NC0063096_Fact Sheet_20230321

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO063096
Permit Writer / e-mail Contact: Gary Perlmutter / [e-mail]
Date: March 17, 2023
Division / Branch: NC Division of Water Resources / NPDES Municipal Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑X Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers: EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW): EPA Form 2A, three (3) effluent pollutant scans, four (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 Holly Springs
Utley Creek Water Reclamation Facility (WRF)
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 8, Holly Springs, NC 27540
Facility Address:
150 Treatment Plant Road
Permitted Flow:
6.0 / 8.0 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
MAJOR Municipal; 95% domestic, 5% industrial'
Facility Class:
Grade IV
Treatment Units:
Bar screens, Grit removal, Activated sludge with anaerobic, anoxic and
reaeration basins, Secondary clarifiers, Tertiary filters, UV disinfection,
Cascade aeration, Aerobic digester, Solids stabilization, Dewatering,
Biofilter for odor control
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Yes, active
County:
Wake
Region
Raleigh
Footnote.
1. Based on total permitted flow of 0.3 MGD.
Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Town of Holly Springs has
applied for NPDES permit renewal and submitted a renewal application dated 1/22/2021, received by the
Division on 1/29/2021. In the cover letter to the application, the Town made the following requests:

NCO063096
• Reduce monitoring frequencies of effluent BOD, TSS, Ammonia and Fecal Coliform;
• Remove effluent monitoring of Total Lead;
• Remove effluent monitoring of Orthophosphate, or if maintained provide justification;
• Reduce monitoring frequencies of all instream parameters;
• Provide an opportunity to review the draft permit prior to its public notice.
These requests will be addressed in the appropriate sections of this Fact Sheet below.
This facility serves a population of — 41,000 residents and operates a pretreatment program with two (2)
Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), one of which is a Categorical Industrial User (CIU). The SIUs are
Southern Wake Landfill and Seqirus (formerly Novartis Vaccines; 40 CFR Category 439), each with an
active Industrial User Permit (IUP) issued by the Town. In addition, a draft IUP was submitted to the
Division by the Town for Amgen Inc. in July 2022, and Fujifllm Diosynth Biotechnologies has applied for
an IUP with the Town in September 2022. In light of these new industrial dischargers, quarterly
monitoring for Chlorides will be increased to monthly in the permit based on additional industrial
dischargers and impacts on headworks.
Review of the application found it incomplete with the required four 2nd species toxicity reports and
Chemical Addendum lacking. These items were received by request on 2/16/2023. The three required
effluent pollutant scans were run in February 2018, May 2019 and August 2020; the four 2nd species tests
were conducted in November 2019 and February, May and August 2020.
Sludge management: Wasted sludge is digested, dewatered, collected in boxes, then picked up by McGill
for offsite composting.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfall(s) / Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 / Utley Creek
Stream Segment:
18-7-5.5
Stream Classification:
No
C
Drainage Area (mi2):
0.73
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
0.11
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
0.25
30Q2 (cfs):
0.32
Average Flow (cfs):
0.82
IWC (% effluent):
99%
2022 303(d) listed / parameter:
No'
Subject to TMDL / parameter:
Statewide TMDL / Mercury
Basin / HUC:
Cape Fear / 03030004
USGS Topo Quad:
Apex, NC
Footnote.
1. The receiving stream segment has no monitoring stations, so no data are available for assessment. Therefore, the stream
segment is neither listed in any of the Division's biennial Integrated Reports nor in any 303(d) list as impaired.
Page 2 of 15

NC0063096
3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data is summarized below for the period November 2017 (the current permit effective date) through
December 2022.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Permit Limit'
Flow
MGD
2.324
4.561
1.112
MA = 6.0
BOD, summer
mg/L
2.0
5.7
< 2.0
MA = 5.0
WA = 7.5
BOD, winter
mg/L
2.0
10.1
< 2.0
MA = 10.0
WA = 15.0
BOD removal
%
99.2
99.7
83.3
> 85
Ammonia (NH3-N),
mg/L
0.16
5.00
< 0.1
MA = 1.0
summer
WA = 3.0
Ammonia (NH3-N),
mg/L
0.20
2.38
< 0.1
MA = 2.0
winter
WA = 6.0
Total Suspended Solids
mg/L
2.50
3.0
< 2.5
MA = 30.0
(TSS)
WA = 45.0
TSS removal
%
99.2
100.0
95.0
> 85
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
mg/L
8.9
10.7
7.5
DA > 7.0
PH
SU
8.04
8.39
7.66
6.0 - 9.0
Fecal Coliform
#/100 mL
1.2
1300
< 1
MA = 200
WA = 400
Total Residual Chlorine
µg/L
NA 2
DM = 17
(TRC)
Temperature
°C
21.6
28.8
13.8
Conductivity
µmhos/cm
756
1153
472
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
mg/L
1.08
3.45
0.20
(TKN)
Nitrite + Nitrate Nitrogen
mg/L
0.96
4.49
0.08
(NO2 + NO3)
Total Nitrogen (TN)
mg/L
2.03
6.83
0.35
MA = 5.0
Total Phosphorus (TP)
mg/L
0.12
0.63
< 0.03
MA = 0.5
Orthophosphate
mg/L
0.08
0.42
< 0.02
MA = 0.27
Total Hardness
mg/L
140.6
237.0
89.2
(as CaCO3)
Total Chlorides
µg/L
78.1
99.3
54.1
Total Lead
µg/L
2.6
10.0
< 0.1
MA = 11.1
DM = 285.0
Footnotes.
1. MA = Monthly Average; WA = Weekly Average; DA = Daily Average; DM = Daily Maximum.
2. No TRC data available in DMRs or PPAs; facility uses LTV for disinfection.
The highest annual average effluent flow is 2.494 MGD or 41.5% of the permitted flow in calendar year
(CY) 2022.
Page 3 of 15

NCO063096
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/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 beproposedfor this permit
action: The Town requested reduction of instream parameters to quarterly in the permit renewal
application. The current permit requires instream monitoring for DO, Temperature, pH, Conductivity,
BOD5, N143-N, TKN, NO2+NO3, TN, Orthophosphate, TP, Chlorophyll -a and Turbidity at various locations
and frequencies (Table 1). Downstream locations D2 and D3 are —1.25 and —2.1 miles below the outfall,
respectively. These latter downstream monitoring locations were added to the permit in a modification for
the expansion from 2.4 MGD to the current flow tiers in 2012 based on historical concerns of eutrophication
in Thomas Millpond and Green Tree Reservoir. 16,
Table 1. Instream monitoring locations, parameters and frequencies.
Sample
Location /
Sample Location Description /
Parameter(s)
Frequency
Outfall
Geocoordinates
U / 001
Upstream
35.64494°N, 78.84963°W
Total Hardness
Quarterly
U / 001
Upstream
DO Temperature, pH, Conductivity
3/week (Jun -Sep)
35.64494°N, 78.84963°W
Weekly (Oct -May)
D1 / 001
Immediately downstream
DO Temperature, Conductivity
p p H y
3/week (Jun -Sep)
35.64486°N, 78.85276°W
Weekly (Oct -May)
DO, Temperature, pH,
D2 / 1D2
Thomas Millpond
Conductivity, BOD, NH3-N, TKN,
Monthly
35.64633°N, 78.87128°W
NO2+NO3, TN, Orthophosphate,
TP, Chlorophyll -a, Turbidity
Below Green Tree Reservoir
DO, Temperature, pH,
D3 / 1D3
Dam
Conductivity, BOD, NH3-N, TKN,
Monthly
35.64481°N, 78.88473°W
NO2+NO3, TN, Orthophosphate,
TP, Chlorophyll -a, Turbidity
Hardness is monitored upstream only for use in Reasonable Potential Analysis for hardness -dependent
dissolved metals and is discussed in the RPA portion of this fact sheet (see Subsection 6.4.). The remaining
instream data are treated here.
Instream data from submitted DMRs spanning November 2017, the effective date of the current permit,
through December 2022, were reviewed. The data were checked against applicable stream standards as well
as for effluent impacts, the latter via statistical testing of downstream averages against the upstream average
of each parameter using t-test with the level of significance (p-value) set at 0.05. The data are summarized
in Table 3 and discussed below.
Page 4 of 15

NCO063096
Table 2. Instream Data Summary: averages with ranges in parentheses.
*Significantly different from Upstream (U); **Significantly different between sites.
Upstream
Downstream
Parameter, units
Standard
U
D1
D2
D3
DO, mg/L
8.89
8.64*
9.84*
8.73
5.0
(6.96-14.01)
(7.52-11.80)
(3.76-16.96)
(6.05-10.70)
Temperature, °C
18.6
22.9*
19.9
18.2
32.0
(2.2-27.2)
(8.7-29.9)
(9.2-31.9)
(7.4-28.6)
pH, SU
7.42
8.14*
8.13*
7.76*
6.0-9.0
(6.99-9.17)
(7.18-8.45)
(7.33-9.31)
(7.07-8.60)
Conductivity,
91
693 *
598 *
548 *
µmhos/cm
(45-456)
(103-1314)
(328-971)
(254-928)
BOD, mg/L
--
--
2.22
2.25
(< 2 - 3.85)
(< 2 - 4.81)
Ammonia, mg/L
--
--
0.14
0.14
(< 0.01 - < 0.5)
(0.03 - < 0.5)
TKN, mg/L
__
__
0.97
(< 0.25 - 2.^
0.95
(< 0.2 - 2.86)
NOz+NOs, mg/L
--
--
0.61
0.58
(< 0.01- 3.68)
(< 0.02 - 3.42)
TN, mg/L
__
__
1.57
1.52
(0.41 - 5.07)
(0.38 - 4.89)
Orthophosphate,
0.077
ON, 0.084
mg/L
(0.024 - < 0.5)
(0.027 - < 0.5)
TP, mg/L
__
0.132**
0.098
(0.022 - 0.877)
(0.028 - 0.34)
Chlorophyll -a,
--
4.3
3.6
40
mg/L
(< 1 - 28.9)
(< 1- 16.0)
Turbidity, NTU
--
--
1 **
50
(2.22 - 55.7)
(1.69 136)
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) - DO is in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life. Minima of all
stations except D2 were above the stream standard of 5.0 mg/L. Two D2 measurements were below the
standard in summer, 2022: 4.69 mg/L on 7/13/2022 and 3.76 mg/L on 8/3/2022. Significant differences
were found between the upstream and D 1 and D2, but not D3 with the average at D 1 lower than upstream
and that at D2 higher than upstream. Concurrent effluent average DO is similar and does not appear to be
affecting the instream DO.
Temperature - Temperature is in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life. Maxima of all
stations were below the 32°C standard for lower piedmont and coastal plain waters. Significant differences
were found between the upstream and D 1 only, with the D 1 average 4.6°C higher. Paired upstream and D 1
measurements revealed increases over the 2.8°C standard increase in 371 sampling events or 83%.
Concurrent effluent temperatures appear higher, with substantially higher winter minima, suggesting its
effect on the immediate downstream temperature.
pH- pH is in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life. Both the upstream and downstream D2
stations had values outside the standard range of 6.0-9.0 SU, all of which were > 9.0 SU. Averages of all
downstream stations were significantly higher than the upstream average when statistically tested and show
Page 5 of 15

NCO063096
a decreasing trend with distance from the outfall. Concurrent effluent pH on average appeared higher than
the upstream, but not downstream averages.
Conductivity — Conductivity is in the permit as an indicator of industrial sources. The Town has an active
pretreatment program with a growing list of SIUs and potential SIUs. Average downstream conductivity is
over 5X that of upstream with averages decreasing with distance from the outfall. Concurrent effluent
average Conductivity was higher than the highest downstream average (DI) by over 50 µmhos/cm,
indicating its impact on the stream conductivity.
Fecal Coliform — Fecal coliform was previously in the permit as an instream monitoring parameter until a
modification in 2015. Division instream monitoring guidance for fecal coliform and conductivity (DWQ
2002) allows for removal of fecal coliform monitoring from a permit unless the receiving water is impaired
due to coliform or is a Class B waterbody. Utley Creek is neither impaired nor Class B, and the effluent
data reviewed have a geometric mean of 1.2 cfu/100 mL with most data below detection at 1 cfu/100 mL.
Based on this information, instream fecal coliform monitoring is not required and will not be added to the
permit.
Monitoring frequencies for parameters in U and D1 are set in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0500 and
will be maintained in the permit.
Additional parameters — In addition to the above parameters, BOD, Ammonia, TKN, NO2+NO3, TN,
Orthophosphate, TP, Chlorophyll -a, and Turbidity are required in the permit, monitored in downstream
sites D2 and D3 only. Only TP tested significantly different between stations (higher at 132), and several of
the parameters are largely reported as below detection (Table 4). No stream samples yielded results above
the 40 µg/L standard for Chlorophyll -a, and four yielded results above the 50 NTU standard for Turbidity
(one at D2 and three at D3). Most of the elevated turbidity values were since November 2022; recent
satellite imagery via Google maps show construction activities just north of D3, suggesting disturbed soil
as a source of turbidity at that station.
Table 3. Number and percentage of nondetects of additional instream monitoring data among 62 sampling
events from Nov. 2017 — Dec. 2022.
Parameter
D2
D3
BOD
40 (65%)
44 (71%)
Ammonia
49 (79%)
40 (65%)
TKN
1 (2%)
2 (3%)
NO2+NO3 NAN6
(10%)
8 (13%)
Orthophosphate
33 (53%)
33 (53%)
Total Phosphorus
6 (10%)
8 (13%)
Chlorophyll -a
27 (44%)
21 (34%)
Trends of recent increase in concentrations were also found in BOD, nitrogen species and Total Nitrogen,
Total Phosphorus and Chlorophyll -a, at both D2 and D3. Based on the relatively low concentrations with
increasing recent trends, plus the growth in the area, monitoring for these additional parameters will be
maintained in the permit. To gain a better understanding of the effluent's impact on the stream, upstream
monitoring will be added to the permit for all additional parameters, at the same frequencies as downstream.
Utley Creek drains into Harris Lake, a cooling water reservoir for the Harris Nuclear Plant, owned by Duke
Energy. DWR lake monitoring station CPFWOC 1 is located in the White Oak Arm of the lake, — 4.15 miles
below the outfall. There are no recent DWR data, but the Division receives annual monitoring reports from
Page 6 of 15

NCO063096
Duke Energy for the entire reservoir, and data from 2015 - 2019 were available for review. Lake station S2
is in the White Oak arm, at approximately the same location as CFPWOCI. The 2019 report notes that the
reservoir is well mixed in the winter months and become trophic to hypertrophic in summer (July -
September). The report also notes that nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) concentrations appear to increase
since 2014. Annual averages at S2 appear lower than those at either D2 or D3 instream sites (Table 4).
Table 4. Effluent, downstream (132, 133) and lake (S2) nutrient annual average data.
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Year
Effluent
D2
D3
S2
Effluent
D2
D3
S2
2017
2.83
2.13
2.14
0.66
0.15
0.14
0.12
0.05
2018
3.12
2.56
2.62
0.91
0.20
0.20
0.17
0.08
2019
1.60
0.98
1.00
1.10
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.08
2020
1.31
1.30
1.00
0.79
0.10
0.16
0.08
0.12
2021
1.45
1.20
1.05
0.85
0.09
0.08
7
0.06
2022
2.45
1.72
1.77
NA
0.09
12
0.09
NA
IF
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (YIN): YES
Name of Monitoring Coalition: Middle Cape Fear River Basin Association (MCFRBA). Based on site
specific concerns, instream monitoring is not waived for monitoring coalition participation.
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): From February 2019 through
January 2023 (past 5 years) no limit violations were reported.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 16 of 16 quarterly chronic toxicity tests, as well as all 4 second species chronic
toxicity tests, sampled in November 2019, February, May and August 2020.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The most recent facility inspection,
conducted on 12/19/2022, reported no compliance issues.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
6.1. 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); 7Q 10 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): A
QUAL2K model was run in 2014 for the expansion to the current flow tiers at the current discharge location.
The model did not result in any dilution factors as the receiving stream is a discharge -dominant flow.
Page 7 of 15

NC0063096
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
6.2. Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD= 30 mg/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: Limitations for BOD
are speculative effluent limits based on QUAL2K stream model performed in September 2014 and CE-
QUAL-W2 lake response modeling performed in 2009 for instream DO protection. The limits for DO was
changed from 6.0 mg/L to 7.0 mg/L to be consistent with previous analyses and permits per the Speculative
Letter in Holly Springs Environmental Assessment Addendum in December 2014. No changes are proposed
from the previous permit limits.
6.3. Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/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: Limitations for
ammonia in the current permit of MA = 1.0 / 2.0 mg/L in summer / winter and WA = 3.0 / 6.0 mg/L in
summer / winter are based on speculative limits derived from QUAL2K stream modeling performed in
2014 and CE-QUAL-W2 lake response modeling performed in 2009. The speculative nutrient limits were
originally developed to protect downstream Harris Lake from excessive nutrient enrichment. A Wasteload
Allocation (WLA) was calculated for protection against Ammonia toxicity using the WRF's design flow
of 6.0 and 8.0 MGD and the receiving stream's 7Q10 of 0.11 cfs summer and 0.25 cfs winter. Resulting
allowable concentrations were the same as the current for the summer, but more slightly protective in the
winter at 1.8 mg/L MA / 5.4 mg/L WA for both flow tiers. Ammonia limits are maintained in the permit.
The current permit TRC limit is 17 µg/L, to be applied when the plant is using chlorination for disinfection.
This facility uses UV disinfection with a backup chlorination disinfection system on site. The WLA used
for Ammonia limits also resulted in a TRC allowable concentration as protective as the current limit. No
changes are proposed. ,
6.4. 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 '/2 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.
Effluent and upstream hardness sampling is required in the current permit despite its near negligible summer
7Q10 of 0.11 cfs. Average effluent hardness is 140.6 mg/L and upstream hardness is 24.3 mg/L, the latter
lower than the default value of 25 mg/L. Therefore, the default value was used in the RPA.
Page 8 of 15

NC0063096
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between November 2018
and December 2022. 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.
• 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: None.
• 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: All
reviewed.
• 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.
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: None.
No detections were reported among additional parameters analyzed.
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.
6.5. Toxicity Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This is a Major POTW, and a chronic WET limit at 90%
effluent will continue on a quarterly frequency for both flow tiers.
6.6. 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.
The current permit has a Mercury Minimization Plan (MMP) special condition. A MMP summary was
submitted with the permit application.
Page 9 of 15

NC0063096
Table 5. Mercury Effluent Data Summary.
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
# of Samples
3
1
1
4
7
Annual Average Conc. n /L
1.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
Maximum Conc., n /L
2.51
0.50
0.50
0.59
1.84
TBEL, n /L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
12.9
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since no annual average mercury
concentration exceeded the WQBEL, and no individual mercury sample exceeded the TBEL, no mercury
limit is required. Since the facility is > 2 MGD and reported quantifiable levels of mercury (> 1 ng/L), the
mercury minimization plan (MMP) will be maintained in the permit.
6.7. Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation within
this permit: The receiving water has no TMDL or nutrient management strategy as the Harris Lake reservoir
it flows into is used primarily as a cooling water source for Harris Nuclear Plant. Nutrient (Total Nitrogen,
Total Phosphorus and Orthophosphate) limits in the current permit are based on a nutrient response model
developed for discharge to Harris Lake, when the outfall was proposed to be relocated downstream of two
impoundments: Thomas Millpond and Green Tree Reservoir, both of which have histories of algal blooms
caused by excess nutrients. The model indicated that the lake is highly responsive to phosphorus, in
particular orthophosphate. A QUAL2K model was run in 2014 with updated information on the
impoundments, namely that Thomas Millpond has decreased in size and depth due to a partial dam break
and increased sedimentation, thus reducing nutrient effects. Based on model results that the receiving waters
would be protected, the permit was modified in 2015 maintaining the outfall location.
Due to evidence of growth in the service area plus recent increases in nutrient concentrations, especially
nitrogen, in the effluent and downstream locations (Table 5), current limits and monitoring frequencies will
be maintained. In particular, orthophosphate monitoring will be maintained as this form of phosphorus is
directly taken up by algae and thus linked to algal blooms.
The current permit has re -opener special conditions for supplementary nutrient monitoring, dam
modification, and downstream water quality. These will be maintained.
6.8. Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: Holly Springs participated
in the 2019 POTW survey of PFAS chemicals, showing detections in multiple parameters, including PFOA
and PFOS, as well as 1,4-Dioxane. The Town also submitted effluent data collected in July 2022 as part of
the required Chemical Addendum, also showing detections in these parameters. 1,4-Dioxane was not
included; the Town stated in the Chemical Addendum: "We currently have no reason to believe any POC,
with approved methods, that are not covered in Permit NC0063096 are present in the discharge from the
facility." Summary data are in Table 6.
Page 10 of 15

