NC0027103_Fact Sheet_20220802

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO0271O3
Permit Writer/Email Contact Gary Perlmutter, [e-mail]:
Date Initiated: August 2, 2022
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources / NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑ Renewal
© Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information:
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Pembroke / Pembroke WWTP
Applicant Address:
PO Box 866 / 98 Union Chapel Road, Pembroke, NC 28372
Facility Address:
8257 Deep Branch Road, Pembroke, NC 28372
Permitted Flow:
1.33 MGD / 2.0 MGD (proposed)
Facility Type/Waste:
MAJOR Municipal; 96.99% domestic, 3.01 % industrial'
Facility Class:
Grade III
Treatment Units:
Bar Screen, Grit Removal, Oxidation Ditches, Clarifiers, Chlorination,
Cascade Aeration, Solids Handling
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Yes
County:
Robeson
Region
Fayetteville
Footnote.
1. Permitted industrial flow = 0.04 MGD
Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Town of Pembroke had
applied for an NPDES permit renewal for its Pembroke WWTP, received by DWR on January 23, 2019.
Review of the application found it complete with PPAs sampled in November 2016, August 2017, and
August 2018; 2nd species WET tests were sampled in October, November and December 2018 with a note
that the remaining required WET test would be sampled for in January 2019 and submitted separately. The
Page 1 of 13

additional test results were received in February 2019. A Chemical Addendum to the application was
received on March 23, 2022.
This facility serves the Town of Pembroke (pop. —3016) and treats domestic and industrial wastewater with
an active pretreatment program involving one Significant Industrial User (SIU). Sludge management
includes digesting and dewatering; bio-solids are then hauled off -site for composting.
The Town submitted a modification application along with an EAA for expansion to 2.0 MGD in July 2021.
Prior to this, speculative limits were prepared for 2.0 and 2.66 MGD flows in 2013. The EAA was reviewed
in March 2022 and found complete. An effluent sheet for the 2.0 MGD expansion tier has been added to
the permit.
The EAA included a speculative limits letter dated April 8, 2013 for 2.0 and 2.66 MGD. Considering the
age of the letter, a streamflow request was made to USGS, the results of which were different than those
used for the 2013 speculative limits. An updated set of speculative limits were calculated and issued on
June 2, 2022. The 2.0 MGD effluent sheet includes limits that are reflective of the updated speculative
limits and streamflows.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 / Lumber River
Stream Segment:
14-(7)
Stream Classification:
WS-IV, B; Sw, HQW
Drainage Area (mi2):
427
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
65.8
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
161
30Q2 (cfs):
144
Average Flow (cfs):
503
IWC (% effluent):
3.0 at 1.33 MGD
4.5 at 2.00 MGD
NC 2020 303(d) listed/parameter:
None
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
State-wide Mercury TMDL
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC:
Lumber / 03-07-51 / 03040203
USGS Topo Quad:
122NW / Pembroke, NC
i
Streamflows were updated by USGS per Division request and differ substantially from those used for the
current permit as well as the speculative limits calculated in 2013 for the expansion flows. The updated
streamflows affect the Instream Waste Concentration (IWC), which in turn affect toxicity parameters of
WET test limits, toxicity -based Ammonia, and pollutants evaluated by Reasonable Potential Analysis
(RPA) at both the existing permitted and proposed expansion flow tiers. See sections below.
The receiving stream has received multiple Excellent bioclassification ratings since 1983. The most recent
rating is from a 2016 sampling of benthic macroinvertebrates — 4 miles downriver from the discharge,
which yielded a high number of sensitive taxa as well as an overall high number of specimens.
Page 2 of 13

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized in Table 1 for the period of January 2018-December 2021.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Permit Limit 1
Flow2
MGD
0.91
3.66
0.30
MA = 1.33
Temperature
°C
22.4
30.0
8.8
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD)
mg/L
3.35
26.20
< 0.25
MA = 18.0
WA = 27.0
BOD removal
%
98.3
99.9
85.2
> 85
Total Suspended Solids
(TSS)
mg/L
5.63
95.00
0.40
MA = 20.0
WA = 30.0
TSS removal
%
97.2
99.9
15.0
> 85
Ammonia -Nitrogen
(NH3-N)
mg/L
0.49
10.60
0
MA = 12.0
WA = 35.0
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
mg/L
8.8-
11.79
6.96
DMin > 5.0
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
#/100 mL
6
727
< 1
MA = 200
WA = 400
pH
S.U.
7.20
7.68
6.51
6.0-9.0
Total Residual Chlorine
(TRC)
µg/L
25.0
28.0
25.0
DMax = 28 3
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
mg/L
2.3
17.6
< 0.5
Nitrate -Nitrite
(NO3+NO2)
mg/L
9.80
26.50
0.02
Total Nitrogen (TN)
mg/L
11.9
37.6
0.5
Total Phosphorus (TP)
mg/L
1.99
5.47
0.04
Footnotes.
1. MA = Monthly Average, WA = Weekly Average, DMin = Daily Minimum; DMax = Daily Maximum.
2. Average for calendar year 2021 = 0.84 MGD, 63% of design flow.
3. Values < 50 µg/L considered compliant.
Fourteen instances where the facility did not meet the minimum 85% removal rate for TSS removal were
reported, most of which occurred between October 2018 and January 2019. Comments in the October 2018
and January 2019 Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) stated that the plant received wastewater high in
TSS & BOD from the SIU Trinity Frozen Foods, which was dropped from the facility's pretreatment
program in July 2019. The Permittee requested reduction or removal of daily Temperature monitoring from
the permit. However, temperature monitoring is in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0508 and will be
maintained.
4. Instream Data Summary
Page 3 of 13

Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/L of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also Monitoring Coalitions
established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case instream
monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action: The current permit has instream monitoring requirements for Temperature and DO at frequencies
of weekly from October through May and 3/week from June through September. The upstream sampling
location is at the CSX railroad trestle (above plant) and the downstream location is at Bridge SR 1554.
Since the Permittee is not a member of a monitoring coalition, data were submitted with effluent data in
monthly DMRs. Instream data from January 2018—December 2021 were checked for statistically significant
differences by Student's t-test and compared against concurrent effluent data as well as applicable state
water quality standards (WQS). Instream data review findings for each parameter are summarized in Table
2 below.
Table 2. Instream and concurrent effluent monitoring summary statistics.
Parameter
Upstream
Downstream
Effluent
Standard
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO), mg/L
Average = 7.66
Range: 3.53-10.99
Average = 7.70
Range: 3.77-11.01
Average = 8.55
Range: 7.08-9.48
DA = 5.0
Instant = 4.0
Temperature, °C
Average = 20.3
Range: 2.0-27.7
Average = 20.3
Range: 2.0-27.8
Average = 23.9
Range: 14.0-29.0
DM — 32.0
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) — DO remains in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life. Reviewed
instream DO data showed seasonal patterns of summer winter lows and winter highs at both locations. DO
minima in September 2018 were below the instantaneous WQS of 4.0 mg/L standard at each station. No
statistical differences were found between upstream and downstream average temperatures. Concurrent
effluent DO data showed less pronounced seasonal variation, with summer minima substantially higher
than instream.
Temperature — Temperature remains in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life. Reviewed
instream temperature data showed seasonal patterns of summer highs and winter lows at both locations.
Summer temperature maxima at both stations were below the WQS of 32°C for lower piedmont and coastal
plain waters (15A NCAC 02B .0211). No statistical differences were found between upstream and
downstream average temperatures. Review of paired up- to downstream temperatures found no exceedances
of the 2.8°C increase standard (15A NCAC 02B .0211). Concurrent effluent temperatures were consistently
higher in winter months.
The current permit does not require instream monitoring of Conductivity or Fecal Coliform. Instream
Conductivity was removed from the permit in 2000 due to "sufficient collection of data for this parameter."
Evaluated monthly data from April —October 1999 averaged 184.3 and 184.1 µhmos/cm upstream and
downstream, respectively. Conductivity is parameter based on industrial discharges. Pembroke WWTP has
a pretreatment program with one SIU, a bakery, which is not monitored or limited for conductivity.
According to Division guidance on instream monitoring, fecal coliform may be removed unless the
receiving stream is Class B or impaired for this parameter. The receiving Lumber River is a Class B water;
therefore, Fecal Coliform instream monitoring has been added to the permit.
Page 4 of 13

The Permittee requested elimination of instream monitoring requirements for temperature and DO in the
permit renewal application, as it did in the previous permit renewal application. As the Division previously
did not waive the instream monitoring requirements, monitoring frequencies are maintained in the permit,
since generated data is important to assess the quality of the receiving waters (15A NCAC 02B .0508).
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (Y/N): No
Name of Monitoring Coalition: N/A
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): From March 2017 through
February 2022, a total of 11 exceedences were reported that resulted in violation actions. These include one
Fecal Coliform weekly geomean exceedance in February 2021 that resulted in an enforcement case; six
monthly flow exceedances from November 2018 through February 2021, resulting in one Notice of
Deficiency (NOD), two Notices of Violation (NODs) and three enforcement cases; and four TSS
exceedences (three weekly average and one monthly average) from December 2017 through January 2019,
resulting in one NOD, one NOV and two enforcement cases.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 17 of 17 quarterly chronic toxicity tests from January 2018 through January
2022 as well as all four 2nd species WET tests, sampled in October, November and December 2018, and
February 2019.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The most recent facility inspection,
conducted on 4/20/2021, reported no compliance issues. The most recent pretreatment compliance
inspection was conducted on 6/23/2020; the resulting report also acted as a NOV for failing to properly
implement the pretreatment program as evidenced by the Town's failure to take appropriate actions against
the SIU's Industrial User Permit (IUP) limit violations involving multiple BOD and TSS exceedences.
Several additional comments were provided in the report.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1 Q 10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA.
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B. 0204(b): NA.
Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD = 30 mg/L for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: The original BOD
limit was set at 18 mg/L monthly average, from a Wasteload Allocation (WLA) calculated in 1994 for the
plant's proposed expansion from 0.82 MGD to the current flow of 1.33 MGD in combination with a change
Page 5 of 13

