NC0032077_Permit (Issuance)_20051208

NPDES DOCIMENT :MCANNIN`: COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0032077
Contentnea MSD WWTP
Document Type:
Permit 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:
December 8, 2005
This document is printed on reuse paper - igrIore any
content on the i esrerse side

r
y
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
State of North Carolina
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
December 8, 2005
Mr. Charles Smithwick, District Manager
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewer District
P.O. Box 477
Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0032077
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewer District
(WWTP)
Wiley Gaskins Road (NCSR 1910)
Pitt County
Dear Mr. Smithwick:
The Division of Water Quality (the Division) hereby issues this final permit for the subject facility.
This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and
the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency dated May 9, 1994, or as subsequently amended.
Phased Permit / New Outfall Location. The Division has determined under Rule 15A NCAC 02B.0227
that this facility discharges to an unnamed tributary (UT) of Contentnea Creek, i.e., to waters of the state
under zero flow conditions (see the Division's letter to the Permittee dated November 28, 2005).
Consequently, permit limits and monitoring requirements have been modified. This permit is therefore
"phased" to provide a compliance schedule to either 1) upgrade the plant, or 2) extend the outfall to
Contentnea Creek's mainstem to achieve better dilution. Please note that your site map has been updated
to reflect your revised outfall location.
Concerning Mercury. Based on five data points (EPA Method 1631), mercury shows "reasonable
potential" to exceed its water quality standard under "zero -flow" conditions, but not at Contentnea
Creek's mainstem (considering dilution). Therefore, to protect water quality under zero -flow conditions,
the Division has increased mercury monitoring to Monthly and added a limit of 0.012 tug/L. At the
mainstem of Contentnea Creek, mercury samples shall be collected Quarterly, and there is no mercury
limit at this time. Upon written request, the Division will reconsider mercury's "reasonable potential,"
provided this request is supported by a minimum of 12 analyses using EPA Method 1631.
AWNVA
NCDENR
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mall Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone] Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

Contentnea MSD
Contentnea Creek WWTP
Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0032077
Page 2
Concerning Total Residual Chlorine. Since your last permit renewal, the Division has adopted a
stream standard for chlorine. The Division has therefore added TRC monitoring and limits (17 and 28
jig/L) to your permit, in keeping with other NPDES permits statewide. Please note that you may need to
acquire additional instrumentation, equipment, and/or services adequate to monitor and control chlorine
at this concentration. This limit shall become effective 18 months from the permit effective date.
Renewal Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA). As part of this renewal, the Division conducted a
Reasonable Potential Analyses (RPA) on potential toxicants and metals considering Significant Industrial
Users (SIUs), previous effluent monitoring, and this facility's Pretreatment Program. This RPA evaluates
"reasonable potential" for parameters to exceed North Carolina's instream Water Quality Standards.
The RPA database was updated to include Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) through June 2005. The
Division evaluated reasonable potential at both.discharge locations addressed in this permit, each outfall
with a different dilution factor or Instream Waste Concentrations (IWC). The IWC for zero -flow
conditions is 90%. The IWC for discharge to Contentnea Creek's mainstem is 12%. Having concluded its
review, the Division offers the following comments and changes considering your previous permit:
wal Sunup of RPA Recommended Changes/Additions:
� 3iJ., Irw. ..k!„.. kN✓ %cE
} �r r�. Par. meter, �- '
\^t
i . '
. r [' �' xC£„ 4"1-a?.c.�`�^`i.�w.�`�j{%....�w..,�,d;�,;,x��l.. �`, k: �",�,� ram. -:oS �'..zf-:t F �
, �s " ; k: , o�mmenar —A b l khan .,w MM MM
Total Arsenic
-
Not detected. No changes to the permit.
Total Cadmium
-
Not detected. No changes to the permit.
Total Chromium'
No
No changes to the permit.
Total Copper
Yes
No changes to the permit.
Yes
Added Daily Max. limits to permit; Weekly monitoring
_cyanide
Total Lead
-
No changes to permit.
Total Mercury
Yes
Added monitoring and permit limit (see Concerning Mercury).
Total Nickel :.
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease :
Yes
Add Monthly Ave. permit limit; Weekly monitoring (to Phase II only).
Database adjusted to remove data outlier (Jan04).
Total Selenium
-
Not detected. No changes to the permit.
Total Silver
-
Not detected. No changes to the permit.
Total Zinc
No
No changes to the permit.
*RP = "reasonable potential" to exceed instream Water Quality Standard
If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days after receiving this letter. Your request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and must be filed with the office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless
such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.

Contentnea MSD
Contentnea Creek WWTP
Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0032077
Page 3
This permit is not transferable except after notifying the Division of Water Quality. The Division may
require modification, or revocation and re -issuance of this permit. Please notice that this permit does
not affect your legal obligation to obtain other permits required by the Division of Water Quality, the
Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or other federal or local
governments.
If you have questions, or if we can be of further service, please contact Joe Corporon at
[Joe.Corporon@,ncmail.net] or call [phone], extension 597.
Respectfully,
4 : Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosure: Final NPDES Permit NC0032077
cc: Washington Regional Office, Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
The Wooten Companv
120 North Boylan Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603

Permit NC0032077
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(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,
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Contentnea MSD WWTP
NCSR 1910, Grifton
Pitt County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary of Contentnea Creek within the Neuse River
Basin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, III, and 1V hereof.
The permit shall become effective on January 1, 2006.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31, 2008.
Signed this day December 8, 2005
t-yr • Alan W. Klimek, PE, Diror
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0032077
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.
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
is hereby authorized:
1. to continue to operate an existing 2.85 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of
• grit removal
• two (2) activated sludge units
• clarifiers
• chemical phosphorus removal system
• methanol storage and feed system for enhanced denitrification
• chlorine contact chamber
• post -aeration basin
• aerobic sludge digester and sludge drying beds,
located at the Contentnea MSD WWTP on NCSR 1910 in Grifton, Pitt County, and
2. to discharge from said treatment works, at the location specified on the attached map, to an
unnamed tributary of Contentnea Creek, a class C-Swamp NSW waterbody within the Neuse
River Basin; and
3. upon receiving an Authorization to Construct (ATC) permit, build a new outfall into Contentnea
Creek; and after submitting an Engineers Certification Form for approval of new outfall
construction,
4. to discharge treated wastewater from said treatment works to Contentnea Creek, a class C-
Swamp, NSW waterbody within the Neuse River Basin.

.o�TickBitE .
.� ' I •
t
%__P. ei.- ...-y5--..,..:74.
Downstrearii.
xl �s —r Ps�.
',...... •_,,..
IContentnea Creek i �'-7;4.. _ CAL -
- w —�$-_ �.._.... -*- - —
•
Contentnea Metropolitan
Sewer District WWTP
Latitude: 35° 21' 20" N State Grid/Quad: F 29 SW / Grifton, NC
Longitude: 77° 24' 58" W Permitted Flow: 2.85 MGD
Receiving Stream: UT of Contentnea Creek Stream Class: C-Sw; NSW
Drainage Basin: Neuse River Basin Sub -Basin: 03-04-07
North
NPDES Permit No. NC0032077
Pitt County

Permit NC0032077
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
a.) Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until November 1, 2006, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001 into an unnamed tributary (UT) of
Contentnea Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
1 f -'a�y ift J},�4•)w1.' . •
l.Tj, Y C �i;falYt�+" ?y .i
-i` s•. . ,� ra l' uy ,,. fJi Z'i }
t �. 3�i->e. iy tn�' .!.,,.yJ iel
�
:'o r,' \ {'O%7.4 u.. is kl l' L I %. ASA
�i�lT!L���l�/r� .Yi ��1 .fl �(\i'�i
%It i,;(ls ,4A t,,P A y,
..d i�i'i�e[� �_ !� 1M'
if4.MO OJ
•...r' �j"�, rs. Ir •. ry- ,ir "";�'�.,�-,f
'. ��r r�. Y'. :".. 1:.�;Tn':
••�tn�.�_sy,`',•C 'L/;^,*r •_T• �7 I.
.%. �f,� (y
I ,i'L�'.�'. �i'J.
jri , I.: ..2
•�.: iS:wsMJ.�-�.i�tYH`,+..r. .ti1�.�{}.:.R�.
��f��•�•�1�Y;
s1•�.����
..3[J }'i VE ' a./L1M T Oj�.�j..�i/. , i •'
''wy>i ,'Y1 , f .ra'.x x t rt ,sY.,t.�;, •it 4if "`.. -. • l ^.
••f ... :, s1.J, .� � "�,;���.1 �. �,s .S �
.V �•/
1.'�f'1Pi�,...., E� Y `Ri ,*..�J
, .-.. ,. � _
!. S C" 7 ' 'YL F•5
'� �. � Z {�
y �F 1 ir'i..s' .1� t•7s .;k
.. , ,: .� 4 . - .
f -' '}
- onthlya hl
i Y
.2 -FT•C
f l �
_,.i Average'
il'My • 4 .l
7' �'.{ 1dy
fi
'f tG .��f' f1 �
�, Y
,,;Average 7
7 5,,.. wit n% r±17,
b l�3aiL. ,ii
i t4�
� 1�. 4 1�
s'} •
y Vl'aximprn,:.
.~I'I r,•-4;4 aimed ''
��Me'T en2et [','
.(V.1 ''3 SA[:
��'�r��� Tk •f!
F
Fa e.g . cy '7
jJ' �i�
it' ...P �,.
�r : JVwp+
A � L�
P s _
"'tY.
�e
y'(�!, .I •-e'�
}�, �y �
rz ..... _ ..,
Flow (MGD)
2.85
Continuous
Recording
I or E
Total Monthly Flow (MG)
Monitor and Report
Monthly
Recorded or
Calculated
I or E
BOD5, 20°C 2
22.0 mg/L
33.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
NH3 as N
15.0 mg/L
35.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E
Total Residual Chlorine 3
28 µg/L 3
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily
Grab
E
PH
Shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0
standard units.
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily average shall not fall below 5.0 mg/L
Daily
Grab
E
Total Phosphorus
2.0 mg/L (Quarterly average) 4
Weekly
Composite
E
TKN (mg/L) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
NO3-N + NO2-N (mg/L) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN (mg/L) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN Load 6
Monitor and Report (lb./mo.)
32,1001b./year (annual mass loading) 7
Monthly
Calculated
E
AnnuallyCalculated
E
Cyanide
22 µg/L8
Weekly
Grab
E
Conductivity
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Mercury 9
Quarterly
Grab
E
Chronic Toxicity 10
Quarterly
Composite
E
Temperature, °C
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
Dissolved Oxygen
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
Conductivity
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
See next page for Table Footnotes

Permit NC0032077
Table Footnotes:
1. Sample Locations: 1— Influent; E — Effluent; U — Upstream at NCSR 1800; D- Downstream at Jolly's Old
Field Landing. Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations shall not exceed 15% of
their respective influent value (i.e., 85% removal is required).
3. The Total Residual Chlorine shall be monitored only if the facility uses chlorine. The chlorine limit shall
become effective 18 months after permit effective date.
4. Quarterly average for Total Phosphorus shall constitute the average of composite samples collected weekly
during each calendar quarter (January -March, April -June, July -September, October -December).
5. For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NO3 N+NOZ N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and NO3 N+NOZ N are nitrate and nitrite nitrogen, respectively.
6. TN Load is the mass quantity of Total Nitrogen discharged in a given period of time. See Special Condition
A. (3), Calculation of TN Loads.
7. Compliance with this limit shall be determined in accordance with Special Condition A. (4) of this permit,
Annual Limits for Total Nitrogen.
8. Cyanide — This permit limit reflects receiving -stream conditions. However, because of the variability in
cyanide test -method procedures and results statewide, the Division shall consider any and all cyanide
detected/reported below 10 jig/L to be "zero" (not detected) for purposes of limit compliance.
9. Mercury Monitoring - the permittee shall monitor Total Mercury in accordance with field and laboratory
procedures specified in EPA Analytical Method 1631.
10. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F @ 11 %, January, April, July, and October [see A. (6)].
11. Variable Stream Sampling -- Stream samples shall be taken three times per week during the months of
June, July, August and September, and weekly during the remainder of the year. As a participant in the
Lower Neuse Basin Association, Inc. (LNBA), the subject facility is not responsible to conduct instream
monitoring. Should the Permittee terminate its membership in the Association for any reason, the Permittee
shall immediately notify the Division and immediately assume stream sampling requirements as stated herein.
Units:
lbs/day = pounds per day
mg/L = milligrams per liter.
MGD = million gallons per day
Lbs/year = pounds per year
µ _
MG =
microgram per liter
million gallons
• Additional Special Conditions apply to this permit [see Special Conditions A. (5.) and A. (8.)].
FINAL DISCHARGE SHALL CONTAIN NO FLOATING SOLIDS OR FOAM VISIBLE IN OTHER THAN TRACE AMOUNTS.
b.) For the period beginning with the approved completion of a new outfall into Contentnea Creek, and lasting
until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater to Contentnea Creek according
to the effluent limitations and monitoring conditions in Part A.(1.) above.

Permit NC0032077
A. (2) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on November 1, 2006 and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated
wastewater from Outfall 001 into an unnamed tributary of Contentnea Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
1
#� �.'%�! S: �i .1d7..� .1'''t1. rFt
.,11 ` {, . , ,AV�E
�Sl P, , •i 15 . i�..
.. ..:• ,.
' f l.ak.Y. ,� 4'''+' .�:'" Y 4
! � �1.J-rvi�� r{':'".7',r,i,^�, d�.:�' Syq_6_;x.�Ls
•' _; , L a 11
• 3k } .. i.. i ,
- �_.. !v bl"''ii v',r"��Y: � ,vie.
1. 'ef+..` r�. .
lf_���� �:
J� p � ,
✓ ny
JT o +` N
; ate,,
� �t�41, 1..ry��;?�.�f�!�•�r',
., b
'
�.IJo�.
_
. (} t,>
't , S f
-r :; a .Y.= 41:1 rN .
�,� li.Y .!'i1�K.Zr�, .r,.r`
!� O ra*,s I r #
": r .,i § , y.' `� 't : __
_t.. �.._ ..,..-d�.....r. ;`l
l'n'.,: * ? y" 77'gy
a : Pt �} 'P '`. y t1,.
F ,, :,
Fj. 3 4 44'
!�'
•. . • '� ,.�; £tt . i '' ct }. z ' is ++ `:
_ . , : ; )
♦ _
onti 1yWeekly
N i+yi.
i r..x...t.�1i .
rprage ,
K" r'�:r sr}
i+ }.~l�
''�'�� ia„_,r- .la.;.-. S
,A Brag •
'�f� .Y" -TP:.
f Daily1 '} t
t •�. �,f� L..y.i
.i.;i:'x
' - .N um'
,,,;. [-91 ♦ f.. ,e! a.�.±:.tY
, easurexinent�'
Fi.'.
�n.f,.:..+
. egu G- _��"
".;-w� .,.r'��'','4-.1%;
�Ie"
fir- - K`h
,71Y�4 " .... '
r 7 . �k 1F---- -- .„4
.Yf = -,
L f' 3
.: • J.i �
:- 1 P.'_4 0..... «r:
Flow (MGD)
2.85
Continuous
Recording
I or E
Total Monthly Flow (MG)
Monitor and Report
Monthly
Recorded
or
Calculated
I or E
BOD5, 20°C 2 (April 1— Oct 31)
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
BOD5, 20°C 2 (Nov. 1— Mar 31)
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
NH3 as N (April 1— Oct 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E
NH3 as N (Nov. 1— Mar 31)
2.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
E
Total Residual Chlorine 3
17 µg/L 3
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature ° C
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily
Grab
E
pH
Shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0
standard units.
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily average shall not fall below 5.0
g/L
Daily
Grab
E
Total Phosphorus
2.0 mg/L (Quarterly average) 4
Weekly
Composite
E
TKN (mg/L) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
NO3-N + NOZ N (mg/L) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN (mg/I,) 5
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Composite
E
TN Load 6
Monitor and Report (lb./mo.)
7
32,100 lb./year (annual mass loading)
Monthly
Calculated
E
AnnuallyCalculated
E
Oil and Grease
16.7 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
E
Cyanide
5 µg/L8
Weekly
Grab
E
Conductivity
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Copper
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Mercury 9
Quarterly
Grab
E
Chronic Toxicity 10
Quarterly
Composite
E
Temperature, °C
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
Dissolved Oxygen
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
Conductivity
Variable 11
Grab
U, D
See next page for Table Footnotes

Permit NC0032077
Table Footnotes
1. Sample Locations: I — Influent; E — Effluent; U — Upstream at NCSR 1800; D- Downstream at Jolly's Old
Field Landing. Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations shall not exceed
15% of their respective influent value (i.e., 85% removal is required).
3. The Total Residual Chlorine shall be monitored only if the facility uses chlorine. The chlorine limit shall
become effective 18 months after permit effective date.
4. Quarterly average for Total Phosphorus shall constitute the average of composite samples collected
weekly during each calendar quarter (January -March, April -June, July -September, October -December).
5. For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NO3 N+NO2 N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and NO3 N+NO2-N are nitrate and nitrite nitrogen, respectively.
6. TN Load is the mass quantity of Total Nitrogen discharged in a given period of time. See Special
Condition A. (3), Calculation of TN Loads.
7. Compliance with this limit shall be determined in accordance with Special Condition A. (4) of this
permit, Annual Limits for Total Nitrogen.
8. Cyanide — This permit limit reflects receiving -stream conditions. However, because of the variability in
cyanide test -method procedures and results statewide, the Division shall consider any and all cyanide
detected/reported below 10 µg/L to be "zero" (not detected) for purposes of limit compliance.
9. Mercury Monitoring - the permittee shall monitor Total Mercury in accordance with field and
laboratory procedures specified in EPA Analytical Method 1631.
10. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F @ 90 %, January, April, July, and October [see A. (7)].
11. Variable Stream Sampling -- Stream samples shall be taken three times per week during the months of
June, July, August and September, and weekly during the remainder of the year. As a participant in the
Lower Neuse Basin Association, Inc. (LNBA), the subject facility is not responsible to conduct instream
monitoring. Should the Permittee terminate its membership in the Association for any reason, the
Permittee shall immediately notify the Division and immediately assume stream sampling requirements
as stated herein.
Units:
lbs/day = pounds per day
mg/L = milligrams per liter.
MGD = million gallons per day
Lbs/year = pounds per year
µg/L =
MG=
microgram per liter
million gallons
Additional Special Conditions apply to this permit [see Special Conditions A. (5.) and A. (8.)].
FINAL DISCHARGE SHALL CONTAIN NO FLOATING SOLIDS OR FOAM VISIBLE IN OTHER THAN TRACE AMOUNTS.

