinion

Tabor City WWTP
June 17, 2015
Page 3
there are better alternatives available which are much easier to operate and maintain.
Our recommendation is to install rotating disk filters similar to the Aqua -Aerobics® unit pictured above.
Other reliable units on the market are, Kruger®, and Nova®. For example the Aqua unit operates as
follows:
Filter Mode - Inlet wastewater enters the tank or basin, completely submerging the cloth media. By
gravity, liquid passes through the cloth media. As solids accumulate on and within the media, a mat is
formed and the liquid level in the tank or basin increases. The filtered liquid enters the internal portion
of the disk where it is directed to final discharge through the center shaft.
Backwash Mode - At a predetermined level or time, the backwash cycle will be initiated. Solids are
backwashed from the surface by liquid suction from both sides of each disk. During backwash, disks are
cleaned in multiples of two, unless a single disk unit is utilized. Disks rotate slowly, allowing each
segment to be cleaned. Backwash water is directed to the headworks. Filtration is not interrupted
during this cycle.
Solids Wasting Mode - The filtration process requires no moving parts. Heavier solids are allowed to
settle to the bottom portion of the filter tank. These solids are then pumped on an intermittent basis
back to the headworks, digester or other solids collection area of the treatment plant.
We have previously specified these types of units at several locations with little if any problems. The
facility will require two units and a flow distribution box installed between the clarifier and chlorine
contact basin. The back wash waste would be pumped to the digester in order to eliminate the solids
completely from the primary treatment train.
Chlorine Contact Basin
The chlorine contact basin is the typical serpentine treatment reactor designed to provide sufficient
residence time to effectively disinfect the effluent wastewater. Your system utilizes gas chlorine for
disinfection and sulfur dioxide gas for de -chlorination. Ordinarily we would encourage a change to ultra-
violet disinfection, however due to the coloration of the effluent at times it is possible the UV
transmittance would fall below the optimal range for consistent disinfection therefore causing
exceedance of the permit limit for fecal coliform. Coloration and excessive solids are the primary
reasons the UV system which was recently removed failed.
One observation we found quite troubling was the amount of solids which were built up in the contact
basin, which is indicative of poor solids removal from the biological process. The operator noted the
solids were removed on a bi-monthly basis. We also noticed a green plant growing within the solids near
the basin's effluent weir. In order for plants to grow at this location, the solids must contain some
degree of nutrients, and the chlorine is nearly depleted. We believe the organic material in the basin is
most likely consuming the chlorine, and causing inconsistent chlorine levels. This condition causes
difficulty regulating the sulfur dioxide used for de -chlorination therefore, If not monitored closely can
cause toxicity issues with the effluent. Effluent dissolved oxygen (DO) should also be monitored closely
since the de -chlorination process typically depletes DO in the effluent.
If the Town elects to move forward with a "working" tertiary filter, we believe the solids problem will be
eliminated. While there is nothing wrong with the use of gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide, we recommend
the use of hypochlorite for disinfection and any of the following chemicals to accomplish de -
chlorination.

Tabor City WWTP
June 17, 2015
Page 4
;R De'chlorination Chemical
Theoretical mg/L Required
z' # ' >i
T oNeutralize 1 mg
Sodium Thiosulfate (solution)
0.56
Sodium Sulfite (tablet)
1.78
Sulfur Dioxide (gas)
0.9
Sodium meta bisulfate (solution)
1.34
Sodium bisulfate (solution)
1.46
While the Town may continue to utilize a gas system for chlorination/de-chlorination, other methods
may prove to be Tess expensive and without question safer.
Digester/Sludge Holding
While we didn't specifically look at this basin during our visit, we understand from the correspondence
you supplied that the sludge is dewatered and disposed of by McGill Environmental. We believe it would
be advantageous to re-evaluate this method to determine if a more cost effective solution is available.
Conclusions
The information and recommendations described herein are preliminary, based on a very cursory review
of the facility. Its purpose it to give the Town an idea of the level of funding needed to address many of
the more pressing issues, and potentially move forward with applications for funding. A more
comprehensive review of the facility and more detailed discussions with the Town are needed to refine
the scope and costs of the work to be accomplished. This comprehensive study would involve review of
the DMR's and "record drawings" to further evaluate the treatment process and plant hydraulics.
As per your previous communication with Mr. Bobby Blowe of our office, the available funding sources
are as follows:
• Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF): The next deadline for this funding is
September 30, 2015. These funds are typically 20 year loans at 0% interest. There may
be a possibility of the Town receiving 50% principal forgiveness depending on how the
project scores in comparison with other applications and the amount of funds
available. This program is administered through NCDENR Division of Water
Infrastructure.
• Community Development Block Grant — Infrastructure (CDBG-I): The deadline for this
application is the same as the CWSRF program. This program is also administered
through NCDENR Division of Water Infrastructure. To qualify for this program the Town
must meet the 51% threshold of low to moderate income (LMI). As mentioned
previously by Bobby Blowe, the Town's LMI is currently 43%. The Town could
undertake a survey of incomes throughout the service area. This task can certainly be
accomplished but it is doubtful the Town would qualify.

