NC0088820_Permit (Issuance)_20100330

NPDES DOCUHENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0088820
Pender County
WTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Staff Report
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
March 30, 2010
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reverse side

4
ern
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
•
Mr. Michael G. Mack, Director
Pender County Utilities Department
605 E. Freemont Street
Burgaw, NC 28425
Dear Mr. Mack:
March 30, 2010
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit
NPDES Permit NC0088820
Pender County WTP
Pender County
Class
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for the subject permit.
Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to
the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or as
subsequently amended).
There were no changes other than minor narrative corrections. The map detail was increased to
highlight the wastewater discharge system. If future changes occur, such as the addition of a separate
discharge line to the Cape Fear River or an increase in drinking water treatment capacity above 2.0 MGD,
you must submit a permit modification application.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 150E of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings
(6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made, this
decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division
may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal
requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality or permits
required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other federal or local
governmental permits that may be required.
Page 1 of 2
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 .
• Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748
Internet: http:lH h2o.state.nc.us 1
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
•
Nose Carolina
�tura!!y

If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Ron Berry at telephone number
(919) 807-63 96 or at email [e-mail].
Sincerely,
r; Coleen H. Sullins
Attachments
Cc: Wilmi ngton Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section (email)
Environmental Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Unit/Susan Meadows (email copy)
CDM/Kelly Boone (email)
Central Files
NPDES Unit
Page 2 of 2

Permit NC0088820
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
•
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision 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,
Pender County
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Pender County WTP
West of Highway 421 near
New Hanover and Pender County Line
Pender County
to receiving waters designated as Cape Fear River in the Cape Fear River Basin in accordance with
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective May 1, 2010.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on November 30, 2013.
Signed this day March 30, 2010.
Cole-n H. Sullins Dir for
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0088820
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Pender County
is hereby authorized to:
1. To o perate a conventional water treatment plant with a 2.0 MGD drinking water capacity, and a
discharge of filter backwash wastewater and other treatment plant wastewater. This facility is
located off Highway 421 near the New Hanover and Pender County line in Pender County and
consist of:
p Raw water meter and controls;
p Storage and chemical feed systems for alum and/or ferric sulfate, caustic, corrosion inhibitor,
sodium hyperchlorite, fluoride, oxidant;
p Two (2) rapid mix basins;
p Two (2) trains, four stage flocculators;
Q Two (2) sedimentation basins with sludge withdrawal controls;
0 Four (4) gravity filters with backwash controls, sand and activated carbon media;
p Filtered water collection sumps with pumps;
p Four (4) GAC contactors and four (4) spare GAC contactors for future use;
p Clearwell with pumps and spare clearwell for future use;
p Two 1.5 MG (2) residual/equalization basins;
p Effluent wastewater meter with recorder/totalizer;
p Effluent recycle system;
p Effluent wastewater pumps and piping;
p and dechlorination system.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into the Cape
Fear River, C, Sw classified waters in the Cape Fear River Basin.
•
•

-
•1
L •--
IAA'`
• .- , ►
-44- .ter r ..•
.
•
•
. .. . art-- We.. __ -" _.f
-I*"- _ .., • •_-44,*la-
'�ylR - ► • -4..h
•► 7 --r.._-• '• , r
•
- - ripro.: Ca•
alEtiptoft -
ow_ jr%ineft ,
64-Nkj
• -10
..
"air- i -
•S
•
r
NC008882O
Discharge
Connection
•,
24.•
�.• : T� -. •i,- ,,, -_ r �f.
-44
♦ 1
L• ,
•.1.
I+.
-- ' Alb-
4114b. re:-
,,,, .. -4
-4l- „.. - - -
-
r.l.- .xy�'-►..-— —•- - '
•
Existing Discharge
Line (owned by other)
• - - .• - ..
`Y �7! r�r
•.►-
•
-- -- . -
Ado-
-.4%11*.
Vitt"-
. ....
r•
_---� • • %.
ft
•r
tis
• ..y�-- ..0
molly-
-
dAy-
• ..
r
Pender Coun
VirTP.Facility
NC0088820
,
•
•
•
•
. •i- ` Ali.
•
I .0,
N OO8882O
Discharge
rw Sr•r.1. • t
--fir - -- lb- �r - 1 ..,'
Ai-
• _•-
--- ;
-4W -- — -ter- A - --
—
,.
-
USGS Quad: J265E Leland, NC
Outfall Facility
Latitude: 34° 19' 25.5" N 34° 20' 18" N
Longitude: 78° 0' 49.8" W 78° 0' 44" W
Stream Class: C, Sw
Su bbasi n: 03-06-17 HUC: 03030005
Receiving Stream: Cape Fear River
North
Facility Location �►
. Pender County WTP NC0088820
Pender County

Permit NC0088820
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee
is authorized to discharge treated filter backwash wastewater and other treated wastewater from outfall
001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACT TISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location
Flow
Continuous
Recording
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
pH
Not greater than 9.0 S.U. nor
less than 6.0 S.U.
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)1
28 pg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Turbidity, NTU
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Aluminum, mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Fluoride, mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper, mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
'Total Iron. mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Zint, mg/L 2 r
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Manganese, mg/L
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mg/L (TKN)
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Nitrite/Nitrate Nitrogen, mg/L
(NO2-N + NO3-N)
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen, mg/L (TN)
TN = (NOZ-N + NO3-N) + TKN
Quarterly
Calculated
Effluent
Total Phosphorus, mg/L (TP)
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Acute Toxicity Test 3
Quarterly
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) compliance is required when chlorine or chlorine derivative disinfection occurs
in water sources used in backwashing or otherwise become part of the facility wastewater. The Division
shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 pgL to be in compliance with the permit. However,
the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory
(including field certified), even if these values fall below 50 pg/L.
2. If zinc orthophosphate or other zinc -based corrosion inhibitor addition occurs to water used for filter
backwash then total zinc monitoring is required.
3. Acute Toxicity, 24 hr. static P/F, TGF6C (Primepa/es prome/as) at 90%; February, May, August, and
November. All Effluent Characteristics shall be monitored in conjunction with toxicity test. See Special
Condition A. (2.).
All samples must be collected during a typical discharge event from this facility's effluent.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NC0088820
A. (2) ACUTE TOXICITY MONITORING (QUARTERLY)
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a Quarter/v basis using protocols defined in the
North Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute Toxicity In
A Single Effluent Concentration" (Revised July, 1992 or subsequent versions). The monitoring shall be
performed as a Fathead Minnow (Pimephales prome/as) 24 hour static test. The effluent concentration
at which there may be at no time significant acute mortality is 90% (defined as treatment two in the
procedure document). Effluert samples for self -monitoring purposes must be obtained during
fepresentative effluent discharge below all waste treatment. The tests will be performed during the
months of February, May, August, and November.
The parameter code for Pimephales promelas is TGE6C. All toxicity testing results required as part of
this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Form (MR-1) for the month in which it
was performed, using the appropriate parameter code. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-2 (original) is to be
sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall 'be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no'Iater
than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
per -formed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during any month, 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 Section
at the address cited above.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may
be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently then required by this permit, the results of such
monitoring shall be included in the calculation & reporting of the data submitted on the DMR & all AT
Form submitted.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will
require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following
the month of the initial monitoring.

Draft Permit Comments from Kelly Boone
From: Boone, Kelly [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 1:54 PM
To: Berry, Ron
Cc: Dowbiggin, William
Subject: RE: Your copy of draft permit for Pender County WTP - NC0088820
Ron,
My commdnts on the Draft permit dre as follows:
Name of permittee is Michael Mack, not Michael Mark.
on the cover sheet supplement, I would propose changing "clearwell with
pumps" to
"clearwell(s) with pumps" because the second clearwell may be constructed during
Phase 1 (it
is a bid alternate).
Also on the cover sheet supplement, we would prefer to list 8 GAC contactors
rather than 4
contactors. There will be 4 contactors initially, but there is an EA supplement
under review
with USDA to modify the project to 4 mgd, for which we would need 6 contactors. We
expect
approval of this FONSI very soon. Listing 8 contactors now would preclude having to
modify
the permit later.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Kelly
Kelly R. Boone, P.E.
CDM
5400 Glenwood Ave., Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Cell [phone]
Email [e-mail]
From: Berry, Ron [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 8:43 AM
To: Boone, Kelly
Subject: Your copy of draft permit for Pender County WTP - NC0088820
Ms. Boone,
see attached. Any questions let me know. Please advise if any equipment items are
incorrect and
once the final discharge configuration is known.
Ron Berry [e-mail]
Engineer I
DWQ/Point Source/NPDES
NCDENR
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Office: Archdale Building Room 925N
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Page 1

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
Public Notice, -North Carolina
Environmental Management
Commission/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Permit
The North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission proposes
to. issue a NPDES wastewater dis-
.'char e. permit to the person(s)
listed below. • -
Written comments regarding the
proposed "permit will be accepted
:until 30 days after the publish date
of this notice. The Director of the
NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
may hold a public hearing should
there be a significant` degree of
public interest. Please mall com-
ments and/or Information requests
to DWQ at the above address. In-
terested persons may visit the DWQ
at 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh,
NC to review information on file.
Additional Information on NPDES
permits and this . notice may by
found on our website:
www.ncwaterauality.orq
or by calling [phone].
Invista S.a r.l. has applied for re-
newal of NPDES Permit NC0001112,'
which allows discharges of treated
wastewater to the Cape Fear River
and the Northeast Cape Fear River
near Wilmington. Total Residual
Chlorine and .mercury are water
quality limited..
Pender County Utilities Department
requested ' a NPDES permit,
NC0o88820, for Pender County WTP
In Pender County:' this discharge is
treated filter backwash and other
wastewater to Cape Fear River,
Cape Fear River Basin.
Green's Oyster Company requested
to renew Its active permit
(NC0074942) to discharge into
Shallotte River within the Lumber
River Basin.
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of Said County and State,
Keith Raffone
Who, being duly sworn or affirmed, according to the law, says that he/she is
Controller
of THE STAR -NEWS, a corporation organized and doing business under the Laws of the State of
North Carolina, and publishing a newspaper known as STAR -NEWS in the City of Wilmington
Public Notice, North Carolina Environmental Management Commission/NPDES Unit 1617
Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES Wastewater
Permit The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission proposes to issue a N
was inserted in the aforesaid newspaper in space, and on dates as follows:
2/6 Ix
And at the time of such publication Star -News was a newspaper meeting all the requirements ancl
qualifications prescribed by Sec. No. 1-597 G.S. of N.C.
In Testimon
year aforesaid.
k71
Title: Controller
�
worn or affirmed to, and scribed before me this 7'7"1J
, A.D., g-,0!G
hereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
My commission expires 1 . day of
d `y,RN 111,,,,,•
,,
icial seal, th 4''¢�nd
NOTq,i,y
13
L$LICNotar tblic
' ▪ ' , 2012- �" C1/FR CQ\31-
nitniiiamoo
Upon reading the aforegoing affidavit with the advertisement thereto annexed it is adjudged by the Court that the said
publication was duly and properly made and that the summons has been duly and legally served on the defendant(s).
This day of
MAIL TO:
Clerk of Superior Court

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0088820
- Facility Information:....... _ .. . ...
Applicant/Facility ,_- .
Name::
Pender County WTP
Applicant:Address: ...
605 E. Freemont Street; Burgaw, North Carolina 28425
Facility`Adcdress-
.... .
Near Highway 421 at New Hanover/Pender County line; Burgaw,
North Carolina
Permitted Flow
Not Required (phase 10.2 MD, phase II max 0.9 MGD)
Type of Waste:. , :'
Conventional WTP wastewater
Facility/Permit:: Status::
Class I /New
County:
Pender County
-_ !'- _> Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream: ,._
Cape Fear River
:Stream.Classification:
C, Sw
Subbasin: r.; .
03-06-17
_'Index 'No... =. , ......:
18-(63)
Drainage -Area (mi2):,
7040
303(d) ,Listed?
No
Summer 7Q10 (cfs) ..- ,. ,:'
918 (*calculated)'Regional
`Office:' ..
Wilmington
Winter 7Q10.:(cfs); :'
NA
State Grid / USGS •
Quad:'• r _
J265E
Leland, NC
30Q2 (cfs) : '..-
NA
, Permit -Writer: ;
Ron Berry
Average Flow (cfs):
: �` i
8142 [,;
(*calculated) ;..r [,?
aDate:' H. �Y:�;
' r i a3_..' ��. ` ,* , 2 z i s r�r�i�W?
1/25/10
IWC (%) :. r ': .. ,
< 0.15% • . '
tez:l. iiii t' .
*Used NC000663 data, USGS designates this stream as tidal and does not provide flow data
BACKGROUND
Pender County has applied for.. a new NPDES permit for a conventional drinking water
treatment plant that will be constructed to service the 'greater Pender County area and
require a wastewater discharge into. a tidal freshwatersegment of the Cape Fear River. The
decreasing availability. of acceptable 'raw ground water�(no salt intrusion) in this coastal
water County, the accessibility to a raw. water river source':via. the. existing LCFWASA system,
and the anticipated increase in;demand.for-drinking_iwater for the County were the driving
force for developing this new drinking water treatment facility.
The initially NPDES application -and EAq,-yvereiretu.rned to the applicant with given directives
from DWQ to re -address several -key itemsone.being. the' proposed 'discharge location. Upon
review of the re -submitted application -and EAA,,, _the ,Division concurs with utilization of the
former BASF discharge system minto the Cape Fear-Rver as an acceptable discharge location.
•Two construction phases are planned,- phase'`Lallows!=for ''an- initial T2.0 MGD treatment
capacity while phase II allows for an expansion toia 6.0 MGD treatment capacity. Potentially,
the original plant 2.0 MGD capacity may be eligible fora treatment capacity upgrade. On the
average approximately 10% of the treatment .capacity will be needed for backwashing with
an anticipated peak wastewater discharge of 0.9 -MGD at the 6.0 MGD capacity. To take
advantage of engineering, _funding % availability,. __and .construction.: cost the concrete
construction needed for_the expanded treatment works will be completed in phase I.
PROCESS
The LCFWASA operates a pumping station with a piping network located 21 miles upstream
of Wilmington and :just; upstream :of . lock; and: dare :1 on; the -Cape. Fear, River. The line will
extent to the - Pender , County( ,WTP site -:where - based,on , demand -the raw water will be
introduced to the treatment, plant., A dual ;treatment •train approach is, used for capacity
control and operational efficiency.:. . ,, .); , ; ci
.,.: , tr; r : , v _.t river ;o .rr.
As the raw water enters either tra_ in's rapid mixers various chemical are added to initiate
flocculation, disinfection, and pH. The raw water continues through a series of flocculators
Fact Sheet
.1 t ,; :NI'Drs•l\COO88820 LI) ';
; re! C. , �. i 'r� _hotrp i'itfli," !I" /7 r(•
i
'1;1 ., .TI - .. - •faY :1 .