in the receiving water's classification to WS-IV-Sw-HQW with the WS-III classification designated —2
miles downstream. The limit and later weekly average limit are set to protect instream DO, based on
receiving stream flow characteristics (7Q10s = 120 cfs), calculated by USGS in 1993.
The speculative limits of 11.9/17.8 mg/L monthly/weekly average BOD at 2.0 MGD were prepared in 2013,
based on freezing the ultimate BOD loads (i.e., the facility is not allowed to discharge oxygen -consuming
waste above what is currently permitted). Based on the updated streamflows, BOD speculative limits have
been revised to 12.0/18.0 mg/L monthly/weekly average at the 2.0 MGD flow tier and were added to the
permit.
Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/L (summer) and 1.8 mg/L (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 µg/L) and capped at 28 µg/L (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 µg/L are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal:
Ammonia (NH3-N). The current Ammonia limits of 12.0/35.0 mg/L monthly/weekly average were
originally set to protect the DO standard. Speculative limits of 8.0/24.0 mg/L monthly/weekly average were
prepared in 2013 for the 2.0 MGD tier based on freezing the ultimate BOD loading upon expansion. Revised
speculative limits were calculated in 2022 based on updated streamflows and resulted in no change for
Ammonia. Ammonia was reviewed in the attached WLA sheet using the current and expansion flows of
1.33 and 2.0 MGD and receiving stream low flows of 7Q 10 = 65.8 cfs (summer) and 161 cfs (winter). The
resulting allowable concentrations are less stringent as the current and speculative limits. The current limits
at 1.33 MGD are maintained and the speculative limits at 2.0 MGD were added to the permit.
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC). WLA calculations for TRC cap the allowable concentration at 28 µg/L at
both flow tiers using the updated streamflows. This value is the same as the current permit limit as well as
speculative limit for 2.0 MGD. The current TRC limit at 1.33 MGD is maintained and the speculative limit
at 2.0 MGD was added to the permit.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of Y2 detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
All metals and toxicant parameters were sampled and reported via three required PPAs; no additional
toxicant monitoring is made in the facility's pretreatment program based on the single SIU type (a bakery).
The RPA was run using three effluent PPA Hardness sample data and the default instream Hardness value
of 25 mg/L. Because no metals are necessary based on the RPA analysis, Hardness monitoring is not
required and was not added to the permit.
Page 6 of 13

A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between 5. Pollutants of
concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water quality standards/criteria. Based
on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for this permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria: None at 1.33 or 2.0 MGD.
• Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria, but
the maximum predicted concentration was > 50% of the allowable concentration:
o Total Silver: All nondetects at < 3 and < 5 µg/L
allowable concentrations at 1.33 MGD = 0.988 µg/L (chronic), 4.094 µg/L (acute);
allowable concentrations at 2.00 MGD = 0.667 µg/L (chronic), 2.797 µg/L (acute).
Monitor and report at lower PQL (< 1 µg/L).
• No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria
and the maximum predicted concentration was < 50% of the allowable concentration: Total
Arsenic, Total Beryllium, Total Cadmium, Total Phenolic Compounds, Chloride, Total
Chromium, Total Copper, Total Cyanide, Total Fluoride, Total Lead, Total Molybdenum, Total
Nickel, Total Selenium, Total Zinc.
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans were evaluated for
additional pollutants of concern.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a water quality -based effluent limit (WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set, two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration: None at 1.33 or 2.0 MGD.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a monitor -only requirement, since as part of a
limited data set, one sample exceeded the allowable discharge concentration, or the
maximum predicted concentration was > 50% of the allowable concentration: None at
1.33 or 2.O MGD.
o The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since they did not
demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria and
the maximum predicted concentration was < 50% of the allowable concentration: At 1.33
and 2.0 MGD, all parameters tested were non -detects except for Chloroform, whose
maximum predicted value was < 50% of the allowable concentration.
If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.
Toxicity Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: The facility is a Major POTW with a chronic WET limit at
1.7% effluent, sampled quarterly, in the current permit. This limit is based on the IWC calculated using the
design flow tier of 1.33 MGD and the summer receiving stream 7Q10 of 120 cfs (WET Permitting Limits
and Monitoring Requirements guidance memo, 8/2/1999). With the updated summer 7Q10 of 65.8 cfs, the
IWC was calculated to be 3.0% at 1.33 MGD and has been added to the permit as a revised WET limit. The
IWC at 2.0 MGD results in a WET limit of 4.5% effluent as provided in that flow tier's speculative limits
prepared in June 2022 and was also added to the permit.
Page 7 of 13

Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year) and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (-2% of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (> 1 ng/L) will receive
an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case -by -case basis, depending if mercury is a pollutant
of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed the WQBEL
value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/L) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value of 47 ng/L.
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Mercury monitoring via the three PPAs
is required in the current permit with samples to be analyzed by EPA Method 1631E (low level). Submitted
low level mercury data from the PPAs collected in October 2016, August 2017 and August 2018 were
reviewed for TMDL evaluation. Only the October 2016 sample was tested by EPA Method 1631E, yielding
a result of 0.904 ng/L, lower than either the TBEL of 47 ng/L or the WQBEL of 197.51 ng/L. The other
two PPA samples yielded results of < 0.2 µg/L each, tested via EPA Method 245.1. No changes were made
to the permit; a note has been added to the cover letter reminding of the requirement to analyze by EPA
Method 1631E for all samples collected.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation within
this permit: NA.
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: The receiving water
section of New Hope Creek is classified as a water supply (WS-IV) and is subject to specific water quality
standards. Parameters that were measured in detectible amounts subject to WS standards include Hardness,
Nitrate -Nitrogen and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). The RPA (see above) found no reasonable potential to
exceed standards for the above parameters with maximum predicted values < 50% of the allowable
concentrations for each. No additional monitoring or limits were added to the permit.
A Chemical Addendum was received by request on 3/23/2022. The cover letter states that based on the
POTW's sole SIU's industry type (a bakery), no additional parameters of concern other than those already
limited or monitored are expected to be in the POTW's effluent.
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody: The receiving water is a HQW based on the
stream benthic invertebrate community rated as excellent. State regulations for HQW were reviewed in
RPA and speculative limits development.
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H.0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: NA.
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B. 0226 for this permit renewal: NA.
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Page 8 of 13

Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/L
BOD5/TSSfor Monthly Average, and 45 mg/L for BOD5/TSSfor Weekly Average). YES.
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA.
Are 85% removal requirements for BOD5/TSS included in the permit? YES.
If NO, provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA.
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge)
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: An EAA for the proposed expansion to 2.0 MGD
was submitted in July 2021, and included speculative limits that were prepared by the Division in 2013.
The EAA was reviewed and found complete; an approval letter was sent on March 7, 2022. Subsequent
review triggered a request for updated streamflows, from which speculative limits were revised and
incorporated into the permit.
9. Antibacksliding Review
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): NO.
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: NA.
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.0500; 2) NPDES
Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance, Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti -backsliding
prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
The current permit has reduced monitoring of 2/week for BOD, TSS, Ammonia and Fecal Coliform. The
Town requested retaining the reduced monitoring for the above parameters, providing data summaries.
Page 9 of 13

Review of submitted DMR data from January 2019 — December 2021 found that numeric criteria were met
for all parameters. Reduced monitoring for BOD, TSS, NH3 and Fecal Coliform is maintained at 2/week
for the 1.33 MGD flow tier.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective December
21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
electronically. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional NPDES
reports electronically effective December 21, 2020, EPA extended this deadline from December 21, 2020,
to December 21, 2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4, 2021, was extended as a final
regulation change published in the November 2, 2020 Federal Register. This permit contains the
requirements for electronic reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.
12. Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions
Tables 3 and 4 summarize the permit conditions and proposed changes at 1.33 and 2.0 MGD flow tiers,
respectively.
Table 3. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes at 1.33 MGD.
Parameter
Current Permit 1
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA = 1.33 MGD
Monitor continuously
No change
15A NCAC 02B .0400 at seq., 02B
.0500 et seq.
BOD5
MA = 18.0 mg/L
WA = 27.5 mg/L
Monitor 2/week
No change
WQBEL. Based on WLA to protect
DO standard from oxygen consuming
waste. 15A NCAC 2B.0200. Reduced
monitoring criteria werenmet.
TSS
MA = 20.0 mg/L
WA = 30.0 mg/L
Monitor 2/week
No change
TBEL. Secondary treatment standards /
40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC 2B .0406.
Reduced monitoring criteria were met.
NH3-N
MA = 12.0 mg/L
WA = 35.0 mg/L
Monitor 2/week
No change
WQBEL. Based on WLA to protect
DO standard from oxygen consuming
waste. 15A NCAC 2B.0200. Reduced
monitoring criteria were met.
TemperatureState
Monitor daily
No change
WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 2B .0500.
Parameter
Current Permit 1
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
DO
DA > 5 mg/L
Monitor 3/week
No chan e
g
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200., .0500.
pH
6 — 9 SU
Monitor 3/week
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200, .0500.
Page 10 of 13

Fecal Coliform
MA = 200 /100 mL
WA = 400 /100 mL
Monitor 2/week
No change to
effluent.
Add instream
monitoring
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200., .0500. Reduced
monitoring criteria were met.
TRC
DM = 28 µg/L
Monitor 3/week
No change
WQBEL. Allowable concentration cap
to meet state standard, 15A NCAC 2B
.0200, .0500.
TKN
Monitor 1/month
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 2B .0500.
NO2+NO3
Monitor 1/month
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Monitor 1/month
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Phosphorus
(TP)
Monitor 1/month
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Silver
Monitor via Effluent
Pollutant Scans
Add quarterly
monitoring; test
and report to lower
reporting level
Results were nondetects at < 3 and < 5
µg/L; PQL is 1 µg/L. Allowable
concentration is 1.0 µg/L (chronic)
Total Mercury
Monitor via Effluent
Pollutant Scans using
EPA Method 1631E
No change
In accordance with 2012 Statewide
Mercury TMDL Implementation, per
facility size and monitoring data
criteria.
Toxicity Test
Chronic
Ceriodaphnia dubia
Pass/Fail at 1.7%
effluent
Change to 3.0%
effluent
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts.
15A NCAC 2B.0200 and 15A NCAC
2B.0500. IWC changed based on
revised 7Q10 values obtained in 2022.
Effluent Pollutant
Scan
Monitor 3/permit
cycle
Update years to be
monitored
40 CFR 122
Electronic Reporting
Special Condition
Update wording
In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Rule 2015.
Footnote.
1. MGD = Million gallons per day; MA = Monthly Average; WA = Weekly Average; DA = Daily Average;
DM = Daily Maximum.
Table 4. Permit Conditions at 2.0 MGD flow tier.
Parameter
Permit Condition
Basis for Condition
Flow
MA = 2.0 MGD
Monitor continuously
15A NCAC 2B .0505
Page 11 of 13