Tabor City WWTP
June 17, 2015
Page 5
• High Unit Cost Grant (HUC): This program is similar in nature to the CWSRF grant
program and is administered by the same group. In order to qualify for this program
the applicant's residential customer's annual average water and/or sewer bill must be
over the HUC threshold of 1.5% of Median Household Income (MHI) for both or 0.75%
of MHI for either water or sewer service. The funds available for this grant are very
limited and generally only one or two projects from both water and sewer are funded.
• United States Department of Agriculture — Rural Development (USDA-RD): The date in
which acceptance of applications for USDA-RD funding is open on a continuous basis.
The interest rate may vary depending on when the application is made and the Town's
financial condition. The term can also vary between 20 to 40 years.
Cost Opinion
The following table is an opinion of probable costs, based upon the recommendations described herein.
These costs include a 20% contingency because they are very preliminary in scope.
Item
Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Total Price
1 Mobilization (Max. 2% of Bid) . : LS
2 Automated Valve to EQ Basin LS
3
4
6
Vortex Grit System
Clarifier
Disk Filters/Flow Distribution
Chemical Feed Modifications
Yard'Piping
Electrical
Total
20% Contingency
Construction Total
Preliminary Engineering
Design Phase Services
Bid & Award Phase Services
Construction Admin.
Construction Observation
rant Admin
Total Technical Services
LS
LS
LS
1
$20,500.00:-
$23,500.00
$150,000.00
$210,000.00
$395,000.00
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
$65,000.00
o,500.00
$23,500.00
$150,000.00
$210,000.00
$395,000.00
$75,000.00
$75,000.00
$65,000.00
$1,014,000.00
$202,800.00
$1,216,800.00
$28,000.00
$96,500 00
$14,500.00
$66,000.00
$62,500.00
25,000.00
$292,500.00

Tabor City WWTP
June 17, 2015
Page 6
Municipal Engineering Services Company appreciates this opportunity to be of service to Tabor City and
look forward to moving forward with the next step of finding adequate funding to accomplish the goals
and objectives of the Town.
Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this preliminary report. You can contact Mr. Bobby
Blowe or myself at 919-772-539 or via email at [e-mail] or [e-mail] . We
will be pleased to come down and have a group discussion with you and your staff and/or Town board if
you so desire.
Sincerely,
MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING SERVICES COMPANY, PA
Michael L. McAllister
Senior Project Manager
CC: Mr. Bobby Blowe, PE (MESCO)
Mr. Jimmy D. Woodie, PE, PLS (MESCO)
Mr. Tom Tharrington (NCDENR Wilmington Regional Office)

DWR
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Division of Water Resources Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report
To: ® NPDES Unit Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: (Permit No. NC0026000)
Attn: Julie Grzyb Regional Login No.:WiRO
From: Morella Sanchez King 4tktCP V+
/C
Wilmington Regional Office
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge facility staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as they are applicable.
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a. Date of site visit: Two inspections were performed: Routine Inspection on 07/17/2014, Follow up inspection
on 08/07/2014, and sampling inspection on 10/16/2014
b. Site visit conducted by: Dean Hunkele, Morella Sanchez King, and Tom-I'harrington
c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No
d. Person contacted: Richard Davis (previous ORC) and their contact information: (919) 672 - 4247 ext.
e. Driving directions:
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: 34°08'56 N Longitude: 78°51'26"W
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Grisett Swamp
Classification: C Waters
River Basin and Subbasin No. Lumber River (#030402060505)
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
RECEIVED/DENR/DWR
OCT 2 9 Z014
Water Quality
Permitting Section
II. PROPOSED FACILITIES FOR NEW AND MODIFICATION APPLICATIONS
1. Facility Classification: (Please attach completed rating sheet to be attached to issued permit)
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow:
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, explain:
3. Are site conditions (soils, depth to water table, etc) consistent with the submitted reports? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 5