where more chemicals are added and the further enhancement to remove the solids occurs.
Next the raw water enters a sedimentation basin where the overflow raw water flows to the
train's four gravity filters. A sand and activated charcoal media make up the filter bed.
The filtered water is pumped from each filters collection well, through GAC contactor filters,
and into the clearwell. Corrosion inhibitor, fluoride, disinfection (chlorine) and pH adjustment
chemicals are added to the combined filter collection well and the clearwell. Ammonia is
also added to the clearwell to further enhance the disinfection. A finished water pump
transfer the drinking water from the clearwell and into the distribution and storage system.
The filters require routine backwashing and are backwashed with the filtered water from the
filter water collection wells.
The backwash wastewater is accumulated in one of two 1.5 MGD retention ponds. These
ponds are also used to collect the settled solids that accumulate in the sedimentation basin.
The flow will be alternated between the ponds to allow for separation of the solids. As
needed the liquid portion is removed from a pond and either a portion, 10% maximum,
diverted as recycled back to the treatment works or further dechlorinated before being
pumped 4,000 feet into an existing Cape Fear River discharge pipe on the adjacent property,
formerly BASF. 3
The actual Cape Fear River discharge point is approximately3;4 eet beyond the WTP tie
in connection point. It is anticipated the existing discharge pipe will be used for other
approved NPDES discharges.
Current plans are to wait until significant solids have accumulated in a pond and then take
that pond out of service for cleaning by a contractor. Other future alternatives for solids
removal are under consideration.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
The "NPDES Permitting Strategies For Potable Water Treatment Plants" guidelines for
conventional water treatment were applied. There is no permitted flow limit requirement.
However, the facility will be required to have a recorder to provide the total gallons of
wastewater discharged. Based on BPJ for this tidal .receiving stream, Cape Fear River, an
effluent TRC limit of 28 µg/I will be imposed. Effluent limits on TSS and pH will also be
imposed.
An acute toxicity monitoring test using fathead minnow at 90% effluent concentration will be
required. Since this segment of the river is not impaired for turbidity then effluent turbidity
monitoring only will be required. There is a potential for a zinc -based corrosion inhibitor to be
present in the backwash water so conditional zinc monitoring will be included in the permit.
Monitoring for total copper, fluoride, total iron, aluminum, manganese, nitrite/nitrate
nitrogen, total kjeldahl nitrogen, total nitrogen; and total phosphorus will be required.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: February 3, 2010
Permit Scheduled to Issue: March 2010
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
if you have questions. regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit,
please contact Ron erry at [phone] or email/[e-mail].
NAME: I u - DATE: /26,16
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPL)TY.S \ COOS 882()
fit "i•: '0:400,7nf7-
r .r+ n:,rc JP'
.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
SURFACE WATER PROTECTION SECTION
WILMINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
To:
Ron Berry, NPDES Permitting
Kelly Boone, CDM
From: Tom Tharrington, Wastewater Trmt. Consultant, WiRO-T
Date: December 8, 2009
Through: Rick Shiver, Regional Water Quality Supervisor, WiRO
Subject: Comments on the Environmental Assessment for Pender County
Surface Water Treatment Plant
The subject EAA was received in the Wilmington Regional Office and a
review of the document was conducted. The following are brief comments from
that review.
The EAA evaluated possible disposal options including...
• Connection to existing WWTF
• Land Application
• Wastewater reuse
• Direct discharge to the Cape Fear River
• A combination of the above alternatives
The connection to an existing wastewater treatment system is currently not
an option due to a lack of facilities near the proposed project. However, the
preliminary plans for a wastewater treatment facility to be located just south of the
site by the Cape Fear Public Utilities Authority did present an opportunity for a
combined discharge. The timelines for completion of the two facilities, dissimilar
processes and independent permitting and monitoring requirements does present
obstacles.
The Land Application option appears to be cost prohibitive in regards to both
land acquisition and additional infrastructure needed to convey the wastewater to
the disposal site(s). Zoning regulations prevent using the previously purchased
property for a disposal site, so adjacent or satellite properties would need to be
purchased, which are limited and relatively expensive.

Wilmington Regional Office Recommendation/Comments:
The approach that the Wilmington Regional Office would support involves a
combination of disposal alternatives. Specifically the reuse of wastewater
combined with an NPDES permitted direct discharge. Information in the provided
documentation indicate that provisions in the North Carolina Administrative Code
allow for the recycle/reuse for at least a portion of the generated wastewater. This
reuse would only account for a portion of the total volume in the best case and in
some situations would not be permitted in order to preserve drinking water quality.
The discharge of the wastewater via NPDES permit would require the facility
to meet low-level chlorine residual limits. This low-level chlorine limit may be an
issue for combining effluent discharges with the proposed CFPUA wastewater
treatment, as the method for disinfection for this facility may not yet be known. If a
UV disinfection process were selected for the CFPUA facility then a combined
discharge with chlorinated water plant wastewater would be undesirable.
The Wilmington Regional Office appreciates the opportunity to comment on
the EAA and supports the disposal of the proposed Pender County Surface Water
Plant wastewater through the combination of wastewater reuse/recycle processes
and direct discharge of the remaining effluent via an NPDES permitted outfall line.
This outfall line should be designed and constructed independent of any other
facilities proposed for the area, this will allow for appropriate monitoring and control
of the treated effluent in order to meet NPDES permit limits.
If you have additional questions regarding this project please contact the
Wilmington Regional Office.
CC: Central Files
WiRO Pender Surface Water Treatment Plant (Pender County File)
Tom Tharrington, WiRO

Berry, Ron
From: Travaglia, Alex [TravagliaA@cdm_com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 10:45 AM
To: Berry, Ron
Cc: Dowbiggin, William; Buckley, J. Brenan; Boone, Kelly; Tom Tharrington; Rick Shiver; Vinzani,
Gil
Subject: FW: Pender County WTP NPDES Application
Attachments: EAA Costs.pdf
Dear Mr. Berry,
As requested in your email of May 15, 2009, we have further evaluated the land application alternative, and have
contacted the Wilmington Regional office regarding the discharge design. A summary of our conclusions is presented
below. Revised costs for each alternative option are included in the attachment.
1) Land Based Disposal
a. The soils at this site seem to be suitable for land disposal, based on phone conversations with DWQ staff and
on a recent soil assessment. We have modified our cost analysis for this option accordingly.
b. We have revised the land cost. This value is based on the actual sale price of properties in the vicinity of the
proposed site for the new water treatment plant (reference: Pender County GIS, attached).
c. The resulting Present Value for this option is $8,895,000 (see attached calculations) and would require
Pender County to purchase additional 122 acres from BASF or other seller.
d. Pender County has approached BASF to investigate the possibility to acquire additional land, but it is our
understanding that this option is not being considered by BASF at this time. While this might be a long-term
alternative, it is not a viable alternative in the short-term and should be excluded from further evaluation.
2) Outfall Design
a. Both Rick Shiver and Tom Tharrington have verbally suggested that use of spray irrigation be
investigated, since spray fields were successfully operated in the past at the BASF facility. Tom
Tharrington also mentioned the possibility to use the existing outfall pipe that discharges to Cape Fear
River. As discussed above, this would not be a feasible option since it appears that additional land is not
currently available. Even if the land becomes available, the cost is not affordable, adding over
$8,000,000 to the project.
b. As mentioned, it is our opinion that the most environmentally sustainable option for the outfall
discharge would be to construct it outside the wetland system, at an acceptable distance from the
wetlands. This design approach is aimed at minimizing any impact to the sensitive area near the
proposed WTP site for the following reasons:
i. The anticipated discharge from the outfall is minimal. The requested maximum discharge in the
NPDES permit is 0.9 mgd (equal to 1.4 cubic feet per second). This is a conservative number, and
during normal operating conditions the average discharge flow would be much less than 0.9
mgd.
ii. The discharge will be easily absorbed by the ground.
iii. The discharge consists of WTP process by-product wastewater, which is non -oxygen consuming.
We would welcome the opportunity to further discuss this with you and Mr. Shiver.
Regards,
Alex Travaglia, P.E.
CDM
5400 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 300

Raleigh, NC 27612
919-787-5620 (main) •
919-325-3578 (direct)
919-781-5730 (fax)
[e-mail]
From: Berry, Ron [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 9:25 AM
To: Travaglia, Alex
Cc: Tom Tharrington; Rick Shiver; Vinzani, Gil
Subject: Additional Concerns with Pender County WTP NPDES Application
Mr. Travaglia,
After further review of Pender County proposed WTP EAA and NPDES application, including recommendations by the
regional office, the Divisions needs to revise our comments and required actions by the applicant and/or his
representative.
1) The land application, Alternative 2.2, does not provide an acceptable explanation of existing soil relative to an
irrgation application. The design and cost model must reflect the available conditions including realistic land cost.
Revise this alternative narrative and cost accordingly.
2)The proposed outfall location, Alternative 2.4, is not acceptable. Continue to work with the Wilmington Regional
Office to finalize an acceptable location and design.
If you have any questions you can contact me.
Ron Berry [e-mail]
Engineer I
DWQ/Point Source/NPDES
NCDENR
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
2 0f.
2-

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Land Based Disposal
Capital Cost
1. Land
122.3 acres @ $29,000 per acre2 • $3,547,000
2. Transfer Pump Station
Pump station at WTP $200,000
3. Force Main
Estimated distance: 200-LF @ $70/LF $14,000
4. Land preparation and irrigation system (pipe, valves, fittings, controls)
80.0 acres @ $750 per acre $60,100
5. 60-day residual storage basin at average flow for base bid alternate (0.40 mgd)
Residual capacity 24 Mgal 3,208,556 cft
Freeboard 2 ft
Max water depth 6 ft
Surface area 534,759 sq. ft. 12.3 ac
Length 731 ft
Width 731 ft
24 Mgal @ $145,000 per Mgal $3,480,000
Subtotal $7,302,000
Contingency (15%) $1,096,000
Total Capital Cost $8,398,000
2 Based on 2006 average land price near Hwy 421 (Source: Pender County GIS - see attachment)
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump station (estimated) $10,000
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time) $15,000
3. Repair parts and maintenance of spray fields
Repairs and maintenance $5,000
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing $5,000
5. Annual Permit Renewal Fee
Permit fee $860
Subtotal $36,000
Contingency (15%) $6,000
Total O&M Cost $42,000
Page 2of7
N:IPender County - 67476\permitting\NPDES\EAA\EAA Costs-6.8.09.x1sLand Based Disposal
f

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Land Based Disposal
Assumptions:
Application rate: 2.9 in/week
Maximum discharge rate: 900,000 gpd
Calculations:
Land required for spray irrigation:
(900,000 gpd)/(7.48 gal/ft3)/(2.9 in/week)x(7 days/week)x(12 in/ft)/(43,560 ft2/acre) 80.0 ac
Width : 1,320 ft
Length: 2,640 ft
Land acquisition
Spray irrigation area:
60-Day residual storage basin:
Additional area/set-backs:
80 ac
12 ac
30 ac
Total 122 ac
Title 15A NCAC 02T .0506 Setbacks
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA):
Evaluation period, n: 20 Years
Discount rate, r: 5.625%
Capital cost: $8,398,000
Annual O&M cost: $42,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $8,398,000
PIA = ((1 +r)" - 1)/(r(1 +r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost * PIA $496,800
Present value: $8,895,000
Page 1 of 7
N:1Pender County - 674761permittinglNPDESIEAAIEAA Costs-6.8.09.xlsLand Based Disposal

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Surface Water Discharge
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA)
Evaluation period, n: 20 Years
Discount rate, r: 5.625%
Capital cost: $58,000
Annual O&M cost: $7,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $58,000
P/A = ((1+r)" - 1)/(r(1+r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost * P/A $82,800
Present value: $140,800
Capital Cost
1. Piping and valves from Residual Basins
200 LF - 10" PVC pipe $14,000
2. Valves
8" plug valve $4,000
8" flap valve at outlet $4,000
3. Rip -rap at outlet
Estimated qty: 100 CY @ $35/ton $15,000
4. Parshall Flume
1 parshall flume $10,000
5. Sampler
1 sampler $3,000
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing
2. Annual Permit Renewal Fee
Permit fee
CDM
Subtotal $50,000
Contingency (15%) $8,000
Total Capital Cost $58,000
$5,000
$860
Subtotal $6,000
Contingency (15%) ' $1,000
Total O&M Cost $7,000
Page 3 of 7
N:1Pender County - 674761permitting\NPDES1EAA\EAA Costs-6.8.09.xlsSurface Water Discharge

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Backwash Water Recycle
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA)
Evaluation period, n: 20 Years
Discount rate, r: 5.625%
Capital cost: $287,000
Annual O&M cost: $41,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $287,000
P/A = ((1+r)"-1)/(r(1+r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost * PIA $485,000
Present value: $772,000
Capital Cost
1. Transfer Pump Station
Pump station at WTP $200,000
2. Force Main
Estimated distance: 700-LF @ $70/LF $49,000
Subtotal $249,000
Contingency (15%) $38,000
Total Capital Cost $287,000
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump station (estimated) $10,000
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time) $15,000
3. Repair parts and maintenance of pumping equipment
Repairs and maintenance $5,000
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing $5,000
Subtotal $35,000
Contingency (15%) $6,000
Total O&M Cost $41,000
Page 4 of 7
N:IPender County - 674761permitting\NPDES\EAA\EAA Costs-6.8.09.xlsRecycle

ConnectGlS Page 1 of 1
Name:
Deed:
Address:
Zip:
Deferred Value:
Neighborhood:
Property Address:
Property Description:
1:5374 feet
PENDER PROPERTIES LLC
2867/252
PO BOX 1139
28466-1139
0
00
421 HWY OFF
ACL R/R OFF W/S 421 D5
Parcels
PIN:
Deed Date:
City:
Land Value:
Total Value:
Tax Codes:
Acres:
2283-81-4928-0000
1/19/2006
WALLACE
105642
105642
G01 F25 R40
273.67
Pender County GIS
,/:;\12,F
‘17-
Sale Price:
Plat:
State:
Building Value:
Subdivision:
Zone:
Township:
14607000
NOPLAT
NC
0
RA
GRADY
Thls mass Is preearec b• the 'rventer) d real erepe1y
toJna •itnt-, this )ursa than. arc is :ero ice from
re:oiled aeeas Oats, are c?e- ot:ttl: rem -as and
data. 1.:ers eels mat are here'? rol"ec ma:?e
atgrerrrto a cubic orsrar) rfermadan sarces
snculd to consul*: for?e '.er'capc, of the
rbrmaaan :ontat a on WI: rag. Penner ;aunty
assumes re legal resperstolr? !er the IntssraiIo•+
contained er fi,s met.
http://gis.pender-county.com/ConnectGl S Web/(S(rci1tc55fanxnp45bt152cic))/Map/PrintWi... 5/29/2009