NCO063096
Table 6. Influent and Effluent Data of 1,4-Dioxane and PFAS Chemicals.
Parameter
Influent
July 2019
Influent
Aug 2019
Influent
Sep 2019
Effluent
July 2022
1,4-Dioxane, µg/L
< 2.0
4.3
10.2
NA
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), ng/L
< 10
10
10
24.2
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), ng/L
< 10
12
7.6
4.02
Perfluorohepanoic acid (PFHpA), ng/L
13
21
27
6.09
Perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA), ng/L
19
27
37
40.2
Perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA), ng/L
19
21 ,.4
31
71.3
Perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA), ng/L
< 10
< 8.2
8
20.2
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS), ng/L
j < 9.2
j < 7.2
1 6
22.6
Utley Creek WRF discharges into a Class C waterbody upstream Harris Lake, Class WS-V with a water
supply watershed located —17 miles downstream in the Cape Fear River. Because 1,4-Dioxane was detected
at concentrations high enough for further evaluation, monthly monitoring for this parameter will be added
to the permit. In addition, a permit reopener special condition regarding 1,4-Dioxane based on changes
toward limits, monitoring or treatment will be added to the permit.
Based on detection of PFAS chemicals reported in the Chemical Addendum, monitoring of PFAS chemicals
will be added to the permit at a quarterly frequency. Since an EPA method for sampling and analyzing
PFAS in wastewater is not currently available, the PFAS sampling requirement in the Permit includes a
delayed implementation until the first full calendar quarter beginning 6 months after EPA has a final
wastewater method in 40 CFR 136 published in the Federal Register. This date may be extended upon
request and if there are no NC -certified labs.
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody.• NA
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H. 0107( c)(2) (B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: NA
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/L
BOD5/TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg/L for BOD5/TSS for Weekly Average). YES
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Are 85% removal requirements for BOD5/TSS included in the permit? YES. Review of BOD and TSS data
found only one occurrence of less than 85% removal: of BOD on 7/31/2020 due to a low influent
concentration.
If NO, provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Page 11 of 15

NCO063096
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 213.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: NA
9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): YES.
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: Limits for Total Lead and monitoring
requirements have been removed from the permit due to Reasonable Potential Analysis of recent effluent
data, including hardness data (both upstream and effluent) yielding results of no reasonable potential of
exceeding stream water quality standards.
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 213.0500; 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 Town requested reduced monitoring frequencies for BOD, TSS, Ammonia and Fecal Coliform with
justification in the permit renewal application. Effluent data from the past three years (January 2020
December 2022) were evaluated and found all target parameters to meet the criteria. Monitoring for BOD,
TSS, Ammonia and Fecal Coliform will be reduced from daily to 2/week.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
Page 12 of 15

NC0063096
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. Effective December 21, 2020, NPDES regulated facilities will be required to submit
additional NPDES reports electronically. This permit contains the requirements for electronic reporting,
consistent with Federal requirements.
12. Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions
Table 7. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 1,2
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 6.0 / 8.0 MGD
No change
15A NCAC 2B .0505
Summer:
MA = 5.0 mg/L
WQBEL. QUAL2K model
WA = 7.5 mg/L
No change in limits.
performed in September 2014.
BOD5
Winter:
BAT recommended in Speculative
MA = 10 mg/L
Monitor 2/week (6.0
Limits Letter in 2014.
WA = 15 mg/L
MGD only)
Effluent data meet criteria for
Monitor Daily
reduced monitoring frequency.
No change in limits.
TBEL. Secondary treatment
MA = 30 mg/L
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
TSS
WA = 45 mg/L
Monitor 2/week (6.0
2B .0406.
Monitor Daily
MGD only)
Effluent data meet criteria for
reduced monitoring frequency.
Summer:
WQBEL. QUAL2K model
MA = 1 mg/L
WA = 3 mg/L
No change in limits.
performed in September 2014.
NH3-N
Winter:
BAT recommended in Speculative
MA = 2 mg/L
Monitor 2/week (6.0
Limits Letter in 2014.
WA = 6 mg/L
MGD only)
Effluent data meet criteria for
Monitor Daily
reduced monitoring frequency.
> 7 mg/L
WQBEL. QUAL2K model
DO
No change in limit or
performed in September 2014 and
Monitor Daily
monitoring frequency.
EA Addendum submitted to Pam
Behm on 12/17/2014.
p H
6 — 9 SU
No change in limit or
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
Monitor Daily
monitoring frequency.
NCAC 2B .0200
MA = 200 /100 mL
No change in limits.
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
Fecal Coliform
WA = 400 /100 mL
NCAC 2B .0200.
Monitor Daily
Monitor 2/week (6.0
Effluent data meet criteria for
MGD only)
reduced monitoring frequency.
Temperature
Monitor daily
No change
State reporting requirements, 15A
NCAC 2B .0508.
Page 13 of 15

NC0063096
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change IF
DM = 17 µg/L
No change in limit or
-
Total Residual
Monitor daily*
monitoring frequency.
WQBEL. State WQ standard 15A
Chlorine (TRC)
*if chlorine or chlorine
Revise footnote to
'
NCAC 2B .0200.
derivatives is added to
monitor if chlorination
the treatment process
is used for disinfection
Conductivity
Monitor daily
No change.
State reporting requirements, 15A
NCAC 213.0508.
TKN
Monitor weekly
No change
To calculate Total Nitrogen
NO2+NO3
Monitor weekly
No change
To calculate Total Nitrogen
MA = 5 mg/L
No change in limit or
WQBEL. Nutrient response model
Total Nitrogen
Monitor weekly
monitoring frequency.
for discharge to Harris Lake
performed in 2009.
MA = 0.5 mg/L
No change in limit or
WQBEL. Nutrient response model
Total Phosphorus
Monitor weekly
monitoring frequency.
for discharge to Harris Lake
performed in 2009.
No change in limit or
WQBEL. Nutrient response model
MA = 0.27 mg/L
monitoring frequency.
for discharge to Harris Lake
Orthophosphorus
Monitor weekly
Correct parameter
"Total
performed in 2009.
spelling to
ICIS Parameter Codes spreadsheet,
Orthophosphate"
10/12/2022.
Monitor effluent and
Required to assess dissolved metal
Total Hardness
instream, upstream of
No change
limitations.
discharge, quarterly
Total Chlorides
Monitor quarterly
Increase to monthly
Potential new industrial sources of
chlorides.
MA = 11.1 µg/L
RPA: maximum predicted value <
Total Lead
DM = 285 µg/L
Remove from permit
50% of allowable concentration.
Monitor monthly
Add monthly
monitoring and
Based on limited effluent data
1,4-Dioxane
No requirement
reopener special
showing detection, more results are
71
condition
needed to evaluate.
Add quarterly
PFAS
No requirement
monitoring with
PFAS chemicals detected in influent
delayed
and effluent samples.
implementation
Downstream
No change
To provide a background dataset
parameters at D2
Monitor monthly
downstream; add
upstream for comparison with
and D3
upstream monitoring
downstream data.
Chronic limit, 90%
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
Toxicity Test
effluent
No change
amounts. 15A NCAC 213.0200 and
Monitor quarterly
15A NCAC 213.0500
Effluent Pollutant
Three times per permit
No change
40 CFR 122
Scan
cycle
Page 14 of 15

NC0063096
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Mercury
Revise language
WQBEL. Consistent with 2012
Minimization Plan
Special Condition
toward maintenance
Statewide Mercury TMDL
(MMP)
Implementation.
Electronic
Special Condition
Update language
In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting
Reporting Rule 2015.
Footnotes.
1. Limits and/or monitoring frequencies apply to both flow tiers unless otherwise specified.
2. MGD = Million gallons per day; MA = Monthly Average; WA = Weekly Average; DM = Daily Max.
13. Public Notice Schedule
Permit to Public Notice: mm/dd/2023
Per 15A NCAC 21-1.0109 & .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 any 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): Yes
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable)
• Cover letter to permit renewal application
• Four 2nd species test results
• NPDES Pretreatment POC form
• WET Summary sheet, p. 44
• Compliance inspection report, 12/19/2022
• NH3/TRC WLA calculation forms for 6.0 and 8.0 flow tiers
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary for 6.0 and 8.0 flow tiers
• Dissolved Metals Fact Sheet Memo
• MMP Summary
• Mercury TMDL Evaluation, 6.0 and 8.0 flow tiers
• Chemical Addendum
• Chemical Addendum — Supplemental datasheet
• 2019 POTW influent PFAS data
• Monitoring Reduction spreadsheet
Page 15 of 15

�.f tlnfl,
s,e
n
O II
f � rlki+r
THE Town OF
Holly
Sprin"c
P.O. sox 8
128 S. Main Street
Holly Springs, N.C. 27540
www.hollyspringsnc.us
January 22, 2021
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Michael Montebello
NPDES Permitting Unit Supervisor
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RECEIVED
JAN 2 9 2021
NCDEQ/DWR/NPDES
Subject: NPDES Permit Renewal Request — Town of Holly Springs, #NC0063096
Dear Mr. Montebello:
This serves as a request by the Town of Holly Springs to renew NPDES Permit No.
NC0063096. Enclosed are one signed original and two (2) copies of the permit renewal
package as required. The Town's permit expires July 31, 2021.
As per NCDENR document "DWQ Guidance Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring
Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing Facilities" dated October 22,
2012, we respectfully request that the monitoring frequencies for BOD5, TSS, NH3-N, and
Fecal Coliform be reduced from daily to twice per week. The Town of Holly Springs Utley
Creek Water Reclamation Facility is an Exceptionally Performing Facility. For your review,
please see attached document, "Justification for Reduced Monitoring for the Town of Holly
Springs Utley Creek Water Reclamation Facility NC0063096."
In addition, the Town of Holly Springs also requests the following changes be incorporated
into the renewed permit:
1. Removal of additional monitoring requirements for Total Lead. Total Lead
has been less than detection for the entire permit cycle and should no longer
qualify as a reasonable potential concern.
2. Removal of Orthophosphorus monitoring requirement. It is the Town's
position that the Orthophosphorus requirement is redundant because of the
existence of the Total Phosphorus monitoring requirement. The discharge
limitations on both parameters are reasonably proportional to one another, thereby
creating the redundancy. If DEQ determines that Orthophosphorus shall remain a
monitoring requirement, the Town respectfully requests rationale.
3. Monitoring frequency reduction to quarterly for all instream monitoring
requirements at sample locations U, D1, D2, and D3.
[phone]

THE TO” OF
Hoffy
spri 1g,S
P.O. Box 8
128 S. Main Street
Holly Springs, N.C. 27540
www.hollyspringsnc.us
The Town of Holly Springs further requests that a prompt initial review of this application
be made to verify that it is complete as submitted and no additional information is needed
at this time. Please provide a written response once this review has been completed. A
brief email to seann.byrdghollysprin sg nc.us would be ideal.
The Town of Holly Springs also respectfully requests that an "owner's" draft of the reissued
permit be provided to us prior to public notice for comment so that we may review, and
follow up with your office if we note any items of concern.
If you have questions or need additional information please contact me at [phone] or
via email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Terry Foster
Treatment Plant Manager/ORC
Town of Holly Springs NC
CC: Kendra Parrish, Director of Utilities and Infrastructure
Seann Byrd, Interim Water Resources Director
[phone]

aceAnalytical
wwwpacelabs.com
February 21, 2020
Debra Batten
Town of Holly Springs
150 Treatment Plant Rd
Holly Springs, NC 27540
RE: Project: Toxicity
Pace Project No.: 92463382
Dear Debra Batten:
Pace Analytical Services, LLC
9800 Kincey Ave. Suite 100
Huntersvllle, NC 28078
[phone]
Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on February 03, 2020.
The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the
most current, applicable TNI/NELAC standards and the laboratory's Quality Assurance Manual,
where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report.
Some analyses have been subcontracted outside of the Pace Network. The subcontracted
laboratory report has been attached.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,,
Amanda Payne
[e-mail]
[phone]
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Seann Byrd, Town of Holly Springs
Terry Foster, Town of Holly Springs
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, U.C.
Page 1 of 24

Document Name:
Document Revised; February 7, 1018
I
Semple Condition Upon Recelpt(SCUR)
Pa e 1 of 2
BCBAR3IyllCBl
Document No,
Document No,:
Issuing Authority:
06
Pace Carolinas Quality Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville ❑ EdenEl Greenwood ❑ Huntersville ❑ Raleighlo Mechanicsville[]
• Client T- Name: r-r WO# : 92463382
�1rProject tE:
Courier: []Fed Ex ❑UPS ❑LISPS ❑Client
❑ Commercial []pace ❑Other:_
Custody Seal Present? ❑Yes ®No Seals Intact? ❑Yes EfNo
IIIIII62 I IIIII II III
Date/Initials Person Examining Contents.zAl '7-ZN
Packing Material; ❑Bubble Wrap ❑Bubble Bags ®None ❑ Other Biological Tissue Frozen?
Thermometer: p []Yes❑No ®N/A
❑IRGun ID! qly-y-�U7 Type oflem Mwet []Blue ❑None
Cooler Temp ('C): � I , 7 - Correction Factor: Add/Subtract ('C) 0.0 � Temp should 6e above freezing to VC
Cooler Temp Corrected (°C): I • []Samples out of temp criteria. Samples on Ice, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated Soil (�o N/A, water sample)
Old samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC (check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source (internationally,
my.. HNn Ie.1..A1ne Ya...all veA o..nl,. O6,.H rive. M-
Comments/Discrepancy:
of Custody Present?
NYes
[]No
❑N/A
1.
es Arrived within Hold Time?
�Pes
[-]No
❑N/A
2.
Hold Time Analysis (<71 hr,)?
❑Yes
❑No
❑N/A
3.
urn Around Time Requested?
Yes
®No
❑N/A
4.
nt Volume?
®Yes
[]NO
❑N/A
S.
t Containers Used?
e Containers Used?
panalysfs:
Dyes
. & es
❑No
❑No
❑N/A
❑N/A
6.
ners Intact?
'�(r Yes
[IN.
❑N/A
7.
ed analysis: Samples Field Filtd?❑Yes
No
®H/A
B.
Labels Match COC?
udes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix:
❑Yes
❑No
❑N/A
9.
Headspace in VOA Vials (>5-6mm)?
[]Yes
No
N/A
10.
Trip Blank Pre sent?
Trip Blank Custody Seals Present?
❑yes
❑Yez
[]No
No
QN/A
N/A
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Lot ID of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Date/time:
Field Data Required? []Yes ❑No
Project Manager SCURF Review: Date: a l )a -I :"t o
Project Manager SRF Review: Date: _7- 1IZ IZD
Page 2 of 24

Document Name: Document Revised: Febmary 7, 2018
Sample Conditlon Upon Recelpt(SCUR) Page 1 of 2
7C8M8lytlCai Document No.: Issuing Authority:
F-CAR•CSS033-Rev.06 Pace Carolinas Quality Office
*Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination Is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation
samples.
Exceptions: VOA, Collform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water) DOC, LLHg
**Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle
Project# , WO# : 92463382
PM: RP Due Date: 02/17/20
CLIENTi 82-Ho11y Spy
�
Z
w
n
$
E
�
Z
Bi
n
E
�
2
w
n
E
�
2
u
m`
G
N
v
oO
E
ry
v
x
Z
U
E
A
Z
�7
$
E
1✓
n
x
p
m
u
E
9
L
j
m
y'o
a
Q
u
''
c
au
ar
N
a
`m
�
2
q,
b
E
E
1(1
v
x
e,
x
m�
O
E
N
Z
x
z
E
E
m
E
¢
a
Z
E
>
E
>
a^
arxr,
E
o
z
os
;
.br
0
>
�
y
g1
R
,`,�,
n
>
a
¢
?
—
E
�
?
E
o
YI
')
(
1
m
V
U
i
o
�
S
2
E
S
r
o
E
o
N
Q
10
u
cd,
yEi
E
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
SO
11
12
pH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample ID
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time preservation
adjusted
Amount of Preservative
added
Lot If
•....e
.ni .._.�_..__.in
_i�_�neu„o f.. wt!f!
,inn rlklnarin
Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a cupr v, i 6 ��, in v�i� oe..in.�a�e �nn.n..o..n..._ __...... ......_.._.. _...__ ,
Out of hold, Incorrect preservative, out of tamp, Incorrect containers.
Page 3 of 24

n
'y
�. � ;0
All3
c
ll
(1
y 3
V
(G)Grnb(C)Campesllo
a
n
a
O
N c b
=J
O
Z
r
h-
y5 O
N
F
m
1
u
o• a11
Clean WaielAcl
Stomnvnlcr
�' � n
e8
Sediment
n
C
a
g
gg�
Non -Regulatory
N of Conlniners
S 8 i
3
o
Plnssfc
Glass
�, !n
4
o
noo'
volume
S
'-
a R
�.
leo
s
d
5
;x::.
4°
m
RICH
u
o
L
Actlle Passmnil
>
S'
Acute MuIIiCone.
Chronic PasslPnil
Chronic Mnitl-Coot.
a
a
—
Q dubia
D aamompa
y
3
"_
x,
Pnlhcnd Minnow
u
o
e
MYsid Shrimp
�
e
o
N
Silverside
a•
o
O
IIynllcln
a
uo O
n
Chirononurs
q
5
TI E/I'RE
0o
� o n
C
J)
3
WBR
Mncroinverlchrnlc lD
o. m
j
y 3
o0n
g
o
0
u
v 0
u
O
�
b
N
7
G
c
O
I: IT AMMWD LAB W II
Page 4 of 24

?aceA alyficaal.
WIR
2018
Laboratory receiving samples: Raleigh Mechanicsville❑
Asheville ❑ EderI Greenwood ❑ Huntersville ❑ }}
momCllentName: Project0: Wo# : 92463382
�✓A C) d� �✓ PM: RP Dus Dele: 02/17/20
Courier: FedEx ❑UPS ❑uses pcuent CLIENT: 92-Hoj�Y Sp9
❑ Commercial apace ❑Other.Ea
No Seal Present? []Yes RJNo Sealsintact? t❑]�Y''es tallo pate/Initials Person Examiningeontenty ZO Z-5'-20
Packing Material: ❑
Bubble Wrap I ❑Bubblegags' IgNone El other Biological Tissue Frozen?
[]yes []No PN/A
Thermometer: aF�gOC Typaofha: ffWet ❑Blue []None
❑IRGun10: 1/ J
Cooler Temp('C): � • 6 Correction Factor:Add/SubtrAct('C) 0,0 Temp should be above freezing to 6'C
Cooler Temp Corrected('C): j ❑Samples out oftomp cdteda. samples on Ice, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated Sell aq N/A, water sample)
Did samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States; CA, NY, or (dteck maps)? DldincludnglHawaes ii and Puerto Ricol?❑YesCe (internationally,
Correct Containers Used?
Sample Labels Match COC?
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Person contacted;
(]No ❑N/A 16.
)kYes []NO ❑N/A I.9.
Project Manager SCURF Review: I
Project Manager SLIP Review:
Date/Time:
Field Data Required? []Yes ❑No
Date: yr
Date:/Z()
Page 5 of 24