Permit NC0032077
A. (3) CALCULATION OF TOTAL NITROGEN LOADS
a. The Permittee shall calculate the monthly and annual Total Nitrogen (TN) loads as follows:
i. Monthly TN Load (lb./mo.) = TN x TMF x 8.34
where:
TN
=
the average total nitrogen concentration (mg/L) of the composite
samples collected during the month
TMF
=
the Total Monthly Flow of wastewater discharged during the month
(MG/mo.)
8.34
=
conversion factor, from (mg/L x MG) to pounds
ii. Annual Mass Loading (lb./yr.) = Sum of the 12 Monthly TN Loads for the calendar
year
b. The Permittee shall report monthly Total Nitrogen results (mg/L and lbimo.) in the discharge
monitoring report for that month and shall report each year's annual results (lb./yr.) in the December
report for that year.
A. (4.) ANNUAL LIMITS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN
a. Total Nitrogen (TN) allocations and TN Load limits for NPDES dischargers in the Neuse River basin are
annual limits and are applied for the calendar year.
b. For any given calendar year, the Permittee shall be in compliance with the annual TN Load limit in this
Permit if:
i. the Permittee's annual TN Load is less than or equal to said limit, or
ii. the Permittee is a Co-Permittee Member of a compliance association.
c. The TN Load limit in this Permit (if any) may be modified as the result of allowable changes in the
Permittee's TN allocation.
i. Allowable changes include those resulting from purchase of TN allocation from the Wetlands
Restoration Fund; purchase, sale, trade, or lease of allocation between the Permittee and other
dischargers; regionalization; and other transactions approved by the Division.
ii. The Permittee may request a modification of the TN Load limit in this Permit to reflect allowable
changes in its TN allocation. Upon receipt of timely and proper application, the Division will modify
the permit as appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program requirements.
iii. Changes in TN limits become effective on January 1 of the year following permit modification. The
Division must receive application no later than August 31 for changes proposed for the following
calendar year. Application shall be sent to:
NCDWQ / NPDES Unit
Attn: Neuse River Basin Coordinator
Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

Permit NC0032077
d. If the Permittee is a member and co-Permittee of an approved compliance association, its TN discharge
during that year is governed by that association's group NPDES permit and the TN limits therein.
i. The Permittee shall be considered a Co-Permittee Member for any given calendar year in which it is
identified as such in Appendix A of the association's group NPDES permit.
ii. Association roster(s) and members' TN allocations will be updated annually and in accordance with
state and federal program requirements.
iii. If the Permittee intends to join or leave a compliance association, the Division must be notified of the
proposed action in accordance with the procedures defined in the association's NPDES permit.
(1) Upon receipt of timely and proper notification, the Division will modify the
permit as appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program
requirements.
(2) Membership changes in a compliance association become effective on January 1
of the year following modification of the association's permit.
e. The TN monitoring and reporting requirements in this Permit remain in effect until expiration of this Permit
and are not affected by the Permittee's membership in a compliance association.
A. (5.) NON -DETECTION REPORTING -- DETERMINING COMPLIANCE
If an analyte is not detected by a given laboratory method, the Permittee shall report the minimum detection
level (MDL) for that specific test method, preceded by the "<" sign. Example: < 5.0 mg/L = "not detected"
above 5 milligrams per liter. To determine compliance with a permit limit, the Division shall calculate
reasonable potential in accordance with EPA guidelines considering %2 the MDL, if not detected.

Permit NC0032077
A. (6.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
For discharges beginning prior to November 1, 2006, or for discharges occurring after relocating the outfall to the mainstem
of Contentnea. Creek to achieve better dilution, the effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of
reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 11.0 %.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the `North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or `North Carolina
Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of January, April, July, and November. Effluent sampling for this testing 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 -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the `North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) 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, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch 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 Environmental Sciences Branch 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.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring
requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival, 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.

Permit NC0032077
A. (7.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
For discharges after November 1, 2006 (assuming that the outfall has not been relocated to achieve higher dilution), the
effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia
dubia at an effluent concentration of 90.0 %.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina
Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of January, April, July, and November. Effluent sampling for this testing 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 -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) 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, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch 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 Environmental Sciences Branch 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.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring
requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an
invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be a completed no later than the last day of the month
following the month of the initial monitoring.

Permit NC0032077
(8.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The Permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached table (in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 136). Samples shall represent seasonal variations. Unless otherwise indicated here, metals shall be
analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
1,1-dichloroethylene
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen
1,2-dichloropropane
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite
1,3-dichloropropylene
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Ethylbenzene
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease
Methyl bromide
2-chloronaphthalene
Phosphorus
Methyl chloride
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids
Methylene chloride
Chrysene
Hardness
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Antimony
Tetrachloroethylene
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic
Toluene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium
1,1,2-trichloroethane
1,3-dichlorobenzene
Chromium
Trichloroethylene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper
Vinyl chloride
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead
Acid -extractable compounds:
Diethyl phthalate
Mercury
P-chloro-m cresol
Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Selenium
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Silver
2,4-dimethylphenol
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Thallium
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Fluoranthene
Zinc
2,4-dinitrophenol
Fluorene
Cyanide
2-nitrophenol
Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds
4-nitrophenol
Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile organic compounds:
Pentachlorophenol
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein
Phenol
Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzene
Base -neutral compounds:
Isophorone
Bromoform
Acenaphthene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride
Acenaphthylene
Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Anthracene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane
Benzidine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane
Benzo(a)anthracene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Benzo(a)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Chloroform
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Pyrene
Dichlorobromomethane
Benzo(ghi)perylene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethane
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2-dichloroethane
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
The Permittee shall report test results to the Division in DWQ Form- A MR-PPA1 or in a form approved by the Director
within 90 days of sampling. The report shall be submitted to the following address: Division of Water Quality, Water
Quality Section, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.

FILE CONTENTS:
Leftid"e:
BIMS Tracking Slip.
❑ Old Tracking Slip.
Right side:
❑ Streamline Package Sheet
Draft Permit Cover Letter.
Lf /)5raft Permit
Facility Map �"
II ' Fact Sheet.f tJ '1
C�' i3Permit Writer's Notes
O Staff Report from Region
0 Old Permit
lermit Application.
C9' Acknowledgement Letter
❑ Permittee Responses
O Waste Load Allocation
Note:
NPDES PERMIT
DRAFT Sz. FINAL
CHECK LIST
a)P-r-iN1T2JcA t) S c�
Facility
Permit No. l - C 3Ze�
NPDES Permit Writer:
(
(to region, only if stream ned)
(add new policy text; . mmarize m or changes o permit)
(order: cover, suppl- ent, map, - fluent -sheets, special conditions)
(E-Map: include f cility Outfa ; U and D sample locations)
(document per 't writer's is es and re -issue logic)
(if not in Fact Sheet -- chr.nology, strategy, DMR Review, RPA, etc.)
(as appropri e -- not nee.ed if streamlined)
(Text, Effluent Sheets and Special Conditions)
(New Permit or Renewal; any additional permittee correspondence)
(NPDES Unit written response to Renewal Application)
(to acknowledgement letter, if any)
(reference date; notes if recalculated for current action)
Italics indicate special conditions not always required or applicable.
/Submitted to .fl 12e-i- v' OY— for Peer Review: Date "SA (,Me5 . Admin cutoff f- _A
d Peer Review completed by 11( P£'Pl) Date 3W 5—
❑ Public Notice System Update BIMS Update: Events Limits
O Permit Mailed / E-Mailed to
(Regional Staft) by Date
❑ Regional Office Review completed by 0 /K' / a
D�ate+�
O Submitted to �for Public Notice on G5te'ti • Notice Date
O EPA Review by 0/41 - ►i ` initiated by �ab�.- Datey
r ' PA Review completed by ' t 2 -i*C- f ` U`aTr initiated by � L Date
Additional Review by 64 'u A-1- 1 'f2 �F- initiated by .Y Date ate'
tY Additional Review completed by 61. (— on: Date /j _
I FINAL to Dave / Mike / Susan / Tom • signature on Pf.)F067 Letter Dated S
O Additional Review
Et Final Files transferred to Server (Permits Folder)
. BIMS Update: Events Limits

Re: Confentnea MSD -- Corrections
Subject: Re: Contentnea MSD -- Corrections
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 08:40:28 -0500
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
thanks for addressing my comments. FYI, in A.2 for BOD5, summer/winter
still aren't specified will send a no comment letter.
Marshall
6'eG cvtS
1 of 1 12/7/2005 9:42 AM

DENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET Addendum
28Nov05
Joe R. Corporon
NPDES Unit
FOR: Contentnea MSD WWTP
NPDES Permit NC0032077
Pitt County
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District/Contentnea MSD WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 477; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Facility Address:
NCSR 1910; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Permitted Flow
2.85 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (98%) and industrial (2%) with pretreatment program;
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Pitt County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
UT of Contentnea
Creek
Regional Office:
Washington (WaRO)
Stream Classification:
C-Sw-NSW
State Grid / USGS Quad:
F29SW/Grifton, NC
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Joe Corporon
Subbasin:
03-03-07
Date:
Nov 28, 2005
Drainage Area (mi2):
1000
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
0.0
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
0.0
30Q2 (cfs)
0.0
Average Flow (cfs):
0.0
IWC (%):
100%
Lat. 35° 21' 20" N Long. 77° 24' 58" W
Receiving -Stream Zero -flow Conditions. During previous permit cycles, the Permittee has
discharged with the understanding that they controlled a designated effluent channel and considered this
channel part of their treatment system. However, the Division has determined that this discharge feature
does not qualify as an "effluent channel" under state rule 15A NCAC 02B.0227 (see DWQ's letter
dated 28Nov05). The Division has therefore determined that the Permittee discharges to waters of the
state under "zero -flow" conditions.
The Division must alter the permit to meet stricter limits for BOD5 and ammonia considering zero -flow
conditions and the potential need for advanced treatment. Furthermore, zero -flow conditions forbid
flow expansion/discharge increase at the current outfall location. Compliance to `zero -flow' conditions
is mandatory, except that the Permittee may relocate the outfall to the main -stem of Contentnea
Creek to achieve better dilution. The Permittee was warned of this potential determination in the 2001
permit issuance cover letter.

Considering the above, the Division has corrected the permitted outfall location to read: an unnamed
tributary of'the Contentnea Creek. Revised Outfall: Lat. 35° 21' 20" N; Long. 77° 24' 58" W
(Previous Outfall: Lat. 35° 21' 06" N; Long. 77° 24' 58" W).
Phased Permit. This permit has been "phased" to provide a compliance schedule wherein the
Permittee may install advanced treatment or move the outfall [see permit section A.(1) a. and b. and
section A.(2)]. Phase I permit limits reflect conditions to be met following expiration on November 1,
2006 of Special Order by Consent, EMC SOC WQ SO4-005. If "zero -flow" issues are not resolved by
November 1, 2006, the permit shall revert to stricter limits under Phase II [Permit Section, A. (2)].
Concerning Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA). Because of time elapsed since the first draft
permit was prepared, the Division has revisited the RPA to include the most recent effluent data (see
attached database and conclusions). RPA evaluated both discharge locations and corresponding
Instream Waste Concentrations (IWCs) of 11% (Tables 1 and 2) and 100% (Tables 3 and 4). This
RPA considered DMR data spanning January 2002 through May 2005 and summarizes the calculation
of permit limits.
RPA Summary Table 1.
Chronic RPA Findings for IWC of 11 %
Parameter
, Samples
(n)
Hits,
, ,(n)
Maximum
Allowable
,. Concentration
RP*
- y/n,
Comments/:
Renewal>Action
`Predicted' ,
Arsenic
14
0
Not detected
457 µg/L
—
No changes to the permit.
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
18 µg/L
—
No changes to the permit.
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
457 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
64 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
46 µg/L
Yes
(see Table 2) limit is less
stringent than acute and will
not be included in the permit.
Lead
14
0
Not detected
—
-
No changes to permit
Mercury
5***
5
0.014 µg/L
0.110 µg/L
?
No changes to the permit.
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
867,111 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
42 µg/L
805 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
24.6 mg/L
136.4 mg/L**
No
Delete monitoring from
permit (data adjusted to
remove outlier Jan04)
Selenium
14
0
Not detected
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
357 µg/L
457 µg/L
No
See Table 2 -- Action Level
Standard — no chronic toxicity
problem, therefore no limit;
continue monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed instream Water Quality Standard.
**BPJ = based on 15 mg/L (best professional judgment)
*** Mercury analytical database reflects test -method EPA 1631 (5 data points) only.

RPA Summary Table 2.
Acute RPA Findings for IWC of 11 %
Parameter
Samples
(n)
Hits
Maximum
'/2 FAV-/
CMC
RP*
y/n
Comments
Renewal Action
(n)
Predicted
Arsenic
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No acute criteria
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
15.0 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
1022 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7.3 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
22 µg/L
Yes
Add acute limit
equal to Y2 FAV. Because this
acute limit will be applied as
a Daily Maximum, the
chronic Weekly Ave. limit
(46 µg/L, Table 1) limit is
less stringent than acute and
will not be included
in the permit.
Lead
14
0
Not detected
34 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5
5
0.014 µg/L
—
—
No acute limit; Standard
based on bio-accumulation
(See Table 1)
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
No criteria
-
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
42 µg/L
261 p.g/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
24.6 mg/L
—
—
No acute criteria
(See Table 1) (data adjusted
to remove outlier Jan04)
Selenium
14
0
Not detected
56 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not detected
1.23 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
357 µg/L
67 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed mstream Water Quality Standard.

RPA Summary Table 3.
Chronic RPA Findintts for IWC of 100 %
Parameter
Samples
(n)
Hits
.(n) ;
Maximum
Predicted '
Allowable
. Concentration
RPM
y/n
Comments /
lenewalAction
Arsenic
14
0
Not detected
50 µg/L
—
No changes to the permit.
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
2 µg/L
—
No changes to the permit.
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
50 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
5 µg/L
Yes
(see Table 4) limit is less
stringent than acute and will
not be included in the permit.
Lead
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5
5
0.014 µg/L
0.012 µg/L
?
By Method 1631; Monthly
monitoring - no permit limit
at this time (BPJ) ***
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
867,111 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
42 µg/L
88 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
24.6 mg/L
16.7 mg/L**
Yes
Added Limit; increased
monitoring to Weekly;
(data adjusted to remove
outlier Jan04)
Selenium
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
357 µg/L
50 µg/L
Yes
See Table 2 -- Action Level
Standard — no chronic toxicity
problem, therefore no limit;
continue monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed instream Water Quality Standard.
**BPJ based on 15 mg/L best professional judgment
*** Mercury: Insufficient database (not detected by EPA Method 245.1) - analytical results limited to
testing by method EPA 1631 - five data points only. Footnote added to the permit providing for
reevaluation of RP after 12 data points, upon written request by the Permittee. Receiving stream not
impaired for mercury.

RPA Summary Table 4.
Acute RPA FindinEs for IWC of 100 %
Parameter_ , '
Samples
(n)
Hits'
Maximum
Predicted .
h z FAY /
CMC
RP* :
y/n
_ _ Comments./
Renewal. Action
(n) -
Arsenic
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No acute criteria
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
15.0 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
50 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
5 µg/L
Yes
Add acute limit
equal to %2 FAV. Because
this acute limit will be
applied as a Daily
Maximum, the chronic limit
(5 µg/L, Table 3) Weekly
Ave. is less stringent and
will not be included in the
permit.
Lead
14
0
Not detected
34 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5
5
0.014 µg/L
—
—
No acute limit; Standard
based on bio-accumulation
(See Table 3)
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
No criteria
—
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
42 µg/L
88 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
24.6 mg/L
—
—
No acute criteria
(See Table 1) (data adjusted
to remove outlier Jan04)
Selenium
14
0
Not detected
56 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not detected
1.23 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Zinc •
57
51
357 µg/L
50 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed instream Water Quality Standard.