Page 1 of 1
JJ �`
;ram_ c�••r?�, ,�1oS4-m
I t
II
cp
http://gis.pender-county.com/output/Pender gis0373607908355 jpg 6/12/2009

ConnectGlS
Page 1 of 1
Parcels
Name:
Deed:
Address:
Zip:
PENDER CNTY
3044/319
807 S. WALKER STREET
28425
Deferred Value: 0
Neighborhood: 00
Property Address: 421 HWY
Property 358.62AC PB 42/113 421 HWY PB 19/79 99
Description: INTERIUM IMPROVEMENTS
1:1662 feet
PIN:
Deed
Date:
City:
Land
Value:
Total
Value:
Tax
Codes:
Acres:
2291-76-4724-
0000 Sale Price: 4000000
9/7/2006 Plat:
BURGAW
359853
State: NC
Building
Value:
359853 Subdivision:
0
G01 F25 R40 Zone: 12
358.62 Township: GRADY
Pender County GIS
This magi I: rreoarec tr the Irventcry Wren! orcarb
ta,tnd rottlin tots jursactlon, arc i::croleo rrom
re:0' lea (teed: oats, arc are' with: reroMs aria
oats.l,ser: d tis mar are Item: roMiec that ire
starer -emit e: ou:Ic orlrory irrcrmstan L)J'Ces
:naiad to consist*: tor re '.erlcaho't of the
rbrmatio :rl1smed on trl: rao Pender Gourd
a::ure: RC .e;ai re:car:lotti,'br the Inhumation
contained cr trio moo.
http://gis.pender-county.com/ConnectGlSWeb/(S(hf33ni454zwb4v45rc3zpsi2))/Map/Print... 6/12/2009

ConnectGlS
Page 1 of 1
Name:
r' `f
/ • /
•
49
�4
vil
Parcels
PIN: 2293-41-2927 Sale Price: 300000
000L
Deed: 3552/153 Deed 12/5/2008 Plat: 00050010
Date:
Address: 3127 BOUGAINVILLEA WAY City: WILMINGTON State: NC
Land Building
Zip: 28409 41570
Value: 88598 Value:
Total
Deferred Value: 0 130168 Subdivision:
Value:
Neighborhood: 00 Tax G01 F25 R40 Zone: SEEMAP
Codes:
Property Address: 34 PENDER LAKE RD Acres: 15.3 Township: GRADY
FUFU GROUP LLC
Property L 4 PB 5/10 E/S 421 1 PRESTIGE
Description: WOODS MHP
1:948 feet
Pender County GIS
Ttlo 'nao I: rreoarec 1 r tt+e Irventcr, d real orcioe1y
food wltn0 tuts lursacaon, ara Is:cr'.ama from
r_.toTec oeeos Pats. ara ere* curb: re:ays ana
y313. Leers d Ins mar are Berea; rottec tha: tre
3bref-eltiovez Duple ormary rfcrmatlan so.rces
sncuta to consulte7 tar re .er'rpno': of the
r'crmana, cantor*: an th1 raa. Penoer ..ourty
a:s4fres rc legal reercrstotrl, br the InfaT'a.ID•1
conte1nea cr trts mao.
http://gis.pender-county.com/ConnectGlSWeb/(S(hf33ni454zwb4v45rc3zpsi2))/Map/Print... 6/12/2009

5400 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 300
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]
November 4, 2009
Mr. Ron Berry
Environmental Engineer I
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
Archdale Building - 512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Dear Mr. Berry:
Enclosed please find three (3) copies of the revised Engineering Alternatives Analysis and
NPDES Permit Application for the proposed Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant,
for your review and comment.
Please do not hesitate to contact us, should you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Av".,66.:444,,8
William B. Dowbiggin, P.E., BC
Senior Associate
Camp Dresser & McKee
cc: Michael G. Mack, Director, Pender County Utilities
J. 3renan Buckley, P.E., CDM
consulting • engineering • construction • operations

t
EXAMPLE SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS WITH NPDES DISCHARGE OUTFALLS
oats
The majority of surface water treatment plants in North Carolina have NPDES discharge outfalls (such as
pipes) so we are proposing the industry standard. NCDENR public water supply requires the ability to
discharge process wastewater to avoid problems with recycling such as happened in Milwaukee with
Cryptosporidium. We are not aware of a surface water treatment plant in North Carolina without an
riga
NPDES discharge pipe though one may exist. Examples of surface water treatment plants in North
''a Carolina with NPDES discharge pipes include:
In Cape Fear River as proposed plant:
- Fayetteville
- Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority (new permit for discharge near Tarheel NC just
south of Fayetteville)
tab,Wilmington
Cary/Apex
Harnett County
ezio,
''ia6, Various watersheds:
albs
- Durham
- Raleigh
- Asheville
- Charlotte
- Gastonia
- Greenville
elaN
eleas
AIRN
AMIN

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
Mail the complete application to:
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit Number
NC00)`»n2-O
If you are completing this form in computer use the TAB key or the up - down arrows to move from one
field to the next. To check the boxes, click your mouse on top of the box. Otherwise, please print or type.
1. Contact Information:
Owner Name Pender County
Facility Name
Mailing Address
City
ANN
State / Zip Code
Telephone Number
Fax Number
e-mail Address
Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
Mr. Michael G. Mack, Director - Pender County Utilities
Department - 605 E. Freemont Street
Burgaw
NC 28425
[phone]
(
[e-mail]
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Check here if same as above ❑
No street address at this time. Facility will be located
Street Address or State Road near the intersection of Highway 421 and the New
Hanover County line (property previously owned by BASF)
City
State / Zip Code
County
Burgaw
North Carolina
Pender
3. Operator Information:
Name of the firm, consultant or other entity that operates the facility. (Note that this is not referring to the
Operator in Responsible Charge or ORC)
Name Pender County
^^ Mailing Address
City
State / Zip Code
Telephone Number
Fax Number
605 E. Freemont Street
Burgaw
NC 28425
[phone]
Page 1 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

fie1
/st1
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
4. Ownership Status:
ofk Federal ❑ State ❑ Private ❑ Public
5. Type of treatment plant:
exAN
® Conventional (Includes coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, usually followed by
filtration and disinfection)
fserN
❑ Ion Exchange (Sodium Cycle Cationic ion exchange)
ra\
ea\❑ Membrane Technology (RO, nanofiltration)
Check here if the treatment process also uses a water softener ❑
6. Description of source water(s) (i.e. groundwater, surface water)
rabN The raw water source is the Cape Fear River. A 36 inch raw water pipe will tie-in to the existing
Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority's (LCFWASA) raw water main to the proposed
Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant.
The analysis of the source water collected as well as additional information related to the source
water is included in Appendix A through D.
OIN
7. Describe the treatment process(es) for the raw water:
`laz. The recommended treatment process for the Pender County Surface WTP is based on
conventional treatment. Construction of the new WTP will be phased. Phase 1 will
include a 2 mgd WTP with a 24-inch finished water transmission main. The 2 mgd plant
under Phase 1 will have the infrastructure (concrete and building) in place for rapid
expansion by equipment addition to a 6.0 mgd capacity plant under Phase 2. Further
permitting including an EA or EA Amendment will be required to increase the capacity in
r the future to 6 mgd and/or for an interim capacity of 4.5 mgd. The treatment will
✓ require up to 10 percent water usage for filter backwashing, sedimentation solids
drainage and other uses. Appendix E includes a preliminary schematic flow through the
facility, including flow volumes at all points in the treatment process, and points of
addition of chemicals.
elieN Principal plant features include:
Raw Water Piping
4sz, A raw water transmission main will be installed to connect the proposed Pender County
Surface WTP to the existing LCFWASA's raw water supply pipe. Flow control will be
accomplished by valve throttling.
❑ Green Sand Filter (No sodium recharge)
ezitN
Pretreatment
Pretreatment consists of chemical addition, rapid 'riving, flocculation, and
sedimentation. Up to 10 percent allowance for water losses due to filter backwash, filter-
°`st, to -waste, sedimentation basin solids removal, and other miscellaneous uses at the WTP
,gap, are being accounted for while calculating the net capacity of the plant.
The preliminary design concept includes one rapid mix train; two flocculation trains, each
'saN flocculation train having four compartments to allow tapered energy flocculation; and
420, two longitudinal sedimentation basin. The sedimentation basin has chain and flight
solids collection equipment. A discussion of the major plant process components follows.
Rapid Mix
Two rapid mix basins will be provided. This allows series dosing of coagulant followed by
caustic and/or polymer and redundancy. If one mixer is out of service the coagulant
could be fed at the second mixer. Provisions will be made for feeding ferric or alum
eAN
coagulant, polymer, and caustic to the rapid mix chambers. The rapid mix chambers will
Page 2 of 8 C-WTP 03/05
rich
estN

/lg.%
tsv, NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
each be 5 feet x 5 feet x 8.2 feet water depth.
Flocculation
Two trains of four -stage flocculators will be provided. A baffle wall will separate each
flocculation stage. Each basin will be equipped with a vertical flocculator of the turbine
type driven by a variable frequency drive (VFD). The four basins in series, each with
separate VFD controls will allow for tapered energy flocculation, which will allow for
optimization of the flocculation process.
The flocculator walls are designed to create an over-under flow pattern and a serpentine
pattern in the horizontal plane to minimize short-circuiting. Opening sizes will be
designed to minimize floc breakup. Provisions will be made to feed polymer and caustic
in the flocculation basins. Flow from each of the flocculation basins will pass to the
sedimentation basin influent channel for distribution to the sedimentation units.
Sedimentation
Two sedimentation basins will be provided. Each basin will be equipped with solids
collection equipment. The basins will have approximately 14.5-foot average side water
depth at design flow.
Solids will be collected by chain and flight collectors to hoppers located at one end of the
tank. Solids will be manually or automatically withdrawn through the use of air lift pipes
and drains to a view box, which will allow the operators to visually monitor the solids
consistency in order to determine the length of time for solids removal and minimize
discharge of clean water and maximize plant capacity.
Water will flow from each sedimentation basin into a filter influent flume. Provisions will
be made to feed chlorine, caustic, and polymer into the filter influent.
r Filters
Four filters will be provided. Each filter cell will be 21.75 feet x 12 feet, having an area of
261 sf. The filters will be equipped with air water backwash, washwater troughs, sand,
and GAC or anthracite media.
Filter Hydraulics - Settled water enters the filter from the filter influent channel through
an influent valve, flows into the inlet and backwash trough ports and is distributed over
the filter bed.
Filter Controls - The filters are designed with one effluent flow controller per filter
consisting of a venturi type flow meter and an electrically operated butterfly control
valve. The rate of flow through each filter will be manually set with an option for level
control to match raw water flow using a single rate set load station. Controls will be
electronic with electric valve operators. All filter operations will be from a local control
panel at each filter with flows, head losses, and turbidity.
Backwash System
Finished water from the clearwell will be piped back to the filters for backwashing. This
water will flow through the washwater header in the pipe gallery to the filter gullet,
through the underdrain, and up through the filter media. A blower and air piping will be
provided to allow air/water bed expansion and backwashing. This system is designed to
Awk, wash one filter at a time. If the clearwell is out of service or at too low an elevation for
backwashing, an emergency back-up backwash using water from the transfer pumps will
be utilized. As an alternate to be considered during final design, backwashing from the
Aft, high service system can be done through a pressure reducing valve.
The backwash water will flow into the backwash troughs located above the expanded filter
Asa bed and into the waste backwash water collection channel. From there the backwash
water flows to the residuals basins.
Aft, Transfer Pump Station and Clearwell
The transfer pump station will consist of three submersible pumps. Ductile iron pipe will
be provided to convey filtered water from the transfer pump station at the WTP to the
fAN
Page 3 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
clearwell. The pipe will also convey wash water from the storage tanks to the filters for
filter backwashing. The submersible transfer pumps have rails to raise them as needed for
easy access, although normal maintenance is only needed about once every two years.
Since primary disinfection is by chlorination, the clearwell must provide sufficient
detention time to achieve the required disinfection, measured as disinfectant
concentration times contact time (CT), for Giardia and virus inactivation. The clearwells
must also provide water for filter backwashing and serve as a storage source.
The clearwell design includes a 1-million gallon (MG) baffled precast concrete storage tank .
A second clearwell could be added when the plant expands to 6 mgd net capacity.
The approximate split of purpose for the clearwell is then to dedicate the lower half to
disinfection and the upper third to half for backwashing. Backwashing requires the head
of the upper third to half (pending flow rate) to push the water through to the filters.
Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) Pressure Contactors
GAC will be placed in pressure contactors so only 1 pressure contactor is needed per mgd of
treatment capacity.
Chemical Building
Facilities for feeding the following chemicals will be provided at the application points in
Table 1.
Table 1. Chemical Application Points
Chemical
Ferric Sulfate (or Alum)
Caustic Soda (or Lime Slurry)
Corrosion Inhibitor (Orthophosphate)
Chlorine (Sodium Hypochlorite)
Point of Application (typical points fed in bold)
Rapid Mix Basins 1 and 2
Rapid Mix Basins 1 and 2, Flocculation Basin,
Settled Water (SW) Channel, Clearwell Influent
Clearwell Influent
Rapid Mix Basins 1 and 2, SW Channel, Filter
Effluent. Clearwell Influent, Clearwell Effluent
Aqueous Ammonia (future, when needed) Clearwell Effluent
Polymer Rapid Mix Basins 1 or 2, Flocculation Basins 1
and 2, SW Channel and SW Pipe
Oxidant Raw water, Settled water (as needed)
Ferric Sulfate - Ferric sulfate is provided as the primary coagulant and will be fed to the
rapid mix basins. The design allows for alternate use of alum (aluminum sulfate). The
ferric sulfate dose is expected to range from about 30 mg/L to 100 mg/L depending on the
raw water quality with an average dose of roughly 60 mg/L. The proposed ferric sulfate
facility will use one bulk storage tank with a provision to expand the chemical storage
area in the future and two metering pumps with one pump serving rapid mix and one
pump in standby.
Caustic Soda - Caustic soda (NaOH) facilities are proposed to allow pH adjustment at the
application points shown in Table 1. The caustic dose is expected to range from about 10
mg/L to 60 mg/L, with an average dose of 25 mg/L. Bulk storage facilities will include one
chemical tank and an automatic dilution system to allow purchasing at 50 percent
concentration for cost savings and diluting on -site to 25 percent to be less vulnerable to
freezing and to make it less hazardous to handle. Tank size is to allow dilution and
purchase of a full truckload of chemical with some additional volume to avoid being close
to empty before filling. Three metering pumps will be provided. Typically, one will be on.
Corrosion Inhibitor - Corrosion inhibitor dosing facilities are provided to help inhibit
corrosion in the distribution system and help comply with the lead and copper rule. Plant
staff should try different inhibitors and doses once on-line. For feed equipment initial
sizing, the use of orthophosphate is assumed. The phosphate will be stored in a bulk tank.
Two metering pumps will be provided, one of which will be a standby.
Chlorine (Sodium Hypochlorite) - Chlorine is provided for pre -oxidation, disinfection, and
distribution system residual disinfectant. One bulk storage tank will provide ample
storage with the size needed to allow dilution and filling with a full truckload. Automatic
Page 4 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