BOD
MA = 12.0 mg/L
WA = 18.0 mg/L
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. Based on freezing permitted BOD ultimate loading
at 1.33 MGD (i.e., facility will not be allowed to discharge
oxygen -consuming waste above what is permitted for 1.33
MGD). State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC
2B.0500.
TSS
MA = 20.0 mg/L
WA = 30.0 mg/L
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. Based on freezing permitted BOD ultimate loading
at 1.33 MGD (i.e., facility will not be allowed to discharge
oxygen -consuming waste above what is permitted for 1.33
MGD). State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC
2B.0500.
NH3-N
MA = 8.0 mg/L
WA = 24.0 mg/L
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. Based on freezing permitted BOD ultimate loading
at 1.33 MGD (i.e., facility will not be allowed to discharge
oxygen -consuming waste above what is permitted for 1.33
MGD). State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC
2B.0500.
> 5 mg/L
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. Based on protection of the DO standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200 and .0500.
pH
6-9 SU
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B .0200 and
.0500.
Temperature
Monitor daily
State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC 2B .0500.
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
MA 200 /100 mL
WA 400 /100 mL
Monitor 3/week
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B .0200.
TRC
DM 28 µg/L
Monitor daily
WQBEL. Capped to meet the stream WQ standard per
NH3/TRC WLA Calculation.
TKN
Monitor 1/month
State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC 2B .0500.
NO3 + NO2
Monitor 1/month
State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Nitrogen (TN)
Monitor 1/month
State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Phosphorus
(TP)
Monitor 1/month
State WQ reporting requirements 15A NCAC 2B .0500.
Total Silver
Monitor quarterly
Results were nondetects at < 3 and < 5 µg/L; Recommended
PQL is 1 µg/L. Allowable concentration is 0.7 µg/L (chronic)
Total Mercury
Monitor via Effluent
Pollutant Scans using
EPA Method 1631E
In accordance with 2012 Statewide Mercury TMDL
Implementation, per facility size and monitoring data criteria.
Toxicity Test
Chronic Ceriodaphnia
dubia Pass/Fail at
4.5% effluent, monitor
quarterly
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts. 15A NCAC 02B
.0200, 15A NCAC 02B .0500. IWC based on revised 7Q10
values obtained in 2022.
Parameter
Permit Condition
Basis for Condition
Effluent Pollutant
Scan
Three times per
permit cycle
40 CFR 122
Electronic Reporting
Special Condition
In accordance with EPA Electronic Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD — Million gallons per day, MA — Monthly Average, WA — Weekly Average, DM — Daily Maximum.
Page 12 of 13

13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 06/18/2022.
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the Director
within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the reasons
why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact:
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Gary
Perlmutter at [phone] or via email at [e-mail].
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): No. Only the Division's
Aquatic Toxicity Branch (ATB) commented on the draft, noting that they have no comments or
recommendations for change.
If Yes, list changes and their basis below: NA.
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• NPDES PT POCs review form
• Benthos Site Details page
• Effluent summary charts and tables
• Instream summary charts and tables
• Monitoring Report (MR) Violations page
• WET testing and Self -Monitoring Summary, page 76
• Compliance Inspection Report, 4/20/2021
• Pretreatment Inspection Report, 6/23/2020
• NH3/TRC WLA Calculations sheets, 1.33 and 2.0 MGD
• Freshwater RPA spreadsheet, 1.33 and 2.0 MGD
• Monitoring Reduction spreadsheet
• Chemical Addendum
• Speculative Limits letter, 6/2/2022
• Comment e-mail from DWR - ATB
Page 13 of 13

2/22/22, 10:09 AM NCDEQ-DWR :: Benthos Site Details
NC Division of Water Resources
pMi
Benthos Site Details
Waterbody Location
LUMBER R SR 1003 NR PEMBROKE
County 8 digit HUC Latitude
Robeson 03040203 34.641670
Level IV Ecoregion Drainage Area (mi2)
Southeastern Floodplains and Low
Terraces
•
Station ID Date Bioclassification
IB031 01 Sep 2016 Excellent
Longitude Elevation (ft)
-79.180560 140
Stream Width (m) Stream Depth (m)
437.0 22.0 0.5
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (>1 MGD or < 1 MGD and within 1 mile)
Landuse (%) Forest
NPDES Number Volume (MGD)
Developed ' Impervious Cultivation Grass/Herb/Shrub Wetland Water Barren
Water Quality Parameters 2016 2011 2006
Temperature (°C) 26.6 26.5 27.7
Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L) 7.6 0.0 6.3
Specific Conductance (pS/cm) 63 74 89
pH (s.u.) 6.7 6.5 6.4
Habitat Assessment Scores (max score)
https://www.ncwater.org/?page=672&SiteID=IB031 1/3

2/22/22, 10:09 AM NCDEQ-DWR :: Benthos Site Details
°'°
Ja
Q'
Substrate (%)
Boulder (), Cobble 0, Gravel 0, Sand (80), Silt (10)
Water Clarity
Clear/tannic
Sample Date
01 Sep 2016
15 Jul 2011
17 Jul 2006
18 Jul 2001
09 Jul 1996
11 Sep 1991
07 Aug 1990
13 Jul 1988
23 Oct 1986
15 Jul 1986
17 Jul 1985
27 Jul 1983
27 Jul 1983
Sample ID
12085
11244
9971
8454
7070
5720
5414
4607
3925
3811
3570
3104
3130
Method
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
Full Scale
ST
85
84
83
92
71
87
87
88
82
84
84
95
79
EPT
33
40
29
32
31
31
28
28
31
32
30
30
24
BI
4.80
4.96
4.95
5.02
4.68
5.76
5.38
5.21
5.34
5.33
5.37
5.55
5.28
EPT BI
3.77
3.96
3.78
3.97
3.71
3.97
4.13
4.24
3.78
4.05
4.38
4.06
4.48
Bioclassification
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
https://www.ncwater.org/?page=672&Site1D=1B031 2/3

2/22/22, 10:09 AM NCDEQ-DWR :: Benthos Site Details
Analysis - 01 Sep 2016
Located in central Robeson County near Pembroke the benthic station on SR 1003 is more than 10 stream -miles upstream of Lumberton although the
station is still downstream of 4 major NPDES permitted dischargers. Despite this, specific conductance is relatively low, mitigated in part by good
water levels. Additionally, habitat was noted as favorable for macroinvertebrate colonization. EPT taxa richness of 33 was the second highest and the
NCBI was the second lowest recorded from this site. This segment of the Lumber River has never rated less than Excellent and retains this rating for
2016.
Analysis - 15 Jul 2011
This site on the Lumber River is a few miles upstream of Lumberton and eliminates any effects that municipality may have on Lumber River water
quality. Like the downstream site, the presense of dishargers above this site have not affected water quality as the river at this site has never rated
anything less than Excellent. A diverse and abundant macroinvertebrate community is present here and includes rare and highly pollution intolerant
EPT such as the caddisfly Oecetis sp. D and the mayfly Sparbarus maculatus. Sampling at SR 1003 in 2011 resulted in the highest EPT richness ever
seen from any Lumber River sampling site over the past 30 years.
Analysis - 17 Jul 2006
The Lumber River at SR 1003 rated Excellent in 2006, the same ratiing it received in 10 other samplings since 1983. No declining water quality trends
were observed when all 11 collections were analyzed.
Print Page
DEQ Division of Water Resources • 1611 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1611 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
NCDEQ • NC.gov • © 2022 NC DEQ Division of Water Resources
https://www.ncwater.org/?page=672&SiteID=IB031 3/3

Pembroke WWTP
Effluent Monitoring NC0027103
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
0 1.20
1.00
2 0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
•
Flow
Mo Avg -Limit
•
•
• • •• • •
• • ••• •
• •• • • •
oti oti' oti' oti° oti oti° otiti oti oti oti
°� yo\���ti h\yh�ti y\� o\y��ti \��ti ��ti �\ti ,��ti
J
E
30
25
20
15
10
0
Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Wk Wvg ♦ Mo. Avg
WA Limit • MA Limit
•
♦
A
•
••
•
otict, ti' otiO' oti' otio oti° oti oti oti° oti° ti° oti° otiti otiti otiti otiti
y\ti�ti A\ti�� o\ y\ti�ti o\ ' \ti�' o\ti\ti y\ti\"oti\��\ti�� o\ti�ti y\ti�ti ��ti����ti�� o\ti�ti
ti ti , ti
Summary Statistics
N 1461
Avg 0.91
SD 0.41
Min 0.30
Max 3.66
Summary Statistics
N 998
Avg 22.4
SD 4.1
Min 8.8
Max 30.0
Summary Statistics
N 416
Avg 3.3
SD 3.1
Min 0.3
Max 26.2
Removal Rate
N 416
Avg 98.3%
SD 1.8%
Min 85.2%
Max 99.9%
Page 1 of 6 GB Perlmutter 6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
Effluent Monitoring NC0027103
Summary Statistics
N 418
Avg 5.6
SD 8.1
Min 0.4
Max 95.0
Removal Rate
N 418
Avg 97.2%
SD 6.1%
Min 15.0%
Max 99.9%
Summary Statistics
N 418
Avg 0.5
SD 1.3
Min 0.0
Max 10.6
Summary Statistics
N 626
Avg 8.84
SD 0.94
Min 6.96
Max 11.79
Page 2 of 6 GB Perlmutter 6/16/2022