5. Is the proposed residuals management plan!aNcq'.ratc _ ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? n Yes ❑ No n N/A
If no, please explain:
7. Are there any setback conflicts for proposed treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
8. Is the proposed or existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? n Yes No ❑ N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
9. For residuals, will seasonal or other restrictions be required? (_I Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If yes, attach list of sites with restrictions (Certification B)
Describe the residuals handling and utilization scheme:
10. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
1 1. Pretreatment Program (PO"I'Ws only):
III. EXISTING FACILITIES FOR MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
ORC: : Stephanie Moore Certificate #: 11699 Backup ORC: Certificate #:
2. Are the design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal
system? ❑ Yes or ® No
If no, please explain:
1) Design/Operation: The are three aspects that the permittee must address: (1) Diversion to the side -stream
surge basin of high flows and (2) Operational issues in Clarifier 2 (upper train): it is unclear what is the fate of the
solids within the recycle loop from the aeration basin to Clarifier 2 and back to the aeration basin. The ORC
reported decreases in the MLSS concentrations but cannot explain the fate of the solids that are 'missing?'
Consequently, only one of the two clarifiers is in regular service: (3) the sludge holding basin is listed in the permit
as an "aerated sludge holding basin". However, the ORC on 07/17/2014 reported that aeration is not adequate.
2) Operation and Maintenance: It is apparent that the facility does not receive adequate maintenance which is
critical in the essential treatment units (clarifiers. disinfection). This is evidenced by solids build-up in the weirs
and baffle plate of Clarifier #1. During the Routine inspection. solids were observed in the chlorine contact
chamber from the beginning to the UV racks with depths visually estimated between 6-12 inches along the
bottom. During the Follow up inspection (2 weeks after cleaning the chamber), less solids were present on the
bottom, but more floating solids (denitrifying solids) with color were observed within last run of chamber. The
RAS pumping sumps on both clarifiers reflect lack of maintenance as evidenced by growing plants and
accumulation of dry solids. The ORC indicated that a contractor cleans the chlorine contact chamber every 4-6
months or as needed. but no records were available. The ORC did not specify that other areas of the plant have
been serviced.
Description of existing facilities:
Proposed flow: N/A
Current permitted flow: 1.1 MGD
Explain anything observed during the site visit that needs to be addressed by the permit, or that may be important
for the permit writer to know (i.e., equipment condition, function, maintenance, a change in facility ownership,
etc.)
1) The components of the facility are not properly listed in the permit issued in 2010. Refer to item 8.
2) Sampling protocol is questionable. It is recommended to increase sampling from 3 times per week to 5 times
per week.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

3. Are the site conditions (e.g., soils, topograp1i , depthA) water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? ❑ Yes or ❑ No '1
If no, please explain: N/A
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect the permit (e.g., drainage added, new wells inside the compliance
boundary, new development, etc.)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If yes, please explain: N/A
5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
The applicant provided a sludge management plan which indicates that McGill Environmental Systems will handle
the dewatered solids at their facility. This plan seems to be suitable as long as the permittee keeps
documentation on site. Records of sludge hauling activity (dates and volumes) should be available onsite for
three years (this comment was made in the previous inspection on 05/14/2013). During this inspection, the
hauling records were requested and an e-mail was provided later that day. The permittee should maintain and
provide appropriate record/log indicating hauling dates and volumes (not an e-mail).
6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain: N/A
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
8. Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ❑ Yes or ® No
If no, please explain:
The actual components of the system are: a triplex influent pumping station. Parshall flume, mechanical bar
screen mechanical. manual bar screen. grit remover, "aerated" sludge holding basin, side -stream emergency
surge basin, one extended -aeration activated sludge basin with mechanical surface aerators(Iower basin). one
contact stabilization activated sludge basin mechanical surface aerators(upper basin). two secondary clarifiers
(may be operated in parallel or in series), influent & effluent samplers. UV disinfection within chlorine -contact
chamber (backup: chlorination-dechlorination system). influent & effluent ultrasonic flow meters. and a back-up
power generator.
The following components should be removed from the permit per letter dated 06/07/2013 from Tom Belnick to
the Town Manager:
(1) the tertiary pressure filtration system should be deleted from the list of components since the filters have not
been in reliable operation for at least a decade.
(2) UV disinfection should be deleted from component list since it doesn't function completely and hasn't for years.
Town should remove UV infrastructure within 60 days of receiving this report and begin using 100% chlorination-
dechlorination immediately.
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, a lease complete the following (expand table if necessary):
1 Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
0
I
11
0
1
►1
0
I
11
0
1
11
.
0
I
11
0
I
11
0
,
11
ea
0
,
1l
0
I
/1
0
I
11
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14
Page 3 of 5