—' o ri
o
c
a
z��s3
A F
c
5'
o'
sV
c
�..
Q
F
o w y
aO
a
�
I
I
I
\ I
y
�Dq
yC
� r; Yv
I
I
I
I
ql
Clemt Nolcr Acl
ro
n �C�1
�
Stormenler
a
4 O
Sediment
a
C C
Non -Regulatory
N of Containers
n c
'a a
Plastic
Glass
_
8. nP
Volume
P
g
a
Ice
G
a w
o{�u3i�
a
i
^ M-P
_
L
a
Actne Pass/Pall
Y
'
Aculc Mulli-Conc,
�G
Chronic Pnss/Pail
^
z
•
Chronic Mnlli-Cone.
a
C. dubia
D. ambi tin
s
a
=
-ten Z
8
X
Pnlhced Minnow
=
3 0 3. `
M sid Shrimp
d ? '•
Silverside
rt R R
N
H nllela
Chirononms
E ' n
e
TURF
WER
q ^ ,
ey
Macminvenebralc lD
U �
3 a
"—
N
o
~
�
w5
5-9 (0 9
(R1
C)
a
9
� O
�y
,3o
GTf ASSIGNED LAB ID 11
s
n
O
Page 6 of 24

Document Name:
Document Revised: February 7, 2018
MAfOICBl
Sample Condition Upon Recelpt(SCUR)
Page loft
Issuing Authority:
Document No.:
F-CAR-CS•033.111 06
Pace Carolinas Quality Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville ❑ Eden[] Greenwood ❑ Huntersville In RaleighW Mechanicsville❑
Client Name: WO# : 92463382
Project#: PM: AP Due Data: 02/17/20
—Fcyc�l(-'Oct u'yCLIENT: 92-Holly Sag
Courier: ❑Fed Ex ❑UPS ❑U P5 " Client
❑ Commercial ,[]Pace ❑Other:_
Custody Seal Present? []Yes go Seals Intact? ❑Yes ONo V" Z'(
r Date/Initiau Person Examining Contents:_
2.4• IV
Packing Material:. []Bubble Wrap fallubble Bags None ❑ Other Biological Tissue Frozen?
❑Yes ❑No ❑N/A
Thermometer: � O S
Type of Ice: kP/et ❑glue []None
RR Gun ID
Cooler Temp (•C): S. CO / 4Correction Fact . Subtract °C) n �� Temp should be above freezing to VC
Cooler Temp Corrected(•C): S.�• ❑Samples out of temp criteria. Samples on Ice, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated $oil (Zq N/A, water sample)
Did samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC (check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source (internationally,
Yes Urvo
---
Comments/Discrepancy:
Chain of Custody Present?
�,�(/ .
y
[]No
N/A
1.
Samples Arrived within Hold lime?
yes
[]NO
[]NIA
2.
Short Hold Time Analysis(<72 hr.)?
s
[]No
N/A
3.
Rush Turn Around Time Requested?
❑Yes
kagi,
[]N/A
4.
Sufficient Volume?
Ps
No
❑N/A
S.
Correct Containers Used?
-Pace Containers Used?
kFjJeS
yes
[]No
QNO
❑N/A
❑N A
6.
Containers intact?
❑No
❑N/A
7.
Dissolved analysis: Samples Field Filtered?
Yes
No
/A
g.
Sample Labels Match COC?
-Includes Date/Time/ID/Analysls Matrix:
Headspace In VOA Vials>S-6mm)?
❑Yes
❑No
❑No
❑ N/A
N/A
9.
30.
Trip Blank Present?
Trip Blank Custody Seals Present?
❑Yes
❑Yes
❑No
❑No
/A
61A
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Lot ID of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION
Person contacted: Date/Time:
Field Data Required? ❑Yes []No
Project Manager SCURF Review: V s - y V` Date:
Project Manager SRF Review: r Date: 2 w Page e 7 of 24

Document Name:
Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Sam le Condition Upon Recei t(BCUR)
Page 1 of 2
Document No.:
Issuing Authority:
dL'BA118I1,r/Cr7I
�"
F-CAR-033-Rev.06
Pace Carolinas Quality Office
'Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation
samples.
Exceptions: VOA, Coliform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water) DOC, LLHg
"Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle
Project WO# : 92463382
pN; AP Due Date: 02/17/20
CLIENT: 92—Holly Spp
u
2
2 is
C
J
E E
m b
2
i
J
E
m
<
9
n
J
m
U
v
Oa
E
m
V
Z
V
m
m
a
E
m
A
o
Z
E
so
o
J
y
E
as
3
9
n
J
a
U'
a
_
n
x
Q
a.
el
a
—
e
J
Q
E
le
a¢
y
¢
m
l7
V
O
a
E
U'
a
G
E
U'
a
z
E
0
0
o>>
O
E
m�
U'
z
E'x
l0'
U'
o>>
Q
Z
A
\
E
N
E
a
E
m
E
a>
x
a'
m
c�}
o
1
2
3
J
6
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
PH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample ID
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time preservalion
adjusted
Amount of Preservative
added
Lot a
Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a copy of this form will he tent to the North Carolina DEHNR Cen1fl atlon Office (i.e.
Out of hold, incorrect preservative, out of temp, Incorrect containers. Page 8 of 24

• o
S 3 O
f�a
y
v
my
rn
N
y n
T
[`
I j
—�i
p.9
u 3� y
c.
2
=
�.
\
.'.
(I
.
f
a
(C) Cmb(C) Ca,,.,ile
j
a.Zca_a
M
—
O. O n m
".] 1d
10
O
RE
3
oem
4
a b
� n
.o y
I
1
I
I
I(q1
G• 0
V c'7
v a O
I
I
I
o y
^n O
1
I
I
I
I�
� a .^°.•
4
M1 g
N
o ?
I
I
ET
<
0
I
Clcml \Voter Acl
o j
� � o
m
'
Slmmmmcr
c h
Sediment
_
9
Non-Regulnjcay
m'
"
v of Containers
u
n
1r.
Plastic
fi
n
b
Class
Volume
o Q
5' c,
a
m n
�
nIce
C zor2
O
;>4
Acute Pnss/foil
!u
'
Aculc Mulli-Cone.
Chronic Pnss/fail
0
o
Chronic Mulli-Cone.
-
n
a
C. dubia
D. ambigun
.{
3
i=
O
i'C
v p1 p^ ^
3
fadlend h•111111a\Y
p
p
Mysid Shrimp
w
Silverside
'-
a
a
o �°
Iiynllcla
ro
Chironmtus
a 7l C
WER
Nhwot"m alm at -ID
R- v
i 0
n
C9
ig a
C
g
n
T.
w a
b
^
0 0
El
=
5
o
•�
a
S '
a
E'ITASSIGNED LAB ID It
�J
r
j
Page 9 of 24

�+ Document Name: Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Sample Condition Upon Recelpt(SCUR) Pagel of 2
8CBM2jyfICBj
Document No.: Issuing Authority:
F•CAR-CS-033•Rev.06 Pace Carolinas Quality Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville 0 Eden Greenwood ❑ Huntersville ❑ RaleighRl Mechanicsville
Client Name: w0# : 92463382
'own O� Hotty S Project#:
, r s PM: AP Due Dale: 02/17/20
Courier:
❑Fed Ex ❑UPS [fUSPS' ❑Client
❑Commercial HPace ❑other:_ CLIENT: 92—Holly Spg
Custody Seal Present? ❑Yes [9140 Seals Intact? ❑Yes MNo
Packing Material: []Bubble Wrap ❑Bubble Bags [None ❑ Other
Thermometer: c
❑IBGun ID: C
. V Type of ice: ©Wet ❑Blue
Cooler Temp ('C): I—) - I Correction Factor: Add/Subtract ('C) Q,
Cooler Temp Corrected (°C): L1
Date/Initlals Person Examining Contents: ll" 2'10 Z G
Biological Tissue Frozen?
[]None ❑Yes ❑No INN/A
Temp should be above freezing to 6°C
❑Samples out of temp criteria. Samples on ice, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated Soil (29 N/A, water sample)
Did samples originate in a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC (check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source (internationally,
nye� nN
•^a wrr Llres UNa
Comments/Discrepancy:
ody Present?
ZYes
❑Na
❑N/A
1.
ed within Hold Time?
RTurn
j1Yes
❑No
❑N/A
2.
me Analysis(<72 hr.)?
❑Yes
❑No
❑N/A
3.
ound Time Requested?
❑Yes
No
❑N/A
4.
me?
®Yes
❑No
❑N/A
5.
Correct Containers Used?
-Pace Containers Used?
Yes
Yes
❑No
ON a
❑N/A
❑N/A
6.
Containers Intact?
(Yes
[]NO
❑N/A
7.
Dissolved analysis: Samples Field Filtered?
❑Yes
[]No
f9N/A
8.
Sample Labels Match CDC?
-Includes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix: ti✓ )
[Yes
[]No
❑N/A
9,
Headspace in VOA Vials(>5.6mm)?
❑Yes
[]NO
N/A
10.
[Trip Blank Present?
Trip Blank Custody Seals Present?
❑Yes
❑Yes
❑No
Elio
mN/A
MmIA
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
I ID of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Project Manager SCURF Review: bic�
Project Manager SRF Review: �'rl
Date/Time:
Field Data Required? ❑Yes ONO
Date: I�LLZI 1-0
Date: ���Z'.lit La
Page 10 of 24

Document Name:
Document Revised: February 7, 2018
. BCBfjRd7�j/fjCBj
Sample Condition Upon Recelpt(SCUR)
Page 1 of 2
Document No.;
Issuing Authority:
F-CAR-CS-033-Rev.06
Pace Carolinas Quality Office
*Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation
samples,
Exceptions: VOA, Coliform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water) DOC, LLHg
**Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle
Project # WO# : 92463382
PM: AP Due Date: 02/17/20
CLIENT: 92-Holly Spg
e
Z
a
m
n
J
a
E
m
Z
a
m
n
J
u
a
E
m
Q
2
n
J
U
a
E
m
2
2
w
n
J
n
c
`a
m
..
V
0.
y
O
N
a
E
m
n
0
Z
n
pE
m
O
Z
¢
2
N
u
a
E
m
n
o
z
y
a
yE�
m
m
N
_
°'
t
°
E
a
3
m
J
E
a
m
a
v
a
a
E
a
a
a
V
a
¢
E
a
v
x
a
�_
E
¢
`a
a
V
n
o
x
`w
¢
E
a
Dp
Z
E
¢
E
ry
�,
a
G
p¢
>
E
o
z
O
O
>
E
>
z
n
O
E
>
¢
m
O
E
o
Z.
..
o
Y
g
''g
V-i
>>
Q
x
>
J.
�'
^
I
z
♦n
=
n
,�
E
a
a
z
y
=
h
E—
<
d
rJ
of
O
s
Z
Z.
a
pE
a
y
y
c
E
o
Z
=
=
in
E
z
9
v
n
a
¢
E
1
L
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
IN11
12
PH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample 10
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time preservation
adjusted
Amount of Preservative
added
Lotx
Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a copy of this form will be sent to the North Carolina DEHNR Certification Office ji.e.
out of hold, Incorrect preservative, out of temp, Incorrect containers.
Page 11 of 24

=� 5in2
o• � 0 3 ^
y
T
r"
�-•
,�
w
-�
—
�
un�•-3n
v �
(C)Creb (Cl Comaoeile
hl
O
m `
2 g
�
z gto
N
�ia o N o
O
✓•
3
lT
a
C
7
CN
o 3
-
o
•�
e
I
I
I
I
��, I •
,o y
ej �
�
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
In �I•�,
@y
e o.
w In
'a
'�
a
a O
n,
I
I
I
I
/ ICI.•
n ^'
ti O
Clean%Ya(er Act
OStormwater
o
g h
Sediment
A
3
Non -Regulatory
CC
I
IN of Cou(amers
Plastic
Glass
a
p
Y
VOIIIIIIC
a
A
a
Ice
`a
cS CCc i7'zi�
4n
IA
J
4o x9ro
_
e Passtrail
>
m
'
nbiaW
;\Aculemulli-Conc.
biguRnd
•w* o Z
Minuolyd
Shrimp
Silverside
rs'•
II allele
a o V. O
Chironmaus
u ^o E O
9
TIEURE
w El C
WER
N gv_ i
Macroinvericbralc I
n
iv o 3
i3
3
w
v
3 & W
� R
w O•
w
N
N
9 -
oli
O_ v
G
J iR5
S
0 0
51
ul
b
N
j
ETF ASSIGNED LAB ID II
s
W
e�
0
I~ Page 12 of 24

(604) B77.6942 . PN( [phone]
P.D. Box 1W4, Greenville, CC 20606 4 Cruflsman Courl, Greer, SC 29650
Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival and Reproduction Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1002
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 04-Feb-20
Laboratory ID #: T55801
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #E87819
Test msulh presented in this report conform to all requimm ms of
Farhad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification #23104
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Ccailication Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Page 1 of 6
NCDENR Certification # 022 Page 13 of 24

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50
Date 17-Feb-20
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES# NCO063096 Pipe # 001 County. Wake
LaboratoryPerforming Test:
X
Comment.
Signature of Operal in Responsible Charge
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor
MAIL UKIGINAL TO
North Carolina Cer'odaohnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test
CONTROL ORGANISMS
# Young Produced
Adult (L)ive (plead
Effluent%
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3
#Voung Protlucetl [H24Adult (L)im (D)ead
6 7 8 9 10
pH isl sample 1st sample 2nd sample
Control 1 7.7 8.1 7.8 8.3 7.6 8.1
Treatment 2 1 8.0 8.5 7.9 8.8 8.0 8.6
sled and start and start end
D.O. lst sam le isl sam la 2ntl sam le
Control
Treatment 2
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as %, combining
Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Water Quality
N.C. DENR
1621 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
L IL IL IL IL IL
1 02-Feb-20
Iculated t=-0.6798
itical Value= 2.508
Reduction= -1.9%
0%
Control
21.9
Control
0%
malmenl2
22.3
Treatment ]
enlml CV
7.4%
PASS FAIL
%3rtl Brood
100%
X
Test Start Date
04-Fab-20
Sample 7 04-Fab-20
Grab Comp Duration 1st 2nd
Sample 1 1 1 X 24hrs. T. Tax
Sample 1 1 X I 241fim. Dilution Sample Sample
Hardness (mg/L) 84.0
Spec. Cond. (pmhos) 30 5599 5t
Chlorine(mg/L) <,05 <,05
o
Modality st.Wond starVend
LC50 = % Method of Determination Control
95% Confidence Limits Moving Average Probit HI9h Conc.
% Spearman xarbar ROther pH D.O.
Organism Tested Ce/ioda hnia di. bia
DEM Form AT-1 Page 14 of 24
Page 2 of 6

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
Facility:
HOLLY SPRINGS
NPDEW NC0063096
Sample ID:
EFFLUENT
GTTN T55801
Date: 04-Feb-20
Laboratory:
Certification M NCO22
I Exp. Date; 11/1/2020
Survival Data
7 Day Survival
Test Used: FISHERS TEST
Control 100%
Test Statistic: P= 1.000
Effluent 100%
Critical Value: P= 0.01
PASS: The effluent does not reduce survival of the test organisms.
Reproduction Data
Ram Data
Test for Normality
Mean youngifemale
Std. Dev. -
Test Used: Shapiro-Wilks Test:
Control
21.9 1.62
Effluent
22.3 1.37
W:
0.965
Critical Value:
0.884
nalysis for Differences in Reproduction
Test for Homogeneity of Variance
Test Used: Equal Variance
t Test.
Test Used: F Test
Calculated t=
-0.68
F=
1.40
Critical Value—
2.51
Critical Value—
5.32
The data are homogeneous In variance
PASS: The effluent is not chronically toxic.
Page 15 of 24
Page 3 of 6

Control Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
i 2 3 4 5 6 7 a
Total
source
rap
R10 1-23
1
+5+8
9
22
T4 1.24
2
+4+7
10
21
GG91-22
3
+3+8
11
22
191-23
4
5
+6+11
24
1171-22
5
+4+7
13
24
N10 1-23
6
+3+8
12
23
V71-24
7
+3+9
9
21
HH101-2
a
+5+7
10
22
H61.23
9
4
+6+8
18
Et 1-24
10
+4+8
11
23
JJ4 1-22
11
+3+9
10
22
WO 1-24
12
5
+7+9
21
13
N/A
0
14
N/A
0
15
N/A
0
16
N/A
0
17
N/A
0
18
N/A
0
19
N/A
olMean
20
N/A
01
21.9
90 % Effluent Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e
Total
R10 1-2
1
+5+7
9
21
T4 1-24
2
+4+7
12
23
GG9 1-
3
+4+8
12
24
19 1-23
4
4
+6+10
20
117 1-22
5
+5+8
9
22
N10 1-2
6
+3+9
11
23
V71-24
7
+4+9
12
25
HH101
8
+4+8
10
22
H61-23
9
+3+9
10
22
E1 1-24
10
1
1
+4+7
1
1 11
22
JJ4 1-2
11
+4+7
12
23
W6 1-21
12
4
+7+10
21
0
13
N/A
0
0
14
N/A
0
0
5
N/A
0
0
16
N/A
0
0
17
N/A
0
0
18
N/A
0
0
19
N/A
o
Mean
0
20
N/A
0
22.3
rena
led
AM
JG
JG
AM
AM
JC
JC
JC
11-Feb-20
F.
Ilme led Sren OIMB PM
0]:]O PM
0 BPM
0&OS RM
0]]s RM
OR:19 PM
f0:19 RM JC
Now :tem "°
Old Wrap. °C
24.7
25.3
25.2
24.8
24.9
cowl New lama.°c
24.6
24.5
Page 16 of 24
Page 4 of 6

n
�(W0
Y'W
DO
u
10,
IF CII EIY'I CI9NDISSW.LLE1
�
N U
0.
E 5
r
,. U
r❑n
p
Zr
J
W
qN
W
_
y p
�`
E
E
11i
N 1uy
'1ypp�'
O
U
u
E oil
W E lau-
J
Ql nllt.lgal.lanlll O,lnlllrg
ION,
8 �
El
q ,a
SIIll10Il0.11g�
,h
l
2 c u a
all!slnnl!S
a
C
M
� G7 a
dulPyg P!sdlN
_
Hnlouu!4V
,v
o 8 a
Plmlpo5
�.
v
H
o N
unWilflau yj
u
n!gnp'D
_
-
'nuuJ-AIIgN apmulp
!III.IFSSIIIj alllu,lll7
�
G
�
'DIIO�-IIIIIInI
Bllla\!
.�
C
6
IIII��SS0113111n\V
--.�.
03
6l
OII
a
u
�VZO��
xSS^�1
v
x G
N
�
nl111110�
a g
\
SAID
E g
n!Isu!d
V
c n
siaupuu03. ,!n 6
w
q
,Caoluln5ay-u0N
V
V N
U o 0
IuaunPaS
2
.IOIDAMAOIS
InW.lalury\ unaID
F'
U ii o
2 — �
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E
V
N
S
I
I
I
I
E o
W N v
i o
O
.^
'1
pO A
V OCCC
C
ts
y
h
Y
r
T
O
w
�L
m N
Q YO+ O F
'
— 3
2
9 4
�
O u p
� � o
N
o
�
w Ki
ai T Pd
L1-.
A
N
q
4 N 3
o1llminluJ (J)4uu0(D)
'�
0
'O E
r
3
E
`1
E
.Ei
C]
P
1 p0924e o