Effluent Monitoring NC0027103
Pembroke WWTP
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
pH
• Effluent - - - L. Limit U. Limit
•
O O,� O,� O�� O,O O,O O,O O,O Off° Off° Off° Off° O�y O�y O� . O��
y\ti�ti �\ti�ti�\ti�tio\ti�ti y\ti�ti �\ti�ti�\ti�tio\ti„ y\ti�ti o�ti����ti��o�ti��ti�ti�� �\ti�ti�\ti�'o ',
ti ti ti ti
60 -
50
40 -
J
30
20
10
0
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
• Effluent
Limit Compliant
O,� oti' oti' Otis' oti0 oti° Otio oti° oti° oti° oti° oti° otiti ootiy otiti
��ti��A\ti�� o\ti�ti y\ti�ti o\ti���\ti�� o\ti�ti y\ti�ti �\ti���\"9\ o\9\ y\ti„ �\ti����ti�� o\ti�ti
ti ti ti ti
Summary Statistics
N 418
Geomean 6
Min 1
Max 727
Summary Statistics
N 626
Avg 7.20
SD 0.18
Min 6.51
Max 7.68
Summary Statistics
N 627
Avg 25.01
SD 0.14
Min 25.00
Max 28.00
Page 3 of 6 GB Perlmutter 6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
Effluent Monitoring NC0027103
Summa Statistics
N 48
Avg 11.90
SD 9.40
Min 0.50
Max 37.60
NO2+NO3
N 48
Avg 9.80
SD 8.51
Min 0.02
Max 26.50
TKN
N 48
Avg 2.32
SD 3.63
Min 0.50
Max 17.60
Summary Statistics
N 48
Avg 1.99
SD 1.54
Min 0.04
Max 5.47
Page 4 of 6 GB Perlmutter 6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
Instream Monitoring NC0027103
t-Test: Two -Sample Assuming Unequal Variances
Upstream Dnstream
Mean
Variance
Observations
Hypothesized Mean Difference
df
t Stat
P(T<=t) one -tail
t Critical one -tail
P(T<=t) two -tail
t Critical two -tail
7.660602
3.465548
349
0
694
-0.27969
0.3899
1.647052
0.779801
1.963388
7.699914
3.409674
347
Page 5 of 6 GB Perlmutter, 6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
Instream Monitoring NC0027103
35
30
25
- 20
E 15
10
5
0
Temperature
• Upstream - Effluent
Dnstream —Standard
•
411111411-10,1
•
•
•
c
•
■
•
•
lag
a
oar
•
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
c-I c-I c-I ci ci ci ci ci
N 0 a1 V N O
c-I c-I
0
N
0
N
0 0NNNNNN
-
O O 0 0 0 0
N N
ci ci ci c-I c-I ci
N. O c N O
a-i c-I
t-Test: Two -Sample Assuming Unequal Variances
Upstream Dnstream
Mean 20.33209 20.32248
Variance 43.44558 44.25522
Observations 349 347
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 694
t Stat 0.019149
P(T<=t) one -tail 0.492364
t Critical one -tail 1.647052
P(T<=t) two -tail 0.984728
t Critical two -tail 1.963388
Conductivity (historical), uS/cm
Date Upstream Downstream
Apr-99 147 150
May-99 117.4 115.6
Jun-99 218.3 219.4
Jul-99 234.8 236.9
Aug-99 344 347
Sep-99 141.2 135
Oct-99 87.1 84.9
Average 184.3 184.1
Page 6 of 6 GB Perlmutter, 6/16/2022

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Report Date: 03/08/22 Page 1 01 2
Permit: NC0027103 MRs Betweei 3 - 2017 and 3 - 2022
Facility Name: % Param Nam( %
Major Minor:
Region: %
County: %
Violation Category:Limit Violation
Subbasin:%
Program Category: NPDES WW
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0027103
FACILITY: Town of Pembroke - Pembroke WWTP
COUNTY: Robeson
REGION: Fayetteville
Limit Violation
MONITORING OUTFACE
REPORT
LOCATION
PARAMETER
VIOLATION
DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE
UNIT OF
LIMIT
CALCULATED
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
03-2017 001
04-2017 001
05-2017 001
08-2017 001
09-2017 001
02-2021 001
11-2018 001
12-2018 001
01-2019 001
02-2020 001
01-2021 001
02-2021 001
12-2017 001
11-2018 001
01-2019 001
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
Chlorine, Total Residual
Chlorine, Total Residual
Chlorine, Total Residual
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/20/17 3 X week
04/17/17 3 X week
05/09/17 3 X week
08/29/17 3 X week
09/06/17 3 X week
Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 02/20/21
Broth, 44.5 C
Flow, in conduit or thru
treatment plant
Flow, in conduit or thru 12/31/18 Continuous
treatment plant
Flow, in conduit or thru
treatment plant
Flow, in conduit or thru
treatment plant
Flow, in conduit or thru
treatment plant
Flow, in conduit or thru
treatment plant
Solids, Total Suspended -
Concentration
Solids, Total Suspended -
Concentration
Solids, Total Suspended -
Concentration
01/31/19 Continuous
02/29/20 Continuous
ug/I
ug/I
ug/I
ug/I
ug/I
2 X week #/100m1
11/30/18 Continuous mgd
mgd
mgd
mgd
01/31/21 Continuous mgd
02/28/21 Continuous
12/09/17 2 X week
11/03/18 2 X week
01/26/19 2 X week
mgd
mg/1
mg/I
mg/I
28
28
28
44
33
43
28 30
28 32 14.3
400 447.54
1.33 1.375
1.33 1.553
1.33 1.354
1.33 1.433
1.33 1.39
1.33 1.735
30 30.25
30 33.67
30 51.33
57.1
17.9
53.6
Daily Maximum
Exceeded
Daily Maximum
Exceeded
Daily Maximum
Exceeded
7.1 Daily Maximum
Exceeded
Daily Maximum
Exceeded
11.9 Weekly Geometric Mean
Exceeded
3.4 Monthly Average
Exceeded
16.8 Monthly Average
Exceeded
1.8 Monthly Average
Exceeded
7.7 Monthly Average
Exceeded
4.5 Monthly Average
Exceeded
30.5 Monthly Average
Exceeded
0.8 Weekly Average
Exceeded
12.2 Weekly Average
Exceeded
71.1 Weekly Average
Exceeded
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
No Action, BPJ
Proceed to
Enforcement Case
Proceed to NOV
Proceed to
Enforcement Case
Proceed to
Enforcement Case
Proceed to NOV
Proceed to NOD
Proceed to
Enforcement Case
Proceed to NOD
Proceed to NOV
Proceed to
Enforcement Case

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/08/22"
Page 2 of 2
Permit: NC0027103 MRs Betweei 3 - 2017 and 3 - 2022 Region:
Facility Name: % Param Nam( % County: %
Major Minor: %
Violation Category:Limit Violation - Program Category: NPDES WW
Subbasin:%
Violation Action: %
PERMIT: NC0027103
FACILITY: Town of Pembroke - Pembroke WWTP
COUNTY: Robeson
REGION: Fayetteville
Limit Violation
MONITORING UNIT OF
OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER VIOLATION FREQUENCY
REPORT DATE MEASURE
LIMIT
CALCULATED
VALUE Over
VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
01-2019 001
Effluent Solids, Total Suspended - 01/31/19 2 X week mg/I 20 20.88 4.4 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
0
0
0
Feb May Aug Nov
d
ro
m
0
cc
O
00
O)
00
7Q10: Tidal
c
c
m
O O.
c
m 0
LL c
0
T
C
0
U
NC0088480/001
Pasquotank Cty Reverse Osmosis WTP
Chr Lim: 6% @ 2 MG
0
CO Cr, o
N
0 0 0 0
N N N N
0
0
L.)
0
Mar Jun Sep Dec
Cf
U
a
ro
m d
c
c
m
O a
c
a
m
LL c
0
T
C
0
U
NC0043583/001
Pasquotank WTP
Chr Monit: 90%
0a
-(a
00 m o
0 0 0 0
6
O
Jan Apr Jul Oct
2
O
e--I
O
cc Cf
N
LL N
c
O
00
00
c
O
v
0
m
T
C
0
O
U
NC0027103/001
Pembroke WWTP
NonComp: Single
chr lim: 1.7%
- a • 0 0
LL a
00 00 O ▪ N
O 0 0 0 0
0
0
L.)
0
Mar Jun Sep Dec
NC0081736/001
Pender Co -Melinda K. Knoerzer WWTF
Ac Fthd Lim: 90% @
z
0 a
L
LC50>100% Pass
CO m o
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
U
0
m
m a
0 0 cc
Cf
c
O
00
N
K
NC0088820/001
Pender County WTP (NCG590022)
Acu PF Monit: 90% Ft
LL
C
r1
N
c
LL
CO m 0
O 0 0 0
0
v7
0
N
Feb May Aug Nov
Cf
O
m
U
0
U
0
E O
.N
m
m a
NC0046809/001
Pentecostal Holiness Chrch-Cornerston
NonComp: Single
chr lim: 31%
o-0
0
c
m
Q
00
0
ig
a
CO 01 0 N
O 0 0 0
N N N N
Page 76 of 109
Legend: P= Fathead minnow (Pimohales oromelas). H=No Flow (facility is active). s = Split test between Certified Labs

United States Environmental Protection Agency
E PA Washington, D.C. 20460
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection
1 IN I 2 L 3 I NC0027103 111 121 21/04/20 117
Type
181 R I
I11111111
Inspector Fac Type
191 S I 201
211I1I11 111111111 II 11I 1111 I I II III
I1 P6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA Reserved
671 I 70I3 I 711D I 72 I N I 731 I 74 71
I I
I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Pembroke WWTP
NCSR 1339
Pembroke NC 28372
Entry Time/Date
10:30AM 21/04/20
Permit Effective Date
16/08/01
Exit Time/Date
03:OOPM 21/04/20
Permit Expiration Date
19/07/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
Jason E Deese/ORC/910-521-2989/
Other Facility Data
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Tyler W Thomas,100 Union Chapel Rd Pembroke NC 283720866/Town
Manager/910-521-9758/9105210492 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenar Records/Reports
Sludge Handling DispoFacility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Mark Brantley DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3300 Ext.727/
Stephanie Zorio DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3322/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page# 1