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Contentnea MSD
NC0032077
Time Period jan 2003 - jan 2005
Qw(MGD) 2.85
7Q10S (cfs) 0
7Q10W (cfs) 0
30Q2 (cfs) 0
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 0
Rec'ving Stream Contentnea Creek
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7Q10S 100
@ 7Q10W 100
@ 3002 100
@ QA 100
Stream Class WS-IV, NSW
( Outfall 001
C-) Qw = 2.85 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NCWQS/
Chronic
''/,FAV/
Acute
n #Det. MaxPredCw AllowableCw
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
14 0
3
Acute:
Chronic:
N/A
-- ---------------------------------
50
RP= No
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
14 0
0.5
Acute:
Chronic:
15
——
2.0
RP=No
— — — — --- — ——_—_—_—
RP = No
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
ug/L
Acute:
14 3 39 --
Chronic:
1,022
50
RP_No ----- — — ----- — — --- —
RP=No
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
Acute:
56 24 882
�Chronic:
7
7
RP = YES --------- — — — — — — —
RP=YES
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
14 4 50
Acute:
Chronic
22
—
5
—------_---- ------—
RP = YES
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
14 0 2.5
Acute:
_ _
Chronic:
34
—
25
RP=No -- ----- — — — — --- — —_—
RP = No
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
5 -2
Note: n<12
Limited data
0.014
set
Acute:
Chronic:
N/A
0.012
— — — — ---_— --- — — — — — ---
RP = ?
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
8 1
Note: n<12
Limited data
24
set
Acute:
Chronic:
N/A
3,500
— — — — —_— — — — — — —_—_—_—_—
RP = No NC Criteria
Nickel
NC
88
261
ug/L
Acute:
12 2 42 _ _.—__
^Chronic:
261
_-
88
RP No -----_-_------------_—_—_—
RP = No
Selenium
NC
5.0
56
ug/L
14 0
7
Acute:
_ _
Chronic:
56
— __—
5
RP=?
— — ---_— — --- — ——_—_—_—
RP=?
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1.23
ug/L
Acute:
14 0 2.5
Chronic:
1.23
0.06
RP =?— — ----- — - — --- — — — — —
RP=?
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
Acute:
57 51 357 _____________________
Chronic:
67
—
50
RP = YES
— — — — — — — —
RP = YES
Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, rpa
12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Contentnea MSD
NC0032077
Time Period jan 2003 -jan 2005
Qw (MGD) 2.85
7QIOS (cfs) 36
7QIOW (cfs) 72
30Q2 (cfs) 120
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 1090
Rec'ving Stream Contentnea Creek
WWTP Class IV
!WC (%) @ 7Q1OS 10.93
@ 7Q1OW 5.7807
@ 30Q2 3.5505
@ QA 0.4036
Stream Class WS-IV, NSW
Outfall 001
Qw = 2.85 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NCWQS/ liPAW
Chronic Acute
n tt let Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
14 0
3
Acute: N/A
-___—_---------------------_---_—_—_
Chronic: 457
Cadmium
NC
2 15
ug/L
14 0
Acute: 15
0.5 —
Chronic 18
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
14 3
39
Acute: 1,022
__________
Chronic 457
Chronic:
_______________________--
----- ------------ ----_—
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
56 24 882
Acute: 7
__--------_—_—_—_---------------_—_
Chronic: 64
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
14 4 50
I Acute: 22
Chronic 46
__
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
ug/L
14 0 I 2.5
Acute: 34
_
Chronic 229
_— — —_--------------.— — — —
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
Acute: N/A
5 -2 I 0.014
Note: n<12 Chronic 0.11
Limited data set
— . w 7�: Oe
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
Acute: N/A
8 1 24
Note: n<12 IChronic 867,111
Limited data set
Nickel
NC
88 261
ug/L
12 2 42
Acute: 261
it Chronic 805 --
-------------------------------
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
ug/L
14 0 7
Acute: 56
-----
Chronic:46
-- -----------------------------
Silver
NC
0.06 AL 1.23
ug/L
14 0
2.5
Acute: 1.23
, Chronic055 --
-------------------------------
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
57 51
357
Acute: 67
__-------_—_---_-----------_—_—_—_
Chronic 457
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
" Freshwater Discharge
Oi L
/7i4 ( ft = �/�� / 32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2D9/ rpa
w-/5knit- �3‘ps

Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP Grade
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
Stream Class
7010s (cfs)
7Q10w (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
Time Period
Data Source(s)
Contentnea MSD
IV
NC0032077
001
2.9
Contentnea Creek
WS-IV, NSW
36.0
72.0
120.0
1090
jan 2003 - jan 2005
DMRs
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Name
Type Chronic Modifier Acute POL Units
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
Beryllium
C
6.5
ug/L
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
Chromium
NC
50
1022
ug/L
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
NC
1800
ug/L
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
Molybdenum
A
3500
ug/L
Nickel
NC
88
261
ug/L
Phenols
A
1
N
ug/L
Selenium
NC
5
56
ug/L
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1.23
ug/L
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005, input
8/19/2005

Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
1NWTP Grade
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
Stream Class
7010s (cfs)
7Q10w (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
Time Period
Data Source(s)
Contentnea MSD
IV
NC0032077
001
2.9
Contentnea Creek
WS-IV, NSW
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
jan 2003 - jan 2005
DMRs
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Name
Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
Beryllium
C
6.5
ug/L
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
Chromium
NC
50
1022
ug/L
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
NC
1800
ug/L
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
Molybdenum
A
3500
ug/L
Nickel
NC
88
261
ug/L
Phenols
A
1
N
ug/L
Selenium
NC
5
56
ug/L
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1.23
ug/L
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, input
12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Arsenic
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2003 < 5.0 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 Apr-2003 < 5.0 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 Sep-2003 < 5.0 2.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 Dec-2003 < 5.0 2.5 n 14
5 Feb-2004 < 5.0 2.5
6 Jun-2004 < 5.0 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.0000
7 Sep-2004 < 5.0 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 Nov-2004 < 5.0 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L
9 Jan-2002 < 5.0 2.5
10 Apr-2002 < 5.0 2.5
11 Sep-2002 < 5.0 2.5
12 Dec-2002 < 5.0 2.5
13 Feb-2005 < 5.0 2.5
14 May-2005 < 5.0 2.5
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
59
60
199
200
-1-
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Cadmium
Chromium
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
Jan-2003
<
1.0
0.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
Jan-2003
12
12.0
Std Dev.
2.9559
2
Apr-2003
<
1.0
0.5
Mean
0.5000
2
Apr-2003
7
7.0
Mean
3.8929
3
Sep-2003
<
1.0
0.5
C.V.
0.0000
3
Sep-2003
<
5
2.5
C.V.
0.7593
4
Dec-2003
<
1.0
0.5
n
14
4
Dec-2003
<
5
2.5
n
14
5
Feb-2004
<
1.0
0.5
5
Feb-2004
<
5
2.5
6
Jun-2004
<
1.0
0.5
MultFactor=
1.0000
6
Jun-2004
<
5
2.5
MultFactor =
3.2400
7
Sep-2004
<
1.0
0.5
Max. Value
0.5 ug/L
7
Sep-2004
8
8.0
Max. Value
12.0 ug/L
8
Nov-2004
<
1.0
0.5
Max. Pred Cw
0.5 ug/L
8
Nov-2004
<
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
38.9 ug/L
9
Jan-2002
<
1.0
0.50
9
Jan-2002
<
5
2.5
10
Apr-2002
<
1.0
0.50
10
Apr-2002
<
5
2.5
11
Sep-2002
<
1.0
0.50
11
Sep-2002
<
5
2.5
12
Dec-2002
<
1.0
0.50
12
Dec-2002
<
5
2.5
13
Feb-2005
<
1.0
0.50
13
Feb-2005
<
5
2.5
14
May-2005
<
1.0
0.50
14
May-2005
<
5
2.5
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
59
59
60
60
199
199
200
200
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
- 2 - 12/1 /2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Copper
Cyanide
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
Jan-2003
<
10
5.0
Std Dev.
32.6208
1
Jan-2003
<
5
2.5
Std Dev.
3.1316
2
Feb-2003
11
11.0
Mean
13.1996
2
Apr-2003
<
5
2.5
Mean
3.7221
3
Feb-2003
<
10
5.0
C.V.
2.4713
3
Sep-2003
<
5
2.5
C.V.
0.8413
4
Mar-2003
14
14.0
n
56
4
Dec-2003
<
5
2.5
n
14
5
Mar-2003
<
10
5.0
5
Feb-2004
<
5
2.5
6
Apr-2003
27
27.0
Mult Factor =
3.6000
6
Jun-2004
4.47
4.5
Mult Factor =
3.5700
7
Apr-2003
8
8.0
Max. Value
245.0 ug/L
7
Sep-2004
2.64
2.6
Max. Value
14.0 ug/L
8
Apr-2003
<
10
5.0
Max. Pred Cw
882.0 ug/L
8
Nov-2004
<
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
50.0 ug/L
9
May-2003
<
10
5.0
9
Jan-2002
<
5
2.5
10
May-2003
<
10
5.0
10
Apr-2002
14
14.0
11
Jun-2003
<
10
5.0
11
Sep-2002
<
5
2.5
12
Jun-2003
<
10
5.0
12
Dec-2002
<
5
2.5
13
Jul-2003
<
10
5.0
13
Feb-2005
6
6.0
14
Jul-2003
<
10
5.0
14
May-2005
<
5
2.5
15
Aug-2003
<
10
5.0
15
16
Aug-2003
<
10
5.0
16
17
Sep-2003
<
10
5.0
17
18
Sep-2003
4
4.0
18
19
Sep-2003
<
10
5.0
19
Sep-2004 outlier = 264
20
Oct-2003
<
10
5.0
20
21
Oct-2003
<
10
5.0
21
22
Nov-2003
16
16.0
22
23
Nov-2003
<
10
5.0
23
24
Dec-2003
6
6.2
24
25
Dec-2003
<
10
5.0
25
26
Dec-2003
<
10
5.0
26
27
Jan-2004
17
17.0
27
28
Jan-2004
<
10
5.0
28
29
Feb-2004
<
10
5.0
29
30
Feb-2004
7
7.0
30
31
Feb-2004
17
17.0
31
32
Mar-2004
<
10
5.0
32
33
Mar-2004
<
10
5.0
33
34
Apr-2004
<
10
5.0
34
35
Apr-2004
15
15.0
35
36
May-2004
<
10
5.0
36
37
May-2004
<
10
5.0
37
38
Jun-2004
12
12.0
38
39
Jun-2004
12
12.0
39
40
Jun-2004
9
9.0
40
41
Jul-2004
<
10
5.0
41
42
Jul-2004
<
10
5.0
42
43
Aug-2004
<
10
5.0
43
44
Aug-2004
13
13.0
44
45
Sep-2004
11
11.0
45
46
Sep-2004
6
6.0
46
47
Sep-2004
59
59.0
47
48
Oct-2004
<
10
5.0
48
49
Oct-2004
<
10
5.0
49
50
Nov-2004
15
15.0
50
51
Nov-2004
18
18.0
51
52
Nov-2004
14
14.0
52
53
Dec-2004
12
12.0
53
54
Dec-2004
<
10
5.0
54
55
Jan-2005
245
245.0
55
56
Jan-2005
11
11.0
56
57
57
58
58
59
59
60
60
199
199
200
200
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
- 3 - 12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Lead
Mercury
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2003 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 Apr-2003 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 Sep-2003 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 Dec-2003 < 5 2.5 n 14
5 Feb-2004 < 5 2.5
6 Jun-2004 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.0000
7 Sep-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 uglL
8 Nov-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L
9 Jan-2002 < 5 2.5
10 Apr-2002 < 5 2.5
11 Sep-2002 < 5 2.5
12 Dec-2002 < 5 2.5
13 Feb-2005 < 5 2.5
14 May-2005 < 5 2.5
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
59
60
199
200
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2003 < Std Dev. 0.0014
2 Apr-2003 < Mean 0.0036
3 Sep-2003 < C.V. 0.3834
4 Dec-2003 0.0055 0.0 n 5
5 Feb-2004 0.0028 0.0
6 Jun-2004 0.0036 0.0 Mult Factor = 2.6100
7 Sep-2004 0.0041 0.0 Max. Value 0.006
8 Nov-2004 0.0019 0.0 Max. Pred Cw 0.014
9 Jan-2002 <
10 Apr-2002 <
11 Sep-2002 <
12 Dec-2002 <
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
59
60
199
200
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
- 4 - 12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Nickel
Selenium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2003 < 10 5.0 Std Dev. 3.6056 1 Jan-2003 < 10 5.0 Std Dev. 0.9354
2 Apr-2003 < 10 5.0 Mean 6.5000 2 Apr-2003 < 10 5.0 Mean 4.7500
3 Sep-2003 < 10 5.0 C.V. 0.5547 3 Sep-2003 < 10 5.0 C.V. 0.1969
4 Dec-2003 < 10 5.0 n 12 4 Dec-2003 < 10 5.0 n 14
5 Feb-2004 < 10 5.0 5 Feb-2004 < 10 5.0
6 Jun-2004 < 10 5.0 Mult Factor = 2.6200 6 Jun-2004 < 10 5.0 Mult Factor = 1.4000
ug/L 7 Sep-2004 < 10 5.0 Max. Value 16.0 ug/L 7 Sep-2004 < 10 5.0 Max. Value 5.0
ug/L 8 Nov-2004 < 10 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 41.9 ug/L 8 Nov-2004 < 10 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 7.0
9 Jan-2002 16 16.0 9 Jan-2002 < 10 5.0
10 Apr-2002 < 10 5.0 10 Apr-2002 < 10 5.0
11 Sep-2002 < 10 5.0 11 Sep-2002 < 10 5.0
12 Dec-2002 12 12.0 12 Dec-2002 < 3 1.5
13 Feb-2005 13 Feb-2005 < 10 5.0
14 May-2005 14 May-2005 < 10 5.0
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
199 199
200 200
_5
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
12/1/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Silver
Zinc
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jan-2003 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 Jan-2003 39 39.0 Std Dev. 26.4464
2 Apr-2003 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000 2 Jan-2003 37 37.0 Mean 32.3509
3 Sep-2003 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000 3 Jan-2003 187 187.0 C.V. 0.8175
4 Dec-2003 < 5 2.5 n 14 4 Feb-2003 14 14.0 n 57
5 Feb-2004 < 5 2.5 5 Mar-2003 14 14.0
6 Jun-2004 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.0000 6 Mar-2003 < 10 5.0 Mult Factor = 1.9100
ug/L 7 Sep-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L 7 Apr-2003 13 13.0 Max. Value 187.0
ug/L 8 Nov-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L 8 Apr-2003 56 56.0 Max. Pred Cw 357.2
9 Jan-2002 < 5 2.5 9 Apr-2003 18 18.0
10 Apr-2002 < 5 2.5 10 May-2003 < 10 5.0
11 Sep-2002 < 5 2.5 11 May-2003 < 10 5.0
12 Dec-2002 < 5 2.5 12 Jun-2003 23 23.0
13 Feb-2005 < 5 2.5 13 Jun-2003 23 23.0
14 May-2005 < 5 2.5 14 Jul-2003 75 75.0
15 15 Jul-2003 < 10 5.0
16 16 Aug-2003 69 69.0
17 17 Aug-2003 < 10 5.0
18 18 Sep-2003 21 21.0
19 19 Sep-2003 23 23.0
20 20 Sep-2003 35 35.0
21 21 Oct-2003 31 31.0
22 22 Oct-2003 13 13.0
23 23 Nov-2003 20 20.0
24 24 Nov-2003 11 11.0
25 25 Dec-2003 20 20.0
26 26 Dec-2003 27 27.0
27 27 Dec-2003 27 27.0
28 28 Jan-2004 37 37.0
29 29 Jan-2004 18 18.0
30 30 Feb-2004 33 33.0
31 31 Feb-2004 25 25.0
32 32 Feb-2004 20 20.0
33 33 Mar-2004 < 10 5.0
34 34 Mar-2004 19 19.0
35 35 Apr-2004 25 25.0
36 36 Apr-2004 36 36.0
37 37 May-2004 22 22.0
38 38 May-2004 33 33.0
39 39 Jun-2004 32 32.0
40 40 Jun-2004 55 55.0
41 41 Jun-2004 47 47.0
42 42 Jul-2004 27 27.0
43 43 Jul-2004 30 30.0
44 44 Aug-2004 28 28.0
45 45 Aug-2004 52 52.0
46 46 Sep-2004 53 53.0
47 47 Sep-2004 57 57.0
48 48 Sep-2004 60 60.0
49 49 Oct-2004 27 27.0
50 50 Oct-2004 34 34.0
51 51 Nov-2004 45 45.0
52 52 Nov-2004 33 33.0
53 53 Nov-2004 37 37.0
54 54 Dec-2004 40 40.0
55 55 Dec-2004 36 36.0
56 56 Jan-2005 34 34.0
57 57 Jan-2005 23 23.0
58 58
59 59
60 60
199 199
200 200
32077 - Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, data
- 6 - 12/1 /2005

Memo
To: Gil Vinzani, Supervisor
Eastern NPDES Program
Attention: Joe Corporon, Environmental Technician
Eastern NPDES Unit
ern
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Through: Al Hodge, Supervisor
Washington Regional Office Su `Protection i
;i 2 1
From: Kristin Jarman, Treatment Plant Consultant 4, t_25b.
Washington Regional Office, Surface Water Protection
Date: October 19, 2005
Re: CMSD (NC0032077) Effluent Channel Determination
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District (CMSD) contends that their effluent
discharges from their effluent pipe into an effluent channel. This 1600 foot
channel then discharges into Contentnea creek. The Washington Regional Office
contends that this "effluent channel" is actually waters of the State.
Under 15A NCAC 02B .0028 (attachment A) effluent channels shall:
1) be contained entirely on property owned (or otherwise controlled) by
the discharger (to be demonstrated by the discharger);
2) not contain natural waters except when such waters occur in direct
response to rainfall events by overland runoff;
3) be so constructed or modified as to minimize the migration of fish into
said channel;
4) be identified and designated on a case -by -case basis prior to permit
issuance.
In a letter dated March 19, 2002 to Roger Thorpe from Charles Smithwick,
District Manager of CMSD, Charles addresses the 4 criteria which determine
what is considered an "effluent channel" (attachment B).
Charles states that:
1) The channel is entirely contained within CMSD property.
2) Under normal conditions, the only water in the effluent channel is
CMSD effluent.

3) The channel has a positive bottom slope and the upper end of the
channel is shallow. It was not designed to be an attractive fish habitat.
4) The effluent channel was designated and permitted as an effluent
channel when CMSD was formed and its treatment plant constructed.
The effluent channel is not a natural channel, and its construction was
part of the same construction contract as the treatment plant.
The Washington Regional Office responded to the above letter in a letter dated
April 19, 2002 (attachment C). Addressed to Charles Smithwick from Jim
Mulligan, Water Quality Regional Supervisor at the time, the letter states that the
CMSD channel does contain natural waters including ground water and water
backed up from Contentnea Creek. The 1974 Pitt County Soils Map shows a
perennial stream in this location and the dug channel apparently crossed this
stream. The channel also does not meet the requirements for minimizing fish
migration.
I have visited the site on numerous occasions and have noted the surface water
inflow into the channel from several large drainage pipes. The channel crosses a
backwater slew and waters from the channel and the slew can intermingle. Fish
migration into the channel has not been minimized. This office maintains that this
is not an effluent channel. We would like to suggest that a letter be sent to CMSD
with Alan Klimek's signature stating our position so this matter may be resolved.