12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data bedfr. onduc?.d (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review:
Review of BIMS records from 2010 to 2014 (permit cycle) indicate violations to chlorine, fecal coliform, and
mercury. Mercury violations have been recurrent for the cycle. Refer to enclosed BIMS reports.
Provide input to help the permit writer evaluate any requests for reduced monitoring, if applicable.
Reduced monitoring is not recommended. Sample handling is questionable (refer to Section V).
13. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing BIMS violations? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
14. Check all that apply:
0 No compliance issues ❑ Current enforcement action(s) 0 Currently under JOC
Notice(s) of violation ❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under moratorium
A NOV with Intent to Assess Civil Penalty was issued on (09/25/2014). Refer to enclosure.
Please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify answer/comments (i.e., NOV, NOD, etc.)
If the facility has had compliance problems during the permit cycle, please explain the status. Has the RO been
working with the Permittee? Is a solution underway or in place?
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
® Yes ❑No❑N/A
If yes, please explain: Refer to question 14.
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
The facility does not have a pre-treatment program. However, it was noted that the sludge in the clarifiers and on
the ground by outfall had a fibrous consistency and based on our observations of more than one influent color.
It is recommended that the Town perform some pretreatment sampling of the printing company using its portable
composite sampler.
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ® Yes or ❑ No
If yes, please explain:
2. List any items that you would like the NPDES Unit or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request:
Item
Reason
Operational Analysis of the Triplex
pump station-> Side -stream Surge
(equalization) basin-> headworks
Special Condition A (4). Data suggests that peak flows overwhelm
the plant because the surge basin is not adequately engaged to
equalize high flows.
I&I Study/ Sanitary Sewer Evaluation
Study
Special Condition A.(6): Provide a copy of the I&I . The permittee
indicated that a copy of the report was mailed to the WiRO on
01/04/2013. However the report is not in the WiRO files.
Application B.3
Process Flow Diagram or Schematic
including hydraulic profile
It was not provided in the permit renewal package (Section B-3).
Preparing an adequate hydraulic profile could help identify the
operational problem in Clarifier 2.
Annual Performance Report
There are no filed report at the WiRO files. This is a NCGS 143-
215.1 C requirement.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14
Page 4 of 5

3. List specific permit conditions recommended to be:I-moved from the permit when issued:
Condition
Reason
4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued:
Condition
Reason
Proper operation of the
side -stream surge basin.
Solid losses were observed during the follow-up inspection on 08/07/2014. The
ORC reported that this was caused by the failure to divert high flows during a
storm event that occurred somewhere between 07/23 and 08/04/2014.
5. Recommendation: ® Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
❑ Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
n Issue
❑ Deny (Please s • e easoi . )
6. Signature of report preparer: 1
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: l0lgig la°l�}
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
1) Sample Handling (Inspection on 08/07/2014)
— It did not appear that sampler was connected to flow meter, thus there is no way to determine if sampling
was flow proportional (representative composite sample aliquots are uncertain).
- In the sampling boxes, the sampling tubing was dirty and the thermometers were damaged thus no way to
document that samples were maintained at proper temperature.
— DMRs indicate that parameters are analyzed, and effluent limits are OK, however, sample handling is
questionable.
2) The WiRO requests the Central Office to provide us with the draft permit for review before it is e-mailed/mailed to
the permittee.
Enclosures:
NOV-2014-PC-0205 package and permitte's response to NOV on 10/06/2014.
Inspections Reports (07/17/2014 and 08/07/2014)
Monitoring Report Violations (3 pages)
Permittee's letter to EPA dated 09/30/2014
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5

LKengineering, pllc
February 28, 2014
Ms. Wren Thedford
NC DENR / DWR / NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
\Ivo
\*( t
RE: Renewal of Tabor City WWTP NPDES Permit #NCoo26000
Dear Reviewers,
VD\Vg
t\nl\R ` 2(114
Please find enclosed three (3) copies of the renewal application for the Tabor City NPDES Permit #
NCoo26000. The current permit expires on August 31, 2014. The Town has completed the permit
requirements as outlined in the NPDES renewal guidelines.
If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
LKC ENGINEERING, PLLC
Bill Lester, Jr., P.E.
Enclosures
140 Aqua Shed Court, Aberdeen, North Carolina 28315 * PH: 910/420-1437 * FAX: [phone]
License No. P-1095