31
NPDES yr/mo/day
NC0027103 111 121 21/04/20
I17
Inspection Type
18 [j
(Cont.)
1
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
The facility grounds and laboratory were well -maintained and orderly. All records, including an ORC
log, were available at the time of the review and complete. The facility submitted a permit renewal
application in 2019 that is still awaiting approval by the Division. The laboratory is fully certified.
Facility performs fecal coliform, TSS, and BOD testing in house. The facility's lab is now using the
IBEX method of fecal coliform testing.
Calibration records were current and complete. The DMR reviewed (October 2020) during the
inspection had a few minor transcription errors that will be amended. The facility plans to add Kisha
Locklear as a back-up ORC. The proper form was provided during the inspection. Effluent was
collected from Pembroke's WWTP's 24-hour composite equipment on April 20th and 22nd, 2021 for
chronic toxicity testing. The Division notes that the facility sends samples to TBL. TBL contracts with
Meritech Labs for toxicity testing. The facility passed the chronic Ceriodaphnia dubia test performed
by the DEQ Aquatic Toxicology Lab.
Significant upgrades to the plant are scheduled to occur within a year, specifically new headworks,
clarifier, and oxidation ditch. The auger of the grit chamber was cracked, but still mostly operational.
The grit chamber, along with the headworks, are included in the planned plant upgrade. Heavy foam
was present in the oxidation ditch. Staff reported no indications of Nocardia. Foam was a normal
light -tan color. The #1 clarifier was drained for algae removal and was not in use. Division staff noted
that chlorine cylinders are stored under a roof, but not inside a building. Some liquid bleach used for
cleaning was close to the declorination cylinders. Staff said the bleach would be moved after
advisement from the inspector. Effluent was clear with no apparent pin floc at the time of the
inspection.
Page# 2

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 04/20/2021
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Bioassay Compliance
Record Keeping
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility
classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ • ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
•
•
•
•
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The DMR reviewed (October 2020) during the inspection had a few minor transcription
errors that will be amended. The facility plans to add Kisha Locklear as a back-up
ORC. The proper form was provided during the inspection.
Permit Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new ❑ ❑ ❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? • ❑ ❑ ❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit? El • El El
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? ■ El El El
Comment: The facility submitted a permit renewal application in 2019 that is still awaiting approval
by the Division.
Page# 3

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 04/20/2021
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Bioassay Compliance
Laboratory
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
# Is the facility using a contract lab?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
degrees Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
▪ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The laboratory is fully certified. Facility performs fecal coliform, TSS, and BOD testing
in house. The facility s lab is now using the IBEX method of fecal coliform testing.
Operations & Maintenance
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
N EED
Comment: Significant upgrades to the plant are scheduled to occur within a year, specifically new
headworks, clarifier, and oxidation ditch.
Flow Measurement - Influent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ • ❑
Pump Station - Influent Yes No NA NE
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the wet well free of excessive grease? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps present? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps operable? El • El El
Are float controls operable? ■ El El El
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational? • El El El
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational? • El El El
Comment: Two of three pumps were operational. One pump was under repair.
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Page# 4

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 04/20/2021
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Bioassay Compliance
Bar Screens
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
Is the unit in good condition?
Comment:
Grit Removal
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
Yes No NA NE
•
•
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
Comment: The auger of the grit chamber was cracked, but still mostly operational. The grit
chamber, along with the headworks, are included in the planned plant upgrade.
Flow Measurement - Effluent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ • ❑
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Are the aerators operational? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up? • ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface? ❑ • ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/I) • ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 5

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 04/20/2021
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Bioassay Compliance
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
• ❑ ❑ •
Comment: Heavy foam was present in the oxidation ditch. Staff reported no indications of
Nocardia. Foam was a normal light -tan color.
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier? • ❑ El ❑
Are weirs level? • El El El
Is the site free of weir blockage? • El ❑ ❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is scum removal adequate? • El ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge? • El El El
Is the drive unit operational? • El ❑ ❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc? • El ❑ ❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/4 of the sidewall depth) • El El El
Comment: The #1 clarifier was drained for algae removal and was not in use.
Aerobic Digester
Is the capacity adequate?
Is the mixing adequate?
Is the site free of excessive foaming in the tank?
# Is the odor acceptable?
# Is tankage available for properly waste sludge?
Comment:
Disinfection -Gas
Are cylinders secured adequately?
Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight?
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
Is there chlorine residual prior to de -chlorination?
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 04/20/2021
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Bioassay Compliance
Disinfection -Gas
Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 Ibs of Chlorine (CAS No.
7782-50-5)?
If yes, then is there a Risk Management Plan on site?
If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000- -
If yes, then when was the RMP last updated?
Comment: Cylinders are stored under a roof, but not inside a building.
Yes No NA NE
❑ • ❑ ❑
De -chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ? Gas
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Is storage appropriate for cylinders? • ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is de -chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? • ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the tablets the proper size and type? El El • El
Comment: Some liquid bleach used for cleaning was close to the declorination cylinders. Staff
said the bleach would be moved after advisement from the inspector.
Are tablet de -chlorinators operational? El ❑ • ❑
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Page# 7

United States Environmental Protection Agency
E PA Washington, D.C. 20460
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection
1 IN I 2 LI 3 I NC0027103 111 121 20/06/23 117
Type
181 D I
IIIIIIIIIII
Inspector Fac Type
19 I S I 201
21IIIIII IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII I IIIIII
P6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA Reserved
671 I 70I I 711 172 I N I 731 I 74 71
I I
I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Pembroke WWTP
NCSR 1339
Pembroke NC 28372
Entry Time/Date
10:30AM 20/06/23
Permit Effective Date
16/08/01
Exit Time/Date
01:30PM 20/06/23
Permit Expiration Date
19/07/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
Other Facility Data
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Tyler W Thomas,100 Union Chapel Rd Pembroke NC 283720866/Town
Manager/910-521-9758/9105210492 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Pretreatment
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Kristen N Slodysko DWR/FRO WQ/919-433-3300/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Mark Brantley DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3300 Ext.727/
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page# 1

3I
NPDES yr/mo/day
N C0027103 111 121 20/06/23
117
Inspection Type
18101
(Cont.)
1
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
This report is being issued as a Notice of Violation (NOV) due to the Town's failure to properly
implement its Pretreatment Program as specified in 15A NCAC 2H .0905, 40 CFR 403.8(f)(5), and
NPDES permit conditions Part IV, Section D.9.
Violation:
• The Town has failed to take appropriate enforcement actions against its Significant Industrial User,
Steven Robert's Original Desserts (IUP# 002) for limits' violations. The Town's Enforcement
Response Plan (ERP) indicates that NOVs will be issued for all permit limit violations within 30 days of
receiving analytical data. Steven Robert's Original Desserts had multiple BOD and TSS violations in
both the first and second halves of 2019 and the first half of 2020. The Town did not issue any NOVs
for these violations.
• As per 15A NCAC 02H.0908 (b)(4) and (5), the Town is required to publish public notice of all SIUs
in Significant Non -Compliance (SNC) on an annual basis and report SNC facilities to the Division in its
Pretreatment Annual Report. The Town has failed to determine if any of Steven Robert's violations in
2019 have met the definition of either Chronic or Technical Review Criteria (TRC) SNC limit's
violations. A SNC determination must be made for this facility for 2019. If it is determined that the
facility was in SNC for the 2019 PAR year, public notice must be published and an amended PAR
must be submitted to the DEQ within 30 days upon receipt of this letter. Proof of the public notice
must be included in the amended PAR. The definitions of Chronic and TRC SNC, as defined in 15A
NCAC 02H .0903 (31), are:
"Chronic violations" of wastewater discharge limits, defined here as those in which 66
percent or more of all the measurements taken for the same pollutant parameter (not including flow)
during a six-month period exceed (by any magnitude) a numeric pretreatment standard or
requirement including instantaneous limits, as defined by 40 CFR 403.3(1);
"Technical Review Criteria" (TRC) violations, defined here as those in which 33 percent or more of all
the measurements taken for the same pollutant parameter during a six-month period equal or exceed
the product of the numeric pretreatment standard or requirement including instantaneous limits, as
defined by 40 CFR 403.3(1) multiplied by the applicable TRC; (TRC = 1.4 for BOD, TSS, fats, oil, and
grease, 1.2 for all other pollutants (except flow and pH));
• The Town has failed to properly retain pretreatment records as per 15A NCAC 02H .0908(f). During
the inspection it was noted that the facility did not retain copies of Division approval letters for
program elements including the Head Works Analysis (HWA), Industrial Waste Survey (IWS),
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP), Short -Term Monitoring Plan (STMP), and Industrial User Permits
(IUP). Please retain copies of all Division approval letters for pretreatment program elements as per
15A NCAC 02H .0908(f)(2):
(f) Records Retention:
(1) Control authorities and industrial users shall retain for three years records of monitoring activities
and results, along with supporting information including annual pretreatment reports, general
records, water quality records, and records of industrial user impact on the POTW;
(2) Other documents required by any rule of this Section (including supporting information) for other
pretreatment program elements, such as pretreatment permits (IUPs), HWAs, SUOs, ERPs, etc., shall
be retained for three years after the document has expired, been updated, or replaced;
(3) A summary of all significant industrial user effluent monitoring data reported to the control
authority by the industrial user or obtained by the control authority shall be maintained on forms or in
a format provided by the Division for review by the Division; and
(4) Laboratory records shall be maintained as set forth in Rule .0805 of this Subchapter.
Page# 2