�TTi}Uf /l/T 4
15A NCAC 02B .0226 EXEMPTIONS FROM SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Variances from applicable standards, revisions to water quality standards or site -specific water quality standards may be
granted by the Commission on a case -by -case basis pursuant to G.S. 143-215.3(e), 143-214.3 or 143-214.1. A listing of
existing variances shall be maintained and made available to the public by the Division. Exemptions established pursuant to
this Rule shall be reviewed as part of the Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards conducted pursuant to 40 CFR
131.10(g).
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-214.3; 143-215.3(e);
Eff October 1, 1995.
15A NCAC 02B .0227 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANS
(a) In implementing the water quality standards to protect the existing uses [as defined by Rule .0202 of this Section] of the
waters of the state or the water quality which supports those uses, the Commission shall develop water quality management
plans on a priority basis to attain, maintain or enhance water quality throughout the state. Additional specific actions deemed
necessary by the Commission to protect the water quality or the existing uses of the waters of the state shall be specified in
Paragraph (b) of this Rule. These actions may include anything within the powers of the Commission. The Commission may
also consider local actions which have been taken to protect a waterbody in determining the appropriate protection options to
be incorporated into the water quality management plan.
(b) All waters determined by the Commission to be protected by a water quality management plan are listed with specific
actions as follows:
The Lockwoods Folly River Area (Lumber River Basin), which includes all waters of the lower Lockwoods Folly River in an
area extending north from the Intracoastal Waterway to a line extending from Genoes Point to Mullet Creek, shall be protected
by the specific actions described in Subparagraphs (1) through (5) of this Paragraph.
(1) New development activities within 575' of the mean high water line which require a Sedimentation Erosion
Control Plan or a CAMA major development permit must comply with the low density option of the coastal
Stormwater Runoff Disposal Rules [as specified in 15A NCAC 2H .1005(2)(a)].
(2) New or expanded NPDES permits shall be issued only for non -domestic, non -industrial process type
discharges (such as non -industrial process cooling or seafood processing discharges). A public hearing is
mandatory for any proposed (new or expanded) NPDES permit to this protected area.
(3) New non -discharge permits shall be required to meet reduced loading rates and increased buffer zones, to be
determined on a case -by -case basis.
(4) New or expanded marinas must be located in upland basin areas.
(5) No dredge or fill activities shall be allowed where significant shellfish or submerged aquatic vegetation bed
resources occur, except for maintenance dredging, such as that required to maintain access to existing
channels and facilities located within the protected area or maintenance dredging for activities such as
agriculture.
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1; 143-215.8A;
Eff. October 1, 1995;
Amended Eff. January 1, 1996.
15A NCAC 02B .0228 EFFLUENT CHANNELS
The standards of water quality contained in this Section shall not apply to waters within effluent channels, as defined in Rule
.0202 of this Section, except that said waters shall be maintained at a quality which shall prevent the occurrence of offensive
conditions, protect public health, and allow maintenance of the standards applicable to all downstream waters. Effluent
channels shall be designated by the Director, such that the channels shall:
(1) be contained entirely on property owned (or otherwise controlled) by the discharger (to be demonstrated by
the discharger);
(2) not contain natural waters except when such waters occur in direct response to rainfall events by overland
runoff;
NORTH CAROLINA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Eff. August 1.2004 Page 47

(3) be so constructed or modified as to minimize the migration of fish into said channel;
(4) be identified and designated on a case -by -case basis prior to permit issuance.
Histoay Note: Authority G.S. 143-214.1;
Eff October 1, 1995;
Amended Eff. January 1, 1996.
15A NCAC 02B .0229 TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN - NUTRIENT SENSITIVE WATERS MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY: NUTRIENT OFFSET PAYMENTS FOR NON-TAR-PAMLICO BASIN ASSOCIATION
MEMBERS
(a) All waters of the Tar -Pamlico River Basin have been supplementally classified nutrient sensitive waters (NSW) pursuant to
15A NCAC 2B .0223. The following procedures are to be implemented in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0223 in all waters
of the Tar -Pamlico River Basin for those wastewater dischargers who are not members of the Tar Pamlico Basin Association;
(b) Existing wastewater dischargers expanding to greater than 0.5 million gallons per day (MGD), who are not members of the
Tar -Pamlico Basin Association, shall be required to offset their additional nutrient loads by funding nonpoint source control
programs approved by the Division of Water Quality prior to the issuance of their NPDES permit and at each renewal.
Nitrogen and phosphorus loads shall be offset at the rate of 110 percent of the cost to implement BMPs designed to reduce that
same load created by expanding the discharge above 0.5 MGD. Equations for calculating the offset costs are:
(1) For an existing facility with permitted flow of less than or equal to 0.5 MGD as of December 8, 1994
expanding to greater than 0.5 MGD who is not a member of the Tar -Pamlico Basin Association:
Payment=((PF, x (TN+TP) x 1384)-(0.5 x (TN+TP) x 1384)) x (BMP0 x 1.1) where:
Payment = the nutrient offset payment ($);
PF, = Permitted Flow including expansion (MGD);
TN = 6 mg/1 total nitrogen for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
TP = 1 ing/l total phosphorus for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
1384 = conversion factor;
0.5 = the permitted flow (MGD) above which payment for additional nutrient loading is required;
BMPC = Best Management Practice cost-effectiveness rate in $/kg as set in 15A NCAC 2B .0237 of this
Section;
1.1 = 110 percent of the cost for the nonpoint source controls.
(2) For an expanding facility with a permitted flow of greater than or equal to 0.5 MGD as of December 8, 1994
who is not a member of the Tar -Pamlico Basin Association:
Payment=((PF0 x (TN+TP) x 1384)-(PF x (TN+TP) x 1384)) x (BMPC x 1.1) where:
Payment = the nutrient offset payment ($);
PF, = Permitted Flow including expansion (MGD);
PF = Permitted Flow as of December 8, 1994 (MGD);
TN = 6 mg/1 total nitrogen for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
TP =1 mg/1 total phosphorus for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
1384 = conversion factor;
BMPC = Best Management Practice cost-effectiveness rate in $/kg as set in 15A NCAC 2B .0237 of this
Section;
1.1 = 110 percent of the cost for the nonpoint source controls.
(c) New wastewater dischargers with permitted flows greater than or equal to 0.05 MGD, who are not members of the Tar -
Pamlico Basin Association, shall be required to offset their nutrient loads by funding nonpoint source control programs
approved by the Division of Water Quality prior to the issuance of their NPDES permit and at each renewal. Nitrogen and
phosphorus loads shall be offset at the rate of 110 percent of the cost to implement BMPs designed to reduce that same loading
created by the new discharge above 0.05 MGD. The equation for calculating the offset costs is:
Payment = PF x (TN+TP) x 1384 x (BMPC x 1.1) where:
Payment = the nutrient offset payment ($);
PF = Permitted Flow (MGD);
TN = 6 mg/1 total nitrogen for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
TP = 1 mg/1 total phosphorus for domestic discharges or BAT for industrial discharges;
NORTH CAROLINAADMINISTRATIVE CODE Eff: August 1.2004 Page 48

"unm&Aii
£ittentizat Metto o "tcu c$eioetage Ziittht
CMSD
POST OFFICE BOX 477
GRIFTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28530
CHARLES M. SMITHWICK, JR.
DISTRICT MANAGER
March 19, 2002
Mr. Roger Thorpe
Washington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
Re: Effluent Channel
CMSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
Dear Mr. Thorpe,
tBAR 2 1 2002
CMSD has, since its inception, operated an effluent channel that conveys wastewater
from its treatment plant to Contentnea Creek. When our permit was last renewed, we
were informed that the effluent channel might not meet the standards for such channels as
defined by current North Carolina regulations. We are naturally concerned about this
potential development. Should our effluent channel cease to be an effluent channel for
regulatory purposes, the cost of extending a discharge pipe to Contentnea Creek will
create a financial burden for the District without producing any benefit that we can
identify. In response to an inquiry about this situation made on our behalf, Ms. Kristen
Jarman of your office visited the channel and then wrote that, in her opinion, our effluent
channel did not meet the current regulatory criteria for such channels. While we hold Ms.
Jarman in the highest regard, we feel that in this case she is misinterpreting the rules, and
ask that you look into our case, review the situation, and let us know if our view that our
discharge channel is a discharge channel under North Carolina rules is the correct view.
The rules governing under what circumstance a channel may be designated an effluent
channel were evidently amended some time in 1996, and as presently written establish
four criteria that must be satisfied. We question whether these new rules and criteria are
applicable to our situation at all. We have been designated as having an effluent channel
since the system was first permitted in 1976, and the current rules appear to be intended
for new installations where the Director has not yet made an effluent channel designation.
However, should the rules be found to be applicable to our situation, we believe we still
meet all the four criteria listed in the new regulations. Each of these criteria is restated
below, and the manner in which we meet the criteria explained. The criteria require that
an effluent channel:
Criteria (1) be contained entirely on property owned (or otherwise controlled) by
the discharger (to be demonstrated by the discharger);

A site plan showing the CMSD Property lines and the effluent channel is attached.
This map clearly shows that the channel is entirely contained within CMSD
property.
Criteria (2) not contain natural waters except when such waters occur in direct
response to rainfall events by overland runoff;
Under normal conditions, the only water in the effluent channel is CMSD effluent.
The stormwater runoff from our plant site, and the area immediately around the
plant site will also enter the channel during stormwater events. However, in dry
weather there is no flow in the channel other than CMSD effluent. When the
Contentnea Creek water level rises, effluent does back up in the lower portion of
the effluent channel, but the backed up water is still effluent. The effluent channel
is located in a flood plain. During flood stage Contentnea Creek sometimes
overflows its banks and floods the effluent channel and the large flood plain area
through which the channel is located. The creek banks at the point where the
channel enters the creek are actually higher than much of the flood plain land
adjoining the channel. Because of the bank elevation, when the flood level
subsides, water is trapped behind the banks of Contentnea Creek. This flood
water will flow into the effluent channel which becomes the outlet to Contentnea
Creek. An access road built on one side of the effluent channel cut off natural
surface drainage in several places, so CMSD installed pipes under the access road
in these sports to restore the natural surface drainage pattern. Trapped flood
waters flow through these pipes into the effluent channel, then back to the Creek.
The width of the flood plain is extensive, and after a flood has subsided surface
water may continue to flow through these pipes for some time, but the flow is,
nonetheless, flood water, not a natural creek or stream. Ms. Jarman in some of
her conversations has referred to the pipes CMSD installed under the access road
as "underdrains" and stated that the existence of the pipes was one reason she felt
our discharge channel was not a discharge channel in the current regulatory
meaning of the term. Referring to the pipes as "underdrains" is, in our view, not a
correct use of the term. "Underdrain" as the word is often used is a pipe used to
intercept and remove groundwater. The pipes connecting to the effluent channel
do not intercept or convey groundwater at all, but only allow surface water to
drain under the access road. These surface water drainpipes are shown on the
enclosed pictures, and the pictures more than any words can show the nature and
function of the pipes. These types of pipes in our opinion should have no bearing
on how the channel is classified.
Criteria (3) be so constructed as to minimize the migration of fish into said
channel;
The effluent channel has a positive bottom slope, and except during the highest
flood stages the upper end of the channel has a shallow depth that discourages all

but the smallest of fish. However, the Contentnea Creek water level is sufficiently
high most of the time to cause effluent to backup in the lower end of the channel
to a depth that can support a large variety of size fish. The CMSD treatment level
is normally so good that water quality is not a deterrent to fish entering the deeper
lower channel. However, when constructed, not only was the channel cleared, but
so was a strip of land on the side of it, so that the channel is exposed to direct
sunlight and to flying predators. The bottom is a dug slope on an engineered
grade, so there are no pools nor shade to provide shelter for fish. The channel was
clearly not designed to be attractive fish habitat, and we think therefore that it
meets criteria 3. The quality of our effluent is such that we do sometimes see fish
in the channel. Criteria 3 does not, however, require a channel to be fish free, and
we do not think the occasional sighting of fish in the channel should be a barrier
to its being designated an effluent channel. If Criteria (3) becomes a sticking
point, we are willing to work with your office in devising means to make the
channel less attractive to fish.
Criteria (4) be identified and designated on a case by case basis prior to permit
issuance.
As noted earlier, the effluent channel was designated and permitted as an effluent
channel when CMSD was formed and its treatment plant constructed. The
effluent channel is not a natural channel, and its construction was part of the same
construction contract as the treatment plant. The channel is trapezoidal in shape,
with a 10-foot bottom width, and 3:1 side slopes. The 10-foot bottom width flares
out to a forty foot width at its upper end, so that its width matches the headwall
section that holds the discharge pipe for the gravity and pumped effluent and
stormwater discharges within the CMSD flood protection dike. The design plans
for its construction are dated 1975, and included in the same plan set as the
treatment plant proper. The channel design drawings are shown on Sheet 22 of 44
sheets, which is titled "Plant Effluent Canal and Headwall -Plan, Profile, and
Details". The channel could not be more clearly identified as an effluent channel,
and the effluent channel designation was clearly accepted by the Division Director
(then the Director of the Division of Environmental Management) prior to permit
issuance. The channel was not an improvement or modification to an existing
drainageway or feature, but an engineered hydraulic structure designed and built
for the express, explicit, purpose of conveying effluent from the CMSD treatment
plant to Contentnea Creek. Criteria 4 has been satisfied.

Your assistance in resolving this matter is greatly appreciated. If you need any additional
information, please feel free to call. If you would like to visit the channel, you know you
are always welcome at our plant.
Sincerely,
64*e-4 //,-)f.
Charles M. Smithwick, Jr.
District Manager
C: Ford Chambliss
The Wooten Company

Michael F. Easley, Govenor
William G. Ross, Jr. Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
April 19, 2002
Mr. Charles M. Smithwick, Jr.
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
Post Office Box 477
Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Subject: Effluent Channel determination
CMSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
Pitt County
Dear Mr. Smithwick:
This is in response to your letter dated March 19, 2002 to Roger Thorpe in which you requested
a determination that the channel receiving wastewater from CMSD be classified as an effluent
channel. In order to be an effluent channel the channel must meet all four of the requirements in
15A NCAC 02B .0228. The CMSD channel does contain natural waters including ground water
and water backed up from Contentnea Creek. The 1974 Pitt County Soils Map shows a perennial
stream in this location. The dug channel apparently crossed this stream. The channel also does
not meet the requirement for minimizing fish migration.
Based on this information this channel does not meet the requirements of an effluent channel.
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please contact us at [phone].
Sincerely,
Jim Mulligan
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
cc: Washington Regional Office
Central Files
Dave Goodrich — NPDES Permitting Unit
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity eve Action Employer

Draft Permit Review
Subject: Draft Permit Review
From: John Giorgino <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:30:23 -0400
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
Joe, I have reviewed NC0032077 (Contentnea MSD). I have no comments on the
permit. That was an interesting find concerning the discharge to a UT. Thanks for
forwarding it.
John Giorgino
Environmental Biologist
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Mailing Address:
1621 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Office: 919 733-2136
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Web Page: http://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us
1 of 1 9/7/2005 6:47 AM

DENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET Addendum
25Aug05
Joe R. Corporon
NPDES Unit
FOR: Contentnea MSD WWTP
NPDES Permit NC0032077
Pitt County
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District/Contentnea MSD WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 477; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Facility Address:
NCSR 1910; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Permitted Flow
2.85 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (98%) and industrial (2%) with pretreatment program;
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Pitt County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
UT of Contentnea
Creek
Regional Office:
Washington (WaRO)
Stream Classification:
C-Sw-NSW
State Grid / USGS Quad:
F29SW/Grifton, NC
303(d) Listed?
Subbasin:
No
03-03-07
Permit Writer:
Date:
Joe Corporon
May 10, 2005
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
1000
0.0
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
0.0
30Q2 (cfs)
0.0
Average Flow (cfs):
IWC (%):
0.0
100%
Lat. 35° 21' 20" N Long. 77° 24' 58" W
Receiving -Stream Zero -flow Conditions. During previous permit cycles, the Permittee has
discharged with the understanding that they controlled a designated effluent channel and considered this
channel part of their treatment system. However, the Division has determined that the Permittee does
not wholly control the drainage area contributing to the channel, and without this critical criterion, this
discharge feature does not qualify as an "effluent channel" under federal guidelines. The Division has
therefore determined that the Permittee discharges to waters of the state under "zero -flow" conditions.
Considering the above, the Division has corrected the description of the discharge location to: an
unnamed tributary of the Contentnea Creek. Revised Dutfall: Lat. 35° 21' 20" N; Long. 77° 24' 58"
W (Previous Dutfall: Lat. 35° 21' 06" N; Long. 77° 24' 58" W). Under zero -flow conditions, the
Division must alter the permit to meet stricter limits for BOD5 and ammonia. The Division has
accordingly redrafted this permit to reflect these conditions. Zero -flow will require advanced treatment.
Furthermore, flow expansion/discharge increase is forbidden at the current outfall location.

Compliance to `zero -flow' conditions is mandatory, except that the Permittee may relocate the outfall
to the main -stem of Contentnea Creek to achieve better dilution. The Permittee was warned of these
conditions in the cover letter at issuance of the 2001 permit.
Phased Permit. This pen -nit has been "phased" to provide a compliance schedule wherein the issue of
"zero -flow" conditions may be addressed [see Permit, Sections A. (1) and A. (2)]. Effluent BOD5 for
permit limits for Phase I reflect conditions to be met following expiration on November 1, 2006 of
Special Order by Consent, EMC SOC WQ SO4-005. If "zero -flow" issues are not resolved by November
1, 2006, the permit shall revert to stricter limits under Phase II [see Permit Section, A. (2)].
Concerning Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA). Because of time elapsed since the draft permit
was prepared, the Division has revisited the RPA to include the most recent effluent data (see attached
database and conclusions). RPA was calculated for both discharge locations and corresponding
Instream Waste Concentrations (IWCs 11% and 90%). The RPA evaluation presented here considered
DMR reports spanning January 2002 through May 2005 (see RPA summary Tables 1 and 2).
A Findings for IWC of 11
Parameter
Samples
Hits
(n)
Maximum--'"
Predicted
Allowable
Concentration
RP*
yin
Comments /
Renewal Action
Arsenic
14
0
3 µg/L
457 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Cadmium
14
0
0.5 µg/L
18 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
457 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
64 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
46 µg/L
Yes
Added Weekly Ave. limit to
permit; Weekly monitoring
Lead
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5***
5
0.014 µg/L
0.012 µg/L
Yes
Not detected by EPA Method
245.1. BPJ Monthly
monitoring by
EPA Method 1631
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
867,111 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
. •
805 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
792 m :
15 mg/L**
Yes
Add Monthly Ave. limit to
permit; Weekly monitoring
Selenium
14
0
Net detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
3.7 µg/L
457 µg/L
No
See Table 2 -- Action Level
Standard — no chronic toxicity
problem, therefore no limit;
continue monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential' to exceed ins
**BPJ = best professional judgment
*** Mercury analytical records reflects both
more sensitive method EPA 1631 (5 data po
for mercury, the Division evaluated Method
eam Water Quality Standard.
e less -sensitive method EPA 245.1 (7 data points) and the
s), 12 data points total. To establish "reasonable potential"
631 results only, in deference to the water quality standard.