Al
9
I/❑I EIVI CI.INDISM1.I.3
N
b �u
�
a
�
VN
G o s
,•CUE
E
6 v
QI nln)q�laanuloaoulAl
21AM_
y
O4
91LU91'I'
E
c��
SIIl1101111.II11;J
f.°
n
�
p u0 ,ao y
:IpIS.lOA1!S
.a
Z d
f11111.u1S pls,fp�
,�
O
1
�
9
!�. ,� o Ei
moun!IN p11�41141
'>G
F�
kl
� � � "pp
E
H
O o w c7
� w o m
nn5lAum'Q
E
Illc!Ilp'�
Ec
IPU/ssn�1 onm•14D
X
�
s
•�
g
•ouaD'!Iln!N �Uloy
.i
Img/ssIld 01111V
.!
O
n
adsag
MHO
��i�v/n�
n1
fl
N
P
a
O1111110A
p
eSSu1D
E
upsuld
u`
1: u
S.laulnpmD to it
z ]
0
fi
�
,C101111115ay-LION
Ulawipag
a°
�
.1o111A11111U1S
�
IDV.ta)ury11nre1D
a
^�
I
I a
I�
I
I
p1 0
.a
LI
I
I
o
N
I
I
I
1
E
u q
W
y a
^y F-
p o
1=
QQ
o
E
N
O
p N VI
10
J
l['
Q
u
pz
^lls�dl�ly (a)m•1�(n1
'�
cr-'T
_.
�
h
a, m
6
4 � a�
N
Z�
i
a E a
nl
a
rn
i-1�
a
O
N
P
g' ✓bAO o
U
W
to
ti
n
nI
O F o` w
age

E,)'onvFnlmuln.
P.O. BOX "1 t,414, Greenville, 5C 29b06
(E64) B77.6942 . FAX [phone]
4 Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29650
Fathead Minnow Survival and Growth Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1000
Permit Renewal Second Species Testing
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 06-Feb-20
Laboratory Sample ID #: T55801 CD
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
Robert W. Kelley, PhD.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #E87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Cenificetion Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Forbad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification #23104
NCDENR Certification # 022
Page 19 of 24
Page 1 of 6

..nr naym•rvuu-em emcrau anuu rvnmrow rvlW11-wncemr.'am Ies[
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES # NC0063096 Pipe #: 001 County:
% i.a�4✓/s�J" t.
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Environmental Sciences Branch
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Test Initiation Date/Time 02/06/20
% Eff. Rapt.
Control Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
E-22.51 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
F-45.01 Surviving #
Original #
Wtloriginal (mg)
75 01 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
90.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
100.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Water Quality Data
Control
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg)rL) Init/Fin
Temp (C) Inif/Fin
High Concentration
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mglL) Init/Fin
Temp (C) Init/Fin
Sample
Collection Start Date
Grab
Composite (Duration)
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity (mg/L)
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Chlorine(mg/L)
Temp at Receipt ( C)
/ 12:30 PM Avg WUSurv. Control 0.6898
2 4 4
10
1 10
10
1 10
10
1 10
10
1 10
0.6350
1 0.6230
0.6180
1 0.8830
9
10
9
9
10
10
9
9
0.5640
0.5580
0.6822
0.7533
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.4280
0.6510
0.5580
0.7200
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.5520
0.6120
0.6120
0.6990
10
1 10
9
10
10
10
10
10
0.5390
1 0.6390
1 0.5870
1 0.7020
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.5960
0.7540
0.4830
0.7270
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6898
% Survival
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6394
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.5893
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6188
% Survival
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6168
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6400
Test Organisms
Cultured In -House
X Outside Supplier
Hatch Date: 02/04/20
Hatch Time:
_ Day
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
7.6
/ -
7.7 /
8.2
1 7.8
/ 7.8
1 7.7 /
8.0
1 7.7
/ 7.9
1 8.1
/ 7.7
1 7.9
/ 7.4
----/
I
8.1
/ -
8.2 /
7.3
7.3
/ 6.3
8.1 /
7.6
8.0
/ 7.3
7.5
/ 6.7
7.6
/ 13.5
----/
6.6
24.7
/ -
24.6 /
25.0
24.5
/ 25.3
24.6 /
24.8
24.7
/ 25.0
24.6
/ 25.3
24.5
/ 25.2
---- /
25.5
n 1 2 ..1 a 5 R 7
8.0
/ -
1 8.3 /
8.4
1 7.9
/ 8.2
1 8.1
/ 8.6
18.3
/ 8.3
1 7.8 /
8.0
8.0 /
7.9
1 ----/
6.1
9.1
/ -
8.0 /
7.0
9.0
/ 6.5
8.0
/ 7.7
8.1
/ 7.0
8.9 /
5.6
8.2 /
6.4
----/
6.7
25.0
/ -
124.7 /
25.0
124.8
/ 25.3
124.8
/ 24.8
124.7
/ 25.0
124.8 /
25.3
124.7 /
25.2
1
Dilution H2O
Hardness (mg/L)
82.0
Alkalinity(mg/L)
57.6
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
307
Survival
Growth
Overall Result
Normal
no
yes
ChV >100.00%
Hom. Var.
es
Yes
NOEC
100.0%
100.0%
LOEC
>100.00%
>100.00%
ChV
>100.00%
>100.00%
Method
Steel's Test
T-Test
Slats
Survival
Growth
Cone.
Critical
Calculated
Critical
Calculated
23%
10.00
16.00
2.41
0.68
45%
10.00
18.00
2.41
1.36
75%
10.00
18.00
2.41
0.96
90%
10.00
16.00
2.41
0.98
100%
10.00
18.00
2.41
0.67
DWQ Form AT-5 (1/04)
Page 3 of 6

g )o q 86ed
s .bzj;
6 d
N
N,
5
ro ro b b
(!1
0
p
_
pp
3 a
(G)Grna (C)Cmnpmila
0
N
o' � n
7
�
} &
9L
�.
o �•
C
°�c•a
Q
yJ
Inv
WO
a
❑
O
O
tA
o_
1 F
a
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
, In
o ry
n
0
I
I
I
1
I
art'
� U. O
I
I
I
1
I
0 o
sRn
Clean Wnler
Slorn»valer
q,
u'n
Sedinicot
S y
3
Non -Regulatory
C C
11 or Containers
a.
Plnstic
n
'o
Class
y 3
c
Volume
m
t�
Ice
'O
HCora
O
Acme Pnss/1>uil
6
Acule Multl-Conc,
�G
Chronic Pnss/I°nil
o
Chronfe Muftf-Coto.
o
-
0
X
C.<hlbin
D. amitigtm
H
B
o
o
S
X,
f§Inteml Polinuoty
o
.
8 fl 9, y
t
Mysid Sbrim t
•
Z?
w S �
$Ilyemide
F'
3
rt �� b
N
I-lyullnht
ro
N p• a p
`»
Chlrononnts
o. El r
--.
WEIR
h-0ncminvcrlclo mo I
tJ 0 �l
S
g R
go,
✓G.
w
rn
�
e
liTT ASSIONED LAB ID 11
bi

4Z JO �Z a6ed
g JO Z 96ed
peso )ou lP )sal-tl/N PPPO=O
L'bZ dwel rypmlu00
'aslm aylo PalOu
sselun swsryeBl
OL aney sdm lltl
sluewwo0
m
xo-tl-•++bda Poylaw)+el
AtlOZZ BS I' elw+ln
SZ D. dw+l rom
APOIIISI 4
4011
I p+olegwgl
I-OSZ wnlon t+Pi
Iw 006
aaatl9P C%
q Pgwawngn
0UZ/OE4 JSHNI jol+m uopnlla
000N +d.tlt+al
1WOOL b00E6 awp woq oaN
OZ-geH-60 I-P woq'oaN
OHd S3lVHd3Wld wslueaaotsal
OP RN P19 PePa1S
Wd of:ZI aw11 Pal a Pets
oZ-gej qa ales Pal BPate
Z gtuoN
ON N.aQdN
1NAmAAA aldwae
SONIHdS AllOH Pa110
00 IOOSSl
EM

gjo g a6ed
EO
C}
C�
ry 'a
(C)CrnD (C)Cmnpndla
I
°
n � ^7
y
n
ry_
�
•ice
o e o tL b
�`
q �
0
6'
� �•
�
I.—
� �; o c
4
G• 0
z
r-or�
N
V'
l �
- c
�
w
I
I
I
I
R
»•
cZ
atO
1
I
1
I
�•
1
I
I
I
Clean Water Act
ro
o• ^
Slormwaler
ry
a
Sediment
3
cNon-ReRnlntory
(
f/ or Containers
0 0
a
'?<.
11I11slic
Glass
iy
Et
c
Volume
0.
Ice
a
\
ma
--
Acute Pass/Fail
Aculc Moill-Cole.
X
Chl'onie Puss/Fail
P
a
Chronic mlulu-Cone.
-
,
R. nmbibuo
.I
n
=
tq
X
o
Fnlhend minnow
o
Mysid Shrimp
'r6•
,n2
SilvomIde
o � y
111
liynlleln
�
Clilmnomus
a
0 n n
o.
9
TIE/1'RE
—_
WER
a 57
a
1
�. o
Macroinvertebndo ID
=
7 3
13
3
by
C Q o
R
n
V
N
5
5
'
o
rya
Q,
ri V
N
e
®
F PTASSIGNED LAB IDII
�,
goo

g do g 96ed
o°Zc�
d
,y 3 ,^o fit`
ey
.�
.�,
v
C':
•-r�
m
�'
7
N
0 3 o A y
b
w�
by 3 b
e
rh,
N y
(C)Crna (C)Cmnpnrha
�'
n
'vi.
't
e
�7y
pry
d
6
fn
q
y� o a
hoc
?
N ro
o
rl''1
o
a tt
f z
i
y i
a d
L
tA
o
r c� �.
a.
S• R
a
G
o
O
o a
9
E
✓
n e.
1
o n M
I
I
I
I
a o
rn
n A Ca
I
I
I
I
e A�
v p,p
I
I
I
I
Ir�
na s
c a6
Lq e Z
U.
I
I
I
I
1�
N
c o z
I
I
I
I
I
o. $,
Clean Wnter Act
,y
SI°rmwoler
p
an
Sediment
= c.
9
Non -Regulatory
c
io Tr
tv
{lol'Conlainers
Plastic
n
N
R c
C
_
Class
Volatile
Q
o
0
a
7
Ice
�
a
R
'i �
ov
4`n�
4gsoro
es
o.
y.
7e;
Acute Pass/Inil
r
S
Acute Adult( -Cone.
?G
Chronic Pnss/l§IiI
e
a'
a
o
Chronic Nlulli-Cone,
-
n
—
n
C. Aubin
D. ambigun
.I
�
p�G
Pnlhcad Minnow
o
Mysid Shrimp
a�
Silverside
-
0 0 b
Hynllclo
ro
Chh'onomus
ry �
"I'IC/I'RE
nv 3 c
Pa^
WRR
Macroinvcdcbraw I
a a
it 9
n
nC
�✓
o
�
Elo
ry. C
e
KN
11
N•
W •o c
?
O
o g'
a ry
B
N
j
p^
G•I'•I'ASSIGNGD LAB ID It
ry
• J
W
�J

laceAnalyfica(
www.pacelabs.com
May 19, 2020
Debra Batten
Town of Holly Springs
150 Treatment Plant Rd
Holly Springs, NC 27540
RE: Project: TOXICITY
Pace Project No.: 92476030
Dear Debra Batten:
Pace Analytical Services, LLC
9800 Kincey Ave. Suite 100
Hunlersvllle, NC 28078
[phone]
Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on May 04, 2020. The results relate only to the
samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the applicable TNI/NELAC Standards and the
laboratory's Quality Manual, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report.
Some analyses were subcontracted outside of the Pace Network. The test report from the external subcontractor is
attached to this report in its entirety.
The test results provided in this final report were generated by each of the following laboratories within the Pace Network
If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
l/�. -Pµrl
Amanda Payne
[e-mail]
[phone]
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Seann Byrd, Town of Holly Springs
Terry Foster, Town of Holly Springs
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC.
Page 1 of 23

Laboratory receiving samples:
AshevilleEl EdenO Greenwood[] Huntersvilfe'❑ RaleighE Mechanicsville❑
Client
lllI-entName: WO# : 92476030
Uwn U•F Ao 114 S/2/'iWPr*ct#
Courier: ❑Fed Ex ❑UPS ❑USP v Client II I II' II IIII II I II I III
❑Commercial �C]Pace ❑Other:_ 92476030
Custody seal Present? ❑Yes �KNo Seals Intact? []Yes MNo
Date/Inklab Person Examining Contents: Z RI
Parking Material: ❑Bubble Wrap []Bubble Bags faillone ❑ Other Biological Tissue Frozen?
Thermometer: ❑yes Do ®N/A
❑IB Gun ID: Type of Ice: wet ❑Blue ❑None
Coaler Temp ('G):.6. v Correction Factor: Add/Subtract('C( —(,,
Temp shouldbe aMve freezing to 6'C
Cooler Temp Corrected rC(: S y 4ymp!esout ofiemp criteria. Samples Was, moBngprocmz
has begun
USDARegulated Soil (94 N/A,xatersampie) '
Old samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC (check maps)?
L
Time
SuNiclent Volume? G5,Y'ea ❑No ❑N/A 5.
Correct Containers Used? 9Y. [IN. ❑N/A G.
-Pace Containers Used? MY- rlw, rIWA
Sample Labels Match CDC?
1M
Trip
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
QYes [IN. ❑N/A 19.
Did mmpfasodgWtg OCM a tarelgr scarce (Intematlamily,
mdudfneHavnd and Paean Ricol? rlYas nNo
Lot 10 of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICAT:ON(NESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Date/Time:
Reld0au Requhed? ❑Yes ONO
Page 2 of 23
Project Manager SCURF Review! Date:

=Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation
samples.
Excepnew voA, Conform, TOC, Oil and Greece, ORO/8015 (water) OOC, I LHg
**Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle.
Project WO# : 92476030
PM: AP Due Date: 05/18/20
CLIENT: 92—Holly Spill
_$c•
�E
CJ
E
1
a
�d
E
E
a-
E
.l
E
O
n
�EE
ai
�FF
Q
,an
3
8
p,
Q
E
z
rV
m
O
>
qJE
E
4E
t7E a
S
yoI 1�
o
p
4
Il
12
13
�a
5
6
7
B
a
10
ll
u
PH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample 10 Type of Presanialdia pH upon receipt onto presemd.n adjusted Time preserva0en Amcunt olPresemtivo lot}
adjusted added
u..a, n...u.. n[uua r.mn-mnn
nfnn Il.a.
Page 3 of 23
V..rs. pah�nn�-wham Ie a Al ...--, aM,11l a NMh Carolina compliance samples, a copy m .ni. rv......... —..... „,

mg 33 0
W
R
Cn
m
d n
C.
rS.'
c o
6
C)
2
7
-i..
M
0 0
u — m
»
^
(C) Crnb(Q Comymile
a. n
"ZJ
m — F
y'e
E'. p
c
s
o rn y
N
I
I
I
1
^ o
c
I
I
I
I
o Z
I
I
I
I
I
Cleml Wn(cr Acl
o' a
Slornmater
g p
a
Sediment
n a M
d
a
Non -Regulatory
Hq
Hof Conlainem
n
Plnslic
F Q
'
o,
Volume
a>
Ice
ri
rt
zz
bops^
Q
u
x„ o
QQQ
O
Acote Pass/Pnil
@�
Amu. Mulli-Cone.
6
f1
'�
Chronic PnsslPnil
Chronic Mnlli-Colic.
C. dubia
D. ambigun
H
3
8
o^
Pnthend Minnow
u
3 v yMysid
Shrimp
4 n
S! tk
R
Silvorside
o R
I'lyallela
.e
o = O
1
Chirmlomus
j
TerRE
IWER
^,0 3 CI
Mocroinverfcbmic I
fi n
n
an
I:IT ASSIGNEDLA6 ID/'
Page 4 of 23

;aceAnalyttcal
Sample Receiving Non -Conformance Form (NCF)
Date: S >���z J Evaluated by: Z I [torWkorder
x okorder/Login Label Here or List Pace
Client:/ Number or MTJL Log -in Number
Here
1. If Chain -of -Custody (COC) Is not received: contact client and if necessary, fill out a COC and indicate that it was filled out by
lab personnel. Note issues on this NCF.
2. If COC is incomplete, check applicable Issues below and add details where apuronriate:
Collection date/time missing or
I
Analyses or analytes: missing or
I
Samples listed on COC do not match samples
incorrect
clarification needed
received (missing additional etc.)
Sample IN on COC do not
I
I
_
match sample labels
Required trip blanks were not received
Required signatures are missing
Comments/Details/Other Issues not listed above:
Ibl 61;1-4 J,d noi- Per- All
2,AA
�q.:,w
�n GoG,
3. Sample integrity Issues: check applicable issues below and add details where appropriate:
Samples: Condition needs to be brought to
Samples: Past holding time
lab ersonnel's attention details below
Preservation: Improper
Temperature: not within acceptance criteria (typically
Samples: Not field filtered
Containers: Broken or compromised
0-6C
Samples: Insufficient volume
received
Containers: Incorrect
Temperature: Samples arrived frozen
Samples: Cooler damaged or
Custody Seals: Missing or compromised on
compromised
samples, trip blanks or coolers
Vials received with improper heads ace
Samples: contain chlorine or
sulfides
Packing Material: Insufficient/Im ro er
Other:
Comments/Details:
4. If Samples not preserved properly and Sample Receiving adiusts PH, add details below:
Sample ID:
Date/Time:
Amount/type pres added:
Preserved by:
Initial and Final H:
Lot # of pres added:
Sample ID:
Date/Time:
Amounlftype pres added:
Preserved by:
Initial and Final H:
Lot If of pres added:
Sample ID:
Date/Time:
Amount/type pres added:
Preserved by:
Initial and Final H:
Lot If of pres added:
F-ALL-C-01 1 -rev.00, 05Ju12O18 Page 5 of 23

Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville 0 EdenO Greenwood[] Nuntersvitfe ❑ RaleighE MechanicsvilleQ
Client Name: W0# : 92476030
Own OC 80/jz Project:
S r,�l� PM: RP Due Date: 06/18/20
Courier: QFed Fx Uun LJUSPS
'U
El commercial 1409ce 1JCM r:_ Client CLIENT: 92—Holly Spp
rystodpSeal Present? Des qNo Seals Intact? 01'es ONO _
Date/InitlaVason Fxandning Content': Zr'rlT .`J'L'Z�r
Packing Material: []Bubble Wrap - QBubble Bags None El other SleloglcalTLcsue Frozen?
Thermometer G P []Yes ONO ZN/A
(]Bieun ID, Typaof low ®Wet Dim QNone
Cooler Temp ('Cj: , y. Z Corractlon factor: Add/Subtract ('C) — Yl. I
Cooler Temp Corrected rCjs v . _ Temp should be above firming to 6'C
❑Sampwout oftemp rdtera. samptes an ire, Moungprorers
USDA has tegua
Regulated Soil (� N/A, xater <a-mple(
old sampfes arlglnate in a quanntlne zonexithfn the united States: CA, NY, or SC (check naps(? old samples oeouta tam a ramign warre llntemeoimy,
rlY„< Flu.,
Short
Correct Containers Used?
Sample labels Match CDC?
COMMEWS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Myer
LJHo
[fN/A 1 5.
OYU
QNo
ON/A 6.
ea
ONO
EIWA
Oev
QNo
ON/A 7.
OYes
ON.
WWA 6
(.Ores
ON-
QN/A 9.
wr
tat ID of splk containers•
Ci INUIItIG1T ON/RESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Date/Time:
Held Data Required? OYn []NO
Protect Manager SCURF ,-RReview:
protect hlanaeer !PF
Data:
Page 6 of 23