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 06/23/2020
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Additional Comments:
• The IUP for Steven Roberts expires on 7/21/2020. The SIU has not submitted an application for
permit renewal. As per Part II Section 23 of the General Conditions of Steven Robert's IUP, the SIU is
required to submit an IUP renewal application at least 180 days prior to the active permit's expiration
date. Please ensure that Pembroke is adequately implementing its pretreatment program by requiring
Sills to submit IUP renewals within this time frame. The POTW should retain a copy of the completed
permit application.
• A COC (Chain of Custody) should be completed for all samples collected by the SIU and POTW.
This applies to samples that are collected at the SIU by the POTW and then analyzed in-house at the
Pembroke WWTP. Using a COC may increase the defensibility of data generated during sampling
events.
• Please ensure that the STMP is being properly implemented. Report all STMP effluent data on
monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports. This includes parameters that are supplementary to NPDES
monitoring requirements. Ensure that all detection limits meet the minimum detection limit listed in the
STMP. During the inspection it was noted that detection limits for cadmium, chromium, and silver did
not meet the minimum detection limits required by the facility's STMP.
• The Division recommends maintaining STMP data in a digital table. Data is currently maintained
by the POTW in paper copies of analytical reports. Maintaining the data in a digital table may
facilitate the data review process and help ensure that all sampling is completed at the correct
locations and frequencies and that minimum detection limits are being met by the analytical
laboratory.
To prevent further action, please respond in writing to this office within 30 days upon your receipt of
this Notice of Violation regarding your plans to address the indicated violations and other identified
issues, if applicable.
Page# 3

Permit: NC0027103
Inspection Date: 06/23/2020
Owner - Facility: Pembroke WWTP
Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Yes No NA NE
Page# 4

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Pembroke WWTP
PermitNo. NC0027103
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
1.33
65.8
161
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
65.8
1.33
2.0615
17.0
0
3.04
560
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
32.92 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/I, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals); capped at 35 mg/I
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis); capped at 35 mg/I
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)
65.8
1.33
2.0615
1.0
0.22
3.04
25.9
161
1.33
2.0615
1.8
0.22
1.26
125.2

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Pembroke WWTP
PermitNo. NC0027103
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
2
65.8
161
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/I)
s7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Coliform
Monthly Average Limit:
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF<331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
65.8 s7Q10 (CFS)
2 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
3.1 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
4.50 IWC (%)
378 Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/I)
w7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
22.23 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/I, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals); capped at 35 mg/I
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis); capped at 35 mg/I
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)
65.8
2
3.1
1.0
0.22
4.50
17.6
161
2
3.1
1.8
0.22
1.89
83.9

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
0 CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Pembroke WWTP
III
NC0027103
001
1.330
Lumber River
03040203
WS IV, B; Sw, HQW
0 Apply WS Hardness WQC
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q1 Ow (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
1Q10s (cfs)
65.80
161.00
144.00
503.00
L 53.87
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
Combined Hardness Chronic
Combined Hardness Acute
32.13 mg/L (Avg)
25 mg/L (Avg)
25.22 mg/L
25.26 mg/L
Data are from subbmitted DMRs and PPAs.
Streamflows updated by USGS in 2022.
Data Source(s)
CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
CHECK WQS
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Name
WQS
Type Chronic Modifier
Acute
PQL Units
Arsenic
Aquactic Life
C
150
FW
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Human Health
Water Supply
C
10
HH/WS
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Life
NC
6.5
FW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Life
NC
0.5937
FW
3.2693
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
4 Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
118.5677
FW
912.8700
ug/L
Chromium VI
Aquatic Life
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aquatic Life
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
7.9390
FW
10.5757
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Aquatic Life
NC
1,800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
2.9704
FW
76.3817
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
37.5042
FW
338.1887
pg/L
Nickel
Water Supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
56
ug/L
Silver
Aquatic Life
NC
0.06
FW
0.3018
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
127.6636
FW
126.8244
ug/L
Chloroform
Aquatic Life
NC
2000
FW
pg/L
Hardness
Water Supply
NC
10o
WS
mg/L
Nitrate Nitrogen
Water Supply
NC
10
WS
mg/L
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, input
6/16/2022

27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, input
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1
Effluent Hardness
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 31.7 31.7 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 31.8 31.8 Mean
3 8/23/2018 32.9 32.9 C.V. (default)
4 n
5 10th Per value
6 Average Value
7 Max. Value
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
H2
Upstream Hardness
0.6658
32.1333
0.6000
3
31.72 mg/L
32.13 mg/L
32.90 mg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 25 25 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5 10th Per value
6 Average Value
7 Max. Value
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
N/A
25.0000
0.0000
1
25.00 mg/L
25.00 mg/L
25.00 mg/L
-3-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 & Par02
Arsenic
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 3 1.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 10 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par03
Beryllium
2.0207
3.8333
0.6000
3
3.00
5.0 ug/L
15.0 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 2 1 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 2 1 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
0.2887
0.8333
0.6000
3
3.00
1.00 ug/L
3.00 ug/L
-4-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par04
Cadmium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 2 1 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 2 1 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par05
Chlorides
0.2887
0.8333
0.6000
3
3.00
1.000 ug/L
3.000 ug/L
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A mg/L
N/A mg/L
-5-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par06
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par07
Total Phenolic Compounds
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A ug/L
N/A ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 7 7 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 40 20 Mean
3 8/23/2018 40 40 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
16.6233
22.3333
0.6000
3
3.00
40.0 ug/L
120.0 ug/L
-6-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par08
Chromium III
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par09
Chromium VI
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A pg/L
N/A pg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A pg/L
N/A pg/L
-7-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par10
Chromium, Total
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 10 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Pall
Copper
2.5981
3.5000
0.6000
3
3.00
5.0 pg/L
15.0 pg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 4.1 4.1 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 10 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
0.5196
4.7000
0.6000
3
3.00
5.00 ug/L
15.00 ug/L
-8-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par12
Cyanide
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 11 10.8 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 5 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 5 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par13
Fluoride
3.3486
6.93
0.6000
3
3.00
10.8 ug/L
32.4 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A ug/L
N/A ug/L
-9-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par14
Lead
Date
10/25/2016 < 3
8/3/2017 < 5
8/23/2018 < 5
BDL=1/2DL Results
1.5 Std Dev.
2.5 Mean
2.5 C.V. (default)
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par15
Mercury
0.5774
2.1667
0.6000
3
3.00
2.500 ug/L
7.500 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A ng/L
N/A ng/L
-10-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par16
Molybdenum
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
2 Mean
3 C.V.
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par17 & Par18
Nickel
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A ug/L
N/A ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 1 0.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 10 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
2.5981
3.5000
0.6000
3
3.00
5.0 pg/L
15.0 pg/L
-11-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par19
Selenium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 10 5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 10 5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 10 5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par20
Silver
0.0000
5.0000
0.6000
3
3.00
5.0 ug/L
15.0 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 < 3 1.5 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 < 5 2.5 Mean
3 8/23/2018 < 5 2.5 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
0.5774
2.1667
0.6000
3
3.00
2.500 ug/L
7.500 ug/L
-12-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par21
Zinc
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 49 49 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 91.9 91.9 Mean
3 8/23/2018 56.1 56.1 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6 Mult Factor =
7 Max. Value
8 Max. Pred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par22
Chloroform
22.9944
65.6667
0.6000
3
3.00
91.9 ug/L
275.7 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1.7 Std Dev.
5.38 Mean
2.5 C.V. (default)
n
10/25/2016 1.7
8/3/2017 5.38
8/23/2018 < 5
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
1.9355
3.1933
0.6000
3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 5.380000 pg/L
Max. Pred Cw 16.140000 pg/L
-13-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par23
Hardness
Date Data
10/25/2016
8/3/2017
8/23/2018
31.7
31.8
32.9
BDL=1/2DL Results
31.7 Std Dev.
31.8 Mean
32.9 C.V. (default)
n
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
Par24
Nitrate Nitrogen
0.6658
32.1333
0.6000
3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 32.900000 mg/L
Max. Pred Cw 98.700000 mg/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 0.52 0.52 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 0.565 0.565 Mean
3 8/23/2018 12.3 12.3 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
6.7882
4.4617
0.6000
3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 12.300000 mg/L
Max. Pred Cw 36.900000 mg/L
-14-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par25
TDS
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 10/25/2016 254 254 Std Dev.
2 8/3/2017 240 240 Mean
3 8/23/2018 280 280 C.V. (default)
4 n
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
20.2978
258.0000
0.6000
3
Mult Factor = 3.00
Max. Value 280.000000 mg/L
Max. Pred Cw 840.000000 mg/L
-15-
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, data
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA
Qw (MGD) = 1.3300
1Q10S (cfs) = 53.87
7Q1OS (cfs) = 65.80
7Q1OW (cfs) = 161.00
30Q2 (cfs) = 144.00
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 503.00
Receiving Stream: Lumber River HUC
- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
WWTP/WTP Class: III
IWC% @ 1Q10S = 3.685758472
IWC% @ 7Q1OS = 3.037804941
IWC% @ 7Q1OW = 1.264246925
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 1.411391777
IW%C @ QA = 0.408168114
03040203 Stream Class: WS-IV, B; Sw, HQW
Outfall 001
Qw=1.33MGD
YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
STREAM AS HQW OR ORW
COMBINED HARDNESS (m2/L)
Acute = 25.26 mg/L
Chronic = 25.22 mg/L
YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
STREAM AS WATER SUPPLY
Effluent Hard: 0 value > 100 mg/L
Effluent Hard Avg = 32.13 mg/L
PARAMETER
TYPE
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
J
a
F
D
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Applied Chronic Standard Acute
n # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
Arsenic
C
C
75 FW(7Q10s) 170
5 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute (FW): 4,612.3
Chronic (FW): 2,468.9
Max MDL = 10 _
Chronic (HH): 1,225.0
Max MDL = 10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No detects
Beryllium
NC
_
3.25 FW(7Q10s) 32.5
ug/L
3 0
Note: n <9
Limited data set
3.00
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 881.77
___ _ _______ _ ___
Chronic: 106.99
Max MDL = 2
_ _ _____________________
No detects
Cadmium
NC
0.2969 FW(7Q10s) 1.6347
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
3.000
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 44.351
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 9.773
Max MDL = 2
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No detects
Chlorides
NC
115 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ ---- _ _ -----------------------------
Chronic: 3,785.6
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
0.5 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ _ - _
Chronic:----- ----
354
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
150 A(30Q2)
ug/L
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
120.0
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 10,627.8
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Chromium III
NC
59.2838 FW(7Q10s) 456.4350
µg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: 12,383.7
-- _ _ _ ----_ _ -----------------------------
Chronic:1,951.5
Chromium VI
NC
6 FW(7Q10s) 8
µg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: 217.1
-- _ _ _ _ _
Chronic:----- ------
181.1
---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)samples
NO DETECTS
Max reported value = 5
Max MDL = 10
a: Nop monitoring required if all Total Chromium
are < 5 pg/L or Pred. max for Total Cr is <
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
Page 16 of 18
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw = 1.33 MGD
Copper
NC
3.9695 FW(7Q10s) 5.2879
ug/L
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.00
C.V. (default)
Acute: 143.47
___ _ _______ _ ___
Chronic: 130.67
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Cyanide
NC
2.5 FW(7Q10s) 11
10
ug/L
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
32.4
C.V. (default)
Acute: 298.4
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 82.3
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Fluoride
NC
900 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ ----_ _ _
Chronic: 29,626.7
------
Lead
NC
1.4852 FW(7Q10s) 38.1909
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
7.500
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 1,036.174
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 48.890
Max MDL = 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Mercury
NC
6 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-------------------------
Molybdenum
NC
1000 HH(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- Chronic:----32,918.5
------
Nickel
Nickel
NC
NC
18.7521 FW(7Q10s) 169.0943
12.5000 WS(7Q10s)
µg/L
µgiL
3 0
Note: n<9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute (FW): 4,587.8
_ _ _
Chronic (F_W): - -- 617.3------------------------------
Max MDL _=10___ _____
Chronic (WS): 411.5
Max MDL = 10
_ _ _____________________
No detects
Selenium
NC
2.5 FW(7Q10s) 28
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 759.7
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 82.3
Max MDL = 10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Silver
NC
0.03 FW(7Q10s) 0.1509
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
7.500
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 4.094
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 0.988
Max MDL = 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects at < 3 and < 5 ug/L; apply quarterly
monitoring.
Zinc
NC
63.8318 FW(7Q10s) 63.4122
ug/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
275.7
C.V. (default)
Acute: 1,720.5
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 2,101.2
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Chloroform
NC
1000 FW(7Q10s)
µg/L
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
16.14000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 32918.50594
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Hardness
NC
50 WS(7Q10s)
mg/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
98.70000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 1645.92530
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 17 of 18
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw = 1.33 MGD
Nitrate Nitrogen
NC
5 WS(7Q10s)
mg L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
36.90000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 164.59253
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
TDS
NC
250 WS(7Q10s)
mg/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
840.00000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 8229.62649
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
•
1
Page 18 of 18
27103 RPA 1.33 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
0 CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Pembroke WWTP
III
NC0027103
001
2.000
Lumber River
03040203
WS IV, B; Sw, HQW
0 Apply WS Hardness WQC
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q1 Ow (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
1Q10s (cfs)
65.80
161.00
144.00
503.00
L 53.87
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
Combined Hardness Chronic
Combined Hardness Acute
32.13 mg/L (Avg)
25 mg/L (Avg)
25.32 mg/L
25.39 mg/L
Data are from subbmitted DMRs and PPAs.
Streamflows updated by USGS in 2022.
Data Source(s)
CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
CHECK WQS
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Name
WQS
Type Chronic Modifier
Acute
PQL Units
Arsenic
Aquactic Life
C
150
FW
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Human Health
Water Supply
C
10
HH/WS
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Life
NC
6.5
FW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Life
NC
0.5956
FW
3.2835
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
4 Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
118.9690
FW
916.5748
ug/L
Chromium VI
Aquatic Life
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aquatic Life
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
7.9670
FW
10.6251
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Aquatic Life
NC
1,800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
2.9842
FW
76.8082
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
37.6353
FW
339.6065
pg/L
Nickel
Water Supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
56
ug/L
Silver
Aquatic Life
NC
0.06
FW
0.3044
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
128.1107
FW
127.3570
ug/L
Chloroform
Aquatic Life
NC
2000
FW
pg/L
Hardness
Water Supply
NC
10o
WS
mg/L
Nitrate Nitrogen
Water Supply
NC
10
WS
mg/L
27103 RPA 2.0 MGD, input
6/16/2022