Acute RPA Findings for IWC of 11 %
Parameter
Samples
(n)
Hits -
(n)
Maximum
Predicted
I/2 FAV /
CMC
RP*
y/n
Comments /
Renewal Action
Arsenic
14
0
Not detected
-
-
No acute criteria
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
15.0 µg/L
-
No changes to permit
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
1022 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7.3 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard - no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
22 µg/L
Yes
Add acute limit
equal to'h FAV
Lead
14
0
Not detected
34 µg/L
-
No changes to permit
Mercury
5
5
0.014 µg/L
-
-
No acute limit; Standard
based on bio-accumulation
(See Table 1)
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
No criteria
-
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
261 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
79J F g/L
-
-
No acute criteria
(See Table 1)
Selenium
14
0
Not detected
56 µg/L
-
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
No detected
1.23 µg/L
-
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
• 7 µg/L
67 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard - no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed nstr am Water Quality Standard.

KVA Summary i auie 1.
Parameter
Samples
(n)
Hits
(n)
Maximum:.
Predicted
Allowable
Concentration
RP*
y/n
Comments /
Renewal Action
Arsenic
14
0
3 µg/L
50 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Cadmium
14
0
0.5 µg/L
2 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
50 µg/L
No
No changes to the permit.
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7 µg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore no
limit; continue monitoring
2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
5 µg/L
Yes
Added Weekly Ave. limit to
permit; Weekly monitoring
Lead
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5***
5
0.014 µg/L
0.012 µg/L
Yes
Not detected by EPA Method
245.1. BPJ Monthly
monitoring by
EPA Method 1631
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg/L
867,111 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
88 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
792 g/L
15 mg/L**
Yes
Add Monthly Ave. limit to
permit; Weekly monitoring
Selenium
14
0
Not etected
—
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
Not etected
—
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
35 µg/L
50 µg/L
Yes
See Table 2 -- Action Level
Standard — no chronic toxicity
problem, therefore no limit;
continue monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential' to exceed
**BPJ = best professional judgment
*** Mercury analytical records reflects
more sensitive method EPA 1631 (5 data
for mercury, the Division evaluated Met
stream Water Qd uality Stanard.
th the less -sensitive method EPA 245.1 (7 data points) and the
oints), 12 data points total. To establish "reasonable potential"
od 1631 results only, in deference to the water quality standard.

/Acut RPA Findings for IWC of 90 %
Ili H JUliiiiiai y
Parameter
i avia....
Samples
(n)
�.
Fits
(n)
Maximum
Predicted
Y2 FAV /
CMC
RP*
yin
Comments /
Renewal Action
14
0
Not detected
—
—
No acute criteria
Arsenic
Cadmium
14
0
Not detected
15.0 µg/L
—
. No changes to permit
Chromium
14
3
42 µg/L
50 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Copper
56
24
882 µg/L
7 µg/L
Yes
�
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
Cyanide
14
4
50 µg/L
5 µg/L
Yes)
� _
Add acute limit
equal to 1/4 FAV
Lead
14
0
Not detected
34 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Mercury
5
5
0.014 µg/L
—
—
No acute limit; Standard
based on bio-accumulation
(See Table 1)
Molybdenum
8
1
24 µg(L
No criteria
—
No changes to permit
Nickel
14
2
42 µg/L
88 µg/L
No
No changes to permit
Oil & Grease
24
24
C-792 g/L
—
—
No acute criteria
(See Table 1)
Selenium
14
0
N t detected
56 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Silver
14
0
of detected
1.23 µg/L
—
No changes to permit
Zinc
57
51
357 µg/L
50 pg/L
Yes
Action Level Standard — no
toxicity problem, therefore
no limit; continue
monitoring 2/Month
*RP = "Reasonable Potential" to exceed ?nstream Water Quality Standard.

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Contentnea MSD
NC0032077
Time Period jan 2003 -jan 2005
Qw (MGD) 2.85
7Q1OS(cfs) 0
7Q10W (cfs) 0
30Q2 (cfs) 0
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 0
Rec'ving Stream Contentnea Creek
ce_34,01776 n1 s
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7Q10S 100
@ 7Q 10W 100
@ 30Q2 100
@ QA 100
Stream Class WS-IV, NSW
Outfall 001
Qw = 2.85 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(t)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS/ '/, FAV/
Chronic Acute
n #DM. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
Acute: N/A
14 0 3
Chronic: 50
Cadmium
NC
2 15
ug/L
14 0
0.5
Acute: 15
Chronic---2.0
RP = No
RP = No
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
14 3
39
Acute: 1,022
------------------------------------
Chronic:50
RP = No
RP = No
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
56 24
882
Acute: 7
_
Chronic: 7
— RP = YES — — — — — — — — — — — —
RP = YES
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
14 4
50
Acute: 22
— — —
Chronic: 5
_________________---
RP=YES
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
ug/L
14 0
2.5
Acute: 34
——_—
Chronic: 25
RP=No
— — — --- — --- — —_—
RP = No
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
5 -2
Note: n<12
Limited data
0.014
set
Acute: N/A
_
Chronic: 0.012
— — — — ----- — — — —_— — —_—_
RP =?
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
8 1
Note: n<12
Limited data
24
set
Acute: N/A
Chronic 3,500
RP = No NC Criteria
Nickel
NC
88 261
ug/L
12 2
42
Acute: 261
Chronic: 88
RP = No — —
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
ug/L
14 0
Acute: 56
7 _ _ —RP=?
Chronic: 5
I
— — — — --- ---—_—_—_—_—_
RP=?
Silver
NC
0.06 AL 1.23
ug/L
14 0
2.5
Acute: 1.23
-- -s---------------------------------
Chronic:-O
RP=?
RP=?
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
I Acute: 67
57 51 357
Chronic 50
RP = YES — — — — — — — — — — —_—_
RP = YES
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow. rpa
8/30/2005

Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP Grade
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
Stream Class
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q1Ow (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
Time Period
Data Source(s)
Contentnea MSD
IV
NC0032077
001
2.9
Contentnea Creek
WS-IV, NSW
0.0
0.0
jan 2003 jan 2005
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Name
Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Arsenic
NC
50
ug/L
Beryllium
C
6.5
ug/L
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
Chromium
NC
50
1022
ug/L
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
NC
1800
ug/L
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
Molybdenum
3500
ug/L
Nickel
NC
88
261
ug/L
Phenols
A
1
ug/L
Selenium
NC
5
56
ug/L
Silver
NC
0.06
1.23
ug/L
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
32077 -- Joe's RPA 2003 - 2005 Zero Flow, input
8/30/2005

Owner: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist
Facility: Contentnea Sewerage District WWTP
Permit: NC0032077
Region: Washington
County: Pitt
Permit Enforcement History by Owner
ii(s3--K5AD
07/18/05
1
Penalty Remission Enf EMC EMC OAH Collection Has
Assessment Penalty Enforcemen Request Enf Conf Remission Hearing Remission Remission Memo Sent Balance Pmt Case
Case Number MR Approved Amount t Costs Damages Received Held Amount Held Amount Amount to AGO Total Paid Due Plan Closed
LV-2003-0222 04/07/03 $250.00 $51.12 $301.12 $.00 No 04/25/03
LV-2003-0484 2-2003 07/17/03 $500.00 $51.12
$551.12 $.00 No 08/14/03
LV-2003-0544 3-2003 08/14/03 $500.00 $51.12 $551.12 $.00 No 09/04/03
LV-2003-0691 5-2003 10/21/03 $500.00 $51.12
$551.12 $.00 No 11/14/03
LV-2005-0171 1-2005 05/11/05 $500.00 $63.76
$563.76 $.00 No 05/24/05
Total Cases: 5
Total Penalties:
$2,250.00 $268.24
$2,518.24
$2,518.24 $.00
Total Penalties after remission(s): $2,518.24

MONRORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for.
Report Date: 07f1805 Page: 1 of 18
Permit nc0032077 MR3 Between: 1 -2002 and 12 -2005
Facility Name: % Param Name: %
Region: %
County. %
Violation Category. %
Subbasin: %
Program Category %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077
FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt
REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT /PPI
LOCATION PARAMETER
02 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-0ay (20 Deg. C)
08 - 2003 001 Effluent BOO, 5-0ay (20 Deg. C)
09 - 2003 001 Effluent 8013, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
05 - 2004 001 Effluent
08 - 2004 001 Effluent
03 - 2005 001 Effluent
03 - 2005 001 Effluent
04 - 2005 001 Effluent
11 - 2002 001 Effluent
02 - 2003 001 Effluent
02 - 2003 001 Effluent
03 - 2003 001 Effluent
03 - 2003 001 Effluent
BOO. 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
BOO, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
80D, 5-Day (20 Dog. C)
BOD, 5-0ay (20 Deg. C)
BOO, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
BOD, 5-Day (20 Dog. C)
BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C)
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF. M-FC
8roth.44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
VIOLATOR
DATE FREQUENCY
02/28/03 5 X week
08/16/03 5 X week
09/27/03 5 X week
11/08/03 5 X week
11/30/03 5 X week
12/20/03 5 X week
12/31/03 5 X week
05/08/04 5 X week
08/21/04 5 X week
0326/05
03/31/05
04/02/05
11/16/02
5 X week
5 X week
5 X week
5Xweek
02/22/03 5 X week
02/28/03 5 X week
03/01/03 5 X week
03/22/03 5 X week
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for.
Permit: nc0032077 MRS Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005
Facility Name: % Param Name: %
Region: %
County. %
UNIT OF
MEASURE
CALCULATED
LIMIT VALUE
mgll 22 24.99
019/f 33
mgl 33
mgl 33
mgll 22 24.58
mgl 33 49.42
1694 22 24.07
mg/l 33
ff19/1 33
mg8 50 76.1
mgJl 25 37.73
mg11 50 69.12
91100811 400 2,126,7
ft/100m1 400 1,435.36
f#10om1 200 233.91
6/lOOm1 400 668.4
#l100m1 400 642.88
Violation Category: %
Subbash: %
Monthly Average Exceeded
45.7 Weekly Average Exceeded
37.43 Weekly Average Exceeded
37.02 Weekly Average Exceeded
Monthly Average Exceeded
Weeldy Average Exceeded
Monthly Average Exceeded
60.72 Weekly Average Exceeded
33.96 Weekly Average Exceeded
VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
Proceed to
Enforcement Case
No Action, SOC
Pending
No Action, SOC
Pending
No Action, SOC
Pending
No Action. SOC
Pending
No Action. SOC
Pending
No Action. SOC
Pending
No Action, SOC
Pending
No Action, SOC
Pending
Weekly Average Exceeded None
Monthly Average Exceeded None
Weekly Average Exceeded None
Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Exceeded Enforcement Case
Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Exceeded Enforcement Case
Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Exceeded Enforcement Case
Weeldy Geometric Mean No Action. BIMS
Exceeded Calculation Error
Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Exceeded Enforcement Case
Report Date: 07f18705 Page: 2 of 18
Program Category. %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077
FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist- Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt
REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT / PPI
05 - 2003 001 Effluent
07 - 2003 001 Effluent
08 - 2003 001 Effluent
08 - 2003 001 Effluent
08 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 601 Effluent
10 - 2003 001 Effluent
10 - 2003 001 Effluent
10 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
LOCATION PARAMETER
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Cdiform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Cdform. Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth.44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Coliforn, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Coliform, Fecal ME, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE
05/31/03 5 X week
07/05/03 5 X week
08/09/03 5 X week
08/16/03 5 X week
08/31/03 5 X week
09/27/03 5 X week
09/30/03 5 X week
10/11/03 5Xweek
10/18/03 5Xweek
10/31/03 5 X week
11/01/03 5Xweek
11/08/03 5 X week
11/15/03 5 X week
11/30/03 5 X week
12/13/03 5 X week
12/20/03 5 X week
i#100m1
#1100m1
#/100m1
i#100m1
#/100m1
#/10omi
3/100m1
#/100m1
#/100m1
3/100m1
#/100m1
3/100m1
3N10om1
#110om1
#N100m1
f#100m1
CALCULATED
LIMIT VALUE
400 748.53
400 474.68
400 4,784.21
400 7,073.33
200 602.14
400 2,878.52
200 209.17
400 628.08
400 450.68
200 321.86
400 1,894.19
400 10,919.86
400 738.9
200 867.65
400 838.76
400 2,680.13
VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Exceeded Enforcement Case
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weeldy Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geomehic Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weeldy Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending

•
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for. Report Date: 07n8/05 Pape: 3 of 18
Permit nrrv1n7077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12-2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category. %
Subbasin: %
Program Category. %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONRORING DUTFALL
REPORT /PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Col4orm, Fecal ME, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Col7orm, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
02 - 2004 001 Effluent Cotform. Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
04 - 2004 001 Effluent C05form. Fecal ME. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
04 - 2004 001 Effluent Co/form, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
05 - 2004 001 Effluent Coidorm, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
05 - 2004 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MP. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
08 - 2004 001 Effluent Celfonm, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
08 - 2004 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Bmth,44.5C
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
05 - 2004 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
03 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
04 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE OAT VALUE
12/31/03 5Xweek #/100m1 200 314.06
01/31/04 5Xweek #/100m1 200 337.95
01/31104 5Xweek 8/100m1 400 7,266.54
02/21/04 5 X week #/100m1 400 14 422.63
04/03/04 5 X week 0/100m1 400 938.07
04/17/04 5 X week #/1011m1 400 497.44
05/08/04 5 X week 8/100m1 400 24,940.11
05/31/04 5 X week t//100m1 200 306.03
08/21/04 5Xweek 1#100m1 400 532.9
08/28/04 5Xweek 8/100m1 400 536.04
12/20/03 SXweek mgA 45 54.4
12/31/03 5 X week mg0 30 31.44
05/08/04 5 X week mg7 45 46.8
01/08/05 5Xweek nga 45 56.5
03/26/05 5 X week mg7 45 45.88 Weekly Average Exceeded None
04/02/05 5 X week mg/I 45 56.4 Weekly Average Exceeded None
VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weeidy Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Monthly Geometric Mean No Action, SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Geometric Mean No Action. SOC
Exceeded Pending
Weekly Average Exceeded No Action, SOC
Pending
Monthly Average Exceeded No Action, SOC
Pending
Weekly Average Exceeded No Axton, SOC
Pending
Weekly Average Exceeded Proceed to
Enforcement Case
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for. Report Date: 07/18/05 Page: 4 of 18
Penult- nc0032077
Facility Name: %
MRS Between: 1 -2002 and 12-2005 Region: %
Param Name: % County. %
Violation Category %
Subbasin: %
Program Category. %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT /Pei LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06 - 2002 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 06/01/02 5 X week nr9A Frequency Violation None
07 - 2002 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 07/06/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
09 - 2002 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 09/07/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation Nono
11 - 2002 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 11/16/02 5 X week mg l Frequency Violation None
12 - 2002 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 12/28/02 5 X week rn9n Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/04/03 5 X week mgfl Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD. 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/25/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
04 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 0426/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 07/12/03 5 X week mg/l Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 09/06/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent BOO, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 09/20/03 5 X week rage Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 11/15/03 5 X week mgll Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 11/29/03 5 X week mg./1 Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 12/27/03 5 X week mgil Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent BCD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/03/04 5 X week men Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Boo, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/24/04 5 X week n/90 Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 04/17/04 5 X week mg0 Frequency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 06/05/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent BOO, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 07/10/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: nc0032077 MRs Botwean: 1 -2002 and 12 -2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category.
Subbasin: %
Report Date: 07/18A15 Page: 5 of 19
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACIUTY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFACE VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / pp! LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09 - 2004 001 Effluent BOD, 5.Oay (20 Deg. C) 09/11/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
11 • 2004 001 Effluent BOO. 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 11/13/04 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent 800, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 11/27/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 D01 Effluent BOD, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 12/25/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent 800, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/01/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent 00D, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/08/05 5 X week mg/1 FrequencyViolationNo Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent BOO, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 01/22/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
03 - 2005 001 Effluent 800, 5-Day (20 Deg. C) 03/26/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
06 - 2002 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 06/01/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
07 - 2002 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 07/06/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
09 - 2002 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 09/07/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
11 - 2002 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 11/16/02 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
12 - 2002 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 12/28/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/04/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/25/03 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
04 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 04/26/03 5 X week mgf Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 07/12/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 09/06/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for. Report Dau: 07/18/05 Page: 6 of 113
Permit nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12-2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County. %
Violation Category: %
Subbasin: %
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACIUTY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
'COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE UMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 09/20/03 5 X week INA Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 11/15/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 1129/03 5 X week n1g4 Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 12/27/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/03/04 5 X week nil Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 EMuent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/24/04 5 X week 1.911 Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 04/17/04 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 06/05/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 07/10/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
09 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 09/11/04 5 X week m9/1 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorin, Total Residual 11/13/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 11/27/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 12/25/04 5 X week m911 Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/01/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/06/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual 01/22/05 5 X week nlgf Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
03 - 2005 001 EMuent Chlorine, Total Residual 03/26/05 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
06 - 2002 001 Effluent Cdlfonn, Fecal MF, M-FC 06/01/02 5 X week it/1130m1 F
Breth 44 5C requency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/18/05 Page: 7 or 18
Permit nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 end 12 2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County- %
Violation Category. %
Subbasin: %
Program Category:
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dlst - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT f PP! LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
07 - 2002 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC 07/06/02 5 X week TN100m1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
09 - 2002 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MP, M-FC 09/07/02 5 X week 0/100m1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
11 - 2002 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC 11116/02 5 X week 4/100ml F
cy
Broth,44.5C raquenViolation None
12 - 2002 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MP. M-FC 12128/02 5 X wreak #/100m1 Frequency raquerlcy Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC 01/04/03 5 X week 1410om1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC 01/25/03 5 X week #/100m1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
04 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC 04/26/03 5 Xweek 6/100m1 F
Broth,44.5C raquency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MP, M-FC 07/12/03 5 X week 0/100m1 F
Broth,44.5C requency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MF. M-FC 09/06/03 5 X week 0/100m1 F
Broth,44.5C roquency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC 09/20/03 5 X week 0/100m1 F
Broth,44.5C requenoy Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC 11/15/03 5 X week t#100m1 F
Broth,44.5C requency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MP, M-FC 11/29/03 5 X week 1#100m1 F
Broth,44.5C requency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC 12/27/03 5 X week #/100m1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Conform. Fecal MF, M-FC 01/03/04 5 Xweek #4100m1 F
Broth,44.5C requency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC 01/24/04 5 Xweek #/100m1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
04 - 2004 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC 04/17/04 5 Xweek 1#10om1 Frequency Violation None
Broth,44.5C
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for-
Permit nc0032077 MRs Between: 7 -2002 and 122005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Perm Name: % County. %
Violation Category: %
Subbasin: %
Report Date' 07/10/05 Page: 8 0118
Program Category -
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
06 - 2004 001 Effluent
07 - 2004 001 Effluent
09 - 2004 001 Effluent
11 - 2004 001 Effluent
11 - 2004 001 Effluent
12 - 2004 001 Effluent
01 - 2005 001 Effluent
01 - 2005 001 Effluent
01 - 2005 001 Effluent
03 - 2005 001 Effluent
06 - 2002 001 Effluent
07 - 2002 001 Effluent
09 - 2002 001 Effluent
11 - 2002 001 Effluent
12 - 2002 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Coliform. Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Colifonn, Fecal MP, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Coliform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Focal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth.44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF. M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
Conform, Fecal MF, M-FC
Broth,44.5C
DO. Oxygen. Dissolved
DO, Oxygen, Dissolved
DO, Oxygen, Dissolved
DO, Oxygen, Dissolved
DO, Oxygen. Dissolved
DO, Oxygen, Dissolved
DO, Oxygen, Dissolved
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE UMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06/05/04 5 Xweek 0/100m1 Frequency Violation None
07/10/04 5 X week #/100m1 Frequency Violation None
09/11/04 5 Xweek 11/100m1 Frequency Violation None
11/13/04 5Xweek ft/1D0m1 Frequency Violation None
11/27/04 5 Xweek #/10om1 Frequency Violation None
12/25/04 5 X week t#100m1 Frequency Violation None
01/01/05 5Xweek #/100m1 F No Action, Faculty
Frequency Natation Reporting Error
01/08/05 5 Xweek #/10om1 Frequency Violation No Aden' Facifiy
Reporting Error
01/22/05 5Xweek #/10om1 Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
03/26/05 5 X week 6/100m1 Frequency Violation None
06/01/02 5 X week mgyl Frequency Violation None
07/06/02 5 X week mg4 Frequency Violation None
09107/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
11/16/02 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
12/28/02 5 X week mall Frequency Violation None
01/04/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
01/25/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS tor: ReportOates 07/1E/05 Page: 9 ci1e
PemiIt nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category. %
Subbaskl: %
Program Category. %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONFTORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MFA1IRE UNIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
04 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 04/26/03 5 X week "VA Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent DO. Oxygen, Dissolved 07/12/03 5 X week mg5 Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 09/06/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 0920/03 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 11/15/03 5 X week mgf Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 1129/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 12/27/03 5 X week mg9 Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 01/03/04 5 X week mgll Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 01/24/04 5 X week MA Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 04/17/04 5 X week mgl Frequency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 06/05/04 5 X week mg/ Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 07/10/04 5 X week mg7 Frequency Violation Nona
09 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 09/11/04 5 X week mgl Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 11/13/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 1127/04 5 Xweek mgl Frequency Violation Nono
12 - 2004 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 1225/04 5 X week mg/ Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 01/01/05 5 X week mgl Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Repotting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 01/08/05 5 X week mgl Frequency Violation No Action, Faciiy
Reporting Erns
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS tor.
Permit: nc0032077
Facility Name: %
MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Param Name: % County. %
Violation Category. %
Subbask/: %
Report Oats: 01/18105 Pape: 10 .118
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
01 - 2005 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 0122105 5 Xweek mg/1 Frequency Violation No Action. Faciiy
Reporting Error
03 - 2005 001 Effluent DO, Oxygen, Dissolved 0328/05 5 X week mg/ Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Flow, In conduit or thru treatment 12/24/03 Continuous mgd Frequency Violation None
plant
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Flow,
o , in conduit or thru treatment 1225/03 Continuous mgd Frequency Violation None
nt
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Flow, In conduit or thru treatment 1228/03 Continuous mgd Frequency Violabon None
plant
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Flow, in conduit or thru treatment 12/27/03 Continuous mgd Frequency Violation None
plant
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Flow, In conduit or thru treatment 1228/03 Continuous
mgd Frequency Violation None
plant
08 - 2004 001 Effluent Flow, in conduit or thru treatment 08/14/G4 Continuous mgd Frequency Violation None
plant
06 - 2002 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 06/01/02 5 Xweek mg/ Frequency Violation None
07 - 2002 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 07/06/02 5 Xweek mg/ Frequency Violation None
09 - 2002 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 09/07/02 5 Xweek mg/1 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2002 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 11/18/02 5 Xweek MY Frequency Violation None
12 - 2002 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 1228/02 5 Xweek mg/1 Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 01/04/03 5 Xweek mgil Frequency Violation Nono
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 01/25/03 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
04 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 04/26/03 5 X week mgrl Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 07/12/03 5 X week MO Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 09/06/03 5 X week 041 Frequency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07l18ro5 Page: 1t of 18
Pam*: nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Fac44y Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Vlotetion Category: %
Subbasit: %
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT 1 PPI LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 09/20/03 5 X week man Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 11/15/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 1129/03 5 X week mg9 Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 12/27/03 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 01/03/04 5 X week rngn Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 0124/04 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 04117/04 5 X week men Frequency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 06/05/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 07/10/04 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
09 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 09/11/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 11 /13/04 5 X week mg0 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 11/27/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 1225/04 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 01/01/05 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation No Action. Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 01/08/05 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 0122105 5 X week mgll No Action, Facility Frequency Violation Reporting Error
03 - 2005 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Ammonia Total (as N) 0326/05 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent P/F STATRE 7Day Chr 12131/04 Quarterty pass/fail Frequency Violation None
Ceriodaphnia
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/18/05 Page: 12 of 18
Permit nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category: %
SnhhA5in: %
Program Category:
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District VVWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT /PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
06 - 2002 001 Effluent
07 - 2002 001 Effluent
09 - 2002 001 Effluent
11 - 2002 001 Effluent
12 - 2002 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
04 - 2003 001 Effluent
07 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
01 - 2004 001 Effluent
01 - 2004 001 Effluent
04 - 2004 001 Effluent
06 - 2004 001 Effluent
07 - 2004 001 Effluent
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Saids, Total Suspended
Sails, Total Suspended
Saida, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids. Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
Solids, Total Suspended
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06/01/02 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
07/06/02 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
09/07/02 5 X week men Frequency Violation None
11/16/02 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
12/28/02 5 X week man Frequency Violation None
01/04/03 5 X week INA Frequency Violation None
01/25/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
04/26/03 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None
07/12/03 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
09/06/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
09/20/03 5 X week mgll Frequency Violation None
11/15/03 5 X week nr94 Frequency Violation None
11/29/03 5Xweek mg/I Frequency Violation None
12/27/03 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
01/03/04 5 X week mg./1 Frequency Violation None
01/24/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
04/17/04 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
06/05/04 5 X week mg/I Frequency Violation None
07/10/04 5 X week mgn Frequency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Report Dale: 07/18415 Page: 13 al' 19
Permit nc0032077
Facility Name: %
MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12 -2005 Region: %
Param Name: % County- %
Violation Category: %
Subbasin: %
Program Category. %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / Pei LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREOUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09 - 2004 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended 09/11/04 5 X week m94 Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Solids. Total Suspended 11/13/04 5 X week rngt Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Solids. Total Suspended 11/27/04 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent Solids. Total Suspended 12/25/04 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended 01/01/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation No Action. Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids. Total Suspended 01/08/05 5 X week 177011 Frequency Violation No Action. Fadfity
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended 0122/05 5 X week mg/1 Frequency Violation No Action. Facility
Reporting Error
03 - 2005 001 Effluent Solids, Total Suspended 03/26/05 5 X week mgA Frequency Violation None
06 - 2002 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 06/01/02 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
07 - 2002 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 07/06/02 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
09 - 2002 001 Effluent Spedlic Conductance 09/07/02 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
11 - 2002 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 11/16/02 5Xweek umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
12 - 2002 001 Effluent Spedf c Conductance 12128/02 5 X week umhoslcm Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 01/04/03 5 X week umhos/Cn Frequency Violation None
01 - 2003 001 Effluent Spedfo Conductance 01/25/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
04 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 0426/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 07/12/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 09/06/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for Report Date: 07/18/06 Page: 14 or to
Permit: nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12 2005 Region: %
Faulty Name: % Paton Name: % _ County. %
Violation Category.
Subbaeln: %
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist-Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 09/20/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 11/15/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 1129/03 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 1227103 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 01/03/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 01/24/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 04/17/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 06/05/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 07/10/04 5 X week unnhonlcm Frequency Violation None
09 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 09/11/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Volution None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 11/13/04 5 X week umhos/an Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 11/27/04 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 1225164 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 01/01/05 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation No Acton. Facility
Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Specific Conductance O1Iumhos/cm8A)5 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency ViolationNo Action. Facility Reporting Error
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 0122I05 5 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation No Action, Data
Entry Error
03 - 2005 001 Effluent Specific Conductance 03/26/05 5 X week umhosran Frequency Violation None
06 - 2002 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg. 06/01/02 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
Centigrade

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for.
Report Dale: 07/16/05 Page: 15 of 18
Permit: nc0032077
Facility Name: %
MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category: %
Subbasin: %
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFACE
REPORT 1PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
07 - 2002 001 Effluent
09 - 2002 001 Effluent
11 - 2002 001 Effluent
12 - 2002 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
01 - 2003 001 Effluent
04 - 2003 001 Effluent
07 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 001 Effluent
09 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
11 - 2003 001 Effluent
12 - 2003 001 Effluent
01 - 2004 001 Effluent
01 - 2004 001 Effluent
04 - 2004 001 Effluent
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit n00032077
Fadliy Name: %
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE UMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
07/06/02 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
09/07/02 5 X week deg a Frequency Violation None
11/16/02 5 Xweek deg c Frequency Violation None
12/28/02 5 X weak dog c Frequency Violation None
01/04/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
0125/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
0426/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
07/12/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
09/06/03 5 X week deg a Frequency Violation None
09/20/03 5 X week deg a Frequency Violation None
11/15/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
11/29/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
12/27/03 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
01/03/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
0124/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
04/17/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12 -2005 Region: %
Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category. %
Subbasin: %
Reporl Data: 07/18/05 Page: 16 0118
Program Category:
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT IPPI LOCATION PARAMETER
06 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
07 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
09 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
11 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
12 - 2004 001 Effluent Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Temperature. Water Deg.
Centigrade
01 - 2005 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
03 - 2005 001 Effluent Temperature, Water Deg.
Centigrade
06 - 2002 001 Effluent pH
07 - 2002 001 Effluent pH
09 - 2002 001 Effluent pH
11 - 2002 001 Effluent pH
12 - 2002 001 Effluent pH
01 - 2003 001 Effluent pH
01 - 2003 001 Effluent pH
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06/05/04 5 X week deg a Frequency Violation None
07/10/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
09/11/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
11/13/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
1127/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
12/25/04 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
01/01/05 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01/08/05 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
01/22/05 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
03/26/05 5 X week deg c Frequency Violation None
06/01/02 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
07/06/02 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
09/07/02 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
11/16/02 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
12/28/02 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
01/04/03 5Xweek su Frequency Violation None
01125/03 5Xweek su Frequency Violation None

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/18/05 Page: 17 of 18
Permit nc0032077 MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category: %
Subbasln: %
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT f PPI LOCATION PARAMETER OATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
04 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 04/26/03 5 X week au Frequency Violation None
07 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 07/12103 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 09/06/03 5 X week su Fr
equency Violation None
09 - 2003 001 Effluent pH Q9/20/03 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 11/15/03 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
11 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 11/29/03 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
12 - 2003 001 Effluent pH 12/27/03 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 01/03/04 5 X week su Fr
equency Violation None
01 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 01/24/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
04 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 04/17/04 5 X week su Fr
equency Violation None
06 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 06/05/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
07 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 07/10/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
09 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 09/11/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 11/13/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
11 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 11/27/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
12 - 2004 001 Effluent pH 12/25/04 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
01 - 2005 001 Effluent pH 01/01/05 5 X week su Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Erns
01 - 2005 001 Effluent pH 01/08/05 5 X week su Frequency Violation No Action, Facility
Reporting Error
MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Oat.: 07/18/05 Pape: 18 of 18
Permit nc0032077
Facdtty Name: %
MRs Between: 1 -2002 and 12.2005 Region:
Param Name: % County: %
Violation Category. Y.
Subbasin: y.
Program Category: %
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0032077 FACILITY: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage Dist - Contentnea
Sewerage District WWTP
COUNTY: Pitt REGION: Washington
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT f PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
01 - 2005 001 Effluent pH
03 - 2005 001 Effluent pH
Reporting Violation
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LAIR VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
01/22/05 5 X week su Frequency Violation No Adion. Facility
Reporting Error
03/26/05 5 X week su Frequency Violation None
MONITORING OUTFALL
REPORT / PPI LOCATION PARAMETER
06 - 2003
10 - 2004
VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LDAR VALUE VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06/30/03 Signature Missing No Action, BPJ
10/31/04 Signature Missing None

comments on Contentea MSD - DRAFT FINAL Permit
Subject: comments on Contentea MSD - DRAFT FINAL Permit
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 16:11:34 -0500
To: Joe Corporon <[e-mail]>
CC: Gil Vinzani <[e-mail]>, Kristin Jarman <[e-mail]>, Mike
Templeton <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
hope these are useful. fyi, because this is a watch list facility, I
forwarded this to Yvonne Martin in enf, who may have additional
comments. pls respond when you can. will be glad to discuss by phone
if needed. Marshall
1. The RPA analysis for possible continued discharge to the unnamed
trib to Contentnea Cr. cited in the fact sheet uses a 90% IWC, even
though the 7Q10 is zero. I know NC sets the NOEC WET limit at 90% in
such situations and we have accepted that practice because NC's toxic
criterion is narrative. However, NC's 2000 RPA procedures do not
indicate this is done for assessing RP for chemicals. My reading of
the 2000 RPA procedures is that 100% IWC would be used. Is use of 90%
IWC a routine practice for assessing RP for chemicals when there is no
dilution? If so, we would need to reconsider our approval of the 2000
RPA procedures. Pls provide a rationale for why 90% IWC was used for
chemical RPA - to me, use of chemical limits derived from 90% IWC does
not maintain/protect NC numeric criteria in the unnamed trib.
2. re Hg, Table 3 says not detected by EPA Method 245.1, but the
footnote says 5 data pts exist based on Method 1631. Which is correct?
3. if this permit is going to be revoked/reissued, did you get a new
permit application from the permittee? That is a requirement of 40 CFR
124.5(c). If so, that needs to be sent here. If not, why not?
4. for the GODS and ammonia summer/winter limits, I don't see where you
defined which months are which.
5. For TN, A.1 says weekly composite sampling is required, but A.3 says
TN is the avg of all grab samples. Which did you mean?
6. In A.1.a.11, line 5 and A.2.a.11, line 6, "state" should be
"stated".
7. In A.3.b, think you mean to include a summation sign in front of
"(Monthly Mass Loadings)", but that symbol is missing in what I'm
looking at.
8. the A.5 language regarding reporting of compliance results using PQL
seems new to me. Why is NC using PQL rather than MDL? was 1/2 PQL used
to assess RP for non -detects for this facility? seems to me that would
have affected your decision for Cd and Pb. Pls explain.
1 of 1 12/1/2005 9:02 AM

rrilr
13f-r
i41 e- I-
ct(o - -
CA (k, / t1"
G- ( K-- Ll a
0
fob-r c 64F "1? id
`.M)/J5 75,1 usPK,r N a-- r•
C6' �
t6,W
ios_v/
cif
)Z77c-f4
COLTif
tAk
1,,r4k c r &a(j-
2 ‘1719( t 3V4CY
\n 014 -r
6 2z
p4-r-4_itt(44-;,k Q4.64r
4 -�
r)f
Gam: cl (136-0�
Q2/13 t# PAEZif &tr-
(sti2A-1 oo.71--0•( bosf-c^i,)

CHARLES M. SMITHWICK, JR.
DISTRICT MANAGER
anteneezett C/ iopoIi an Saver/age cOnnuct
CMSD
POST OFFICE BOX 477
GRIFTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28530
September 30, 2003
Ms. Natalie V. Sierra
NCDENR-DWQ-NPDES Unit
1617 Mail service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Draft NPDES Permit NC0032077
Contentnea MSD WWTP
Dear Ms. Sierra,
°cf.
— 1 ci,UJ
- WATER QUALITY
• rIT SOURCE ilifr itl i1
We have reviewed the draft NPDES Permit transmitted by letter dated September 10,
2003 and would like to request two changes to the permit. The changes we request deal
with the cyanide limit, and with the chronic toxicity test dilution value.
The proposed cyanide weekly testing frequency is, in our view, excessive. We have
historically monitored for cyanide quarterly, and upon receipt of the draft permit reviewed
our test results as far back as 1998. During all that time, cyanide in excess of testing
detection limits was found on only four occasions, and there were no instances in which
cyanide approached, much less exceeded, the proposed limit of 22.0 µg/L. In view of this
extensive record of compliance, we feel requiring that cyanide be tested weekly is simply
unwarranted. Weekly testing ($25/sample) will add $1,200 to our annual budget, but will
not provide any information not achievable by quarterly testing, i.e. documentation that
the CMSD discharge continues to not exceed the proposed 22 µg/L permit limit. Had
there been no prior testing record, we could better understand the NC-DWQ wishing to
build up some database of results before reducing the monitoring frequency, but since we
have been testing for cyanide for years, we do not feel a period of weekly testing is
needed. Also, the weekly average and daily maximum values for cyanide in the draft
permit appear to be reversed (i.e. the daily maximum should be more than, not less than,
the weekly average).
We also request that the chronic toxicity value continue to be calculated at 11 %, rather
than the proposed 90%. We base this request on several factors: (1) We believe the NC-
DWQ is mistaken in stating that our discharge is not an effluent channel. Our effluent
channel has been designated as such since 1975, when the NC-DWQ predecessor
organization reviewed and approved the plans for construction of the channel. The NC-
DWQ apparently based its determination on the effluent channel regulations written in
1996. These regulations appear to be written only to specify the circumstances under
which an effluent channel will be recognized for construction taking place after the date
of the regulations. Even were the 1996 regulations applicable, we believe our effluent
channel still meets the criteria set forth in the 1996 regulations. Some staff at the NC-