Olt\
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
dilution facilities will be provided to allow storage at 6 percent. The normal feed points
are settled water for oxidation of iron and manganese and filtered water for primary
_ disinfection and to provide a disinfectant residual. The rapid mix feed point is only for
periodic basin cleaning since feeding to this point continuously would cause high levels
of disinfection byproducts. Metering pumps will be provided.
Polymer - Polymer will be stored in 50-Ib bags or drums in the chemical storage area. The
proposed feed system will consist of a batching system, feed tank and aging tank, and
two metering pumps. Dry polymer will be transferred by hand. The metering pumps will
pump liquid polymer from the feed tank to the feed points. The pumps will also allow use
of a liquid polymer direct from the drum separate from the day tanks in case use of
different polymers concurrently is needed. Two metering pumps will be provided.
Oxidant - This system may be used for optional pre -oxidation as needed for events of high
raw water manganese. Liquid peroxide or sodium permanganate will be used at this WTP.
Storage may be in drums or bulk. Two metering pumps will be provided; one of which will
be a standby.
Aqueous Ammonia - Ammonia may need to be fed downstream of the clearwells in the
eaL future for disinfection by-product control. Initially, ammonia facilities will not be
included since free chlorine is desired for compatibility with the groundwater systems.
8. Describe the wastewater and the treatment process(es) for wastewater generated by the
facility:
Treatment Process Residuals and Waste Washwater Disposal
1. Residuals Sources
Provision of adequate residuals handling facilities and proper residuals management is
critical to the successful operation of a WTP. The major sources of residuals include the
,lk1 sedimentation solids, spent filter backwash water, and filter -to -waste water. Suspended
matter, color, and other impurities in the raw water are removed primarily during the
coagulation/clarification process. A small amount of residuals not removed in the
sedimentation basins is removed in the filters, and the solids are subsequently removed
from the filters in the spent filter backwash water.
2. Residuals Quantity
The quantity of residuals produced by the plant depends on the raw water quality, flow
and the chemicals used to treat the raw water. Knowledge of water chemistry and
extensive experience at operating other treatment plants has shown that a relationship
exists between these factors that can be used to predict the amount of residual solids
,at, produced.
By far, the majority of residuals produced in the plant come from the coagulation process.
Other additives such as polymer can be assumed to produce amounts of residuals
equivalent to the dosages added to the water. Suspended solids also produce an
equivalent weight of residuals, as they are non -reactive. Iron and manganese (including
manganese from permanganate) are oxidized in the treatment plant and are removed in
the oxidized precipitate form. Therefore, the equation used to calculate the amount of
solids produced is:
,sit, S = 8.34 * Q (0.53C + SS + A +1.9Fe +1.58 Mn) (1)
Where the parameter values used for calculations include,
elms S = solids produced (lb/day)
average plant flow (mgd), 3.0 mgd
C = average coagulant dose, 60 mg/L Fe2(SO4)3
est, SS = average raw water suspended solids (mg/L)
= b*Tu, where b = constant, assume 1.5 and Tu =
average raw water turbidity in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) = 39 mg/L
A = additional chemicals added (mg/L), 2 mg/L for estimated annual average
Fe = average raw water iron concentration (mg/L), 0.90 mg/L
`AN Mn = average raw water manganese concentration (mg/L), 0.1 mg/L
Page 5 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

ea)
N
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plantsesse
The raw water suspended solids can be estimated from the raw water turbidity:
SS (mg/L) = b* Tu as shown above
The correlation factor between turbidity and suspended solids may vary from 0.7 to 2.2 and
may seasonally vary for the same raw water supply. Since no suspended solids data was
available, the value of b was assumed to be 1.5 for the purpose of estimating the residuals
quantity.
Using equation (1) and the above parameter values, S = 1,900 dry lb/day.
Based on our experience from other treatment plants, roughly 90 percent of the solids
produced will end up in the sedimentation solids. The rest will be collected in the spent
filter backwash water.
eat, 3. Waste Characteristics
The sedimentation solids and spent filter backwash water have significantly different
characteristics. Sedimentation solids flow is a relatively small flow with a higher solids
concentration than backwash water, typically between 0.5 percent to 2 percent,
depending on the raw water quality and coagulant conditions as well as the frequency and
duration of solids removal. Sedimentation basin solids are removed each day and its
removal can be timed to be proportional to the volume of water treated by each
sedimentation basin.
The approximately 10 percent of the solids not removed in the sedimentation basins will be
removed by the filters and subsequently removed from the filter media during filter
backwashing. Spent filter backwash water is discharged to the reclamation basins after
each filter backwash.
EAN
4. Residuals Handling Approach
ems The proposed two Residuals Basins will serve to receive the sedimentation solids,
washwater from the sedimentation basins, filter backwash water, and filter -to -waste water.
The residuals basins will be used for storage and as an equalization / clarification basin. In
est normal operation, backwash water and other high flows would be directed to one basin
while the other basin functions as more of a polishing basin. When one basin is down for
cleaning, the other basin would be decanted down prior to backwashing to capture the
oft, backwash and then allow it to settle before decanting. A thickener will not be necessary
until the future when sludge is land applied or dewatered on -site. Once a basin reaches 5
percent solids concentration, bidding for contract removal is needed. Decant can be
pumped using the recycle pump station to the raw water piping or flow to the pipe for
discharge in accordance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit.
Residuals Basins
The two residuals basins will have a combined capacity of approximately 3 MG and a depth
of approximately 7 ft. Each of the basins has been sized to provide approximately 365
days of storage capacity.
The lowest cost option is currently to put all solids in the residuals basins and to take
backwash high flows to one basin first, then to the other basin at lower decanted flow
rates for polishing. Once a basin is full of solids, contract solids removal will occur. In the
long term, once the plant is expanded or if contract -cleaning bids are much higher than
Aft,currently quoted, other disposal options can be revisited.
Based on the residuals production projected above, and assuming a solids concentration of
2 to 5 percent, the estimated residuals basins cleaning frequencies are presented in Table
2.
tegoN
tint' Page 6 of 8 C-WTP 03/05
r�1

• NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
rAN
Table 2. Estimated Residuals Basins Cleaning Frequency
Average Daily Plant Flow (mgd) 3.0
At 5 percent Solids
`°`t) Residuals Volume 1.7 MG/year
Depth of Residuals per year 5.5 ft
Estimated Dredging Frequency Once every year
At 2 percent Solids
Residuals Volume 4.3 MG/year
Depth of Residuals per year 15 ft
Estimated Dredging Frequency Once every 4 months
Note: Dredging requirements estimated based on reserving the top 1.5 ft to 2 ft of lagoon
depth for decanting.
emN
9. Number of separate discharge points: one discharge of 0.9 MGD (see location in Appendix F)
Outfall Identification number(s) 001
10. Frequency of discharge: Continuous ® Intermittent ❑
If intermittent:
Days per week discharge occurs: Duration:
pits
estN
11. Plant design potable flowrate up to 6.0 mgd (2.0 initial) MGD
Backwash or reject flow 0.2 (avg), 0.9 (peak) MGD
12. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall, including
latitude and Iongitude):
rst‘ The receiving stream is the Cape Fear River. A map showing the location of the outfall is
included in Appendix F. Two alternatives have been evaluated for the alignment of the outfall
pipe, as shown in Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix F. Both alternatives would discharge at the same
location. A final determination on the pipe layout will be made following N.C. Division of Water
Quality (DWQ)'s review of the Engineering Alternatives Analysis.
424, 13. Please list all water treatment additives, including cleaning chemicals or disinfection
treatments, that have the potential to be discharged.
Ala
Ferric Sulfate (or Alum),Caustic Soda (or Lime Slurry), Corrosion Inhibitor (Orthophosphate
Chlorine (Sodium Hypochlorite), Aqueous Ammonia (future, when needed), Polymer,
Page 7 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
Oxidant
14. Is this facility located on Indian country? (check one)
Yes ❑ No El
15.
Additional Information:
• Provide a schematic of flow through the facility, include flow volumes at all points in
the treatment process, and point of addition of chemicals.
• Solids Handling Plan
16. NEW Applicants
Information needed in addition to items 1-15:
• New applicants must contact a permit coordinator with the NCDENR Customer
Service Center.
Was the Customer Service Center contacted? ® Yes ❑ No
• Analyses of source water collected
• Engineering Alternative Analysis
• Discharges from Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis plants shall be evaluated using a
water quality model.
17. Applicant Certification
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the
best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
Michael G. Mack
PrinPe _ on Signing
Signature of Applicant
Pender County Utilities Director
Title
lam' t O`
Date
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 (b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any false
statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document files or
required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission
implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or
monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine not to exceed $25,000, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section
1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both,
for a similar offense.)
Page 8 of 8 C-WTP 03/05

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
1.1 Raw Water Characterization
The proposed raw water source to be used as a drinking water supply at the Pender
County Surface Water Treatment Plant (WTP) is the Cape Fear River provided by the
Lower Cape Fear Water and Sewer Authority (LCFWASA) via intake at locking dam
No. 1 at Kings Bluff. The Cape Fear River is a proven drinking water supply source
for the P.O. Hoffer Water Treatment Facility (WTF) of the City of Fayetteville Public
Works Commission (PWC), Brunswick County's Northwest WTP, and the Sweeney
WTP in Wilmington. Conventional coagulation, settling, and filtration are practiced
by each of these utilities, though the oxidants/disinfectants vary. The P.O. Hoffer
WTF has tube settlers instead of conventional sedimentation basins, and Brunswick
County and part of the Sweeney WTP include superpulsator clarifiers. The Sweeney
WTP uses preozonation followed by intermediate ozonation and biofiltration, and
chlorine for a residual disinfectant in the distribution system, while P.O. Hoffer WTF
uses chlorine for settled water oxidation and primary disinfection and chloramines for
a residual disinfectant in the distribution system.
There are five water supply watershed protection classifications in North Carolina
(WS-I through WS-V in decreasing order of protection and thus quality). The water
supply of the Lower Cape Fear River in Bladen County at the LCFWASA intake is a
WS-IV classification. A summary of the stream quality requirements that State
discharge regulations are to maintain for the WS-IV supply is attached in Appendix
B. This classification requires a protected area in the watershed within a 10-mile
radius of the raw water intake and a critical area in the watershed within a one-half
mile radius of the intake.
We have evaluated the significance of the various water quality parameters with
respect to current and known proposed future drinking water regulations to aid in the
selection of the preferred treatment approach. This information is discussed below
with a focus on the water quality data and subsequently in this section for each
regulated parameter.
The water quality of the Cape Fear River is characterized by several data sources. The
United States Geological Survey (USGS) have grab sample data for the Cape Fear
River. Table 1 shows a summary of the available water quality data on the Cape Fear
River. As shown in Table 1, the Cape Fear River has an average turbidity of 26
nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) with a maximum turbidity of 330 NTU based on
the USGS data. Alkalinity and hardness are low, averaging between 21 mg/L and 27
mg/L, respectively. Total organic carbon (TOC) averages about 6 mg/L with a
maximum concentration of 12 mg/L. Iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) levels are low,
and the limit of 0.3 mg/L for Fe and 0.05 mg/L for Mn are achievable using oxidation,
coagulation/settling, and filtration. There has been some detection of synthetic
organic chemicals (SOCs), which are not removed well by conventional treatment
1
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

Alt\
elaN
elikN
eALN
tAIR
ellaN
exts
eAtN
egIN
fdit
411)
EAN
estN
AlitN
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
alone. Fayetteville has detected simazine, atrazine, and di-2-ethylhexyphthalate on
multiple occasions, but at concentrations well below the treated drinking water limits,
and none were detected in their most recent testing.
Table 1
Water Quality Parameters for Cape Fear River
Parameter
River Data
Treatment Methodology
or Comment
Average
Maximum
Turbidity
26 NTU
330 NTU
Readily removed by coagulation,
clarification, and filtration
Cryptosporidium
Detected
occasionally
Unknown
Fayetteville and Wilmington report no
detections — allow for future UV
Alkalinity
21 mg/L
52 mg/L
Affects organic carbon removal
requirement
Hardness
27 mg/L
46 mg/L
Soft water — requires corrosion
control optimization
TOC
6 mg/L
About 12
mg/L
Requires enhanced coagulation and
GAC, possible future short chlorine
contact and chloramines as needed
for Stage 1/2 THM/HAA
Color
58 CU
•
332 CU
Coagulation/sedimentation and
chlorination all reduce color to its
aesthetic limit of below 15 CU
Iron
0.9 mg/L
2 mg/L
Limit of 0.3 mg/L can be met with
oxidation, coagulation, clarification,
and filtration
Manganese
0.1 mg/L
0.45 mg/L
Limit of 0.05 mg/L can be met with
oxidation, coagulation, clarification,
and filtration
Simazine
-
0.176 parts
per billion
(ppb)„
Maximum contaminant limit (MCL) of
4.0 ppb, granular activated carbon
(GAC) is Best Available Technology
(BAAtrazine
-
0.2 ppb*
MCL of 3.0 ppb, GAC is BAT
Di-2-
ethylhexylphthalate
(DEHP)
-
0.86 ppb*
MCL of 6.0 ppb, GAC is BAT
Benz(o)pyrene
-
-
Permitted for upstream discharges,
MCL of 0.2 ppb, GAC is BAT
Note:
Am\ * PWC, Fayetteville data (concentration detected in one sample)
idcz
The Best Available Technology (BAT) defined by Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) for these SOCs is granular activated carbon (GAC) adsorption. GAC for SOCs
can be applied with a post -filter contactor and/or in lieu of anthracite coal in the
conventional filters. Post -filter contactors have the disadvantage of higher costs and a
second set of filters to operate, but offer the advantages of allowing the GAC to stay
CDM
2
AWN
k4alt.s
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulationa.doc