4-
a
9
U
'Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verNled and w(thin the acceptance range for preservation
samples.
Eueptlons: VOA, Corsform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water( 00S tLH9
"8ottam half of box Is to I(st number of bottle
Projects WON: 92476030
PM: AP Due Date: 03/18/20
CLIENT: 92—Holly Spp
c z Q 0
Z 2 Z 6 t5 n
v u u v V
3 m a. a aE a m a 3 m iy y
c c c n _2
a a a m a n 9 o E c { E A O O o o $ n h
> J > S
gJe E Ev` E gg E E E a a E Y E E E E —a, : E E
>>
PH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample ID Type of Preservallve
pH upon receipt
Oats preservation adjusted
Time preservation
adjusted
Amount of Pmserntive
added
Lot
Page 7 of 23
Vote: 'Nheneverhere fs a diatrepancraffecting ,Yarth Carolina mmpnance vmples,a<apv arms,n,m n�n,.,.��. w+m norm �armma usm.ncn„n�n�•• n...

o��o
t
m
N
d
2
=
0
-' 3 n
3 a
N `<
(G) Gmb(C) Cmnpmhe
(�.
0 3 F>
n
n
z
o
c
r•
Mk
zq�R �
p IJ w
IJ Jv
�
8 a
_y ¢
3
.&�
N
m
O
o
=
rN
e
-
vi y
yo
P'
c �
9a
I
I
1
I
tl
1CT
_ e b
'm Q `O
N� x
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
IC
Iry
n c^
I
I
I
I
P
�
I
I
I
I
1
Ir�
S
c.
Clean Water Act
Slmmwaler
p
rS
Sedimcnl
c tan
Z!
3
Non -Regulatory
C c
Nor Containers
n
Plastic
Clings
E
`
Volume
a
ICC
]
C �
rt
`��zorE
3
n
G
Acule Pass/Pail
a
Acutc Multi-Conc.
Chronic Pnsslfail
a
o'
Chronic Mnili-Conezz
�-
`
C. dubia
D. ambigua
y
3
=
C
N o O
v' g
Fnlhcnd Minnow
0
a
3 0 0
�I
Mysid Shriml
t1i
a`,
Silverside
a'•
,
o R e
ti
Id nllela
G
ro
o In o
Q
Chironamus
j
w 3 C
lam+
WER
hdncroinvertebraw ID
R
O
L N
4R
9' o c
El ^
S
n
d
fyY�
�
w
^m
N
^ 5
rl
o
S
§.
3
o e
'o
A u
g v
G'Il'ASSIGNED LA6ID I!
Page 8 of 23

Document No.:
Lsso/ngAuthonty:
:aralinas Duartty Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville 0 Eden[]
Greenwood]
Huntersvfife []
ffalelghjQ' MachanlosvilleEl
Client Name:
wo#
: 92476030
'
Tel,,-'- -Y�
ROUX Swl'r-ry
ProJec
PM: AP
Due Date: 05/18/20
Courier []Fed Fx QuPS
❑Commercial fPace
SPS
�ptpv_
CLIENT:
92-Holly Spg
Custody Seal Ffesent? Dyes JRNo
Seals intact? Dyes
ONo
'`
DateQnit61s
1ersen FxaMnington[enlssz — S•�T-Lo
Parking Matedal: []Bubble Wtap - []Bubble Rags [gNane D other SlologlcalTIssus Frozen?
Thermometer. /J � ,,,� Dyes []No EN/A
OIBGun ID: Q / u!-05 - Type o/lie: . Wet ORlue ONone
CoolerTemp rc): , 3 1 Correction Factor: Add/Subtract VC) — Q
Temp should be abase
Cooler Temp Corrected (•CJ: i _3
freezNgto 6'C
❑SamP�outoftemp mieda.5ampfescn Ice, ro.tlng prorest
hube¢un
USDA Regulated Soil (K) N/A water sample)
Dldsamptes Originate in a quarantine zone within the United Oates: CA, W, or SC (check maps)?
Short HaldTbne Anatysis(42 hr.)? ®1'ea Oxo EIWA 11
Rush Tum Ammost Time RenunMn,R n,._. rvu_ M... .i
Correct Containers Used?
Sample labels Match COC?
COMMENTS/SAMPLE MSCREpANCy
) Yes QNo ON/A 16,
PYe. QNo ON/A 1 9.
10.
a faralgn source Iintemadamgy,
Field Data Required? []Yes []No
Lot ID of split containers: WENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Date/T1me:
Project.Manager SCURF Review:
Date:
Project Mena... SRF R.,dmu• e..,,..
Page 9 of 23

*Check mark top half of box lf pH and/,kn��aw Project,`�O$: 2�7�§�@
wk�mw_ �.¥� _m
_a PM: AP o Date: e z
_#. VOA, _mTor, Off and _mm (water) CO; U.Hg CLIENT: s kBvs
_ half & box m_ list number abottle
k�
\
/
/
\
}
f
a
4
}
{
}
}
{
E
E
E
EE
EE
!
k
k/}{\}!))}/k%}$}}
§.�||>>>3; aLU
aAdjustment Log for Preserved sp�
Sample
+w__.r__.___•_ed
.
.
___
\_
_ __
�-
m
I
i
mwo,a

�o
Y
n
(G) Grnb(C) Cmnneslle
n
b i i= w
J
tll
�i
n
m
m
a
0
3
o
E
S
m
17
n °
rNi c�
I
1
I
I
O
Clean lVnlcr Acl
ro
Stormnnter
o,
Sediment
c h
g
C C
Non -Regulatory
„
i( UP COI11nInerS
n
Plastic
Class
C
0
Volumc
a
N �
�
n
r^,
Ice
o�^
S
R"3.Rr0
0
�q
/
\
Acute Pass/Foil
On
`
Acldc Mulli-Conc.
a
\
..
Chronic Pnssmnil
n
Chronic Mufti -Cone.
—
C. dnbic
D. nmbigml
y
n
3
g
N a, m
3 g 6
Pnlhcnd Minnow
o
`7
:! a
°o � m m
Silverside
-
I yallela
ro
o' c'o O
Chiroucmus
G
^
_
n
TIMIT
WERS
Nlncroinverlebrnle ID
a
it v
n`
C
0
z
o
c
c
3.
n
N
N
W
n 7
N 6
v
n e
o
3 n
0
a
� a
'o
n
b
�
a u
7 ,°3
I: I'I'ASSIONGb LAB 1D 11
c. ^
r,
U
N
n
M
Page 11 of 23

ET.-anIntin,,
P.O. Box 16414, Creenv Ile, CC 29606
(E64) B77.6942 , 17AX [phone]
4 Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29650
Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival and Reproduction Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1002
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 05-may-20
Laboratory ID #: T56433 C DUBIA
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
41
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
- Certification #E87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
Forbad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification #23104
NELAC, conducted underNELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Ficalth. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Page 1 of 6
NCDENR Certification # 022 Page 12 of 23

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50
Date 14-May-20
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES# NCO063096 Pipe # 001 County: Wake
Laboratory Performing Test:
X
Comments
Sigifature of OperaKr in sponsible Charge
X
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor
MAIL ORIGINAL TO Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Water quality
N.C. DENR
1621 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Chronic Test Results
Calculated t=-0.6393
Critical Value= 2.508
CONTROL ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 %Reduction= -2.8%
#Young Produced 21 19 19 25 23 17 22 25 %Mortality Avg. Reprod.
Adml (L)ive (D)eae [HE L L L L L L L L 0% 21.2
Control Control
Effluent % 90.0% 0% 21.8
Tmamum[2 Treatment
Control Cv
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 11.5%
#Young produced 1 22 1 21 1 20 1 23 1 20 24 22 22 24 1T 23 23 %3rd Brood PASS FAIL
Adult (L)iv. (D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L 100% X
Complete This for Either Teal Test St.aWts
Collection (Slart) Date 05-May-20
pH lataemple ample 2ntlsample sample 03-May-20 Sample 05-May-20
Control 7.8 8.0 7.8 8.0 7.8 8.2 Sample T�ce iDu,,t on)
Treatment 2 1 8.2 8.4 7.9 8.6 crab comp DureUon 1st 2ntl
Sample 1 X 24hrs. Tox Tox
Sample X 29hrs. Dilution Sample Sample
D.O. sled and start and start and
lst sam le lst sam la 2ntl sam la Hardness (mg/L) $1.6
Control 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.7 7.6 Spec. Cord. (pmhos) 312 000 000
Treatment 2 8.8 8.1 8.2 8.2 9.1 7.8 Chlorine (mg/L) <.05 <.05
Sample Temp. at receipt VC) 0.4 0.4
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
staNend steNend
Control
High Cone.
pH D.O.
Page 13 of 23
Page 2 of 6

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
Facility: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
NPDESN NC0063096
Sample ID: EFFLUENT
ETra T56433CDUBIA
I Date: 05-May-20
Laboratory:
Certification it: NCO22
I Exp. Date: I1/l/2020
Survival Data
7 Day Survival
Test Used: FISHERS TEST
Control 100%
Test Statistic: P= 1.000
Effluent 100%
Critical Value: P= 0.01
PASS: The effluent does not reduce survival of the test organisms.
Reproduction Data
Raw Data
Test forNonnality
Mean young/female
Std. Dev.
Test Used: Shapiro -Wilke Test:
Control
21.2 2.44
Effuent
21.8 2.01
W:
0.966
Critical Value: -
0.884
Analysisfor Differences in Reproduction
Test for Homogeneity of Variance
Test Used: Equal Variance
t Test.
Test Used: F Test
Calculated t=
-0.64
F=
1.48
Critical Value—
2.51
Critical Value,
5.32
-
The data are homogeneous in variance
PASS: The effluent is not chronically toxic.
Page 14 of 23
Page 3 of 6

Control Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total
source
I rep
R3 4-23
1
+3+7
11
21
X6 4.24
2
+4+5
t0
19
1114-22
3
+3+9
9
21
B8 4-24
4
+3+6
13
22
J4 4-23
5
4
+7+10
21
7 4-24
6
+2+8
9
19
113 4-22
7
+3+6
10
19
F10 4.24
8
4
+9+12
25
GG84.29
9
4
+B+11
23
9 4-24
10
+3+7
7
17
KKB 4-29
11
+3+8
11
22
E7 4-24
12
3
+10+12
25
13
N/A
0
14
N/A
0
15
N/A
0
16
N/A
0
17
N/A
0
18
N/A
0
19
N/A
o
jMean
20
N/A
01
21.2
90 % Effluent Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total
R3 4-23
1
+3+7
12
22
X6 4-24
2
+3+5
13
21
1114-22
3
+4+7
9
20
B6 4-24
4
+3+8
12
23
A 4-23
5
3
+7+10
20
W7 4-2
B
+4+8
12
24
113 4-22
7
+3+7
12
22
F10 4-2
e
4
+9+9
22
GG6 4-
9
4
+e+12
24
A9 4-24
10
1
1
+3+7
1
1 71
17
KKIS 4-2
11
+3+9
11
23
E7 4-24
12
4
+8+11
23
0
13
N/A
0
0
14
WA
0
0
15
WA
0
0
16
N/A
0
0
17
N/A
0
0
18
N/A
0
0
19
N/A
o
Mean
0
20
N/A
ol
21.8
renew
fed
JC
JG
JG
JC
JC
AM
AM
AM
End DaQO
12-May-20
me (ed 6reneW
Old tem . °C
24.7
10'.N AM
25.1
D>SD PM
ID:]9AM AM
25.1
25
24.9
caavol New t.mp•c
24.6
24.5
Lab#
T56433 C DUBIA
Dllent
TOWN OF HOLLY
EFFLUENT
MC0063096
a
N
5
ate
05-May-20
ime
03:30 PM
d By
AM
Test Organism
lCeriodaphrea dubla
Neo. born date
04-Ma -20
Neo. born time
1700-2200
Test Type
INCCPF
than Water
Dllor
MHSF
Uma f Cow.Cow.
WC
90
3rd BROOD
Test vessels
30 ml
Test volume
15 ml
Incubator#
1
LI ht
16108dk
initial Temp-C
24.8
Setenastrum
0.05 m1
IAT
0.05 ml
Test method
Er.s21e-D2-on;laa2
II Commante II
Page 4 of 6
Page 15 of 23

f
m
u a
11 CII fIV'1 CIeINDISSW.LLEI
�.
n
w
F .O
h U
� liTl
5
O
l'
Si a Pi
u
N
a
}pd
8
N •tii,
kr y
u
o 0
15
d
E o F
©
CII
11HM
qq IF
Bll,l/B I.L
6
N
U •� a��
snuwun.pyJ
E
'x"
o Cl p a
�
apls.lanllg
.�
�
u k`
V
(IllIL11IS Ill.,
:b
O
nwull1w pnallpld
nn9lgtwl'p
h
43
w o N
14<II1P ;�
E
W
—
I
'a11n7-gllty�l alllu,lll�
e
e
u
Ipinl/ssu,l aplonlp
rouop-lgnlN aUmV
.�
c
Inld/ssutl a111aV
_O
�G
fl-I ryry
Z55
>
m
�1
P
LpL
SS�AO
—AA�Ae
B
u v
a`.
aal
P
o
p
C
011llllOA
a
n
SSUID
uogsuld
o 's
saouppop do II
j
D
slolulll5all-IION
U
luanllpas
°i
aalnnutlIDl$
C o
u, •� a
loV.1olum uvolJ
U =' c
i V
••yy��44II
I
I
I
I
g
c Ei
I\tll
I
I
I
I
Z .d �
pp
v •a —
WW
b_0
W
I
I
I
I
I
W u v
^1
79
E n
!
5
of
C
N &
a c
P
'Q
'nL' '^o 0 0
1=1
Q
V
1
N
N
U.°.i n'
e 6
F
outodmuJ lJ)9uaD (Ol
V
4
S
`O E
r Fn
h a o
o
F, 9Ei
u19E
o
V
rage o of ti

W'
MY
Nal [IV'I (13NDISSW,1,.1.%I
U a
N
o 0
F .n
—
a U
e u
4'
-• Q
C
N
`J
o F
E Sr F
H y
CII a111XIIIAaA111RIn111A1
p a
iRld/81.1.
snwrnlo.gy�
'
a
N
O c .p ,o
11111III4I.1
M
4 o =
�b
.�` F. u d
allIFJOAII$
p•
m
I-0
r V
I .p y �
tt— III Ji�IAI
O 8 � C.
A\olllll �\J I)IIa1lIII;J
�
�
�
!7
1'
� W o
IIIL 1(Illlll'n
F
IIIQIII)'3
_
°
•a110�•IIIII�I aI110.111J
�
�"•
e
IIIL,I(Fslld altlll.11l7
U
•�
vno3•I6nIN 1010V
•et
llll;J(SSllll 01111V
is
a
u
a
nal
VE
auuyoA
C
a ._
F
E t
ssolp
allsold
u
u
v
� ]
svaupll000 Jo/1
••�
,CaWnp19a21-uoH
E
C n
loaus
mol.Ia11IA\IIIAOIf
?
f'
C C
O d
IaV.10)UM 1111.113
O
•' I
I
I
i
I
n
v v v
`71
I
I
I
I
W u' rn
y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N E �ti
41
0 �d
E
W o
e^ L
N
d >
e
S
w .�
F�
O
u
o
2
R
a
y In
r_
o1RuAnluJ iJ)4�^ol0)
`J
\
E
4 E •-.
'C
w
a
U
W
in
rn
�•
v°i
v1
1
)
.fir
2J' [J � `�' �
Page 6 of 6

E
eVrantawlaint.
P.G. Box 16414, Greenville, SC 28606
(E64) 877-6942 . FAX [phone]
4 Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29650
Fathead Minnow Survival and Growth Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1000
Permit Renewal Second Species Testing
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES M NCO063096
Test Date: 05-May-20
Laboratory Sample ID #: T56433 PYROMELAS
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
V
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
�Certification W87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Farhad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification #23104
NCDENR Certification # 022
Page 18 of 23
Page 1 of 6

Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES # NC0063096 Pipe #: 001 County: Wake
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Environmental Sciences Branch
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699.1621
Test Initiation Datetrime
05/05/20
/ 03:30 PM
% Eff. Repl.
1
2
4
Control Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
22.5 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
45.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
76.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
90.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wtoriginal (mg)
100.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wtoriginal (mg)
Avg Wt/Surv. Control 0.7037 Test Organisms
4 Cultured In -House
10
9
10
10
10
9
10
10
0.7130
0.6467
0.7200
1 0.7350
10
1 10
10
1 10
10
1 10
1 10
1 10
0.6040
1 0.4900
1 0.6300
1 0.6610
10
1 9
10
1 10
10
1 9
10
1 10
0.6410
1 0.6411
0.6720
1 0.6780
10
10
10
9
10
10
10
9
0.7060
1 0.7990
1 0.6910
1 0.6567
9
1 10
9
1 10
9
1 10
1 9
1 10
0.5867
1 0.6750
1 0.6333
1 0.7170
10
1 10
10
1 8
10
1 10
1 10
1 10
0.8590
1 0.7710
1 0.5840
1 0.6250
% Survival 100.0% Xe Outside Supplier
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7037 Hatch Date: 05/04/20
% Survival 100.0% Hatch Time:
Avg Wt (mg) 0.5963
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6560
Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7129
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6530
% Survival
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7098
Water Quality Data
Day
Control
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fin
Temp (C) InittFin
High Concentration
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L.) Init/Fin
7.7
/ -
7.8
/ 7.7
7.7
/ 7.5
7.8 /
8.1
7.6
/ 7.7
7.8
I 7.6
7.8
/ 7.6
----/
7.6
7.9
/ -
7.7
/ 6.9
7.9
/ 6.6
7.7 /
7.0
7.6
/ 6.2
7.6
/ 6.3
7.8
/ 5.4
----/
6.5
24.7
/ -
0.0
/ 25.5
24.5
/ 24.2
24.4 /
24.7
24.4
/ 24.6
24.5
/ 25.0
24.6
/ 25.3
---- /
25.1
8.1
/ -
8.2
/ 8.2
8.0
/ 8.1
8.2
/ 8.2
8.1
I 8.3
8.0
/ 8.0
8.5
/ 8.4
----/
8.2
8.3
I -
7.9
/ 6.6
9.1
/ 7.1
7.8
/ 6.8
8.6
/ 6.5
8.0
/ 6.1
7.4
/ 6.0
----/
6.8
Sample 1 2
Collection Start Date
Grab
Composite (Duration)
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity (mg/L)
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Chlorine(mg/L)
Temp at Receipt ( C)
Dilution H2O
Hardness (mg/L)
81.6
Alkalinity (mglL)
60.6
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
312
Survival
Growth
Normal
no
Hom. Var.
es
Yes
es
NOEC
100.0%
100.0%
ChV
>100.00%
>100.00%
Method
Steel's Test
T-Test
Overall Result
ChV
Slats
Survival
Growth
Cone.
Critical
Calculated
Critical
23%
10.00
18.00
2.41
45%
10.00
18.00
2.41
76%
10.00
18.00
2.41
90%
10.00
18.00
2.41
100%
10.00
16.00
2.41
Calculated
0.90
-0.18
ninin c.,..., er_a 141nnt
Page 2 of 6