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
078.8800000°
Vfl
078.870000°
Vfl 1 I 1 978.8600000°
Vy Q78.850
)000° W 678.840000° W
34.1400000 N 34.1500000' N 34.1600000' N
`�
I •
C m
v �1
`— •
o,
°° rt.
c.
Z
o
z
p_.
co
r9!Iit.°
r` 1 ' Myrtle a re:
n%_ j 1 \1
�" "�
r_
�
_ 11
e—
ms�:\
No
known water supply wells within 1/4
I`sz
,_II
•
1 pt.,
•
• -
( -,, 1
mile of Plant, one well exists on the
plant site for washing purposes
G
/i
I IBM
. 1 I r i i •
106)
•
M•
•... ail:
• •,:JA6Q
o
)�
lit -4.-li
N• • • • Ir.
•
E.
l r�:=
•,-\ /
= ti : (V�IXA ,
�J` )
1 ' c 0
L -ti {
..1) I_
t-'
'7 q to
,
)
\\ ,,, r - -
�_ `_-`���
•
r
I
•r
7 •
/:r
d • I
i `=
__
Lang ntSE� ��I
1
IF,
\//��
_
• • • .. = ,
Plant discharge location
_ -- _
-
Magnetic Declination
-��
S 1
1.
— , y
'•--
-1-----., ' 141, ,.., ...
1,, .. .i&
.
102
i:
r
•
. oo.\,____11101,
AIL_ •,
_
,
I r .11:
A
//
Aegfi.PPP'-
/ •\• , I `
0 1
7
•
j---_°D Fl
. c,„
.1 •, wit
`�,. J 1 1
•
'' it \t `1k v�J
wr.
U
! /
See
e
• •
`till
I •— `` �/ • •
/ i
` _
/ / ,' `
tt �_ '
r �' IN
-1}��
SCALE 1:19015
0 1000 YARDS
\tj
•„1
•
�`
_.I
\ ! � Q
`/
1
1 \ \• r
, ;I_
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 FEET
_o!
��.-ran.
//• f ,
` w
`�
' '
1
0 1 KILOMETER
-�
I - —I
1 1 1 678.680000°VI
I 678.8700000°VV
1 I 1 678.860
000°VIV 1 078.850000b0VV
1 1 1 678.84000060
W 1
Name: TABOR CITY EAST Location: 034.1503355° N 078.8600357° W NAD83
Date: 2/10/2014 Caption: TABOR CITY WWTP TOPO WITH 1/4 MILE RANGE RINGS
Scale: 1 inch equals 1585 feet
Datum: NAD83 Coovriaht fC) 2009 MvT000

600 —
500
400
HEADW❑RKS
• r'
INFLUENT PS
INFLUENT
300
0
iJ
0 10 2a 30 40 50
AERATION
BASIN
AERATION
BASIN 1
IWELL
• 8 v.
GENERATOR BEHIND
' CONTROL BUILDING
CLARIFIER 1
S IGE
DICES
STORAG
TABOR CITY VWVfP
NPDES # NC0026000
SITE PLAN
PLANT
BOUNDARY
PRESSURE SAND FILTERS
(TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE)
UV DISINFECTI❑N
(TAKE OUT OF SERVICE)
CHL❑RINE CONTACT CHAMBER
DECHL❑RINATI❑N
AND POST AERATI❑N
TREATED DISCHARGE LINE
I �
�� yr, .i• �r� =r . . f �.
0 100 200 300
500
+onn�
600 700 }" 800 900
4

k.
Tabor City Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES # NC0026000
,. •.
Un-named tributary
Ito Grissett Swamp
1
sal
•
Effluent Discharge
34.148804
-78.856121
t. 2r 1 3 r= ccq!e
Grissett Swamp
Goo�Ie ea rt
feet1
meters,
2000
600
A