ARN
est
efat)
eltN
eirrN
toiN
eloe
eizst
esms
eltN
AlwN
fIWN
CDM
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
fresh, taken offline when not needed, and lasting longer since preceded by
conventional treatment. GAC replacement frequently depends on the concentrations
of the parameters to be removed and can range from under a month to over a year.
The existing water supplies at Fayetteville PWC and the City of Wilmington are a
source of raw (untreated) and treated water quality data. A summary of the raw
water quality data for the period ranging from January 2006 to June 2007 for the P.O.
Hoffer WTF, Fayetteville and Sweeney WTP, Wilmington is given in Table 2 and
Table 3, respectively.
Table 2
Cape Fear River Monthly Raw Water Data
at the P.O. Hoffer WTF, Fayetteville PWC
(Data for the period January 2006 to June 2007)
Turbidity
TOC
Alkalinity
Hardness
Fe
Mn
F
(NTU)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
Avg.
20
7.9
22.8
29.9
1.09
0.10
0.16
Max.
172
10.6
39.0
41.0
3.73
0.46
0.46
Min.
3
4.9
9.0
18.0
0.06
0.02
0.01
Table 3
Cape Fear River Monthly Raw Water Data at the Sweeney WTP, Wilmington
(Data for the period January 2006 to June 2007)
Turbidity
TOC
Alkalinity
Hardness
Fe
Mn
F
(NTU)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
Avg.
19
7.4
17.4
25.4
1.11
0.06
0.21
Max.
149
16.0
30.0
40.0
5.27
0.38
0.63
Min.
4
4.8
7.0
16.0
0.42
< 0.05
0.10
A review of the water quality records for Fayetteville PWC and the City of
Wilmington confirm that the Cape Fear River water is treatable and can be used as a
public water supply.
As shown in Table 1, conventional treatment (coagulation, clarification, and filtration)
with chlorine disinfection and optimized corrosion control will meet most
requirements. Pender County may wish to consider ultraviolet (UV) light disinfection
for an extra barrier to Cryptosporidium, though the data from Fayetteville and
Wilmington suggest that the UV will likely not be mandated by regulations.
Operations staff will need to optimize dosages and chemicals for corrosion control.
The future capability to possibly add ammonia to form chloramines for a residual
disinfectant, gives flexibility for future use for lowering disinfection byproduct
concentrations if and when required.
3
EAN Appendix A Water Quality and Regulationa.doc
em1

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
1.2 Drinking Water Regulations
Drinking water is federally regulated to minimum standards by the EPA under the
authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The SDWA was established by
Congress in 1974 to protect human health by regulating the nation's public drinking
water supply. The SDWA was extensively amended in 1986 and again in 1996. These
regulations are adopted and, in some cases, made more restrictive by the North
Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR). NCDENR
has been given primacy by the EPA for enforcing these regulations.
A primary focus of the SDWA is to set national contaminant -based drinking water
standards, including both primary and secondary standards. Primary drinking water
standards are intended to address adverse health effects and consist of maximum
contaminant level goals (MCLGs), which are non -enforceable goals, and MCLs, which
are enforceable limits set as close to MCLGs as practical, considering cost and
feasibility of attainment. Secondary drinking water standards address general public
welfare, such as the odor or appearance of drinking water and are also non -
enforceable. "Contaminant" is defined by the SDWA to include any physical,
chemical, biological, or radiological substance.
Originally, the SDWA focused primarily on treatment as the means of providing safe
drinking water at the tap. The 1996 amendments greatly enhanced the existing law by
recognizing source water protection, operator training, funding for water system
improvements, and public information as important components of safe drinking
water. This approach helps to ensure the quality of drinking water from the source to
the customer's tap.
Under the SDWA, all public water systems are subject to the drinking water
standards, enforced as MCLs for particular contaminants. A "public water system" as
defined by the EPA is one that provides piped water for human consumption and has
at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 persons. Regulations
require these systems to meet MCLs and/or to use certain treatment techniques to
protect against adverse health effects. Regulations include prescribed testing, record
keeping, reporting, and timely notification of failure to meet applicable drinking
water standards.
The current primary and secondary drinking water regulations are listed in Table 4.
Each category of contaminant in Table 4 is discussed below with respect to occurrence
and relevance to this project.
CDM
4
Appendix A Water Duality and Regutationadoc

r
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
owN Table 4
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations
e
si
ese
k
re t
elaN
e
Ants
PAN
eAN
esagN
AllaN
egiseN
4111
egraN
Parameter
MCLG-1
(mg/L)a
MCL or
Potential Health Effects
from Ingestion of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
TT-
(mg/L)
Cryptosporidium
as of
01/01/02:
zero
as of
01/01/02:
TT 2
Gastrointestinal illness (e.g.,
diarrhea, vomiting, cramps).
Human and animal
fecal waste.
Giardia Iamblla
zero
TT3
Gastrointestinal illness (e.g.,
diarrhea, vomiting, cramps).
Human and animal
fecal waste.
Heterotrophic plate count
(HPC)
n/a
a
HPC has no health effects,
but can indicate how
effective treatment is at
controlling microorganisms.
HPC measures a
range of bacteria
that are naturally
present in the
environment.
Legionella
zero
TT3
Legionnaire's Disease,
commonly known as
pneumonia.
Found naturally in
water, multiplies in
heating systems.
Total Coliforms (including fecal
coliform and E. Colt)zero
o a
5.0 1
Used as an indicator that
other potentially harmful5
bacteria may be present-.
Coliforms are
naturally present in
the environment;
fecal coliforms and
E. coli come from
human and animal
fecal waste.
Turbidity
n/a
Tf3
Turbidity is a measure of the
cloudiness of water. It is
used to indicate water quality
and filtration effectiveness
(i.e., whether disease -
causing organisms are
present). Higher turbidity
levels are often associated
with higher levels of disease -
causing microorganisms
such as viruses, parasites,
and some bacteria. These
organisms can cause
symptoms such as nausea,
cramps, diarrhea, and
associated headaches.
Soil runoff.
Viruses (enteric)
zero
TT2
Gastrointestinal illness (e.g.,
diarrhea, vomiting, cramps).
Human and animal
fecal waste.
CDM
5
e
Appendix A Water Quality and RegulaUons.doc

tor!‘
IAN
ewN Table 4 (continued)
rAN
taN
tAtsk
r�1
toltN
tootN
otook
oath
44)
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Disinfectants &
Disinfection
Byproducts
1
mC �� z
( g r
MCL or
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
TT'- x
(mg/LP
Bromate
as of
01/01/02:
zero
as of
01/01/02:
0.010
Increased risk of cancer.
Byproduct of drinking
water disinfection.
Chloramines (as
CIZ)
as of
01/01/02:1
MRDLG=4-
as of
01/01/02:
MRDL=4.0-
Eye/nose irritation
stomach discomfort,
anemia.
Water additive used to
control microbes.
Chlorine (as C12)
as of
01/01/02:
MRDLG=41
as of
01/01/02:
MRDL=4.01
Eye/nose irritation
stomach discomfort.
Water additive used to
control microbes.
Chlorine dioxide (as
Chlor102)
as of
01/01/02:
MRDLG=0.81
as of
01/01/02:
MRDL=0.81
Anemia; infants and
young children: nervous
system effects.
Water additive used to
control microbes.
Chlorite
as of
01/01/02:
0.8
as of
01/01/02:
1.0
Anemia; infants and
young children: nervous
system effects.
Byproduct of drinking
water disinfection.
Haloacetic acids
(HAA5)
as of
01/01/02:
n/a¢
as of
01/01/02:
0.060
Increased risk of cancer.
Byproduct of drinking
water disinfection.
Total
Trihalomethanes
(TTHMs)
none--
0.10
Liver, kidney, or central
nervous system problems;
increased risk of cancer.
Byproduct of drinking
water disinfection.
as of
01/01/02:
n/a
as of
01/01/02:
0.080
Inorganic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/Lf
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
MCL or TT'-
(mg/L)-2
Antimony
0.006
0.006
Increase in blood
cholesterol; decrease in
blood glucose.
Discharge from
petroleum refineries;
fire retardants;
ceramics; electronics;
solder.
Arsenic
none'-
0.01
as of 1/23/06
Skin damage; circulatory
system problems,
increased risk of cancer.
Erosion of natural
deposits; runoff from
glass and electronics
production wastes.
Asbestos
(fiber >10
micrometers)
7 million fibers
per liter
7 MFL
Increased risk of
developing benign
intestinal polyps.
Decay of asbestos
cement in water mains;
erosion of natural
deposits.
Barium
2
2
Increase in blood
pressure.
Discharge of drilling
wastes; discharge from
metal refineries;
erosion of natural
deposits.
COM
6
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

tvAN
eIRN
PAN
Table 4 (continued)
eats
PAN
PAN
PAN
cAN
PAN
N
EAN
PAN
PAN
tart
PaN
PAN
PAN
eczsl
ximN
Albs
PiAN
PAN
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Inorganic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)2
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
-
MCL or TT,
(mg/L)a
Beryllium
0.004
0.004
Intestinal lesions.
Discharge from metal
refineries and coal -
burning factories;
discharge from
electrical, aerospace,
and defense industries.
Cadmium
0.005
0.005
Kidney damage.
Corrosion of galvanized
pipes; erosion of
natural deposits;
discharge from metal
refineries; runoff from
waste batteries and
paints.
Chromium (total)
0.1
0.1
Some people who use
water containing
chromium well in excess
of the MCL over many
years could experience
allergic dermatitis.
Discharge from steel
and pulp mills; erosion
of natural deposits.
Co er
pp
1.3
Action
Level=1.3
Short-term exposure: •
Gastrointestinal distress.
Long-term exposure:
Liver or kidney damage.
People with Wilson's
Disease should consult
their personal doctor if
their water systems
exceed the copper action
level.
Corrosion of household
plumbing systems;
erosion of natural
deposits.
Cyanide (as free
cyanide)
0 2
0 2
Nerve damage or thyroid
problems.
Discharge from
steel/metal factories;
discharge from plastic
and fertilizer factories.
Fluoride
4.0
4.0
Bone disease (pain and
tenderness of the bones);
Children may get mottled
teeth.
Water additive, which
promotes strong teeth;
erosion of natural
deposits; discharge
from fertilizer and
aluminum factories.
Lead
zero
Infants and children:
Delays in physical or
mental development.
Adults: Kidney problems;
high blood pressure.
Corrosion of household
plumbing systems;
erosion of natural
deposits.
TT8;
Action
Level=0.015
Mercury (inorganic)
0.002
0.002
•
Kidney damage.
Erosion of natural
deposits; discharge
from refineries and -
factories; runoff from
landfills and cropland.
ccM
7
egt
Appendix A Water Quality and Reguladons.doc

ewe1
imN
ezz
r�1
ezigN
aigN
esiss
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Table 4 (continued)
Inorganic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)a
Potential Health Effects
from Ingestion of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
MCL or TT1
(mg/L)a
Nitrate (measured
as Nitrogen)
10
' 10
"Blue baby syndrome" in
infants under six months - life
threatening without
immediate medical attention.
Symptoms: Infant looks blue
and has shortness of breath.
Runoff from fertilizer use;
leaching from septic
tanks, sewage; erosion of
natural deposits.
Nitrite (measured
as Nitrogen)
1
1
"Blue baby syndrome" in
infants under six months - life
threatening without
immediate medical attention.
Symptoms: Infant looks blue
and has shortness of breath.
Runoff from fertilizer use;
leaching from septic
tanks, sewage; erosion of
natural deposits.
Selenium
0.05
0.05
Hair or fingernail loss;
numbness in fingers or toes;
circulatory problems.
Discharge from petroleum
refineries; erosion of
natural deposits;
discharge from mines.
Thallium
0.0005
0.002
Hair loss; changes in blood;
kidney, intestine, or liver
problems.
Leaching from ore -
processing sites;
discharge from
electronics, glass, and
pharmaceutical
companies.
Organic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)a
Potential Health Effects
from Ingestion of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
MCL or TT1
(mg/L)a
Acrylamide
zero
TT9
Nervous system or blood
problems; increased risk of
cancer.
Added to water during
sewage/wastewater
treatment.
Alachlor
zero
0.002
Eye, liver, kidney or spleen
problems; anemia; risk of
cancer.
Runoff from herbicide
used on row crops.
Atrazine -
0.003
0.003
Cardiovascular system
problems; reproductive
difficulties.
Runoff from herbicide
used on row crops.
Benzene
zero
0.005
Anemia; decrease in blood
platelets; increased risk of
cancer.
Discharge from factories;
leaching from gas storage
tanks and landfills.
Benzo(a)pyrene
(PAHs)
zero
0.0002
Reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer.
Leaching from linings of
water storage tanks and
distribution lines.
Carbofuran
0.04
0.04
Problems with blood or
nervous system; reproductive
difficulties.
Leaching of soil fumigant
used on rice and alfalfa.
CDM
8
est Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

rAal
fseN
MTN
MtN
r1
eza
faaN
elaaN
ewers
MtN
raN
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Table 4 (continued)
Organic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)2
MCL or
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
TT'-
(mg/L)1
Carbon
tetrachloride
zero
0.005
Liver problems; increased
risk of cancer.
Discharge from
chemical plants and
other industrial
activities.
Chlordane
zero
0.002
Liver or nervous system
problems; increased risk
of cancer.
Residue of banned
termiticide.
Chlorobenzene
0.1
0.1
Liver or kidney problems.
Discharge from
chemical and
agricultural chemical
factories.
2,4-D
0.07
0.07
Kidney, liver, or adrenal
gland problems.
Runoff from herbicide
used on row crops.
Dalapon
0.2
0.2
Minor kidney changes.
Runoff from herbicide
used on rights of way.
1,2-Dibromo-3-
chloropropane
(DBCP)
zero
0.0002
Reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer.
Runoff/leaching from
soil fumigant used on
soybeans, cotton,
pineapples, and
orchards.
o-Dichlorobenzene
0.6
0.6
Liver, kidney, or
circulatory system
problems.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
p-Dichlorobenzene
0.075
0.075
Anemia; liver, kidney or
spleen damage.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
1,2-Dichloroethane
zero
0.005
Increased risk of cancer.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
1,1-
Dichloroethylene
0.007
0.007
Liver problems.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
cis-1,2-
Dichloroethylene
0.07
0.07
Liver problems.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
trans-1,2-
Dichloroethylene
0.1
0.1
Liver problems.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
Dichloromethane
zero
0.005
Liver problems; risk of
cancer.
Discharge from
pharmaceutical and
chemical factories.
CcA
9
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