Leb#
T56433 P.PROME
client
HOLLY SPRINGS
Samp1e10
EFFLUENT
NPDESU
NC0063096
County
Month
5
Start S fed Data
05-May-20
Start S fed Time
03:30 PM
Started 6 fed By
JZ
Test Organism
P.PROMELAS
Neo. born date
04-May-20
ban. born time
9:30-11:001VIT
Tea Type
NCCU
Nunn" Water
MHSF 4124C
Units for cons
%
%3fd BROOD
Tostvessels
400.1
Teet,volume
150 ml
Incubator#
1
Li94d
i61t/6dk
InlRFI Temp°C
25
Artemlz
0.1 2z Ea
Testmothod
EPA9ai-R-02L13:1000
Comments
All reps have 10
organisms unless noted otherwise.
Control ire temp 247
D=Dead N/A -Lost or not used
Page 3 of 6
Page 20 of 23

0
u
ME
m
� v
P (11 41V'1 CIRNDISSV.I.Lfl
n
F .�y
b UV
U
b
O
E v
O
3
Q
ry
U iy
r
E
O
U
E O
^J
Y
N
olAelgalAanu!aonW
CII
o,
�
N
U e 3
ail.1/i:1L6
snulouu.ggD
'T
a 9,0 P
aI11SA0A!Ij
N
,n
•u a E
Awwq!nl puayuli
Z
ungiqull•p
g
ti
4
w
mgnP'p
E
u
rouo,')-!IPIW oploallD
B
e
u
pn�!Issnl! oµm.u��
•auoD-!IIIIIN 01110V
❑
bi
IIII:!/fiSlll! ollla�/
O
L
yy
,r,eA.SCEG ^erg
m
AI
x o
- .
u
�
F
u v
001
a
G
F c
alnll!OA
a 'u
C
ssnlD
'
.E
E
of suld
e
V
S.lalllllllloa {o li
C c ]
5
dloluplsoy-uuN
UO m
luoug
S�
.10111d\lllJol$
JOY AnIuM uoolO
w
U = c
c
E
a o,
'l
I
I
1
I
F
EnEo
Lq E
I
I
I
I
I
C c
o
ifZZS
a
^ o JE_
g
y
U
4
V
•.F
I-'
H O
, c
b
y c
Q
E
E a.
'`
U u c u
A
z
g
E
G
�
H
CA c
y r a
uglunump 1p)galp (ol
V
o
,o E
u ¢�
J
Q
h"
Y2�
7
yV � 'a � •e
pit
P
a E
'g0f.E230
V
L
An
N
w
w
rage 4 or 6

I
U
1101 UTI CIe1N01SSV,l..l 'I
2 Y
w
N 0.,
ro V
d
P
C
U
0
FF�
.ti-.
Al
E
U
F o it
I�
�) u .P
CII wn.IgoLlanuloawgq
nnttiolloAPID
�N
a e .°)o
�
nlnpu6Ll
a
r
g � a
�
�
q
h\o11111Ir�I)I:�IIIILI
�
e
o aq
n
H
�
� w o to
nn9lqum •0
v
.�
=
o
"�'
•a
oll0 I Il I 'l
�•.11 IN •.11oltIJ
61
I.sd0.1 ')
•a
•otloo-IIInW otnoy
6
r!
O
m
^
\
ti71
I!Ikl/ssnd wnow
V
.A
y3y QQY,Yn�
kii'��g
vA
v
oil
�
m
U
e
V,
ssnlp
ollsold
y e
D ]
siolnnlao0 •lo Il
rCnwnp15o2I-uoly
e
ul:,tlllpaS
g°
O�O
C �
aalunuuaolS
r"
C .� .-6
U = c
lay.la111M (10013
S�
O F 6
Z Fi
0.
E
W o
^y F
p
N
.�
••
•_
6 � .�
a
U
w
0. W
H CNxiq
iYi C
r
I
W Syy A s •p
Ur .P R
e11mAlIluJ (J) I.f)IJ)
T
��-
F
E
3 aF q
a
x E
N
c
o
ram-
u
•VJI
{' �
1
—
E
K
u
�
;�
w Q•�,
66y��a� 3'
Page 5 of 6

rl!FI
!LM
r®
rV1
Y
u
Pik
!l UI LIV'1 CIi:INDISSV.I„I,FI
�
N
S
w
C
F .O
tl
U
yy
T
'
fa Pil
a F
N
h
ri
k 00
a
U
E o%I
�
� a � �
CII ala,Igau�nulolmgN
12
%RL1/aLl.
l'�qzU
$
SIIl110110.1111�
O o0 ,Lo y
nlnpn6l-I
a
a
Hof
`I`
1�.a�. C � c
F � p'
OIIIF,IOAIIS
:µ
V
y,
Ill,-
H
tip
w
o a
mmu41N Puaypl�
8
b
N
�
`o w
5,' W o .n
111191QI11U •CI
III(IIII) ;7
E
u
_
-
MII0,711111 NI BIII0.1117
c
\
.�
III. SFu OIIIOAI
a
'0110�-IIIIiNf OIIIO�1
•55
IIU:IlSFIIII 01110V
x
67
O_
I
u
NJ 0
y
N
Gall
u
1-00N�
-AM12i.Ae
sR.
a'L
W
�
O C
� •�
�
01111110%
UO11F111d
9I01IIUµ103 AO !!
D P
O � �
AuW1119ay-LION
e)IIOUII�OS
U o
,10111AIULIOIS
o�
y
h .o
L
lay.101uM unlD
z==
u a
I
I
I
I
O o E
eo
W b
u
�
a
po•
a
g y�7
0
C
T
3 W
O
p
o
,6
rb w d ~
3
OIIIUfI110, 17%IIR1i 1.71
0 `
r
c
=
u
4�4,
ek3®f 23a
i
a
�
�'
t0
aye 0 uI 0

aceAnalytical
www.pacelebs.com
August 31, 2020
Debra Batten
Town of Holly Springs
150 Treatment Plant Rd
Holly Springs, INC 27540
RE: Project: Bioassay -Revised Report
Pace Project No.: 92488902
Dear Debra Batten:
Pace Analytical Services, LLC
9800 Kincey Ave. Suite 100
Huntersville, NC 28078
[phone]
Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on August 03, 2020. The results relate only to
the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the applicable TNI/NELAC Standards and the
laboratory's Quality Manual, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report.
Some analyses were subcontracted outside of the Pace Network. The test report from the external subcontractor is
attached to this report in its entirety.
The test results provided in this final report were generated by each of the following laboratories within the Pace Network:
This revision was issued on 08/31/20 to report the Fathead Minnow species Bioassay results.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
A. -Payer
Amanda Payne
[e-mail]
[phone]
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Seaton Byrd, Town of Holly Springs
Terry Foster, Town of Holly Springs
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC.
Page 1 of 31

P.O. Box 16414, Greenville, SC 29606
(664) B77s942 . Fill.. [phone]
4 Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29660
Fathead Minnow Survival and Growth Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1000
Permit Renewal Second Species Testing
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 04-Aug-20
Laboratory Sample ID #: T57100 P promelas
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
V
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
r5erl
CerHtication #B87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results promo only to provided samples.
Farhad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Ceti£catlon#23104
NCDENR ceroacatimt # 022
Page 26 of 31
Page 1 of 6

uem Iwo cuy nc", .m .. m,.
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES # NCO063096 Pipe #: 001 County: WAKE
Responsible Charge
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Environmental Sciences Branch
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Test Initiation Date/rime
08/04/20
/ 03:30 PM
% Eff. Repl.
1
2
Control Surviving#
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
22.5 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
45.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
75.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
90.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Avg Wt/Surv. Control 0.6016
4 4
10
9
10
10
10
9
10
10
0.5550
0.5822
0.6460
1 0.6230
10
10
9
10
10
10
9
1 10
0.6380
0.7090
0,7567
1- 0.6470
8
0
10
10
8
10
10
10
0.7863
0.6670
1 0.7170
10
9
9
10
10
9
9
10
0.7230
0.7133
0,9189
1 0.7380
10
10
10
T 10
10
10
10
10..
0.7200
0.6310
0.7500
1 0.7050
Test Organisms
Cultured In -House
% Survival 100.0 / = Outside Supplier
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6016 Hatch Dale: 08/03/20
% Survival 100.0 % Hatch Time: 0900-1130M
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6877
% Survival 100.0
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7208
% Survival 100.0%
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7733
% Survival 100.0
Avg Wt (mg) 0.7015
E-1-o-ool Surviving#
%Survival
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Avg Wt
(mg)
0.7108
Water Quality Data
Day
Control
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fin
Temp (C) Inil/Fin
High Concentration
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fin
ji
Temp (C) Init/Fin
10
10
10
8
10
10
10
9
0,7320
0.5530
0.7680
0.7900
7.6
/ -
7.7
/ 7.9
8.2
/ 7.9
7.7
/ 8.1
7.8
/ 7.6
7.6
/ 7.7
7.7
/ 7.8
7.5
/ -
8.1
/ 7.7
6.9
/ 6.3
8.0
/ 7.6
7.7
! 6.8
7.4
/ 6.5
8.0
/ 7.2
---- /
7.8
24.7
/ -
24.fi
/ 25.3
24.7
/ 25.5
24.5
/ 25.1
24.6
/ 25.6
24.6
/ 25.3
24.6
/ 25.2
---- /
24.7
8.1
/ -
8.3 /
8.2
8.1
/ 8.4
8.6
/ 8.5
8.0
/ 8.1
8.2
/ 8,2
8.4
! 8.1
---- /
8.2
8.8
/ -
8.2 /
7.4
8.0
/ 6.0
8.1
/ 7.2
9.4
/ 6.5
7.3
/ 6.1
8.1
/ 6.6
---- /
7.5
25.0
/ -
24.8 /
25.3
25.0
/ 25.5
24.7
/ 25.1
25.2
/ 25.6
24.7
/ 25.3
24.9
/ 25.2
----/
24.7
Sample
Collection Start Date
Grab
Composite (Duration)
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity (mg/L)
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Chlorine(mg/L)
Temp at Receipt ( C)
Dilution H2O
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity (mg/L)Conductivity
M306
(umhos/cm)
Survival
Growth
Normal
no
yes
Hom. Var.
es
yes
NOEC
100.0%
100.0%
LOEC
>100.00%
>100.00%
ChV
>100.00%
>100.00%
Method
Steel's Test
T-Test
Overall Result
ChV >100.00%
Slats
Survival
Growth
Cone.
Critical
Calculated
Critical
Calculated
23 %
10.00
18.00
2.41
-1.70
45%
10.00
18.00
2.41
72.35 '
75°/
10.00
18.00
2.41
-3.38
90%
10.00
18.00
2.41
-1.97
100%
10.00
16.00
2.41
-2.15
Page 2 of 6

NEE
MINNEEMINE
BE
MINERINININNEIN
BE
MEN
ME
MMI
MMERWESMIENEWMIE
Lab#
T57100 P promelas
client
TOWN OF HOLLY
Sempb to
EFFLUENT
NPDES#
NCO063096
county
WAKE
Month
6
Start a fad Date
04-Aug-20
Start &fad Time
03:30 PM
Started &fed By
AM
Te.t Organism
IPIMEPHALE3 PROL
Ned. born date
03-Aug-20
Ned.born tone
10900-113OMT
Test Type
NCCO
Dilution Water
MHSF 1-31-20D
Onto far Gen..
k3rd BROOD
Testvdsseis
400 m1
Test volume
250.1
Incubator#
1
Light
161V8dk
Initial Tomp'a
25
ANemm
.isg 2xDAY
Test metbotl
EPP a)t-Rd3d1):1000
Commands
Allreps Lave 10
organisms unless noted otherwise.
Control in[ temp
ORGANISMS=
SOURCE= ADS 814/20
,48HRS OLD
D=Dead N/A -Lost or not used
Page 3 of 6
Page 28 of 31

1101 8V'I Q'INDI913V,Lill
a
n�F
O F
`\
�I
QI olwgo6wnalmouy,I
N9M
raj 8
91IJIr71.L
�y
666 e � ,E{
snulolmilgD
VI I
w
tmplIS Pl,VW
�
�
m
�
MalnyW
y
�
k
pompud
O i> ,�
ai W
t111 lytl� IU'Q
I��w-fry{
n 91111'D
,�
�
�auop•Plnpy oluoayD
Illldlssodoluoi1lD
'
�°{
�
.
�auoD�ppllq aUloa�
o
Iludlseu� alnnV
fJ
MunloA
d
n
eso(D
u
allsuld
wou wo03 yo
p
ololn aw•uoly
IM
le
SW td
MIIFlnE 04
valDMgW
IG�a
Inv AM uue10
t
m
O nn
q
.+'
-
{
FL W
��l�
U
A
a
• t�
Q
ps
e
C7
tj
W
ary
�7 Q
S S
111
Do
(p tQ
31
Page 4 of 6

J
Le
�
� v
0.
If 01 [IV'I CI:IIVOISSy,I..l.:i
�
m �
N
x
U
m u
O
N N
n. u
i
° H
P a.
l
n
•N,
°
F
m a
H
u
ti
u �l
GIaPugalaa,wlalanlN
Uj
_ MIJ 111
U a G v
SIIUIppp,ll(��
c° Ao
nlallMfl
a
� J C
e
4'
tIwF14S Pls,(YV
o
Q a A. a
nwun!YV Pna1W°;I
H
p
o 0 P
o
ff
al8lqum .a
r w o vi
alqup'�
c'z
11nd/ssnl aluo,u��
rouap-NIItbV splay
WINS311d shay
°
°JLOLYNO
W
�
N
jTSL
Tao!
N
A
�
p1111I10t\
k
ssulp
'j
c
c s
°
aIISL'la
U
� p v
a
p
smumluoJ Jo IF
'c:T--
,Q079p0iay-UON
U g
Iualulpas
.mpwiluolS
a°
c
o
p
R •p
U u �-
o
aay.lalum uualJ
y g
�I`
I l�
I
1
I
1
�•q �
a
I
I
i
1
�• b —Nu'
�I
Q
ca o
.LWca
i N O
1
7
C
''
0
i
n.xj.ryQ
a)�.Fi
FF
l.'
3'�
a�y
U
o a
P w
n%
10
'S0
40
$,°�I-
C,b`Opfov
Page 5 of 6

q
ii Ol gV'(113N0(SSV,1.1i1
�
R
NI
a
E
.G ra
n
q
5n�
m U)udgouonlgo,anpq
21DM�
iRIJ
6
51111101101111�
N
a
v
� ek�,o °�
'�
ulslluRfl
r�
o
�` 8 �'ur
h,
ap)smnllS
Awl.19S VIsRW1
,�
r+
a
g
:� a. u
� Y �
mam11W PoalUud
/
9
H
till Illlllu'(I
�
aq°.
W o N
ulqup'p
.,
R,�
•ouop'IIIuW olu019J
, ."
6
6
IIU Vssud 61HOND
q
'
'OUOL)-pluyl ouloV
6
a
pud/ssud 01113V
Y1
G
aFA1xd
•8
G
I� 5
d
ovj
I
g
OwIIJOA
Y
MID
9a
ollsuldid
�
a �'
slou ulunp ,{a It
a
NolUInBUuluoN
umugpog
e
5
3
JOIUM1010lg
U UU
IOV.fWtl/,{uualp
dl
I
I
I
I
�
1 11
I
I
I
C
I
I
1
y U
�I
[krw
M
i
I
1
I
ro
�
o
•y
}EYJ e
5
CIS
PI
c'i
�
� �
�gg¢�
o
n. 1 .11
Yn
1LU
y
U V I-r o W
Page 31 of 31
Page 6 of 6

rlll�'
A
c'
P.O. Box 16414, Greenville, SC 29606
[phone] , FAX (064) 07 T6930
4 Craftsman Ctxlrl, Greer, SC 29660
Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival and Reproduction Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1002
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 04-Aug-20
Laboratory ID #: T57100 C DUBIA
Test Reviewed andApprovedBy:
W/Vf
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #L87819
Test results presented in this report canform to all reepmemeuts of
Farhad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification #23104
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Flealth. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Page 1 of 6
NCDENR Certification # 022 Page 20 of 31

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50
Date 14-Aug-20
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES# NCO063096 Pipe # 001 County: Wake
Laboratory Perro g Test:
X
Comments
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor
MAIL ORIGINAL TO Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Water Quality
N.C. DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
North Carolina Ceriodanhnia Chronic Pass/Fail Renroduction Toxicity Test
CONTROL ORGANISMS
# Young Produced
Adult (L)Ive (Hired
Effluent%
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t0 11 12
#Young Produced 19 21 1 23 1 20 1 19 20 20 1 22 1 21 1 21 21 19
Adult (L)Ive (D)eed L L L L L L L L L L L L
Comolete This for Either Test
pH ist sample fist sample 2nd sample Sample 02-Aug-20
Control 7.6 8.2 7.8 8.2 7.7 8.1
Treatment 2 8.2 8.6 8.1 8.5 8.1 8.5 Grab comp Hurane
Sample i X 24hm.
Sample 2 X 24hm.
start end start end start end
D.O. 1st sam le lst sam le 2nd sem le Hardness (milli-)
Control 8.1 7.5 7.4 7.8 7.9 8.7 Spec. Cord.(pmhos)
Treatment 2 8.9 7.5 7.5 7.9 8,3 8.7 Chlodne (mglL)
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as %, combining
Ilculated t= 1.97
itical Value= 2.508
Reduction= 5.0%
0%
Control
21.6
Control
0%
realment2
20.5
Treatment
orhol CV
6.7%
PASS FAIL
%3rd Broad
100 %
X
Test Start Dale
04-Aug-20
Samole2 04-Aug-20
let 2nd
Tex TeX
Dilution Sample Sample
83.7
.05
W.,
Mortality star/end staNend
LC50 = % Method of Determination Control
95% Confidence Hired. Moving Average Problt ® High Cone.
% % Spearman Kerber Other pH D.O.
Organism Tested Cerioda hnia dubia
DEM Form AT-1 Page 21 of 31
Page 2 of 6

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
Survival Data
7 Day Survival
Test Used: FISHERS TEST
Control 100%
Test Statistic: P= 1.000
Effluent 100%
Critical Value: P= 0.01
PASS: The effluent does not reduce survival of the test organisms.
Reproduction Data
Rain Data
Test for Normality
Mean young/female
Std. Dev.
Test Used: Shapira-Willcs Test
Control
2t.6 1.44
Effluent
20.5 1.24
W:
0.953
Critical Value:
0.884
Analysisfor Differences in Rep, odaction
Test for Homogeneity of Variance
Test Used: Equal Variance
t Test.
Test Used: FTest
Calculated t=
1.97
F=
1.35
Critical Value=
2.51
Critical Value=
5.32
The data are homogeneous in variance
PASS: The effluent is not chronically toxic.
Page 22 of 31
Page 3 of 6