DWQ have stated that since our effluent channel crosses an old backwater slew of
Contentnea Creek before reaching of the main channel of Contentnea Creek, the 1996
regulations are not satisfied. This interpretation presupposes that backwater slews are
separate and discrete water bodies from the main creek channel, which we do not feel is a
logical assumption. (2) The detention time in the effluent channel (whether the channel is
or is not a "water of the State") is so short (depending on how our flows are running, and
the flood stage of Contentnea Creek, we estimate the detention times vary from less than
30 minutes to no more than a few hours) that actual impacts of our discharge are more
accurately approximated using the dilution ratio associated with our discharge and the
flow in Contentnea Creek. (3) Should we develop problems complying with the 90%
criteria, we will have no choice but to extend our effluent pipe to the main body of
Contentnea Creek. Extending this pipe will require use of financial resources now
dedicated to sewer rehabilitation efforts aimed at eliminating overflows of untreated
wastewater to the actual waters of the State. Further, since our effluent is the only source
of water in the effluent channel except incidental storm water flows which enter the
channel only during and immediately after storm events, if we are forced to build an
effluent pipe, it will result in the catastrophic destruction of most of the aquatic life that
has developed in the channel over the last two and a half decades. (The extreme lower
end of the channel will receive backwater flows from Contentnea Creek, and aquatic life
could still presumably survive in the lowest reach of the channel, albeit at much lower
DO levels. The upper two thirds or more of the channel will become a dry ditch). If
protection of aquatic life is the objective of the change from 11% to 90%, the change is
likely to prove counterproductive, and have an effect opposite of that intended.
We appreciate your attention to this request. Should you need any additional information
to better help you in evaluating this request, please let us know.
Sincerely,
,0=74tel
Charles M. Smithwick, Jr.
District Manager

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit NC0032077
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District/Contentnea MSD WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 477; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Facility Address:
NCSR 1910; Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Permitted Flow
2.85 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic (98%) and industrial (2%) with pretreatment program;
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Pitt County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
UT to Contentnea
Creek
Regional Office:
Washington (WaRO)
Stream Classification:
C-Swamp NSW
State Grid / USGS Quad:
F29SW/Grifton. NC
303(d) Listed?
No
Permit Writer:
Natalie V. Sierra
Subbasin:
03-03-07
Date:
August 21, 2003
Drainage Area (mi2):
1000
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
36
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
72
30Q2 (cfs)
120
Average Flow (cfs):
1090
IWC (%):
100%
Lat. 35° 21' 02" N Long. 77° 24' 59" W
BACKGROUND
The Contentnea MSD WWTP is a 2.85 MGD plant providing treatment for wastewater from Grifton,
Ayden, Winterville and four Significant Industrial Users (SIUs). Contentnea MSD has a full
pretreatment program with the Division of Water Quality's Pretreatment Unit. This program will
continue to be implemented in accordance with the permit.
The existing permit for this facility was issued on January 1, 2001 and expired on May 31, 2003. The
Permittee applied for renewal using EPA Form 2A on December 2, 2002. In addition to NPDES Permit
NC0032077, the Permittee also holds Non -Discharge Permit WQ0001048.
Instream Monitoring and Verification of Existing Conditions and DMR Data Review
This facility discharges to Contentnea Creek in sub -basin 03-03-07 of the Neuse River Basin. At the
point of discharge, Contentnea Creek is not listed as impaired (as per the 2002 303(d) list). The Neuse
River estuary to which it drains, however, is on the 303(d) list for chlorophyll -a. As a result, Contentnea
Creek has been given the nutrient sensitive (NSW) additional classification and Contentnea MSD must
adhere to the nutrient limitations set out by basin plans and the Nitrogen TMDL.
Contentnea MSD is a member of the Lower Neuse Basin Association (LNBA), and instream monitoring
is performed through the LNBA. Unfortunately, the LNBA has not set up monitoring stations to cover
this segment of the creek, so no instream data were analyzed.
This permit contained limits for flow, BOD, TSS, ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N), dissolved oxygen (D.O.),
fecal coliform, total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), pH and toxicity. Effluent temperature, total
residual chlorine, oil and grease, conductivity, copper and zinc must be monitored, but are not limited.
Data from Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) was reviewed from January 2001 through May 2003.
Monthly average data for conventional parameters are summarized in Table 1, while nutrients and
toxicants (except for copper and zinc, which are discussed in the Reasonable Potential Analysis section)
are summarized in Table 2. An exceedence of the BOD monthly average limit was noted in February
2003. This, in addition to a weekly average fecal coliform violation is the only point of non-compliance
evident in the permit term. The plant appears to achieve sufficient nutrient removal to meet the stringent
requireinents of the Neuse River Basin.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0032077 Renewal
Page lof4

Flow Temp. D.O. Conducti-- BOD TSS Fecal
(MGD) (deg. C) (mg/L) vity (umhos) (mg/L)
(mg/L) (#/100m1)
Alaxinttttn
Minimum
1.61
2.65
0.96
17.13
15.13
8.33
8.56
10.26
7.41
508.05
636.95
386.95
11.50
24.99
3.57
15.72
29.24
5.50
58.35
233.91
5.49
Table 1 - NC0032077 Monthly average effluent data for conventional parameters (January 2001-May 2003)
Maximum
Minimum
Oil and Grease
(mg/L)
4.69
28.00
1.50
Chlorine (mg/L)
0.34
1.70
0.15
Total Residual N1i3-N Total Nitrogen
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
2.26
7.31
0.01
9.72
22.70
1.19
Total Phosphorus
(mg/L)
1.01
2.53
0.37
Table 2 - NC0032077 Monthly average effluent data (January 2001-May 2003)
In 2000, the channel to which the Permittee was discharging was evaluated as to whether or not it
qualified as an effluent channel. The Washington Regional Office (WaRO) determined that it did not
qualify as an effluent channel, so the Instream Waste Concentration (IWC) is no longer the concentration
in Contentnea Creek, but in the unnamed tributary. This concentration is 100%.
Correspondence
The WaRO conducted two site visits to evaluate compliance with the permit and prepared a Staff Report
in conjunction with this permit renewal. The staff report does not note any deficiencies and recommends
renewal of the permit. The two Compliance Evaluation Inspections indicate a well -run facility with
excellent effluent quality.
Within this permit term, Contentnea MSD has received one Notice of Violation (with associated civil
penalties) for a violation of the weekly average fecal coliform limit in November 2002. The penalties
were paid and it appears that the facility has otherwise been compliant with the terms of the NPDES
permit.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
Waste Load Allocation (WLA)
The Division prepared the last WLA for the previous permit renewal. The previous and current effluent
limits were based on guidelines and water quality standards. The Division has judged previous
parameters and limits to be appropriate for renewal with some exceptions (see Reasonable Potential
Analysis and Neuse TMDL). Most notably, the IWC is now considered to be 100%, as described above.
This affects primarily the toxicity limit, which will now be 90%.
Weekly average ammonia limits based on a 3:1 ratio with the monthly average (but no higher than 35.0
mg/L) will be implemented in this permit. This is a new statewide policy that resulted from EPA
requirements. Since the current monthly average is 15 mg/L, the new weekly average limit will be 35
mg/L. In addition, an annual pollutant scan will be added such that the Permittee can collect the
necessary data required by EPA Form 2A throughout the permit term. This condition is now standard on
all major municipal permits in North Carolina.
Finally, total residual chlorine limits are being required in all wastewater permits in North Carolina. A
limit of 28 µg/L will be included in this permit. A compliance schedule of 18 months will be allowed for
the construction of dechlorination facilities.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
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 2001 - May 2003. Calculations
included parameters listed in the previous permit and pre-treatment documents to include: arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, selenium, copper, and zinc.
Results suggest no reasonable potential for the facility to discharge arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead,
mercury, nickel, silver, and selenium. These will continue to be monitored through the Pretreatment Long
Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) but will not be included for monitoring in the NPDES permit.
The analysis did indicate reasonable potential for the facility to discharge cyanide, copper and zinc. Zinc
and copper are action level parameters - unless the Permittee begins failing toxicity on a regular basis,
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0032077 Renewal
Page 2 of 4

these will continue to be monitored twice monthly with no limit. Cyanide will be added to the existing
permit with weekly monitoring and limits. The cyanide weekly average limit will be 45 µg/L and the
daily maximum limit will be 22 ftg/L.
Priority Pollutant Analysis
The Priority Pollutant Analysis (PPA) submitted with the renewal application indicated detection of the
following: copper, nickel and zinc. These are all monitored through the NPDES permit and/or the
LTMP. The values detected in the PPA were included in the Reasonable Potential Analysis described
above.
Neuse TMDL
The permit includes nutrient limits consistent with the Nutrient Management Strategy rule (T15A NCAC
2B .0234).
Nitrogen
The Environmental Management Commission adopted Nutrient Management Strategy rules in December
1997, classifying the entire Neuse River Basin as Nutrient Sensitive Waters. The point source rule (T15A
NCAC 2B .0234) sets Total Nitrogen (TN) discharge limits for all point source dischargers larger than
0.5 MGD.
The rule also allows dischargers to form a group compliance association and work together to reduce
nitrogen; this option allows the association members added flexibility in controlling nitrogen discharges.
At the same time, the association is subject to a group NPDES permit ensuring that the association and its
individual members are accountable if they exceed the applicable nitrogen limits.
Under the rule, there are three types of TN limit in the Neuse:
1. the individual limits in the dischargers' individual permits,
2. the aggregate limit in an association's group NPDES permit, and
3. the individual allocations/limits for each Association member, also in that association permit.
A discharger may be subject to the first type of limit, or to the second and third, but never to all three at
the same time. The discharger is first subject to the TN limit (if any) in its individual NPDES permit. If
becomes a co-Permittee to a compliance association's group NPDES permit, it is then governed by the
TN limits in that permit. If the association complies with its group TN limit in a given year, all members
are deemed to be in compliance with their individual allocations/ limits in the group permit. If the
association exceeds its limit, the members then become subject to their individual allocations/ limits as
well
Regardless of which permit governs a TN discharge, allocations/ limits will likely change over time as
the dischargers purchase, sell, trade, lease, or otherwise transfer nitrogen allocations. The Division will
modify the affected permits as necessary to ensure that the limits are kept up to date and reflect any such
transactions.
Under the new rule, the Permittee receives a TN Load limit of 32,100 lb./yr., a calendar year limit. This
limit will be calculated annually. In addition to this limit, the Permittee will be required to report total
monthly flow, total kjeldahl nitrogen and the sum of nitrate and nitrite in addition to the existing
requirement to report monthly total nitrogen concentrations and loads.
Contentnea MSD is a member of the Neuse River Compliance Association at this time. So long as it
remains a co-Permittee member, it is deemed to be in compliance with the TN limit in this permit, and its
TN discharge is governed instead by the Association's group NPDES permit, issued December 30, 2002.
Phosphorus: The Permitee's 2.0 mg/L Total Phosphorus limit is carried forward in the new permit.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0032077 Renewal
Page 3 of 4

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
In keeping with Division policies, the following will be incorporated into the permit:
• New weekly average ammonia limit
• Updated Neuse Total Nitrogen language
• Monitoring and reporting requirements for total monthly flow, TKN, nitrate and nitrite.
• Annual pollutant scan
• Added total residual chlorine limit (with 18 month compliance schedule)
• Added weekly monitoring and limit for cyanide
• Change from 11% to 90% toxicity limit
New Weekly Average and Daily Maximum limits are derived from the latest NC/EPA policies considering 1
FA Vs and allowable concentrations based on reasonable potential.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
ATTACHMENTS: DMR data summary, Reasonable Potential Analysis summary
September 10, 2003
November 3, 2003
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Natalie Sierra at [phone] ext. 551.
NAME:
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
DATE: v 3e 00 3
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0032077 Renewal
Page 4 of 4

Facility Name =
Qw (MGD) =
WWTP Classification
NPDES # =
Receiving Stream
/WC (%) =
Final Results:
Contentnea MSD
2.85
4
NC0032077
Contentnea Creek
100.00
Reasonable Potential Summary
Stream Classification
7Q10s (cfs)=
30Q2 (cfs)
Qavg (cfs)
1° 2°
30
4°
C
Sw I NSW
35
120
1090
Arsenic
Max. Prcd Cw
Allowable Cw
!Implementation
2.5 µg/l 'Are all reported values less than?
50.0 µg/l 'Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
�
1 Monitoring
'Frequency None
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
I Implementation
0.5 µg/l !Are all reported values less than?
2.0 µg/1 'Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
IMonitoring
!Frequency None
'
1/2 FAV (non Trout)!
15.0Iµg/1 '
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Implementation
49.7 µg/I !Are all reported values less than?
50.0 µg/1 !Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
�
IMonitoring
! Frequency None
'
1/2 FAVI
1022jpg/l '
Copper
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
!Implementation
43.1 µg/I 'Are all reported values less than?
7.0 µg/l !Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
.
I Monitoring
!Frequency 2/Month
'
1/2 FAVI
7.3141 '
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
;Implementation
82.6 AO 'Are all reported values less than?
5.0 µg/I !Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
Yes
Yes
1
I Monitoring
! Frequency Weekly
1
1/2 FAV
22.01µg/1 I
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
;Implementation
2.5 µg/l !Are all reported values less than?
25.0 nil!Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
1
IMonitoring
!Frequency None
1/2 Fav
, 33.81µg/l I
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
'Implementation
0.1000 µg/I !Are all reported values less than?
0.0120 µg/1 !Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
!Monitoring
Frequency None
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
'Implementation
62.9 µg/l !Are all reported values less than?
88.0 µg/1 'Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
!
!Monitoring
'Frequency None
'
1/2 FAV
261.0Iµg/l '
Silver
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
.Implementation
5.0 µg/I !Are all reported values less than?
0.1 µg/I !Is the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
I
! Monitoring
1 Frequency None
1/2 FAVI
1.2Iµg/1 '
Selenium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
•Implementation
8.0 µg/l !Are all reported values less than?
5.0 µg/I jls the detection limit acceptable?
Yes
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
No
.
I Monitoring
j Frequency None
1/2 FAV
56.0 µg/I
Zinc
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
;Implementation
715.5 µg/l 'Are all reported values less than?
50.0 g/l !Is the detection limit acceptable?
No
Yes
Limit?
Monitor?
No
Yes
;
IMonitoring
! Frequency 2/Month
1/2 FAVI
67.01110

Contentnea MSD
NC0032077
Temp. D.O. Conduct. BOD TSS O+G Fecal (#/100 NH3-N '1'N
Date Flow (MGD) (deg C) (mg/L) (umhos) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) mL) (mg/L) (mg/L) TP (mg/L) TRC (mg/L)
Jan-01 1.52 8.33 10.26 501.30 13.66 21.90 3.10 73.50 0.05 17.29 1.02 0.25
Feb-01 1.63 11.20 9.66 481.50 14.07 10.30 3.40 92.00 0.44 19.46 1.99 0.19
Mar-01 1.90 11.86 9.09 430.20 16.32 21.20 6.00 181.10 1.14 12.83 1.35 0.15
Apr-01 1.50 15.85 8.75 451.00 9.53 13.30 6.20 31.40 0.77 11.23 0.74 0.35
May-01 1.44 19.59 8.57 556.90 8.50 10.10 28.00 7.90 3.75 15.49 0.47 0.35
Jun-01 1.98 24.00 7.67 486.00 14.26 17.80 6.20 61.00 6.22 11.42 1.08 0.29
Jul-01 1.58 24.57 7.95 542.10 9.41 16.30 6.00 53.50 1.29 18.17 0.37 0.32
Aug-01 1.80 25.13 7.50 475.70 8.52 12.00 5.20 26.10 1.81 10.77 0.78 0.33
Sep-01 1.36 21.94 8.11 550.30 7.15 17.30 6.10 39.70 0.03 22.70 0.97 0.29
Oct-01 1.11 17.21 8.86 621.40 7.48 21.00 7.70 55.70 1.04 21.21 0.80 0.37
Nov-01 1.02 15.47 9.34 636.95 8.55 20.53 2.80 41.14 0.61 14.63 0.72 0.30
Dec-01 0.99 12.94 9.70 618.72 9.01 21.64 3.10 5.49 0.55 12.78 0.84 0.40
Jan-02 1.88 11.20 9.34 490.05 17.80 23.68 2.40 40.71 5.31 9.58 1.66 0.30
Feb-02 1.84 11.35 8.96 506.95 20.43 26.67 2.50 14.10 7.04 10.68 0.91 0.42
Mar-02 2.12 13.85 8.32 443.25 13.05 11.91 3.80 26.85 3.94 10.33 1.52 0.35
Apr-02 2.12 18.41 7.77 400.59 11.43 12.85 2.10 27.30 1.26 3.10 0.78 0.35
May-02 1.29 20.27 8.59 510.36 7.65 7.11 2.90 20.59 0.01 4.65 2.53 0.22
Jun-02 0.99 23.90 8.19 560.15 4.01 5.50 2.40 11.57 0.01 1.19 2.14 0.20
JuI-02 1.05 25.23 7.89 574.50 5.51 6.60 4.00 9.36 0.38 2.10 1.64 0.26
Aug-02 1.02 25.05 8.15 610.91 3.57 7.77 3.90 25.42 0.01 4.13 1.13 0.26
Sep-02 1.01 23.85 8.07 604.20 5.61 9.74 6.40 30.95 0.39 4.58 0.95 0.33
Oct-02 0.96 20.00 8.54 590.87 6.89 11.66 2.20 24.19 0.02 4.50 0.86 0.23
Nov-02 1.66 15.67 8.53 466.00 13.93 18.95 3.40 102.68 1.83 4.52 0.40 0.25
Dec-02 1.75 11.53 8.85 471.68 10.38 10.32 2.80 92.10 3.85 6.91 0.40 0.35
Jan-03 1.40 8.37 9.94 476.79 12.37 14.99 4 47.39 0.61 4.73 0.94 0.32
Feb-03 2.23 10.3 8.76 422.95 24.99 23.47 2.3 233.91 5.17 4.79 0.48 0.197
Mar-03 2.65 13.81 7.41 386.95 17.92 29.24 1.50 146.92 4.63 5.18 0.69 0.24
Apr-03 2.28 16.19 7.97 432.33 15.49 19.70 4.20 35.97 6.00 5.33 0.50 1.7
May-03 2.48 19.67 7.44 432.9 15.88 12.21 1.5 133.55 7.31 7.7 0.674 0.33
,average 1.61 17.13 8.56 508.05 11.50 15.72 4.69 58.35 2.26 9.72 1.01 0.34
Maximum 2.65 25.23 10.26 636.95 24.99 29.24 28.00 233.91 7.31 22.70 2.53 1.70
Minimum 0.96 8.33 7.41 386.95 3.57 5.50 1.50 5.49 0.01 1.19 0.37 0.15