Table 4 (continued)
fieN
exN
ex)
eszN
Axis
riaN
egILN
eXis
laa
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Organic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)
MCL or
TT'-
(mg/L)z
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
1,2-
Dichloropropane
zero
0.005
Increased risk of cancer.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
Di(2-ethylhexyi)
adipate
0.4
0.4
General toxic effects or
reproductive difficulties.
Leaching from PVC
plumbing systems;
discharge from
chemical factories.
Di(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
zero
0.006
Reproductive difficulties;
liver problems; increased
risk of cancer.
Discharge from rubber
and chemical factories.
Dinoseb
0.007
0.007
Reproductive difficulties.
Runoff from herbicide
used on soybeans and
vegetables.
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-
TCDD)
zero
0.00000003
Reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer.
Emissions from waste
incineration and other
combustion; discharge
from chemical factories.
Diquat
0.02
0.02
Cataracts.
Runoff from herbicide
use.
Endothall
0.1
0.1
Stomach and intestinal
problems.
Runoff from herbicide
use.
Endrin
0.002
0.002
Nervous system effects.
Residue of banned
insecticide.
Epichlorohydrin
zero
TT9
Stomach problems;
reproductive difficulties;
risk of cancer.
•
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories; added to
water during treatment
process.
Ethylbenzene
0.7
0.7
Liver/kidney problems.
Discharge from
petroleum refineries.
Ethylene dibromide
zero
0.00005
Stomach problems;
reproductive difficulties;
increased risk of cancer.
Discharge from
petroleum refineries.
Glyphosate
0.7
0.7
Kidney problems;
reproductive difficulties.
Runoff from herbicide
use.
Heptachlor
zero
0.0004
Liver damage; increased
risk of cancer.
Residue of banned
termiticide.
Heptachlor epoxide
zero
0.0002
Liver damage; increased
risk of cancer.
Breakdown of
heptachlor.
CDM
10
eAN
ArpN
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulationa.doc

tiles
ell
riRN Table 4 (continued)
eftN
rAN
lobs
eges
libs
Awl
Abs
Albs
Abs
Asos
Albs
robs
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Organic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)z
MCL or
Potential Health
Effects from
Ingestion of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
TT'-
(mg/L)z
Hexachlorobenzene
zero
0.001
Liver or kidney
problems; reproductive
difficulties; increased
risk of cancer.
Discharge from metal
refineries and
agricultural chemical
factories.
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
0.05
0.05
Kidney or stomach
problems.
Discharge from chemical
factories.
Lindane
0.0002
0.0002
Liver or kidney
problems.
Runoff/leaching from
insecticide used on
cattle, lumber, gardens.
Methoxychlor
0.04
0.04
Reproductive difficulties.
Runoff/leaching from
insecticide used on
fruits, vegetables.
Oxamyl (Vydate)
0.2
0.2
Slight nervous system
effects.
Runoff/leaching from
insecticide used on
apples, potatoes,
tomatoes.
Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs)
zero
0.0005
Skin changes; thymus
gland problems; immune
deficiencies;
reproductive or nervous
system difficulties;
increased risk of cancer.
Runoff from landfills;
discharge of waste
chemicals.
Pentachlorophenol
zero
0.001
Liver or kidney
problems; increased risk
of cancer.
Discharge from wood
preserving factories.
Picloram
0.5
0.5
Liver problems.
Herbicide runoff.
Simazine
0.004
0.004
Problems with blood.
Herbicide runoff.
Styrene
0.1
0.1
Liver, kidney, and
circulatory problems.
Discharge from rubber
and plastic factories;
leaching from landfills.
Tetrachloroethylene
zero
0.005
Liver problems;
increased risk of cancer.
Discharge from factories
and dry cleaners.
Toluene
1
1
Nervous system, kidney,
or liver problems.
Discharge from
petroleum factories.
Toxaphene
zero
0.003
Kidney, liver, or thyroid
problems; increased risk
of cancer.
Runoff/leaching from
insecticide used on
cotton and cattle.
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)
0.05
0.05
Liver problems.
Residue of banned
herbicide.
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
0.07
0.07
Changes in adrenal
glands.
Discharge from textile
finishing factories.
ccM
11
Appendix A Water Quality and Regutationa.doc

g1
fot\
PAN Table 4 (continued)
fAN
tleN
eaN
tarN
OIN
d
.74
e
411
q
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Organic
Chemicals
MCLG1
(mg/L)2
MCL or
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
TT'-
(mg/L)z
1,1,1-
Trichloroethane
0.20
0.2
Liver, nervous system or
circulatory problems.
Discharge from metal
degreasing sites and
other factories.
1,1,2-
Trichloroethane
0.003
0.005
Liver, kidney, or immune
system problems.
Discharge from
industrial chemical
factories.
Trichloroethylene
zero
0.005
Liver problems; increased
risk of cancer.
Discharge from
petroleum refineries.
Vinyl chloride
zero
0.002
Increased risk of cancer.
Leaching from PVC
pipes; discharge from
plastic factories.
Xylenes (total)
10
10
Nervous system damage.
Discharge from
petroleum factories;
discharge from
chemical factories.
Radionuclides
MCLG1
(mg/L)2
MCL or
TT'-
(mg/L)z
Potential Health
Effects from Ingestion
of Water
Sources of
Contaminant in
Drinking Water
Alpha particles
none--
15
picocuries
per Liter
(pCi/L)
Increased risk of cancer.
Erosion of natural
deposits.
---------
as of
12/08/03:
zero
Beta particles and
photon emitters
none
4 millirems
per year
Increased risk of cancer.
Decay of natural and
man-made deposits.
as of
12/08/03:
zero
Radium 226 and
Radium 228
(combined)
none
5 pCi/L
Increased risk of cancer.
Erosion of natural
deposits.
_______
as of
12/08/03:
zero
Uranium
as of
12/08/03:
zero
as of
12/08/03:
30 ug/L
Increased risk of cancer,
kidney toxicity.
Erosion of natural
deposits.
Notes
1 Definitions:
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) - The highest level of a contaminant that is allowed in drinking water. MCLs are set as
close to MCLGs as feasible using the best available treatment technology and taking cost into consideration. MCLs are
enforceable standards.
Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) - The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or
expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety and are non -enforceable public health goals.
CDM
12
Appendix A water Quality and Regulationa.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level (MRDL) - The highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. There is
convincing evidence that addition of a disinfectant is necessary for control of microbial contaminants.
Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal (MRDLG) - The level of a drinking water disinfectant below which there is no
known or expected risk to health. MRDLGs do not reflect the benefits of the use of disinfectants to control microbial
contaminants.
Treatment Technique - A required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water.
2
3
Units are in milligrams per liter (mg/L) unless otherwise noted. Milligrams per liter are equivalent to parts per million.
EPA's surface water treatment rules require systems using surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of
surface water to (1) disinfect their water, and (2) filter their water or meet criteria for avoiding filtration so that the following
contaminants are controlled at the following levels:
• Cryptosporidium: 99% removal/inactivation
• Giardia lamblia: 99.9 percent removal/inactivation
• Viruses: 99.99 percent removal/inactivation
• Legionella: No limit, but EPA believes that if Giardia and viruses are removed/ inactivated, Legionella will also be
controlled.
• Turbidity: Filtration systems must achieve a filtered water turbidity level of less than or equal to 0.3 NTU for 95 percent
of measurements taken each month, and less than or equal to 1.0 NTU at all times. Water utilities are required to record
the effluent turbidity of individual filters every 15 minutes. For any individual filter that has a measured turbidity level
greater than 1.0 NTU in two consecutive measurements taken 15 minutes apart, a report of the filter number, the
turbidity measurement, and the date(s) on which the filter exceeded this limit must be included. In addition, a profile on
the individual filter must be maintained and reported to the State, depending on the measurement of NTU that
exceeded the limit.
• HPC: No more than 500 bacterial colonies per milliliter.
o No more than 5.0 percent samples total coliform-positive in a month. (For water systems that collect fewer than 40 routine
samples per month, no more than one sample can be total coliform-positive). Every sample that has total coliforms must be
analyzed for fecal coliforms. There may not be any fecal coliforms or E. colt.
5 Fecal coliform and E. colt are bacteria whose presence indicates that the water may be contaminated with human or animal
wastes. Disease -causing microbes (pathogens) in these wastes can cause diarrhea, cramps, nausea, headaches, or other
symptoms. These pathogens may pose a special health risk for infants, young children, and people with severely
compromised immune systems.
6
Although there is no collective MCLG for this contaminant group, there are individual MCLGs for some of the individual
contaminants:
• Trihalomethanes: bromodichloromethane (zero); bromoform (zero); dibromochloromethane (0.06 mg/L). Chloroform is
regulated with this group but has no MCLG.
• Haloacetic acids: dichloroacetic acid (zero); trichloroacetic acid (0.3 mg/L). Monochloroacetic acid, bromoacetic acid,
and dibromoacetic acid are regulated with this group but have no MCLGs.
• MCLGs were not established before the 1986 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act. Therefore, there is no MCLG for
this contaminant.
9
Lead and copper are regulated by a Treatment Technique that requires systems to control the corrosiveness of their water. If
more than 10% of tap water samples exceed the action level, water systems must take additional steps. For copper, the
action level is 1.3 mg/L, and for lead is 0.015 mg/L.
Each water system must certify, in writing, to the state (using third party or manufacturer's certification) that when acrylamide
and epichlorohydrin are used in drinking water systems, the combination (or product) of dose and monomer level does not
exceed the levels specified, as follows:
• Acrylamide = 0.05% dosed at 1 mg/L (or equivalent)
• Epichlorohydrin = 0.01 % dosed at 20 mg/L (or equivalent)
DM
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations
National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations (NSDWRs or secondary standards) arc non -enforceable guidelines
regulating contaminants that may cause cosmetic effects (such as skin or tooth discoloration) or aesthetic effects (such as
taste, odor, or color) in drinking water. EPA recommends secondary standards to water systems but does not require systems
to comply as summarized in Table 5. However, states may choose to adopt them as enforceable standards. For more
information, read Secondary Drinking Water Regulations: Guidance for Nuisance Chemicals.
13
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations doc

efeN
eat
eAN
faltN
ro
rm\
r
Ara
rieN
fitN
ra‘
ORN
torr,
rAIN
logN
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Table 5
National Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Contaminant
Secondary Standard
Aluminum
0.05 to 0.2 mg/L
Chloride
250 mg/L
Color
15 (color units)
Copper
1.0 mg/L
Corrosivity
Noncorrosive
Fluoride
2.0 mg/L
Foaming Agents
0.5 mg/L
Iron
0.3 mg/L
Manganese
0.05 mg/L
Odor
3 threshold odor number
pH
6.5-8.5
Silver
0.10 mg/L
Sulfate
250 mg/L
Total Dissolved Solids
•
500 mg/L
Zinc
5 mg/L
Microorganisms
Conventional coagulation/ clarification/ filtration and chlorine disinfection meets all
current federal requirements for control of microorganisms. However, recent
regulations are more restrictive with respect to Cryptosporidium. The Cape Fear River
is vulnerable to Cryptosporidium, though Wilmington and Fayetteville have typically
found none, so an extra treatment barrier, UV, is recommended for optional future
implementation when affordable due to both the regulation of Cryptosporidium and
the desire for an extra barrier to contamination by microorganisms.
Disinfectants and Disinfection By-products (D/DBPs)
DBPs are formed when chemical disinfectants react in the water either with natural
organic matter (NOM) or with bromide ions.
Compliance will require minimizing the free chlorine contact time by adding the
chlorine after sedimentation or filtration, and in the future once there is a long
distribution system, adding ammonia to form chloramines after the primary
disinfection "CT" requirements are met, where "C" is the disinfectant residual and
"T" is the contact time. The use of chloramines is suggested to be deferred until
absolutely necessary for regulatory compliance in the future since there are negative
aspects of chloramines as discussed in the EPA's guidance manuals. Ferric sulfate
enhanced coagulation, and GAC instead of anthracite in the conventional filters, will
also help with D/DBP compliance. The recent regulations for disinfection byproducts
and for Cryptosporidium are discussed in Section 3.2.1 under "Current Regulations".
COM 14
/O1 Appendix A Water Quality and Roguletione.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Inorganic Chemicals
Fayetteville PWC, Brunswick County and the City of Wilmington on the Cape Fear
River currently meet required limits for inorganic chemicals. Therefore, compliance
should be attainable, especially since the North Carolina drinking water regulations
list coagulation and filtration, two planned processes for this plant, as two of the best
available treatment technologies for many of these inorganic chemicals. North
Carolina adopted the secondary limits for iron and manganese as enforceable
standards even though at the federal level, they are only aesthetic (non -enforceable)
standards.
Organic Chemicals
The other listed utilities using the Cape Fear River as a drinking water supply source
currently meet organic chemical limits. There have been detections of SOCs, which
are not removed well by conventional treatment alone. Fayetteville PWC has
detected simazine, atrazine, and di-2-ethylhexylphthalate on multiple occasions, but
at concentrations well below the treated drinking water limits. To provide flexibility
for coping with possible future organic chemical contamination, the capability of
adding powdered activated carbon (PAC) with a steel silo or GAC post -filter steel
contactors, as well as considering GAC as a primary filter media is recommended for
consideration. Additional testing or checks on testing by others, such as the upstream
utilities, NCDENR, and USGS in subsequent phases of this project, is suggested to
check for any water quality deterioration since implementation of this project will
span over multiple years.
Radionuclides
The other utilities using the Cape Fear River as a drinking water supply source
currently listed meet radionuclide limits; therefore, compliance should be attainable.
Copies of drinking water quality reports for Fayetteville PWC and the City of
Wilmington are attached in Appendix C and Appendix D, respectively. These
provide treated water quality information one might expect from the proposed plant.
This information can be used for estimating further treatment requirements for
various industrial uses.
1.2.1 Current Regulations
EPA is continuously working on the development of new drinking water regulations.
Therefore, the schedule, content, and number of new regulations is in a continuous
state of flux. Consequently, updates by EPA should be checked regularly at the
following web site address:
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/
Under the 1996 SDWA Amendments, the EPA developed several regulations that
became effective in the late 1990s and early 2006 and will affect Pender County. These
regulations are the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR),
ccM
15
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
This report covers the major points of these regulations and their ramifications for
Pender County:
• Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR);
• Stage 1 Disinfectants / Disinfection By-product Rule (D/DBPR);
• Stage 2 D/DBPR;
• The Long Term Stage 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR);
• The Long Term Stage 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR);
• Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR);
• Ground Water Rule;
• Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) revisions.
Another important aspect of the continuous regulatory flux that applies to drinking
water facilities is that designs need to allow for possible future facilities should
regulations or source water quality change. Consequently, space for possible future
GAC contactors, UV, and other advanced treatment is recommended.
1.2.1.1 IESWTR and LT1ESWTR Turbidity Requirements
As part of the IESWTR promulgated in 1998, turbidity can be measured in two ways;
combined filter effluent (CFE) and individual filter effluent (IFE). As of January 1,
2002, where population served is equal or greater than 10,000 people, the CFE value
recorded at least every 4 hours must not exceed 0.3 NTU in at least 95 percent of the
measurements taken each month. The LT1ESWTR subsequently applied this limit to
smaller surface water systems. Additionally, the CFE level of representative samples
must not exceed 1.0 NTU at any time. The most significant change in the monitoring
requirements is that the utility is required to record the IFE every 15 minutes. In
addition to the past reporting and record keeping requirements, the utility is required
to report turbidity measurements within 10 days after the end of each month.
Information in this report must include the following:
• The total number of CFE measurements taken during the month.
• The number and percentage of CFE measurements taken during the month, which
are less than or equal to the 95 percent limit.
• The date and value of any CFE measurements taken during the month, which
exceed 1.0 NTU for systems using conventional filtration treatment or direct
filtration, or which exceed the maximum level set by the state.
• The IFE monitoring conducted and any follow-up actions taken for exceedances
during the month.
Utilities must maintain their record keeping for the above requirements for a
minimum of three years. The additional IFE follow-up and reporting requirements
include:
16
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
• For any IFE recordings greater than 1.0 NTU in two consecutive measurements
taken 15 minutes apart, a report of the filter number, the turbidity value, the date(s)
on which the filter exceeded the limit and the cause (if known), must be reported to
North Carolina Division of Health (NCDEH) - Public Water Supply Section
(PWSS), a Division of NCDENR by the 10th of the following month. In cases
where cause for an exceedance is unknown, a profile on the individual filter must
be produced within 7 days and reported to NCDEH-PWSS.
• For any IFE recordings greater than 1.0 NTU in two consecutive measurements
taken 15 minutes apart at the same filter for three (3) months in a row, filter self -
assessment should be conducted within 14 days and a report of the filter number,
the turbidity value, the date(s) on which the filter exceeded the limit, and the
produced filter self -assessment must be reported to NCDEH-PWSS by the 10th of
the following month.
• If two consecutive IFE recordings exceed 2.0 NTU and were taken 15 minutes apart
at the same filter for 2 months in a row, a comprehensive performance evaluation
(CPE) must be performed within 30 days, and the CPE report must be submitted to
NCDEH-PWSS within 90 days. In addition, a report including the filter number,
turbidity value and the date(s) on which the filter exceeded the limit shall be
submitted to NCDEH-PWSS by the 10th of the following month.
1.2.1.2 Stage 1 D/DBPR MCLs for Disinfection By-products
The Stage 1 D/DBPR, which intended to reduce the levels of disinfectants and DBPs
in drinking water supplies, became effective in February 1999. Under the D/DBPR,
two groups of chlorinated DBPs - total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and five haloacetic
acids (HAA5) - are regulated in two stages. In Stage 1, the EPA set MCLs of 80 µg/L
and 60 µg/L, as annual averages, for TTHMs and HAA5, respectively. Compliance is
defined on the basis of a running annual average (RAA) of quarterly averages of all
samples. Monitoring requirements for systems serving 10,000 people or more include
collection of four water samples from the distribution system per quarter, per
treatment plant. The sampling locations should be representative of the average
residence time in the distribution system with at least 25 percent of the samples to be
taken at locations that represent the maximum residence time of water. For systems
monitoring quarterly, if the RAA of quarterly averages covering any consecutive four -
quarter period exceeds the MCL, the system is in violation of the MCL and must
notify the public, in addition to reporting to the State.
In addition, MRDLs in the distribution system were established for chlorine (4 mg/L),
chloramines (4 mg/L), and chlorine dioxide (0.8 mg/L). Table 6 provides the final
MRDLGs and MRDLs. Table 7 includes the MCLs and MCLGs for the disinfection
byproducts.
17
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulationa.doc