Control Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total
source
1,.p
G10 7-23
1
+4+8
11
23
V3 7-24
2
+3+9
10
22
04 7-23
3
+4+7
9
20
X3 7-24
4
+4+8
12
24
R7 7-23
5
+3+8
11
22
P8 7-23
6
+4+8
9
21
W 1 7-24
7
+3+9
11
23
ITS 7-23
8
+4+7
11
22
R1 7-23
9
+4+8
10
22
F6 7-24
10
+4+7
1
9
20
T8 7-24
11
4
+7+10
21
M3 7-23
12
5
+6+8
19
13
NIA
0
14
NIA
0
15
NIA
0
16
NIA
0
17
N/A
0
18
N/A
0
19
N/A
0
can
20
1
NIA
0
21.6
90 % Effluent Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total
G10 7-2
1
4
+6+9
19
V3 7-24
2
+4+7
10
21
04 7-23
3
+4+8
11
23
X3 7-24
4
+3+7
10
20
R7 7-23
5
3
+7+9
19
P8 7-23
6
+3+7
10
20
W1 7-2
7
+3+8
9
20
R5 7-23
a
+4+7
11
22
R17-23
9
+3+8
10
21
F6 7-24
10
1
1
a
+6+9
21
T8 7-24
11
+4+7
10
21
M3 7-2
12
3
+6+10
19
0
131
NIA
0
0
14
N/A
0
0
15
NIA
0
0
16
NIA
0
0
17
NIA
0
0
18
NIA
0
0
19
N/A
0
Mean
0
20
NIA
0
20.5
reAew,'�,,,
JG
Jz
En Date,=
fed",,._
JC
JG
JC
AM
Jz
AM
11-AU -20
Om9 tad&renew
rnnl
pain PAt
oz:n eu
024.9
0
taa ntn JC
Newtamp.?O .'
25.0
Old temp. °C
25.5
25.3
24.7
Control Nowtemp.=c
24.6
24.8
Page 23 of 31
Page 4 of 6

g }o q a6ed
Nr.
�,
IQI (il'All/�r.'OItlnO511J
N
iRi
alley
V
a
N
m
'�
�
jryl7jy c �AQy+ �
Y1 1
(`yam
p'
i
I
I
I
I
aqp o.
Cay
gg
I
I
I
i
Clean Wmcr Aol
Stormtivnlor
9edimsnt
3
Non-Rogulatory
5
N
ot Coatn nors
n
&
Plastic
Man
Volume
S
'pygJ
Too
Tr 'ell -
RIP I
�
Acuto Puss/Pull
Aaata II'i11R1•COila,
•
�
j.�
'y
ChronloPnes/Full
�
�
•
Chranla Malll-Gong
C,
t�l
dubla
D,
nMi �i
Alibi&1111
MUM Minnow
H
y
��-�1��
rt � gp y
4lynllaln
Chlra1101111i5
R
I?v
_
u
TIAlTR6
fd
B
r
8
WER
MnorohreoNDbmlo ID
0'
n ,
�p ®
$
4
41,,M�
D
�b
vl
UI
v
BTT

g;o g o6ed
O
9J
ae
P
�
si
0 0 y
3
Fz
C)
g
rrn
E
h
Y
n 9 O• rri�
�v
X.
q
a C
o
n z
ry�
w
N
F
kN-
on
FV
h
O
a �
r a
a
LA
poi � y
y 9
io �
I
I
I
I
cv
a
m
0 El
'n" �• �
9 uo Q
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
i i
r l
�• n
a
-
o�
c Q
Clenn Wnter Ad
a
y
Slm�nnvnlcr
'° a a
"
0
R
Sediment
a
m b
Non-Regalnloty
�C
�
-IL-
# of Containers
N
o
Plasiic
w
a ''�
a
Glnss
Volume
m, N
w
toe
a
a
TNo_YTi
w
}
uo
I
m
=i ior�'�
o.
Actde Pass/Pnil a
�.
Acute Muili-Cone.
Chronic PnsSA'nil
>
-'
�p•o•
�-
�
Chronic Mnlli-Cone,
n
M
\�
C. duhin
D. ambiglia
.{
3
UJ o M S
S
Pnlhend Minna„'
o
g
,n
•v K% ,y
Mysid shrimp
3
silvol'snlo
G'
rt � ti
I�lynlleln
G
ro
o• au p
Chirononnis
ry
�
_
'I Il:/fliL
WEIR
li o �
Nlacroinvailubrate ID
' v f
n rs. m
s
G
s
v o �
3
av V
(I
N
D � a
u
rn
Nr
GfT ASSIGNED LAB IDiI
L

aceAnalytical
www.pacelabs.com
November 26, 2019
Debra Batten
Town of Holly Springs
150 Treatment Plant Rd
Holly Springs, NC 27540
RE: Project: Toxicity
Pace Project No.: 92452107
Dear Debra Batten:
Pace Analytical Services, LLC
9800 Kincey Ave. Suite 100
Huntersviile, NC 28078
[phone]
Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on November 04, 2019.
The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the
most current, applicable TNI/NELAC standards and the laboratory's Quality Assurance Manual,
where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report.
Some analyses have been subcontracted outside of the Pace Network. The subcontracted
laboratory report has been attached.
If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Val. f�
Amanda Payne
[e-mail]
[phone]
Project Manager
Enclosures
cc: Seann Byrd, Town of Holly Springs
Terry Foster, Town of Holly Springs
REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS
This report shall not be reproduced, except in full,
without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC.
Page 1 of 23

Document Name:
Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Semple Condition Upon Recel t(SCURI
PaLe 1 of
Document No,:
Issuing Authority:
806Ana(yl1ca1'
'
F-CAR-CS-033-Rev.06
Pace Carolinas Quality Off Ice
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville [Q EdenO Greenwood ❑
Client Name:
Huntersville❑ Raleigh
project#:
Courier: ❑Fed Ex ❑UPS r lusps \ Cllent
❑ Commercial t;QPace ❑Other:_ t!
Mechanicsville❑
52107
111
Custody Seal Present? []Yes �E o Seals intact? ❑Yes
./ :ate/IntBals Person examining Contents:
11#4119
Packing Material; ❑Bubble Wrap - []Bubble Bags ❑None ❑ Other Biological Tissue Frozen?
Thermometer; []Yes❑No ❑N/A
Ajg Gun ID;
Type of laet '}Wet []Blue []None
1I21_-
Cooler Temp ('C); 'i<� Correction Factor Add/ubt -C) © C)
Tempshould be above tree:ingto 6'C
Cooler Temp Corrected('C):[]samples out oftemp criteria. Samples an Ice, cooling process
hasbegun
USDA Regulated Sall (M N/A, water sample)
Did samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC(check maps)? old samples originate from a foreign source(internatlonally,
M.. ".,. Ineludine Hawaii and Puerto Rico)? ❑Yes ONO
Comments/Distrepa ncy:
Chain of Custody Present?
Yes
QNO
N/A
1.
Samples Arrived within Hold Time?
as
QNo
❑N/A
2.
Short Hold Time Analysis (472 hr.)?
Yes
LINO
❑N/A
3.
Rush Turn Around Time Requested?
Yes
JgNo
N/A
4.
Sufficient Volume?
es
No
ONIA
S.
Correct Containers Used?
-Pace Containers Used?
es
es
[]No
No
❑N/A
N A
6.
Containers intact?
j4Yes
No
N/A
7.
Dissolved analysis: Samples Field Filtered?
[]Yes
Elflo.
/A
8.
Sample Labels Match COC?
-Includes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix:
$ns
WTI
❑No
❑N/A
9.
Headspace In VOA Vials >S-6mm7
Yes
No
/A
10.
Trip Blank Present?
Trip Blank Custody Seals Present?
❑Yes
Yes
❑No
No
/A
/A
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Lot ID of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION '
Person contacted: Date/Time:
Project Manager SCURF Review: }P
Project Manager SRF Review:
Field Dale Required? ❑Yes []NO
Date: L( () 0 1151
Date: ( ) 01
Page 2 of 23

Document Name:
Sam le Condition Upon Recel t SCUR)
Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Page 1 of 2
8C8Aflal"Ca
F'
Document No.:
F-CAR-CS-033-Rev.06
Issuing Authodtyi
Pace Carolinas Quall Office
*Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is Project If W0# ' 92452107
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation pill AP Due Data: 11/18/19
samples, CLIENT: ,92—Holly Spg
Exceptions: VOA, Collform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DR0/8015 (Water) DOC, LLHg
**Bottom half of box Is to list number of bottle
y�
C
J
Y
E
yy;
L
J
ggu
E
aye
`
J
ppu
E
C
J
n
t`y
!
0
x
E
6
T
y
E
u
E
6
Z
u
E
E
r
b
9
6
.u�.
V
S
�i
dF
_
?
E
o
ry
n
d
dE
V
v
a
J
o
P
2
9W
J,
E
.ti
"�
Q
O
x
E
m
'2d'
>
E
4
c
¢J
>
E
Y
m
x
E
2
QNr
E
M
y
'e
SL
.:
.t
I
V
o.
_
-r
E
Z\6
Y
4
m
E
t,.
nu
u
iad
E
y
b
C
J
at
E
gz
2
o
'A
5
E
e
J
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7,
9
30
11
LL
12
pH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample ID
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time preservation
adjusted
Amount of Preservative
added
Lot
Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a copy of this form will be sent to the North Carolina OEHNR CertiRatlon Office (1.0.
Out of hold, Incorrect preservative, out of tamp, Incorrect containers.
Page 3 of 23

I
�I
MW
° v
fl Ctl Cl\+'I (I -I
c u
E �
N
C.
e
_
O O
�
u
F
NN
r-
4
F
T
L
g 01
as
CII au:agapanuloJauly
�
Q � 0 0
21i.1A\
e
'FOLU11.1.
snumuapl�
O � � a
nlapu,Cl{
a
£
�
W y u
.�
�
F. '� 8 v
Q111111IS OIs,CI>y
F?
�
O o w
A\°IIIIII�y l)IlBlllll,!
u1181yuN 'Q
e
M
Z L• o
aly11P'J
E
m
_
-
•ou°J-!11°W°play)
�
IPI:1/ssu+l aluay�
rouOD-1111I y alaoy
.�
IIII,11S511d allla\/
\
F
46,8s.ut
� d
_ n
""
5
p
Baal
F�
�
d
L i
° F
'g
E�
ssulp
apsuld
o
sJoumPloa ,JOBca
IZTI
p
,(10tuln3ay-uoN
fi
E
W v
U n Q
lualu 1pas
e°
$ o
4
—5
Jolumallo)s
la\+Jolum tmalo
U o
S
ryry
I�j1
1
I
1
U c E
o
m
Sr-
t F o
o
V
a
a
�
o
o V
S
Gp
n W
12 a
E
p O^ N
-- W
1-
Iv
m
m CI �-
V 4 O C
o
✓
O.
C
V
V
Ci F
W U
wi
u°
on
tL
'>
E p
ear_ ti
SrY
co
O O
C
^
=
E n.

Document Name:
Document Revised: February 7,2018
Sample Condition Upon Recelpt(SCUR)
Page 1 of 2
Document No.:
Issuing Authority:
aceAnalytical
f-CAR-CS-033-Rev.06
Pace Carolinas Quality Office
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville Q Eden[] Greenwood ❑ Huntersvlile ❑ Ralelgh0/IVlechanicsvllle0
Client Name: WO# : 92452107
.. -t— Project N:
F-rr/rolvA OF moill i S/pp 1'? PM: AP Due Data: 11/18/19
Courier: ❑Fed Ex ❑UPS ❑USPS Client CLIENT: 92—Holly Spp
❑ Commercial �>ce / ❑Other:_
Custody Seal Present? []Yes©0" Seals Intact? Ryes ONO
Date/Initials Person Examining Contents: ZA 14 A-G
Packing Material: []Bubble Wrap ❑Bubble Bags [DNdne ❑ Other Biological Tissue Frozen?
Thermometer: ❑Yes []NoQP�
❑IRGun ID: ell JUt75 Type of ice: OWet ❑clue []None
Cooler Temp (°C): I I Correction Factor: Add/Subtract (°C) ). (')
Temp should be above freezing to 6°C
Cooler Temp Corrected(`C): LJ1 []Samples out of temp criteria. Samples on ice, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated Soil ( A, water sample)
Did samples originate In a quarantine zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC (check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source (Internationally,
rv, _ "'. _ ..A..m.,...--a end V ,en M-17 -Ivnc MIN.
Commants/Discrepancy:
Chain of Custody Present?
j
LI w1e [_]No
❑N/A
1.
Samples Arrived within Hold Time?
DeYs
❑No
❑N/A
2.
Short Hold Time Analysis(02 hr.)?
QYes
mKo-�QN/A
3.
Rush Turn Around Time Requested?
Elves
Ej]No
❑N/A
A.
Sufficient Volume?
OYzs
[IN.
N/A
5.
Correct Containers Used?
-Pace Containers Used?
QYe
El]Y
[IN.
❑No
❑N/A
❑N/A
G.
Containers Intact?
Q es
❑Na
QN/A
7.
Dissolved analysis: Samples Field Filtered?
QYes
[]NO
❑N,A
8.
Sample Labels Match COC?
-Includes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix:
❑Yes
[]NO
❑N/A
9.
Headspace in VOA Vials (>5-6mm)?
QYes
❑No
�-
EJ /5 A
10,
Trip Blank Present?
Trip Blank Custody Seals Present?
QYes
[]Yes
[]No
ONO
[JWA-
©N/A
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Lot ID of split containers:
CLIENT NOTIFICATION/RESOLUTION
Person contacted:
Project Manager SCURF Review: k j[
.�/t-'
Project Manager SRF Review: 1 Alp
Date/Time:
Field Data Required? ❑Yes ❑No
Date: I ( I Z I
Date: I I I t/I,-"J
Page 5 of 23

Document Name: Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Sample Condition Upon Receipt(SOUR) Page 1 of 2
7C6Ana1y11Ca1' Document No.: Issuing Authority:
F-CAR-CS-033-Rev,06 Pace Carolinas Quality Office
*Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation
samples.
Exceptions: VOA, Collform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water) DOC, LLHg
**Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle
Project a Wait : g2452107
pMt pp Due Data: 11/18/19
CLIENT: 92-Holly Spp
d
a
N
N
¢
a
�'
6
y,
6
Ot
x
o
ad+
6
fz
Q
0
u
v1
ff
v
A
_
¢
-
y
ia.EEEE E
w
'e
¢
z
N
Q
E
,lO�
a
[-E
n
d
E
O
a
z
2•
E
r�
m
V'
�j
E
O
Z
0Z
�?p
O
E
aNVm>m¢>°
>
E
O
a
E
O
v°i
•9
z
N
j
ii
m_
2
m
,n
E
N
?
ry
'^
E
,/O�
l
^
_
o
y,
e
d
aEEOO
OOO
v�i
a
W
4EEEiEEEEa•�
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
I1
12
pH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample ID
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time preservation
adjusted
Amount of Preservative
added
Lot If
h II DEHNRC rtf
flat ^no -en>
Note: Whenever there is a discrepancy affecting North Carolina compliance samples, a copy of this farm will be sent to the Plort Caro na e i ica
Out of hold, incorrect preservative, out of temp, Incorrect containers.
Page 6 of 23

E
7i
u
f/QI iIV'I CIINDI$$V .LLEI
a
n �
—
o 0
�
E �
c
2
0 o E
M
N
u •o
CII 011lllla\IBAU10.1111(.�
�
E o
u
1
$I1t11o11oilEla
,�
j
[:.l u
<Illlllll$ I115�C1�\.
��
u
55a
tmR.I Iltlu •cl
M
y
ti 10 0
m
_
rouo�-!IPI��aluo.I11J
°
�
�
o
pn;Ifssn�anwayJ
�•
•auop-11119•\ a111aV
'p
IIILIfS51111 a11IaV
-(
i:.l
Taal
ii
C
r
s
S '�
a �
__
Uallsold
ti o
ye, SaS u
� 5
p '
=121110;lop
2
,Oo1uplBay-uoN
E
C
U F
�
luattll(la$
Iola,\\tt1.101$
e°
� o 0
Iavn)UA\fluor
�I
I
I
1
I
•G
a
G
I
I
I
I
< 7
J
U
CCU
� V
'•+1
I
i
i
I
n o
n �
�
E
t o
f
p _
E
0
v o c
�
a
'o
q
GL Ei
v
a
1-
U
al
�
E
\
o
n
�ae 002
U
w

Document Name:
Sample CondlUan Upon Racelpt(SCUR)
Document Revised; February 7, 2018
Page 1 of 2
Document No,:
F-CAR•CS-033-RAV.06
Issuing Authority:
Pace CarolinasQuall Office
.,i 08,4 Bty101
Laboratory receiving samples:
Asheville ❑ Eden[]
Greenwood ❑
Huntersville ❑
Raleigh] Mechaniesville❑
CllentNeme:
WO#
: 92452107
Tewv <
l�el� S r
Project q
PM AP
Due Data: 11/18/19
Courier: ❑Fed Ex EMS
❑Commercial (Pace
❑USP5
Mother:_
uclient
CLIENT:
92-Hotly Spill
Custody Seal Present? ❑Yes ®No, Sealslntact? ❑Yes ao
Data/initials Parson Examining Contents;
ss 18114
Packing Material: ❑bubble Wrap []Bubble Sags MNone ❑ Other Biological Tissua Frozen?
Thermometer: �/ ❑Yes ❑No MN/A
SIR Gun ID; I'Cac�K� Type of ice: lylWet []Blue ❑Nono
Cooler Temp (°C): 1. 1 Correction Factor; Add/Subtract (°C) 6.6
Temp should be above freezing to 6°C
Cooler Temp Corrected (°C): _..:) i QSamplm out of temp criteria. samples on lee, cooling process
has begun
USDA Regulated Solf /A, water sample)
Did samples originate Ina quarantlne zone within the United States: CA, NY, or SC(check maps)? Did samples originate from a foreign source (internationally,
. o. N.A.,. u—mu and nirnp f-tvea Who
rub 14.
comments/Discrepancy.,
Chain of Custody Present?
6Yes
[]NO
N/A
1.
Samples Arrived within Hold Time?
Wye
❑No
❑N/A
2.
Short Hold Time Analysis 42 hr.?
09Yes
[]NO
CINIA
3.
Rush Turn Around Time Requested?
Yes
Mo
N/A
4.
Sufficient Volume?
SYas
I77jNo
N/A
S.
Correct Containers Used?
-Pace Containers Used?
MYes
es
❑No
RNo
❑N/A
N/A
6. '
Containers Intact?
gyu
No
Dissolved analysis: Samples Field Filtered?
[]Yes
E2140
N/A
8.
Sample Labels Match COC?
-includes Date/Time/ID/Analysis Matrix:
,f7 &Yes
❑No
❑N/A
9.
v.° o
Headspace In VOA Vials (>S-6mm)?
Trip Blank Present?
Trip Blank Custocly,Seiols Present?
❑Yes
[]Yes
lJYes
QN.
❑No
No
N/A
N/A
N A
10.
11.
COMMENTS/SAMPLE DISCREPANCY
Field Data Required? ❑Yes EINo
`l y'rw (0,1 - r(vi�drI HOC_ 01, 11,1419 - a w, E lflo/�-z
Person contacted:
Project Manager SCURF Review:
Project Manager SRF Review:
Mne
V 1X
Date/Time:
Date; 11 Ili I al
Date; I117/L01
Page 8 of 23