REVISIONS
SYM
DFSL:B[ON
DATE BY
INFLUENT
1.0 Q
FLOW BALANCE NOTES:
In calculating the material balance flows for the Tabor City WWTP, the WAS flow is
estimated at 350 GPD. Of that 350 gallons, the equivalent of 300 gallons per day is
periodically decanted out of the Sludge Digester returned to the headworks. The remaining
50 gallons per day of thickened solids remains in the tank until hauled. These WAS flows
are insignificant compared to the plant process flows and are not included within the
water balance diagram but are contained within the plant.
LEGEND:
HW
RAS#1
RAS#2
AER#1
AER#2
CLAR#1
CLAr#2
WEIR#1
WEIR#2
CLCH
Headworks flow
RAS flow from Clarifier #1
RAS flow from Clarifier #2
Aeration Tank #1 feed flow
Aeration Tank #2 feed flow
Clarifier #1 feed flow from
Clarifier #2 feed flow from
WEIR flow from Clarifier #1
WEIR flow from Clarifier #2
Chlorine Contact Chamber flow
AVERAGE INFLUENT FLOW = 0.41 MGD = 1.0 Q
HEADWORKS
AER #1
Aeration Tank #1
Aeration Tank #2
0.45 Qlo AERATION BASIN
#1
HW
1.0 Q
PLANT NARRATIVE:
Influent flow falls into the plant influent pump station (ps), excess flow can be
diverted- to the equalization basin for later treatment. The influent ps transfers the
untreated waste stream to the headworks where it is screened through either a
mechanical or manual barscreen and metered. The influent flow then passes into a
splitter box where 55% is diverted to Basin #2 and the balance of 45% is
conducted to Aeration Basin #1. These percentage partitions are proportional to the
size of the respective aeration basin. After the aeration basins the two MLSS flows
enter two clarifiers for solids settling. The flow over the clarifier weirs is
approximately half of the aeration tank flow while the remaining flow exits the
bottom as RAS flow returning to the aeration basin from which it came. The weir
flows from the two clarifiers then flows into a single Chlorine contact chamber for
disinfection. The final course of the Chlorine contact chamber is fitted with a
dechlorination feed of Sulfer Dioxide and well mixed by aeration before discharging
from the plant.
CLAR #1
0.9 Q
WEIR #1
0.45 Q
RAS #1 0.45 Q
CLARIFIER #1
RAS #2 0.55 Q
AER #2
0.55 Q
AERATION BASIN
#2
CLAR 2
1.1 Q
CLARIFIER #2
WAS— 350
■
SLUDGE DIGESTION
AND STORAGE
CHLORINE
SOURCE
I I I
11 �lll ED SCHARGETO
1.0 Q
CHLORINE
CONTACTOR
WEIR #2
0.55 0
DE —CHLORINATION
& POST AERATION
TA3OR CITY WWTP FLOW 3ALANCE DIAGRAM
PRELIMINARY - DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Project County, Nonh Cap
DATE: February 20, 2014
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
NO.

INFLUENT
PUMP
STATION
INFLUENT
0 10 20 30 40 50
SCALE
0
\ f
100
200
AERATION
BASIN 2
---UQUID: 76.5'__,
670.03'
SHE
GENERATOR BEHIND
CONTROL BUILDING
r� _CLARIFIER
L '40" #1
r
r
�� EI
DIGESTER /
STORAGQ
N.r
r /'
----
r
/
REVISIONS
SY)•i 1 DESCRIPTION
• • EXISTING YARD PIPING
PROPOSED YARD PIPING
EXISTING WATER LINE
PROPERTY LINE
0-0—o-0 EXISTING FENCE
EXISTING GATE VALVE
N PROPOSED GATE VALVE
POWER POLE
O MANHOLE
• PROPOSED MANHOLE
as EXISTING WATER VALVE
I,t EXISTING YARD HYDRANT
EXISTING RCP
TREE LINE, TYP.
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CONTOUR
PRESSURE SAND FILTERS
(TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE)
UV DISINFECTION
(TAKEN OUT OF SERVICE)
CHLORINE CONTACT CHAMBER
DECHLORINATION
AND POST AERATION
m TREATED DISCHARGE LINE
vI
1
300 LAYOUT AND PIPING PLANS ~__ soo
P0.22
0n
600
700
PLANT
BOUNDARY
800
DATE 113IH'4RF.! 1
DF111 \FL OGI-
❑RAWN DIV.
CHECKED: RGI.
LAYOUT

raal
M�GILL
February 18, 2014
Dear Tabor City,
P.O. Box 61
Harrells, NC 28444
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
www.mcgillcompost,com
McGill Environmental Systems will be able to handle dewatered biosolids from
the Tabor City WWTP for processing at the. McGill Sampson Composting Facility at
1100 Herring Road, Rose Hill NC 28548 (permit number WQ00006816). Our facility
located in Rose Hill has the capacity to handle the sludge output of 500 wet tons per
year.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments.
Best regards,
Raq
Brian Kelleher
Industrial Services Manager
McGill Environmental Systems
Mobile [phone]
Email bkelleheramcgillcompost.com
�•, Website www.mcgillcompost.com