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: YESNO_X_
IF YES, SOC NO.
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attn: Jackie Nowell
Date: January 9, 2003
JAN 10 2003
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pitt County
Permit No. NC0032077
PART I — GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
P.O. Box 477
Griffon NC 28530
2. Date of Investigation: January 7, 2003
3. Report Prepared by: Kristin Jarman
4. Person(s) contacted and telephone number(s): Mr. Charles Smithwick
District Manager
Ms. Renee Pridgen
Assistant Manager/ORC
[phone]
5. Directions to Site: In the Town of Griffon, follow NC 118 East to its intersection
with NC 1910 (Wiley Gaskins Road ; across from the school). Follow NC 1910
approx. 1 mile to CMSD treatment plant which is on the right.
6. Discharge Point:
Latitude: 35 21' 02" N Longitude: 77 24' 59" W
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge
point on map.
USGS Quad. No. USGS Quad Name: Griffon NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain:
!lTTING

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): flat or gently sloping;
elevation varies from 16 to 22 feet above MSL; site surrounded by earthen berm
to protect from Contentnea Creek flooding.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: approx. 500 feet north of treatment plant
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Contentnea Creek
a. Classification: C Sw NSW
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 03-03-07
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
Contentnea Creek provides a migration route, spawning grounds, and
nursery area for anadromous fish (such as striped bass, herring and shad);
supports freshwater fish propagation and provides habitat for other
wildlife; boating and other non -contact recreational use.
PART II —DESCRIPTION OF DISCARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: 2.85 MGD
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater Treatment
facility? 2.85 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design capacity)?
2.85 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to
Construct issued in the previous two years: ATC No. 032077ACC
(3/20/00):
• A 7,000 gallon methanol storage and feed facility
• Four-5hp directional mixers in the first -stage basins
• Two-5hp floating mixers to replace existing aerators in the second -
stage basins
• A second return sludge force main and variable -speed drives on the
existing RAS pumps
• A Dissolved Oxygen monitoring system
• All related structures, piping, controls and other appurtenances
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed
wastewater treatment facilities: Influent and effluent Flow meters, grit
removal with bar screen, (2) activated sludge units with biological nutrient
removal, chemical phosphorus removal system, 7,000 gallon methanol
storage and feed facility, (2) clarifiers after first stage aeration and (2)
clarifiers after second stage aeration, chlorine contact chamber with gas

chlorine feed, sulfur dioxide feed system, post -aeration, (2) aerobic
digestors and sludge drying beds.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities:
None
g.
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: None known
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved program
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ permit no.
Residuals Contractor WQ0001048_(CMSD)
Telephone No._252-524-5584_
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP x PFRP Other
c. Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): Grade IV
Biological WPCS
4. SIC Code: 4952
Wastewater Code of actual wastewater, not particular facilities.
001-- Primary 01_ Secondary 78
Main Treatment Unit Code: 124 3
PART III —OTHER PERTINTENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public
monies involved? (municipals only) Yes
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None
3. Additional effluent limits requested: None
4. Other: CMSD is currently looking for the money to construct an effluent pipe to
Contentnea Creek.

PART IV —EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Washington Regional Office recommends that this permit be reissued. Please send a
copy of the draft permit to this office before the Public Notice is issued.
21.4
Signa
e of Report Reparer
1-'-•' Water Quality Regional Supervisor
/9/<3
Date

r'tCO3 "3ZofF
Michael F. Easley, Govenor
William G. Ross, Jr. Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
April 19, 2002
Mr. Charles M. Smithwick, Jr.
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
Post Office Box 477
Grifton, North Carolina 28530
Subject: Effluent Channel determination
CMSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
Pitt County
Dear Mr. Smithwick:
APR 242002
DENR - WATER QUALITY
•POIt,T SOURCE BRANCH
This is in response to your letter dated March 19, 2002 to Roger Thorpe in which you requested
a determination that the channel receiving wastewater from CMSD be classified as an effluent
channel. In order to be an effluent channel the channel must meet all four of the requirements in
15A NCAC 02B .0228. The CMSD channel does contain natural waters including ground water
and water backed up from Contentnea Creek. The 1974 Pitt County Soils Map shows a perennial
stream in this location. The dug channel apparently crossed this stream. The channel also does
not meet the requirement for minimizing fish migration.
Based on this information this channel does not meet the requirements of an effluent channel.
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please contact us at [phone].
Sincerely,
rit fi is ?7-`
r Jim Mulligan
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
cc: Washington Regional Office
C ntral Files
ave Goodrich — NPDES Permitting Unit
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

£on&eztizea C/% wpotif,aiz- C ewezage ZL J ZICI
CMSD
POST OFFICE BOX 477
GRIFTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28530
CHARLES M. SMITHWICK, JR.
DISTRICT MANAGER
March 19, 2002
Mr. Roger Thorpe
Washington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
Re: Effluent Channel
CMSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
Dear Mr. Thorpe,
M R 2 1 2002
DWQ-WARO
W-WAR©
Q
CMSD has, since its inception, operated an effluent channel that conveys wastewater
from its treatment plant to Contentnea Creek. When our permit was last renewed, we
were informed that the effluent channel might not meet the standards for such channels as
defined by current North Carolina regulations. We are naturally concerned about this
potential development. Should our effluent channel cease to be an effluent channel for
regulatory purposes, the cost of extending a discharge pipe to Contentnea Creek will
create a financial burden for the District without producing any benefit that we can
identify. In response to an inquiry about this situation made on our behalf, Ms. Kristen
Jarman of your office visited the channel and then wrote that, in her opinion, our effluent
channel did not meet the current regulatory criteria for such channels. While we hold Ms.
Jarman in the highest regard, we feel that in this case she is misinterpreting the rules, and
ask that you look into our case, review the situation, and let us know if our view that our
discharge channel is a discharge channel under North Carolina rules is the correct view.
The rules governing under what circumstance a channel may be designated an effluent
channel were evidently amended some time in 1996, and as presently written establish
four criteria that must be satisfied. We question whether these new rules and criteria are
applicable to our situation at all. We have been designated as having an effluent channel
since the system was first permitted in 1976, and the current rules appear to be intended
for new installations where the Director has not yet made an effluent channel designation.
However, should the rules be found to be applicable to our situation, we believe we still
meet all the four criteria listed in the new regulations. Each of these criteria is restated
below, and the manner in which we meet the criteria explained. The criteria require that
an effluent channel:
Criteria (1) be contained entirely on property owned (or otherwise controlled) by
the discharger (to be demonstrated by the discharger);

Michael F. Easley, Govenor
William G. Ross, Jr. Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
August 14, 2001
Mr. John Coward, Chairman
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
P.O. Box 477
Griffon NC 28530
Dear Mr. Coward:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Acting Director
Division • ater Quality
•
Subject: Effluent Channel Determination
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District
NPDES No. NC0032077
Pitt County
In response to a conversation last week with your consultant, Mr. Ford Chamblis of the
Wooten Company, I visited Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District (CMSD) on
August 10, 2001. The purpose of my visit was to determine if the current discharge
channel meets the criteria for an "effluent channel" under state rule T15A NCAC 2B.
0228. It does not appear that the channel meets the criteria. A copy of the definition of an
effluent channel is attached. If you feel that the existing channel meets this definition we
are willing to consider your viewpoint. If you have any questions, please call me at 252-
946-6481.
Sincerely,
Kristin Jar
Environmental Technician
Division of Water Quality
Attachment
c. Gene Coley - ORC
Renee Pridgen — Assistant Manager
Ford Chamblis — The Wooten Company
W RO Files - County
ike Templeton — Permitting Unit
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F.INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject to, an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (Sills) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs. a
remedial wastes must
of the following types of
F.3 through F.8 and
b. Number of ClUs. 1
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy questions
Supply the following Information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the Information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Carolina Classics Catfish
Mailing Address: Post Office Rnx 1n
Avdan Nnrth Camlina PR513
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Catfish Pmcnssinn
F.5. Principal Product(a) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Fresh and Frozen Catfish
Raw materal(s): I ive Catfish
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection
day (gpd) and whether the discharge Is continuous or intermittent.
15 0n0 gpd ( x continuous or Intermittent)
system in gallons per
into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
5.000 gpd (___x______ continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes 1=I No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards CI Yes ® No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NA
unnrn 1-"In. • ne w��...___i

MEI
!�1
AEI
Aso
A•,
FACIUTY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
13 Yes ® No If yes, describe each episode.
NA
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by
CI Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
CI Truck 13 Rail CI Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Numb Amt?ulzts
truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediatfon Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that It will) receive waste from remedial activities?
CI Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at whlch the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
NA
F.14. Pollutants. Ust the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
NA
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
D Yes CI No
tf yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
NA
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
13 Continuous CI Intermittent tf intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
•
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS '
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE
ennrn e-ne,aAna AJ..*L..

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the Sill caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes ® No tf yes, describe each episode.
NA
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by
D Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check ail that apply):
0 Truck 0 Rat 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
FPA Hazardous Waste Numbet Amami Unita
truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
NA NA • NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remedlatfon Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
0 Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to ortgnlate in
the next five years).
NA
F.14. Pollutants. Ust the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration. tf
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
NA
F.15. Waste Treatment.
g. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
0 Yes 0 No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
NA
h. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or Intermittent?
0 Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF -PART F..
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A ;YOU MUST COMPLETE,
&I W%r." f f%rfl an* AI�L����al��

ona
1�1
rat
ran
eft
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F.INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRAICERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other
approved pretreatment program?
Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each
remedial wastes must
of the following types of
F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or Is subject to, an
® Yes o No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (Sills) and Categorical Industrial
Industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
c. Number of non -categorical S1Us. 3
d. Number of ClUs. 1
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy questions
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the Information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: ' East Carolina Stockyard
Mailing Address: Post office Box 3S1
Avden. North Carolina 211513
FA. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Any and Sell Livestock
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materlat(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Livestock Waste
Raw matedal(s): NA
F.6. Flow Rate. .
c. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
2.non-s 0fl0 gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
system In gallons per
into the collection system
d. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
minimal gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes ® No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NA
f�R
,.ir,r r n i ',i-iA A 11A A�IJ:aS��..l

t-1
rah
raft
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes ® No If yes, describe each episode.
NA
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by
0 Yes FA No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
0 Truck 0 Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA H zard is Waste N umber Among ytc
truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that It will) receive waste from remodel activittes?
0 Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
NA
F.14. Pollutants. Ust the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, ff
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
NA
F.15. Waste Treatment.
c. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
0 Yes 0 No
if yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
NA
d. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
0 Continuous 0 Intermittent If intemdttertt, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A-YOU MUST COMPLETE
ilk •Irwr%rf. rl%f1\IAA AJJi.i..+�11+[+�..��ai�+

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN;
Neuse
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F.INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant Industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject to, an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes 0 No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (Sills) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
e. Number of non -categorical Sills. 3
remedial wastes must
of the following types of
F.3 through F.8 and
f. Number of ClUs. 1
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy questions
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Weyerhaeuser Co
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 2R0
Avden North Carolina 28511
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Produce Lumher Prndur is from Southern Yellow Pine
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materlal(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): 2x4 2x6 2xR 9x10 9x121 umher Products
Raw material(s): Southern Yellow Pine
F.6. Flow Rate.
e. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1 200 gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
system in gallons per
into the collection system
f. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3 500 gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes 0 No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes Ea No
11 subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
NA

Pat
Pot
ran
lEs1
rat
Pia
ran
ran
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
D Yes ® No If yes, describe each episode.
NA
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.B. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has It in the past three
0 Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that
D Truck 0 Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume
FPA Hs+7arrlous Wacte Number Amami
years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
apply):
or mass, specify units).
Lida
NA
NA NA
NA NA NA
NA NA NA
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediatlon Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
D Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or Is excepted to origntate in
the next five years).
NA
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). tndude data on volume and concentration, If
known. (Attach additional sheets If necessary.)
NA
F.15. Waste Treatment.
e. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
El Yes DNo
If yes, describe the treatment (provide Information about the removal efficiency):
NA
f. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
0 Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE
snnrn rnnIArta wrrsas�__�

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
CMSD WWTP, NC0032077
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Neuse
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F.INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject to, an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes I7 No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each
Industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
g. Number of non -categorical Sills. 3
remedial wastes must
of the following types of
F.3 through F.8 and
h. Number of CIUs. 1
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy questions
Supply the following Information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the Information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Winterville Machine Works
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 520
Winterville North Carolina 28590
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Piatino and Manufacturinn of Machina Pans
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materlal(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Machine Pans nlated with Nickel and 7inr.
Raw material(s): Nickel and Tine
F.6. Flow Rate.
g. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge Into the collection
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1 000 gpd ( continuous or x intermittent)
system in gallons per
into the collection system
h. Non -process wastewater flow rale. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1.000 gpd ( x continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes D No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ® Yes MI No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
413 10 (Plecfronlalinn of Common Metals)
•innrn rnn• A fl * A

r
raa
MEI
HMI Sludge Production
min
exm
FIR
each bed with a drying surface area of 2,000 square feet.
Sludge Stabilization
Sludge Management Plan
CMSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES Permit No. NC0032077
Non -Discharge Permit No. WQ0001048
Contentnea Metropolitan Sewerage District (CMSD) operates a 2.85 mgd modified biological
nutrient removal (BNR) plant which discharges its effluent into Contentnea Creek in the Neuse
River Basin under NPDES Permit No. NC0032077. Waste sludge from the modified BNR plant is
discharged to either one (1) 375,000 gallon capacity aerated tank or two (2) 347,500 gallon
capacity each aerated tanks for long-term sludge stabilization and storage. Periodically, the sludge
is allowed to settle in the basin and the supernatant is withdrawn and recycled back to the plant
headworks for reprocessing. Stablized sludge can be dewatered in nine (9) sludge drying beds,
Class B pathogen reduction requirements are met using either Alternative 1 [Monitoring of
Fecal Coliform, 503.32(b)(2)] or Alternative 2 [Use of Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens,
503.32(b)(3)]. PSRPs utilized for Alternative 2 include Aerobic Digestion and Lime Stabilization.
Class B vector attraction reduction requirements are met using one of the following options:
Option 3 [Aerobic Digestion, 503.33(b)(3)], Option 4 [SOUR, 503.33(b)(4)], Option 6 [Alkaline
Stabilization, 503.33(b)(6)], Option 9 [Injection, 503.33(b)(9)], or Option 10 [Incorporation,
503.33(b)(10)].
fan
The aerobically stabilized liquified and sand bed dewatered sludges are land applied at
agronomic rates under Non -Discharge Permit No. WQ0001048. CMSD owns and operates four
(4) land application sites (Sites A-D) totaling 60.37 application acres adjacent to the WWTP.
Sludge Disposal

Pi
ROI
Effluent Discharge Pipe
2.85 mgd
Stream Flow
C
k -,,••""ram_
At etic Field
'o-
Sludge Site D
CJ
J
Sludge Site A
Contentnea MSD WWTP
1.; • .�:.. dd. .: .'$ �•Lit is IN.
./(, 1. n. '.*: • aJ.r_�1 Via% -
`-. • L� �aT 4%t Vl. yr; s �''• • +Pe�•�,t
•
44. .ir— is••
•
. 'li` •fi•
ao. 'a••Kt-
Location Map
Contentnea MSD WWTP
USGS Quad: Griffon, NC
July 2001
Scale 1":2000'
.4 •.
.q. .6.••
•
•� (. ..fir.
.•�- 1• ••4Y' • •T... .r .rii+f•
.ir- -4P-w
*P. to, ..eti.. .M1.. -• •.F. • rW

EX. 8' DI SLUDGE TO LAND.5 f
APPLICATION UNE
CHLORINE SOL'N LINE
IFi UENT
95MGD
GRIT AND
SCREENINGS
REMOVAL
CONTROL
BUILDING
e
AIR REAM R
CHLORINE SOL'N UNE —
BLOWER
PAD
CHEM.
TANKS
1ST STAGE AERATION BASIN
1ST STAGE AERATION BASIN
— AAP— ALUM AND POLYMER FEED UNE
— so— SULFUR DIOXIDE FEED UNE
POLYMER FEED UNE
— AL ALUM FEED LINE
--CAM-- CAUSTIC FEED UNE
CHEM.
FEED
BUILDING
---yAL=
pJ
1925 MOD
1
AEROBIC
O
DIGESTER
CL2
BLDG
i
I riff. 43'nR411A
UTILITY
BUILDING
1st STAGE
CLARFER
NO. 1
1
1st STAGE
CLARIFER
NO. 2
METHANOL FEED
METHANOL TANK &
PUMPING STATION
2
1ST STAGE
WASTE SLUDGE
40,020 GPO 0
0.85% SOLIDS &
1.02SP. GRAVTY
'94
CHLORINE SOL'N UNE
PUMPING
STATION
.Y
04
vY
1 DIGESTER
SLUDGE DRAWOFF - is
O.047MGD
DRYING BED
DRAIN LINE
M
OAR FIER
EFFLUENT
s; F
mow. WAS
1
2ND STAGE AERATION
BASIN INFLUENT
WAS
4
CONTENTNEA METROPOLITAN SEWAGE DISTRICT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PIPING PLAN
0 25 50
100
150
2ND STAGE AERATION BASIN
no.lt
1.0 MOD
2ND STAGE AERATION BASIN
6
Pa-
✓
30' DI
WAS AS
DRYING BED
DRAIN LINE
CHLORINE CONTACT
BASIN
2nd STAGE
CLARIFIER
NO.1
J
SECONDARY
CLARFER
INFLUENT
025
a
1.14
SECOND STAGE
SLUDGE
RECIRCULATION 11
PUMP STATION
2nd STAGE
CLARFER
NO. 2
2ND STAGE
WASTE SLUDGE
6500.7000 GPO 0
0.75% SOURS &
1.00 SP. GRAVITY
SLUDGE
DRYING
BEDS
ti
ti
1•
ESTIMATED 100 YR FLOOD ELEVATION IS 26.0'