r'fflgN
/A1
Awsh
t
rPeN
taiq
facas
eaN
rbs
CDM
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Table 6
Stage 1 MRDLGs and MRDLs for Disinfectants
Parameter
MRDLG
(mg/L)
MRDL
(mg/L)
Compliance
Based On
Routine
Monitoring
Chlorine
4.0
4
(as free C12)
RAA
TCR sampling
Chloramines
4.0
4
(as combined
C12)
RAA
TCR sampling
Chlorine Dioxide
0.8
.
0.8 (as CI02)
Sample
results
twoected on
consecutive
days
Daily at entry point
Table 7
Stage 1 MCLGs and MCLs for Disinfection By-products
Parameter
MCLG
(mg/L)
MCDL
(mg/L)
Compliance
Based On
Routine
Monitoring
Chlorite
0.8
1.0
Average of
each 3-sample
set*
Daily at entry point,
monthly in
distribution system
Bromate
0
0.010
RAA
Monthly at entry point
TTHMs
n/a
0.080
RAA
4 samples per plant,
per quarter
HAAs(5)
n/a
0.060
RAA
4 samples per plant,
per quarter
Chloroform
0
n/a
-
-
Bromodichloromethane
0
n/a
-
-
Dibromochloromethane
0.06
n/a
-
-
Bromoform
0
n/a
-
-
Dichloroacetic acid
0
n/a
-
-
Trichloroacetic acid
0.3
n/a
-
-
Notes:
*A set of samples collected for chlorite on the same day in the distribution system at the following sites: one at the first
customer served, one at a representative site, and one at the water's maximum residence time.
1.2.1.3 TOC Removal
The Stage 1 D/DBPR also requires that utilities achieve specific TOC removals to
control DBP precursors. The amount of TOC that must be removed is dependent
upon the alkalinity and TOC concentration of the raw water. Table 8 shows the
percent removal of TOC that is required under this rule. Percent removal is measured
upstream of the point of primary disinfection. Thus, if chlorine is not added until
18
/�1 Appendix A Water Quality and Regulationa.doe

eats
Appendix A
r
tiktN
t
elitN
r
esiN
fobs
t
Water Quality and Regulations
after the filters for CT, then the TOC of the filtered water may be compared to the
TOC of the raw water to calculate TOC removal. The TOC removal requirements will
most likely have to be met with enhanced coagulation. Enhanced coagulation is the
practice of using a coagulant dose in excess of what is normally required for turbidity
removal to achieve a specific reduction in TOC concentration. Further, ferric
coagulant removes more TOC than alum, so it is suggested that the plant initially use
ferric sulfate coagulant for compliance with the regulation.
Table 8
TOC Percent Removal
Source -Water TOC (mg/L)
Source Water Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3)
<60
60-120
>120
> 2.0-4.0
35
25
15
> 4.0-8.0
45
35
25
> 8.0
50
40
30
The Stage 1 D/DBPR provides exemptions for enhanced coagulation. The key
exemptions are:
1. Source or treated water TOC running average is below 2.0 mg/L
2. TTHM < 40 ppb, HAAs < 30 ppb, and use only free chlorine
3. Source water specific ultraviolet absorbance (SUVA) <_ 2.0 L/mg.m running annual
average
4. Finished water SUVA <_ 2.0 L/mg.m
Exemption Items 1 and 2 are not applicable to Pender County on a running annual
average basis and it is recommended that Items 3 and 4 be evaluated. If none of the
exemptions applies, Pender County will be required to meet the TOC removal percent
requirements shown.
1.2.1.4 Disinfection Prof iling/Benchmarking
Under the IESWTR, a utility must monitor daily for a period of 12 consecutive
calendar months to determine the total logs of Giardia lamblia inactivation for each day
of operation based on the published CT99.9 values throughout the entire treatment
plant. Additionally, any utility that uses either chloramines or ozone for primary
disinfection must also calculate the logs inactivation for viruses using a method
approved by NCDEH-PWSS.
If a system is modifying its disinfection practices to comply with the new regulations,
it must calculate their disinfection benchmark by determining the lowest average
monthly Giardia lamblia inactivation in each year of profiling data. They must also
determine the average Giardia lamblia inactivation for each calendar month for each
year of profiling data.
CDM 19
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulatona.doc

IAN
154)
oeabk
AIN
oak
ADA
:
Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
1.2.1.5 Stage 2 D/DBPR MCLs and MCLGs for Disinfection Byproducts
The final Stage 2 D/DBPR, as promulgated in January 2006, is designed to reduce
DBP occurrence peaks in the distribution system based on changes to compliance
monitoring provisions. Compliance monitoring is preceded by an Initial Distribution
System Evaluation (IDSE) to find the worst -case distribution system sample points.
These locations will then be used by the system as the sampling sites for Stage 2 DBP
rule compliance monitoring. The number of compliance monitoring sites is
determined by the population served and the source water type. Compliance is
defined on the basis of a locational running annual average (LRAA) of TTHMs and
HAA5. Compliance must be met at each monitoring location, instead of system wide
using the RAA under the Stage 1 D/DBPR. The Stage 2 D/DBPR will limit all sample
points in the distribution system to RAA of 80 µg/ L TTHMs and 60 µg/ L of HAA5.
1.2.1.6 LT2ESWTR Cryptosporidium Treatment Details
The LT2ESWTR was released simultaneously with Stage 2 DBPR on January 4, 2006 to
address concerns about risk tradeoffs between pathogens and DBPs.
In order to have an extra barrier to Cryptosporidium, additional removal/inactivation
capabilities like UV are recommended as soon as affordable in the future. Level of
treatment required based on LT2ESWTR is listed as follows:
• If the average Cryptosporidium concentration is between 0.075/L and 1.0/L, then 1
log treatment is required.
• If the average Cryptosporidium concentration is between 1/L and 3/L, then 2 log
treatments is required with at least flog being by ozone, chlorine dioxide, UV,
membranes, bag/cartridge filters, or in -bank filtration.
• If the average Cryptosporidium concentration is over 3.0/L, then 2.5 log treatments
are required with at least 1 log being by ozone, chlorine dioxide, UV, membranes,
bag/cartridge filters, or in -bank filtration.
Cryptosporidium removal/inactivation requirements listed in final rule are as follow:
• Watershed control program: 0.5 log credit and reductions in cysts as measured.
,Au, • Alternative sources such as intake relocation: Credit based on measured drop in
cysts.
• Pretreatment: Days of raw water storage and pre -settling with coagulant get 0.5
log credit. Weeks of raw water storage and in -bank filtration get 1 log credit.
• Improved treatment: Monthly CFE turbidity of 0.15 NTU or less 95 percent of the
time gets an extra 0.5 log credit. Monthly IFE turbidity of 0.15 NTU or less 95
percent of the time with no individual filters greater than 0.3 NTU in two
,,, consecutive days get an extra 0.5 log credit. Slow sand filters and membranes get
greater than 2.5 log credit.
• Improved disinfection with chlorine dioxide, ozone, and UV.
CcM 20
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulations.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
1.2.1.7 Filter Backwash Recycling Rule (FBRR)
The FBRR published on June 8, 2001 applies to all systems that use surface water or
groundwater under the influence of surface water, employ conventional or direct
filtration, and recycle one or more of the following:
• Spent filter backwash water.
• Thickener supernatant.
• Liquids from dewatering processes.
Per FBRR, the utility has to report the following to NCDEH-PWSS:
• Intent to recycle in writing.
• A plant schematic showing the origin of all recycle flows, hydraulic conveyance
used to transport the recycle flows, and location where they are recycled back into
the plant.
• Details of typical recycle flow, design flow for the WTP, and State -approved
operating capacity.
In addition, the systems must collect and retain on file the following:
• A copy of the recycle notification form.
• A list of all recyle flows and the frequency at which they are returned.
• Average and maximum backwash flow rates through the filters and the average
and maximum duration of the filter backwash process, in minutes.
• Typical filter run length and a written summary of how filter run length is
determined.
• If applicable, the type of treatment provided for the recycle stream before it enters
the conventional process.
• If applicable, data about the physical dimensions of the recycle treatment units,
typical and maximum hydraulic loading rates, etc.
1.2.1.8 Ground Water Rule (GWR)
The EPA promulgated the final GWR in October 2006 that applies to all Public Water
Supply (PWS) systems that use groundwater. The .rule also applies to systems that
mix surface and groundwater and if the groundwater is added directly to the
distribution system and provided to consumers without equivalent surface water
treatment.
DM
21
Appendix A Water Quality end Regutatiaa.doc

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
Major components of the final GWR include:
• Periodic sanitary surveys to identify the significant deficiencies. The initial survey
is to be completed by December 31, 2012 for all community water systems.
• Source water monitoring to test for E. coli, enterococci, or coliphage in the sample.
• Corrective actions to rectify significant deficiency or source water fecal
contamination.
• Compliance monitoring to ensure that the treatment technology installed is able to
meet 99.99 percent inactivation or removal of viruses.
1.2.1.9 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions
On January 12, 2000, the EPA published minor revisions to the 1991 Lead and Copper
Rule (LCR). The purpose of the Lead and Copper Rule Minor Revisions (LCRMR) is
to eliminate unnecessary requirements, streamline and reduce reporting burden, and
promote consistent national implementation. In some cases, the EPA has added
language, which clarifies requirements and corrects oversights in the original rule.
These revisions do not affect the lead or copper MCLGs, the action levels (ALs), or the
basic regulatory requirements of the rule.
Additional changes to the LCR were prepared on July 18, 2006 (EPA, 2006). Relevant
changes include requiring water systems to:
• Provide advanced notification to the primacy agency or intended changes in
treatment or source water that could increase corrosion of lead.
• Provide a notification of tap water monitoring results for lead to owners and/or
occupants of homes and buildings that are part of the utility's sampling program.
EPA is also proposing to change the content of the message to be provided to
consumers, how the materials are delivered to consumers, and the timeframe in
which materials must be delivered after a lead AL exceedance.
In the proposed revisions in June 2006, the EPA requires PWS to provide advanced
notification to the state primacy agency, i.e. NCDENR, of intended changes in
treatment or source water that could increase corrosion of lead. The NCDENR must
approve the planned changes using a process that will allow them and the PWS to
take as much time as needed to consult about potential problems.
1.3 Conclusions and Recommendations
A review of the water quality data suggests conventional treatment (coagulation,
clarification, and filtration using sand and GAC as the filter media) with chlorine
disinfection and optimized corrosion control, is typical for SDWA requirements as
discussed herein and as demonstrated by other plants treating Cape Fear River water
such as Fayetteville and Wilmington. However, to allow for any changes in
regulations or source water quality, and to reduce risks associated with some SOCs
detected in the Cape Fear River, space for possible UV and other advanced treatment
CDM
22
Appendix A Water Quality and Regutations.doe

Appendix A
Water Quality and Regulations
is recommended, and post -filter GAC steel contactors are recommended for this
project for enhanced compliance with the near -term goal of staying on free chlorine.
The SDWA Amendments developed recently by the EPA that would affect Pender
County include IESWTR, Stage 1 D/DBPR, Stage 2 D/DBPR, LT2ESWTR, FBRR,
GWR, and LCR revisions, among others.
23
Appendix A Water Quality and Regulatione.doc