27103 RPA 2.0 MGD, input
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA
Qw (MGD) = 2.0000
1Q1OS (cfs) = 53.87
7Q1OS (cfs) = 65.80
7Q1OW (cfs) = 161.00
30Q2 (cfs) = 144.00
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 503.00
Receiving Stream: Lumber River HUC
- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
WWTP/WTP Class: III
IWC% @ 1Q1OS = 5.441460418
IWC% @ 7Q1OS = 4.499274311
IWC% @ 7Q10W = 1.889092017
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 2.107409925
IW%C @ QA = 0.612527169
03040203 Stream Class: WS-IV, B; Sw, HQW
Outfall 001
Qw=2 MGD
YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
STREAM AS HQW OR ORW
COMBINED HARDNESS (m2/L)
Acute = 25.39 mg/L
Chronic = 25.32 mg/L
YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
STREAM AS WATER SUPPLY
Effluent Hard: 0 value > 100 mg/L
Effluent Hard Avg = 32.13 mg/L
PARAMETER
TYPE
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
J
a
F
D
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Applied Chronic Standard Acute
n # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
Arsenic
C
C
75 FW(7Q10s) 170
5 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute (FW): 3,124.2
Chronic (FW): 1,666.9
Max MDL =10___ _____
Chronic (HH): 816.3
Max MDL = 10
_ _ ___ ____ ____ ____ ____ __
No detects
Beryllium
NC
_
3.25 FW(7Q10s) 32.5
ug/L
3 0
Note: n <9
Limited data set
3.00
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 597.27
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 72.23
Max MDL = 2
_ _ _____________________
No detects
Cadmium
NC
0.2978 FW(7Q10s) 1.6417
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
3.000
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 30.171
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 6.619
Max MDL = 2
_ _ _____________________
No detects
Chlorides
NC
115 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ ---- _ _ -----------------------------
Chronic: 2,556.0
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
0.5 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ _ _
----- ------------------------------
Chronic: 23.7
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
150 A(30Q2)
ug/L
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
120.0
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 7,117.7
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Chromium III
NC
59.4845 FW(7Q10s) 458.2874
µg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: 8,422.1
-- _ _ _ ----_ _
-1-----------------------------
Chronic:,322.1
Chromium VI
NC
6 FW(7Q10s) 8
µg/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: 147.0
-- _ _ _ ----- _ _ ------------------------------
Chronic: 122.2
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)samples
NO DETECTS
Max reported value = 5
Max MDL = 10
a: No monitoring required if all Total Chromium
are < 5 pg/L or Pred. max for Total Cr is <
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
Page 3 of 5
27103 RPA 2.0 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw = 2 MGD
Copper
NC
3.9835 FW(7Q10s) 5.3126
ug/L
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.00
C.V. (default)
Acute: 97.63
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 88.54
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Cyanide
NC
2.5 FW(7Q10s) 11
10
ug/L
3 1
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
32.4
C.V. (default)
Acute: 202.2
___ _ _______ _____
Chronic: 55.6
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Fluoride
NC
900 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
-- _ _ _ ----_ _ _
Chronic: 20,003.2
------
Lead
NC
1.4921 FW(7Q10s) 38.4041
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
7.500
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 705.768
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 33.163
Max MDL = 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Mercury
NC
6 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
- _ _ _ _ _
----- --
Chronic: 133.4
-------------------------
Molybdenum
NC
1000 HH(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WQS
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 22,225.8
Nickel
Nickel
NC
NC
18.8177 FW(7Q10s) 169.8033
12.5000 WS(7Q10s)
µ 1-,
µg/L
3 0
Note: n<9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute (FW): 3,120.5
Chronic (FW): 418.2
Max MDL _=10___ ____
Chronic (WS): 277.8
Max MDL = 10
_ _ ___ ____ ____ ____ ____ __
No detects
Selenium
NC
2.5 FW(7Q10s) 28
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
15.0
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 514.6
___ _ _______ ___
Chronic: 55.6
Max MDL = 10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Silver
NC
0.03 FW(7Q10s) 0.1522
ug/L
3 0
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
7.500
C.V. (default)
NO DETECTS
Acute: 2.797
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 0.667
Max MDL = 5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects at < 3 and < 5 ug/L; apply quarterly
monitoring.
Zinc
NC
64.0553 FW(7Q10s) 63.6785
ug/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
275.7
C.V. (default)
Acute: 1,170.2
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 1,423.7
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Chloroform
NC
1000 FW(7Q10s)
µg/L
3 2
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
16.14000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 22225.80645
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Hardness
NC
50 WS(7Q10s)
mg/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
98.70000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 1111.29032
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 4 of 5
27103 RPA 2.0 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Pembroke WWTP
NC0027103
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw = 2 MGD
Nitrate Nitrogen
NC
5 WS(7Q10s)
mg L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
36.90000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 111.12903
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
TDS
NC
250 WS(7Q10s)
mg/L
3 3
Note: n < 9
Limited data set
840.00000
C.V. (default)
Acute: NO WQS
___ _ _____ _ _ ___
Chronic: 5556.45161
No value > Allowable Cw
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
•
1
Page 5 of 5
27103 RPA 2.0 MGD, rpa
6/16/2022

Reduction in Frequency Evalaution
Facility:
Pembroke WWTP
Permit No.
NC0027103
Review period
(use 3 yrs)
01/2019 - 12/2021
Approval Criteria:
Y/N?
1. Not currently under SOC
Y
2. Not on EPA Quarterly noncompliance report
Y
3. Facility or employees convicted of CWA
violations
N
Data Review
Units
Weekly average
limit
Monthly
average
limit
50%
MA
3-yr mean
(geo mean
for FC)
< 50%?
200%
MA
# daily
samples
>200%
<15?
200%
WA
# daily
samples
>200%
< 20?
# of non -
monthly
limit
violations
> 2?
# civil penalty
asessment
> 1?
Reduce
Frequency?
(Yes/No)
BOD
mg/L
27
18
9
2.9
Y
36
0
Y
i
0
N
0
N
Y
TSS
mg/L
30
20
10
2.2
Y
40
2
Y
1
N
0
N
Y
Ammonia
mg/L
35
12
6
0.2
Y
24
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
Fecal Coliform
#/100
400
200
100
5.6
Y
800
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
Y/N
Y/N
Y/N
**From Y/N **From BIMS Y/N
BIMS