) ) ) ) » » » » » » » )
w w17 m
rc « TO MOM
L 1nr face avR
OMIT
vows
MOO
4.4 MOM
U MOM
ni u tAut TS2
2N11 I 311 UOR
+4r
mac
FOLY1101
AM in Min (I I1um 00 2 ICQIa)
r
4.41ta IfA
2I /IOQ 2�.4
1
t I 1
11.00012AT0/ 0101a (1 WW1 Of • I400)
TON 0. I1.7
Ram 1i00ti
MOO
1103 n.4
. LI ROI Ii4
01711.001
1
L
lairaiacrATIC. OWN
Cason
Won
14h1
04r 4100
N0. It
t--- i
1 T
1
1 nn4K it----i i
N 1
Q IAR 10 Ca 2001131
—I 44 00000NARIt
—CAUSTIC
-- 40000 R
SCOUT
WYPCCILCIETI
na'1KI 0vN10 —
O0RI109011 NHL-
4a0U4J
44JiTat >z
s
pyg
C. 20.0
11 l I l 1.1 l 1 1
T1
Mtn
(I)
¢ 1
- 1
Irco Is
DO "'•
- 17
1[LU00Jo1
RCM
000001R OWN 0 N1102
I128 Nut101 MR CONTR.. 10101.1 0R
0 MCC TO IANO IM4iA1104
NO Mae ITTOWI PL 00101311O
0,170.1211
D4
ITTOYCLE
MOP
0
OtlsLitI
to
lox pax Fin
DOCIfc
1Aoon1
DOOM
000044 (110Uq
24c0PA214 PP '
AVORR KW.
IC MU.
U. wefts my X
1a 41.0
MORRO. 10 KO. Wra
aowRCLL
-Irlrcornarl r---•
trNOR11I C0111FGT Rif 1 FI01NL j. I .
� 0
J
010 000.7011 (2)
oRaue
NTFOGNORR
4a10am %ma)
214
00Rip stem
WES
1R0R0Rt /1101I2 REMO ILL IO 1W1: OMB • SW MINE
ME N=KC MO 1 I112I11 a OM 000044E. fA in OR
FLOC IMO a 007. LOOM 1RTRCO 140111 OWRIO. Cats AI
FN7s TO 00400 O400TDs 11 RM0 *0,
Inman. A10 I0t10 If. LW.
PRELIMINARY NOT
FOR CONSTRUCTION
9
9
9
9
name on-AMItaNei
e4�1 rft—LiffrMal
sea 00414i120e
110m C .. 111.1.JanDal
POI
0m
�. C�O�M�,
Ma=1hi4r.4
nt 1RWio�o
PENDER COMM, NORTH CAROL04A
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
• HYDRAULIC PROFILE
• & PROCESS SCHEMATIC
.141.1110. 4Q7T-0fa4
Rr Irr41 u.44Ot1O
4-1

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
•
•
w
810 ALT.
B30
FILTER
BIO AI,
26•gFA W/FLOOR STAND
• EL27C MOTOR (TTP 6)
216'—r
r-oti3•_a•
NTRF SLOE C OE
RN. ILL A.6
W/CpMc CKAATOR
10'-6. 1'-2' 10'—i' 1'-2'Y—Cr 2'—r 1'-0'
a'-0' 6'-6'
FLOC -BASIN - r FLOC BASIN1 r
2B 2A
J L
COL�6ASIR 1 r FLOC BASIN
1 B 1A
'6•EIT ME
QDSI16161
PLAN
AUw SLICE CANE
6N. EL MC
6/CRNW OPERA
24' WO AALAE W/ NATO WNLEL C•01
RARO 16x
CONVENTIONAL
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN 2
BIO ALTERNATE
tenor AC. 6N 0_17Coc
NMI OFTSET CRAW O6OLOOA
ON 0 EX TOP SUB
000RO61A7i N01 SL000E
COLLECTOR NOT TO CONFLICT
YN6W SOUL OE ROUTED ALONG
EMUS 1N SED MS66 Al EL
10 SUPPLY NOSE KOOS NO 666—
AS CO. TO RYOO C0M{JCIS 66M
SLU00E SOWETO -
CONVENTIONAL
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN 1
i
66E03 TO CHANNEL
BELOW
r-r.r-6'1Au
A1UlA W0R GATE
OPNG. :L EOc%
WO ALT.
2
BASE BIO
ALUM. 6O
M. MR TNL
GATE
OPNQ L xxzx
01106 CEOS
• 16.111 TO TTNERS
Af
a`
KV
DM1E
Demo
OK.
Kum. R 6 1xR66x66
Y621 O.CO R x
past 00 .1 x
yam; ..r ISS•
pCOM
61c60 ��h rt.IO.RC �r0
M6D6R
FENDER COUNTY. NORTH GAROUNA
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
TREATMENT MODULE
TOP PLAN
6R06T TQ 61471166261
>u N16Q TMTNIOR
om NO,
4-2

Cal
100•-0•
TRANSFER
PUMPS
In
TRANSFER
PUMPS
POLYMER, CORR. !NEBO..
COAL, 0X OE 4T
24 —0•
41— CHEM PUMP & PANEL 5'-0' O.C. (IW)
(MIN.)_1
(MIN.)
1)
SPACE FOR CHEM
BAGS / DRUMS, FORKLIFT
16'13F & 24'x16'
DI TEE (TYP 2)
'I
1— ►,
,1
___���==ate_=:tea:®=
11 II
FUTURE III FUTUREIf
CONF. OFFICE
ROOM 1 I I FUTURE GALLERY
Fr
I
ri
FUTURE FUTURE
LAB 24'-oe OFFICE
f'L.%/I
FUTURE
?STOR
AGE
HYPO/CAUSTIC ROOM
0
LAB
14'x�5'
SHWR/LKR
DR
TOILET
STAIRS
1103)
FILTER GALLERY
ELECTRICAL ROOM
FRIbl
26'x50'
— 24' DI SUCTION
24' 01 DISCHARGE
PENDER COUNTY SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
PLAN
3/16' =
CONTROL ROOM /
OFFICE
CONFERENCE
- BREAK ROOM
FILTERS
MECHANICAL ROOM
REV
N0.
DATE ORAN CHRO I
REUA4x5
1
OE0GNEO SW
CRAAY Sr x
SHEET CVRb
CROSS CF%b -1. 11
APPROVED St•
CATS_
COM
Cow 04OOG Mawr x: .Y
SIOOOMMoVCAnn" 9V2 ]00
Rsloth.fte aa12
tC 0lgJ191 Ta74420
CxsWGp•.gnwrtq•=Ashmaa,•.7r.ay.
PENDER COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
BUILDING PLAN
PROJECT N0. S7476-66236
Fl{,E NAUE: u.mxs
SHEET NO.
4-3

•
w
211-3"
BIO ALT. r
BASE BIO
H
L
1
ti
IIIw°
111111 ..
IIIIIIiIIIIIIIII�
&EL
24"BFV W/FLOOR ST
MOTOR (TYP 4, CyY)00)
FILTER r
r
L
1Iii
IIIIII
11!I! illlll!I11
24"BFV W/FLOOR STAND
& ELEC MOTOR (TYP 8)
1 °-2"
[-FLOC-BASIN- 7 r FLOG BASINr p
1 2B 11 2A 11
I �_- I I
x
`FL SIN-i
I -FLOC BASIN
I I 2D
II
BASIN-
I �
�I J L
F-LO BASIN- 1 r
1B
RAPID MIX —
FLOC BASIN-
: -
O �J �
ALUM.' GRONG
(TPICV+L)
J
FLOC BASIN-1
1A
IAI1I1 All
IS•flYnin
MINIM
ar ilo. 1 f
219'-6
ALUM SLIDE GATE
INV. TT. lit'
W/CRANK OPERATOR
tr
7 -1
PLAN
1/4" = 1°-0"
N
REV.
NO.
DATE
DRWN
CHKD
REMARKS
DESIGNED BY. B. DOWBIGGIN
DRAWN BY: J.COMPONESCHI
SHEET CHK'D 8Y. X
CROSS CHICO BY. X
APPROVED BY.
DATE• JUNE 2008
Camp Dmor& McKee.
5900 Gleamed Menu . Sub 200
Raleigh, NC Z781Z
Tel. [phone]
emeulling •engineering • mmmetlaw • opi e*ne
ALUM SLIDE GATE
INV. EL XXX
W/CRANK DPERATO'
SLUDGE
SCRAPERS —�
24" MUD VALVE W/ HAND WHEEL OPER
RAPID MIX
WASH HOSE
STATION
W/300° OF
2"HOSE
•
CONVENTIONAL
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN 2
BIO ALTERNATE
16"X16° SLG. INV EL.XXXX
WITH OFFSET CRANK OPERATOR
ON EL. XX TOP SLAB
COORDINATE WITH SLUDGE
COLLECTOR NOT TO CONFLICT
2"NPW SHALL BE ROUTED ALONG
WALLS IN SED BASINS AT EL
TO SUPPLY HOSE BIBBS AND WHS—
AS EO. TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH
SLUDGE SCRAPERS
CONVENTIONAL
SEDIMENTATION
BASIN 1
HANDRAIL
DRAIN GATE —
OVERFLOW
PIPE
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
OUTLET
GATE (TYP)
tf�
L CHEM!
FEEDS 0 CHANNEL
BELOW
3'-6"z$-6 TALL
ALUM. WEIR GATE
OPNG. LL XXXX
BIO ALT.
N
BASE BIO
3-6"z2'-6"TALL
ALUM- IMEIR GATE
OPNG. L. XXXX
1 • CHEM FEEDS
1 11
1"
18"STL TO FILTERS
TREATMENT MODULE
TOP PLAN
PROJECT NO. 87478-88238
FILE NAIAD TREATMENT
SHEET N0.
4-2

(
ff
7�5
TIE IN TO EXISTING
LCFWASA RAW WATER MAIM.
OXIDANT
CAUSTIC
HYPO
4.4 MGM 29.8
2.2 MGM 29.5
4.4 MCD: 29.7
TOS EL 31.8 2.2 MG0. 29.5
--
CAUSTIC
FERRIC
POLYMER
RAPID MIX BASINS (1 TRAN OF 2 MIXERS)
9
5
a
POLYMER
4.4 MOD: 29.5
2.2 MOD: 29.4
[x)
FLOCCULATION BASINS (I TRAIN OF 4 MIXERS)
TOS 31.2
4.4 MOD: 29.5
. 2.2 MGD: 29.4
EL 30.0
SEDIMENTATION BASIN
FROM SLUDGE `L' DRAINING BASIN
VALVES
MH-I
0-0.5 MGD
I HWL 21 I
I t 1
I
I T I I
OVERFLOW
OVERFLOW TO EQ.
PUMP STATION
SODIUM HYP0CHL0RRE
CAUSTIC
--- POLYMER
SODIUM
HYPOCHLORRE
FLUORIDE (FUTURE) -
CORROOION INHIR_-
FLR EL 30.93
a 9GO. 29 D 0
FTW
lE EL 20.0
\_\_1 \ \ \��1
11111(II!!
FILTERS (2)
I 11 I
L. THfCIKEER INER JI 7 I---
\ I L ! I
L FU..._J
✓ FUTURE
RESIDUALS QUICK CONNECT
PUMP STATION FOR CONTRACT REAICVAL OR
0 MGD
WE 19
12
RECLAMATION
BASINS
TO TARO APPLICATION
AND FUTURE MECHANICAL OEWATERING
REY.
GATE
ORNR
RQZARA9
DESIGNED 09 9• UONBIC09
DRAWN EL J•CONPONE5CHI
SHEE7 C1Na9 BM J- YAWS
CVIOO DWG ar 000005N
POGROM Br. 9. DDR9100N
ON10 0I199FR 2DD9
OVERFLOW
E71
RECYCLE
PUMP
STATION
TD
RAW WATER PINE
CDM
canoDmarrAN KNG
W00 G`.M99M NN, Sob]si
Rah*. NO 27612
TNECGDGTENGWV
aim lEns • Goi N miNg • aoaa9alan-Nwmtla9
1I90SULFATE
To
DISCHARGE
LOCATION
CAUSTIC
AMMONIA, (FVITI9iE) -,
Xi
G.PCHNA,SH DIANN Y
TRANSFER PUMPS ' /
WET WELL ❑
WL VARIES TOP
EL 19
WEIR EL 15.0
HYPOCHLORITE
HWL 81.0
IIYPOCFILORRE
CHLORINE CONTACT PIPE r 1 1
1 FUTURE I,J
1 CLFARWEIL 1
CORR. INUOB 1 1
1 1
L J
CLEARWELL
CAC CONTACTORS (2)
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
T05 EL 31.2
OVERFLOW TO REC. BASINS
.. CAUSTIC"
HYPOCHLORITE
AMMONIA (FUTURE)
I
i
FINISHED WATER
PUP STATION
NOTES
1, HYDRAULIC PROFILE ASSUMES ALL MIX FLOC BASINS & 5EO BASINS
ARE IN SERVCE AND 1 FILTER IS OUT OF SERVICE. IF A NIX 0R
FLOC BASIN IS OUT, LOWER SETO a9 WATER CHANNEL OATES AS
REIN TO PREVENT OVERFLOW 1N RAPID MIX.
2. GENERAL SCHEMATIC ONLY. MANY PIPES. STRUCTURES, EQUIPMENT
AND VALVES NOT SHOWN. SEE OTHER MVOS FOR PIPES, STRUCRURES,
EQUIPMENT, AND VALVES REQUIRED.
HYDRAULIC PROFILE
& PROCESS SCHEMATIC
i
PRELIMINARY NOT
FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT KO, 49227-66239
FEE RARENNPE0N0E.D9D
SHEET N0.
4-1

W ® ® ® m ® w
TA43iEA
PIMPS
24' y 121211124
PCIA0121. COCA. IOU.
24" CI O>s C2
DIM ww k ►U s'-o• a.c. (N'!
C.Ab
HYPO/CAUSTIC ROOM
IBB
FUTURE if FUTURE
CONF. IliOFFICE
ROOM t)j ��:till
FUTURE GALLERY
I I
1..' ..•` i
FUTURE ii FUTURE FUTURE
LAB 2s• OFFICE 'STOR 2'-o'
AGE
_J
LAB''ii��33
1 M5'
1
8HWRILKR
•1
TOIL
STAIRS
FILTER GALLERY
ELECTRICAL ROOM
26'x5O'
FENDER COUNTY SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
PLAN
CONTROL ROOM /
OFFICE
CONFERENCE
- BREAK ROOM
MECHANICAL ROOM
Mal
•
FILTERS
ant
0201
110.11114
ammo..
ar.1 .a =
WIT on ft-T.CAM
arcs m ■
CDM
atrirdir
FENDER COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
PENDER COUNTY
SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
BUILDING PLAN
..wn, w. .ias-nu$
,u 2442....W.
WO NO.
4-3
1
1
1
V

Legend
• Discharge Pant
- Using BASF Outfall Pipe
Proposed Dudall Pipe
- (Ties Into Existing BASF
Outfall Pipe)
- Proposed WTI.
® Existing Well
Road
Render County Property
100 Year Flood Plain
BASF Property
s
FIGURE 1
NPDES Outfall Option 1
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NOTE.
PROPOSED OUTFALL PIPE
ALIGNMENT MAY VARY
CDM
.n 800 :z+o 1720

Legend
Discharge Point
---- Existing BASF Outfall Pipe
Proposed Outfall Pipe
(Direct Discharge to
Cape Fear River)
Proposed WrP
® Existing Well
Road
_ Pender County Property
0 100 Year Flood Plain
l _i BASF Property
FIGURE 2
NPDES Outfall Option 2
PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NOTE
PROPOSED OUTFALL PIPE
ALIGNMENT MAY VARY