^%10474Aiii,40/ce
POST OFFICE BOX 866
PEMBROKE, NORTH CAROLINA
28372
OFFICE OF THE MANAGER
March 22, 2022
Mr. Gary Perlmutter, Environmental Specialist II
NC Division of Water Resources
NPDES Complex Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Re: Addendum to NPDES Application
NPDES Permit Modification
Pembroke WWTP
Dear Mr. Gary Perlmutter:
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
100 SOUTH UNION CHAPEL ROAD
The NPDES permit modification requires the submittal of a chemical addendum form. This form requires
the Town to identify any potential pollutants ("emerging contaminants") that the Town suspects to be in the
influent of the Pembroke Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The only significant industrial user (SIU)
that discharges to the Pembroke WWTP is Steven Roberts, which is a bakery. Because of the type of SIU
that discharges to the WWTP, we do not expect having emerging contaminants in the WWTP influent.
Please find the completed chemical addendum attached to this letter. Should you have any questions or
need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
•
Tyler Thom
Town Manager, Town of Pembroke
Enclosures: As stated.
PHONE [phone] • FAX [phone]

EPA Identification Number
NPDES Number
Facility Name
Outfall Number
110009845249
Pollutant (Required)
N/A
CAS number
N/A
NC0027103
Method Number
(if Applicable)
N/A
Pembroke WWTP 001
Estimated Concentration (If
Reason Pollutant Believed Present in Discharge Known)
N/A
N/A

DocuSign Envelope ID: 613E3B54-8867-4E64-AA80-851742A6DC2C
ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
RICHARD E. ROGERS, JR.
Director
Mr. Tyler Thomas, Town Manager
Town of Pembroke
P.O. Box 866
Pembroke, North Carlina 28372
Dear Sir:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
June 2, 2022
Subject: Speculative Effluent Limits (revised)
Pembroke WWTP
Permit No. NC0027103
Robeson County
Lumber River Basin
This letter provides updated speculative effluent limits for 2.0 MGD at the Pembroke WWTP. The Division
received permit modification request for expansion dated August 13, 2021, from Miles R. Galloway, P.E., of
Wooten. Please recognize that speculative limits may change based on future water quality initiatives, and it is
highly recommended that the applicant verify the speculative limits with the Division's NPDES Unit prior to any
engineering design work.
Receiving Stream. The Lumber River is located within the Lumber River Basin. The Lumber River has a stream
classification of WS-IV,B;Sw,HQW, and waters with this classification have a best usage for aquatic life
propagation and maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The USGS
responded to a low flow request from the Division on April 21, 2022 with the following revised flows: The
Lumber River has a summer 7Q10 flow of 65.8 cfs, a winter 7Q10 flow of 161 cfs, a 30Q2 flow of 144 cfs, and
an annual average flow of 503 cfs.
The Lumber River is currently not listed as an impaired waterbody on the 2020 North Carolina 303(d) Impaired
Waters List for biological integrity. There are no specific permitting strategies for the Lumber River in the Lumber
River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
Speculative Effluent Limits. Based on Division review of receiving stream conditions and specific proposed
discharge location, speculative limits for the proposed expansion in Table 1. A complete evaluation of these limits
and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants, as well as potential instream monitoring
requirements, will be addressed as part of the review of the NPDES permit application (presently under review by
staff).
Every applicant shall also submit documentation of any additional pollutants for which there are certified methods
with the permit application if their discharge is anticipated. These pollutants may be found in 40 CFR Part 136, if
there are additional pollutants with certified methods to be reported, please submit the Chemical Addendum to
NPDES Application (unless this was completed earlier) and, if applicable, list the selected certified analytical
method used.
NOAT DE
oay,rorem or Environmental ou.i�
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 613E3B54-8867-4E64-AA80-851742A6DC2C
Some features of the speculative limit development include the following:
TABLE 1. Speculative Limits for Town of Pembroke WWTP (Proposed Expansion to 2.0 MGD)
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
EFFLUENT LIMITS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Flow
2.0 MGD
BOD5, 20°C
12.0 mg/L
18.0 mg/L
NH3 as N
8.0 mg/L
24.0 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen (minimum)
Daily average > 5.0 mg/1
TSS
20 mg/L
30 mg/L
TRC
28 ug/L
Fecal coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 mL
400/100 mL
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Monitor & Report
Nitrite / Nitrate Nitrogen
Monitor & Report
Total Nitrogen
Monitor & Report
Total Phosphorus
Monitor & Report
Chronic Toxicity Pass/Fail (Quarterly test)
4.5%
• BOD / NH3 Limits. In accordance with [15A NCAC 02B .0224(c)], expanded NPDES wastewater
discharges in High Quality Waters shall comply with Subparagraph (2) of this Paragraph, except for those
existing discharges that expand with no increase in permitted pollutant loading. These speculative limits
are based on the wasteflow expansion with no increase in current permitted BOD ultimate loading (i.e.,
facility will not be allowed to discharge oxygen -consuming waste above what is currently permitted). The
resulting proposed limits at the expanded flow are considered technologically feasible.
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA). Please note that the Division cannot guarantee that an NPDES permit
for a new or expanding discharge will be issued with these speculative limits. Final decisions can only be made
after the Division receives and evaluates a formal permit application for the expanded discharge.
In accordance with North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c), the most environmentally sound
alternative should be selected from all reasonably cost-effective options. Therefore, as a component of all NPDES
permit applications for new and expanding flow includes a detailed engineering alternatives analysis (EAA) that
must be prepared. The EAA must justify the requested design flow and provide an analysis of potential wastewater
treatment alternatives. The EAA was approved by the Division on March 7, 2022.
In addition to the EAA, please review information available from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Online Map Viewer. If the approved EAA did not include this information, please confirm if there are/are not any
Federally Listed threatened or endangered aquatic species identified within a 5-mile radius of the proposed
discharge location. If there are any identified threatened/endangered species, the applicant may consider
reviewing the proposed project with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether the proposed
expanded discharge might impact such species.
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) EA/EIS Requirements. A SEPA EA/EIS document may be required for
projects that: 1) involve $10 Million or more of state funds; or 2) will significantly and permanently impact 10 or
£D_E
NORTH CAROLINA
gaparhnanl of Environmental quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 613E3B54-8867-4E64-AA80-851742A6DC2C
more acres of public lands. Please check with the DWR SEPA coordinator (David Wainwright, 919-707-9045) as
to whether your project requires SEPA review. For projects that are subject to SEPA, the EAA requirements
discussed above will need to be folded into the SEPA document. If required, a FONSI must be issued prior to
issuance of the NPDES permit for the expansion.
We understand this expansion project is moving forward rapidly; however, we would expect that any request for
NPDES permitting action for the expansion be taken within a five-year period from the date of this letter, or the
noted speculative limits in Table 1 would be subject to reassessment and review.
Should you have any questions about these speculative limits or NPDES permitting requirements, please
feel free to contact Derek Denard at [phone] / [e-mail] or Doug Dowden at (919)
707-3605 / [e-mail]
Respectfully,
DocuSigned by:
NW) PoWitAA,
"-57287E56E81A40D...
Douglas Dowden
Supervisor, NPDES Industrial Permitting Unit
Attachment: EAA Guidance Document
Link to Chemical Addendum Form
Link to NPDES application information
cc: NPDES Files [Laserfiche]
Mr. Carl Scharfe, P.E. - [e-mail]
D_E
NORTH CARCLINA
gaparhnanl of Environmental quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

From: Thomas, Zachary T
To: Perlmutter, Gary
Cc: Moore, Cindy
Subject: RE: Pembroke draft permit for Public Notice
Date: Monday, June 20, 2022 4:14:09 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Hi Gary,
Everything looks good for tox. I will make note of the changes due to the 7Q10 update and the
added flow tier of 2MGD.
Thank you!
Zach Thomas
Environmental Specialist II
Aquatic Toxicology Branch, Compliance and Enforcement Officer
NCDEQ— Division of Water Resources — Water Sciences Section
Based on the current guidance to minimize the spread of COVID-19, the Department of
Environmental Quality has adjusted operations to protect the health and safety of the staff and
public. Many employees are working remotely or are on staggered shifts. To accommodate these
staffing changes, all DEQ office locations are limiting public access to appointments only. Please
check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your
requests by phone or email. We appreciate your patience as we continue to serve the public during
this challenging time.
919.743.8439 Office
919.743.8517 Fax
[e-mail]
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Submit ATForms electronically to: ATForms.ATBPncdenr.gov
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law
and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Perlmutter, Gary
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 4:06 PM
To: [e-mail]; Brantley, Mark <[e-mail]>; Zorio, Stephanie
<[e-mail]>; Kinney, Maureen <[e-mail]>; Deamer, Nora
<[e-mail]>; Thomas, Zachary T <[e-mail]>; Moore, Cindy

<[e-mail]>; Mcgee, Keyes <[e-mail]>; Xiao, Min
<[e-mail]>; Carl Scharfe <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pembroke draft permit for Public Notice
Dear everyone,
The Town of Pembroke WWTP's draft NPDES permit has been sent to Public Notice and is scheduled
to appear in the local newspaper on June 18, 2022. Attached is the draft permit and fact sheet for
you to review. I look forward to any questions or comments you may have.
Sincerely,
Gary Perlmutter
Gary Perlmutter, Environmental Specialist II
NCDEQ/Division of Water Resources
NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
919-707-3611 Office
919-306-1017 Cell
gary.perlmutterPncdenr.gov
Physical Address: 512 N Salisbury St., Raleigh, NC 27604
Mailing Address: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.