Document Name: Document Revised: February 7, 2018
Sample Condition Upon Rece( t SCURj Page 1 of 2
aceMalyticaf" Document No.: Issuing Authority:
F-CAR•C"33-Rev.06 Pace Carolinas Quallty Office
*Check mark top half of box if pH and/or dechlorination is
verified and within the acceptance range for preservation .
samples.
Exceptions:VOA, Caliform, TOC, Oil and Grease, DRO/8015 (water( DOC, LLHg
**Bottom half of box is to list number of bottle
Project It WO# : 92452107
PM: AP Due Data: 11/18/19
CLIENT: 92-Holly Spy
y
E
gg
IJ
9
5Q�
j
Z
D.
V
x
n
V
5
u,
V
pz
i
E
m
E
A
z
E
3
i
o
a
pOI
aEE
[a
N
V
D
aEE
.°g�
q
V
4
=
•�•
v
a
o
ixr
y
Z
O
ggqE
\
Z
C�
E
o
ggqE
.Q`
O
E
E
O
>
Z
8',
y
,ar,
E
Pvl
gg
of
a
o
Q
$
o
4
E
1
2
3
NNN
4
5
7
6
9
10
SI
12
PH Adjustment Log for Preserved Samples
Sample to
Type of Preservative
pH upon receipt
Date preservation adjusted
Time presodtlon
adjus
Amountaddedervative
Lot#
.. .. .._..._,.
MHhlamrmwlll
be sent to the
North Carolina DEHNR Certlflcadon OMce it I,
Note: Whenever there is a mscrepancy aneaung nu,u, --,........ ..... r.--.
Out of hold, incorrect preservative, out of temp, incorrect containers.
Page 9 of 23

k
m
m _DISS V
)
)
_+w
§
|
!
!
>
!�
Fi
»
\
\
[

I
ma`s
1101 OV`I OIJNDISSV dUltl
+�
N
J O
F .�4
,j�n
ea
N �
�s9
Fli
U
u F
"
pl nluagalsomgwllIV
aam
12
e
8
d
all.11all
T
4 c
ulallu 1.1
naplsaonllS
�
mounlyV pnoylnd
h
t
o 5 5
F
,�
� a o m
It118!gIt10'Q
nlgup•p
x
•ouoo-p111IN oplonl�
�,,
�
c
�
Iludlssod oplanlp
+'
y2
•awp'!1111W oU10V
•�
a
11110sud 01110V
40!
•n
5
a § 3
ZY
a5.eaa
�.�
rID
_
•A
OR11110A
(
v
••` 6
ssulD
OPsuld
0
slmuuco Joµ
�
,Cmlupt80y-uoN
lnaugpag
�6 °
C �u
aolmwuaolS.
^'
o
q .e D
G
toy aaWM uualp
a
3
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
Is
�
1
D
q �d
r^
zj
$
tg
�1
Q
uIgo
I
01
M 11 z
ca
� a
� •q � L•: �
tj
x
� 8
DIImtIa1DJ (D)9D+`�(D)
t' �
•`p7
u
>+ d
�.p,^:
•d
'6
U
+L
..�
°'
per, tC
N
W
\A
Page 11 of 23

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50
Date 15-Nov-19
Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES# NCO063096 Pipe # 001 County: Wake
Laboratory Performing Test: -
X
comments
Si nature of 00e-rator4rn Responsible Charge
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor
MAIL ORIGINAL TO Environmental Sciences Branch
Div. of Water Quality
N.C. OENR
1621 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test
CONTROL ORGANISMS
# Young Produced
Adult (L)lve (Diced
Effluent %
culated t= 0.5852
:ical Value= 2.508
Reduction= 1.9%
ouality Avg. Reprod.
0% 21.7
Control Control
0% 21.3
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 8.9%
#Young Produced E20 24 23 19 21 21 21 23 19 22 21 21 %3rd Brootl PASS FAIL
Adult (L)ive togas,L L L L L L L L L L L 100% X
Complete This for Either Test Test Stan Data
Collection fctadl Bats 05-Nov-19
pH lot sample lst sample 2nd sample Sample 03-Noo-19 Sample 05-1,10v-19
Control 7.8 8.2 7.6 8.3 7.6 8.2
Treatment 2 8.1 8.6 8.2 8.8 8.2 8.7 Grab Comp Duration 1st 2nd
Sample 1 X 24hrs. Tax Tax
Sample 2 X 24hrs. Dilution Sample Sample
D.O. start end start and start and
isl sam le lst sam l0 2nd sam le Hardness (nglL) 84.0
Control 8.2 8.2 7.5 8.6 8.2 8.0 Spec. Cond. arenas) 318 748 749
Treatment 2 8.4 8.1 9.0 8.3 8.9 7,8 Chlorine (mglL) <.05 <.05
Sample Temp. at receipt (°C) 0.1 0.2
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test
(Mortality expressed as %, combining replicates)
]Concentration
Mortality st.Wend st.rY.nd
LC50 = % Method of Determination I Cannot
95% Confitlence limits Moving Average Probit I High Cone.
% Spearman Kerber ROlher pH D.O.
Organism Tested uenooapnnia ouoia
DEM Form AT-1 Page 2 of 6 Page 13 of 23

Eln.nlontaino, (664) 077.43W . FAX [phone]B
CO. Box 16414. Greenville, SC 29606 4 QuIlsrridn Ccxtrl, Greer, SC 29060
Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival and Reproduction Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1002
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 05-Nov-19
Laboratory ID #: T55286 PF
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
Robert W. Kelley, PLO.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #E87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
Farhad Rostantpour
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification 423104
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided sam les.
age 1 of 6
NCDENR Certification # 022 Page 12 of 23

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
Facility: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
NPDHSO NC0063096
Sample ID: FINAL EFF
error T55286 Pr
Date: 05-Nov-19
Laboratory:
Certification fl: NCO22
I Eat. Date: il/l/2020
Survival Data
7 Day Survival Test Used: FISHERS TEST
Control 100 % Test Statistic: P= 1.000
Effluent 100% Critical Value: P= 0.01
PASS: The effluent does not reduce survival of the test organisms.
Reproduction Data
Rand Data
Test for Normality
Mean young/female
Std. Dcv,
Test Used: Shapiro-Wilks Test:
Control
21.7 1.92
Effluent
21.3 1.54
W:
0.939
Critical Value:
0.884
Analysisfor Differences in Reproduction
Tesi for Homogeneity of Variance
Test Used: Equal Variance t Test.
Test Used: F Test
Calculated t—
0.59
F=
1.55
Critical Value—
2.51
Critical Value=
532
The data are homogeneous in variance
PASS: The effluent is not chronically toxic.
Page 14 of 23
Page 3 of 6

Control Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Totai
source Iran
11110-23
1
+4+6
12
22
JJ1 10-23
2
+5+6
11
22
N6 10-24
3
5
+8+11
24
01010-24
4
+2+7
8
17
L2 10-24
5
4
+6+12
22
L4 10-24
6
+5+8
10
23
W310-25
7
+4+6
12
22
X3 10-25
8
3
+6+10
19
E1 10-26
9
4
+7+10
21
A2 10-25
10
5
+7+11
23
III 10-23
11
+3+8
12
23
JJ1 10-23
12
+4+7
11
22
13
N/AE
0
14
N/A
0
15
N/A
0
16
N/A
0
17
N/A
0
18
N/A
0
19
N/A
o
IMean
20
N/A
ol
21.7
90 % Effluent Mortality and Reproduction by Test Day
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Total
Ill 10-2
1
+3+8
9
20
JJ1 10-
2
+4+7
13
24
N6 10-2
3
4
+9+40
23
01010-
4
4
+7+8
19
L2 10-2
5
4
+7+10
21
L4 10-2
6
+4+6
11
21
W3 10-
7
+3+7
11
21
X310-2
a
+2+9
12
23
El 10-2
9
4
+6+9
19
A2 10-2
10
1
1
a
+8+10
22
III 10-2
11
+3+8
to
21
if 10-:
12
+4+7
10
21
0
13
N/A
0
0
14
NIA
0
0
15
N/A
d
0
0
111
N/A
0
0
17
NIA
0
0
18
N/A
0
0
19
N/A
o
Mean
01
20
INIA
I
0
21.3
modusilffmm
C
JC
12-NOV-19
wMEMEEL-i—C
JC
JC
AM
JC
JC
p111 PM
01'."1.
7.2e AM
08:. AN
p
JC
24.7
24.5
Old temp. °C
25
24.6
24.8
conuol New temp. -0
24.3
24.3
Page 15 of 23
Page 4 of 6

licit MORNOISSV IU.fl !
e p
cil otwyo6mna)oaoaW
-
6ualoumplD
0 oPlunnllS y , B
;� o ngnlSPla W 9 ,#
w una)gwa'a $ w "d ti
W911P'0
. � � 'y 'ouap•)IDIW oiumyp .
6C IIt4l/seu�C olunAyp I� '
', � � ronaci•pplyy olnay ,
® 110�88ad Bllio�/�41 T
F 8 W
p
d $ .
® RaulO 6 v
ollsald
u/0u Wuo3 ,7a
Noluinaaya,a)y
Joluumo)S a a
N 19 y
I I 1 0
4&� gvyb
- olPodmcp(0) awD(0) 4J 0 J O
a
Page 16 of 23
Page 5 of 6

u
Es
I/ QI EIV9 DaNDISSV1,1A7
C�6
C o
K kU
gb
9
E±
� �
u
� p, •u&
wf
•�
'_'
•
� Fdpj
N
"'
� n�.� ,�
QlnivagDpoeulnmuW
KIM
�
a �qq
nmuulW PuoyNd
l{
H
�
o
un9�Ituu'Q�
� W
vm •D
d
�gg
'DUUD•pUIWapImslD
a
IIUd/ssud alUu.Igp
�
B
gu
•nuuD'IIPJWoivay
'�{
IIUd(csUdDlnaV
C
�b
a�
r
A uvu
aDl
�n
olll�llo/�
�
•8
�
E .e
� �`
OVOID
NN�Id
waUNluoD do
fdofupt aq•uDly
7uNWIpDg
�
^'
� o
NDsunsulUlS
�°
°i
Jo .JDIum UNDID
J
I
I
I
I
9
�(
.g .. 41
1
0
p
g
�
s�Ji
r
N,
VJ
OF 8g
Cf
$
p
TK
a
W
Page 6 of 6
Page 17 of 23

Facility: Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek NPDES # NG0063096 Pipe #: 001 County:
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Environmental Sciences Brandt
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Test initiation Datefrime
11/05/19
/ 03:50 PM
Eff. Repl.
1
2
4
Control Surviving #
Original It
Wt/original (mg)
22.5 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
45.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
75.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
90.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
100.0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Avg WI/Surv. Control 0.6649
4
10
10
9
10
10
0
10
10
0.6620
0.7130
0.6170
1 0.5990
9
10
9
9
10
10
10
9
0.5270
0.6550
0.5170
0.5700
9
10
10
10
9
10
10
10
0.6433
0.6890
0.58501
0.4900
10
10
10
10
10
0
10
10
0.4860
0.4830
0.7030
1 0.6350
8
10
10
9
10
10
10
9
0.4470
0.5570
0.5450
0.6122
10
9
8
9
10
9
10
10
0,6070
0.4989
1 0.5120
0.5740
Test Organisms
Cultured In -House
%Survival 97.5% X Outside Supplier
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6478 Hatch Date: 11/04/19
Survival 94.90% Hatch Time: 0930-it00M
Avg Wt (mg) 0.5673
Survival 100.0
Avg Wt (mg) 0.6018
Survival 100.0
Avg Wt (mg) 0.5768
% Survival
Avg Wt (mg) 0.5403
% Survival
Avg Wt (mg) 0,5480
Water Quality Data
Day
Control
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fin
Temp (C) Init/Fin
High Concentration
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Firs
Temp (C) [nit/Fin
7.7
/ -
7.8 /
7.7
7.7
/ 7.7
7.8 !
8.2
7.7
/ 7.6
7.6
/ 7.8
7.6
/ 7.9
----/
7.9
8.0
! -
8.0 /
7.2
7.9
/ 6.5
7.9 /
6.9
7.4
/ 5.8
8.0
/ 7.1
8.0
----/
6.8
24.7
/ -
24.3 /
25.5
24.3
! 25.0
24,4 /
25.3
24.5
/ 25.6
24.3
/ 24.8
24.4
8.1
/ -
8.1 /
8.2
8.2
/ 8.4
8.4
/ 8.4
8.1
/ 8.3
8.4
/ 8.5
8.5
! 8.5
----
9.4
/ -
7.9 /
7.2
9.2
/ 6.8
8.1
/ 6.3
8.7
/ 6.2
8.3
/ 7.1
8.1
/ 6.7
25.0
/ -
24.7 /
25.5
24.7
/ 25.0
25.1
/ 25.3
25.7
I 25.6
24.4
/ 24.8
24.6
/
Sample
Collection Start Date
Grab
Composite (Duration)
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity (mg/L)
Conductivity (umhos/cm)
Chlorine(mg/L)
Temp at Receipt ( C)
Dilution H2O
Hardness (mg/L)
Alkalinity(mglL)Conductivity(umhos/cm)
M57�06
Survival
Growth
Normal
as
yes
Hom. Var.
es
yes
NOEC
100.0%
100.0%
LOEC
>100.00%
>100.00%
ChV
>100.00%
>100.00%
Method
T-Test
T-Test
Overall Result
ChV >100.00%
Stats
Survival
Growth
Corso.
Critical
Calculated
Critical
Calculated
23%
2,41
0.57
2.41
1.53
45%
2,41
-0.57
2.41
0.87
75%
2.41
-0.57
2.41
1.35
90 %
2.41
0.50
2.41
2.04
100%
2.41
1.07
2.41
1,89
Page 2 of 6

Elnuranlen.n.
P.G, Box 16414, Greenville, SC 29606
[phone].FAX [phone]
4 Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29650
Fathead Minnow Survival and Growth Test
EPA-821-R-02-013 Method 1000
Permit Renewal Second Species Testing
Client: TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
Facility: UTLEY CREEK
NPDES #: NCO063096
Test Date: 05-Nov-19
Laboratory Sample ID #: T55286 P promelas
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #C87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
Forbad Rostampota
Laboratory Director
SCDHEC Certification#23104
NCDENR Cerdfication # 022
Page 18 of 23
Page 1 of 6

Lab4
T55286 P promelas
Client
HOLLY SPRINGS
samplelo
FINAL EFFLUENT
NPDESM
NC0063096
County
Month
start a fed Date
05-Nov-19
Start 8 fed Time
03:50 PM
Started a tea By
JC
Test organism
IPIMEPHALES PRO
Neo. born date
04-Nov-19
Noo.born time
0930-110OMT
Test Type
NCCD
DBmron water
MHSF 10131119A
Units foreonc.
%3rd BROOD
Test vessels
400.1
Test volume
250 mI
Incubatory
1
LIBhI
161t/8d1,
Initial Temp-C
25
Artomia
.1592XDAY
Test method
z.olaa000
Comments
Ail reps have 10
organisms unless noted otherwise.
Control mi tamp -24.2
ORGANISMS
SOURCE=ADS 11/5110
<48HRS OLD
D=Dead N/A -Lost or not used
Page 20 of 23
Page 3 of 6

I
iipl tlV'I4F�NOISSV 10.g
'
0
b
"u_
O
yy
�
�{❑Ulf
,tl O
oN❑
j�j�
Vl V
tNgpi
r�
zr
u o
� 8
QI OIWgo6lonul0A011w
uhIIllFft
.
"
gpp
I/lrlisllls w
—
c.:
"
H
g
I
o � � p'
Mam1IW pooNlug
�
'0110'J•rlliw
q
hill, I -
w
ounyop ,` c'
esutp 6 g .
ollsuld �
V,09 UIL103 0 .7
luolulpo5
JolumuJO)s
.ta .Isla uuulp
cr-
I
I I I
gg o
8 � "
A M N1
y a
z oil,udma�b)QwA (o) �1 t
i_- �tl F84
Page 4 of 6
Page 21 of 23

0
�
�•��`
.�
II UI flV'I UEINDISSV.L.I.
Pi
1.0
n
13
LEl
's
'� '$ }t
(iI utusgn(mmlln1o11W
_.
110%
g
RKEIRIJ.
S
,�
s
n $ ,�
susasnmpp
m}INSVIs W
�'
� o
�cq
B moilinW lwmpud
I^ unB�Kltnu'p�
_
F
y
�
�
V1
O q
IC W o i3
�5
W911P'0
t,�y3
P
� rouoU•Iliniq oplanlp
'Psup.IIIIIW nlnay
11
Ilud/ssudaPtoy
�b
k
�
000110�
�
'g0
p
!�
�� �' All
seUIP
sPssld
❑0091a0330
Aolupteau•uoK
a
IusWipag
`�
iulw.uusulS
w
lov .Iulum usalp
tb o
1
1
I
1
t I
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
q
�
a
P
Y
e
g
v
\
�w
t
a
031mlls1471o) 9t'b(0)
�k
1
3
'
11
a
k
"".
Seim
Page 22 of 23
Page 5 of 6

w1
Page 23 of 23
Page 6 of 6

A
B C D E F I G I H I I I J K L M
N O 1 P
1
NPDES/PT POC Review Form
Version:2022.06.22
2
1. Facility's General Information
3
Date of (draft) Review
2/10/2023
c. POC review due to:
e. Contact Information
4
Date of (final) Review
Municipal NPDES renewal
0
Regional Office (RO)
Raleigh
5
NPDES Permit Writer (pw)
Gary Perlmutter
HWA-AT/LTMP Review
❑
RO PT Staff
Cheng Zhang
RO NPDES Staff
Scott Vinson
6
Perm ittee- Facility Name
Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF
New Industries
❑
Facility PT Staff, email
7
NPDES Permit Number
NCO063096
WWTP expansion
F
❑
f. Receiving Stream
8
NPDES Permit Effective Date
11/1/2017
Stream reclass./adjustment
❑
Outfall 1
9
Chemical Addendum Submittal Date
Outfall relocation/adjustment
❑
Receiving Stream:
Utley Creek
QA, cfs:
0.82
10
NPDES Permit Public Notice Date
7Q10 update
❑
Stream Class
C
7Q10 (S), cfs:
0.11
11
eDMR data evaluated from:
to
Other POC review trigger, explain:
Oufall Lat.
35.38.42 N
Outfall Long.
78.51.07 W
12
a. WWTP Capacity Summary
Outfall II
13
Current Permitted Flow, mgd
6.0
Designed Flow,
m d
6.0
Receiving Stream:
QA, cfs:
14
Permitted SIU Flow, mgd
0.30
d. IU Summary
Stream Class
7Q10, cfs:
15
b. PT Docs. Summary
# IUs
Oufall Lat.
Outfall Long.
16
L
IWS approval date
6/2/2022
# SIUs
2
Is there a PWS downstream of the Facility's Outfalls?
❑ YES 0 NO
17
N
'E-L/STMP
approval date:
9/12/2022
# CIUs
1
Comments:
18
E
a
U)
W
HWA approval date
9/14/2022
I
# NSCIUs
A draft IUP was prepared for Amgen Inc in July 2022. Fugifilm Diasynth Biotechnologies has applied for an IUP in November 2022.
19
# IUs w/Local
Permits or Other
ITypes
20
Z
2. Industrial Users' Information.
21
#
Industrial User (IU) Name
IU Activity
IU Non Conventional Pollutans & Toxic Pollutant
IUP Effective Date
22
1
Amgen, Inc.
Biotech
TN, TP, Orthophosphate, Cd, Chlorides, Cr, Cu, CN, Mo, Pb, Ni, Ag, Zn, several organic chemicals, Priority Pollutants, TDS
Draft
23
2
Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies
439 A & D
NH3-TN, TP, Orthophosphate, Chlorides, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, CN, Pb, Hg, Mo, Ni Se, Ag, Zn, several organic chemicals, Priority Pollutants, PFAS
Draft
24
3
Seqirus, Inc.
439.17&47
NH3-N, Chlorides, Hg, Mo, TN, TP, Priority Pollutants, several organic chemicals
7/13/2018
25
4
South Wake Landfill
Landfill
NH3-N, Cd, Chlorides, Cr, Cu, CN, FOG, Pb, Hg, Mo, Ni, TN, TP, Orthophosphate, Zn, TTO
1/1/2019
26
5
31
Comment:
32
3. Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
33
Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
34
❑
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
3) facility has SIUs and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program
35
❑
36
❑
37
p
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
5) facility's sludge is being land applied or composted
6) facility's sludge is incinerated (add Beryllium and Mercury sampling according to § 503.43)
38
❑
39
❑
40
p
41
❑
42
❑
7) facility's sludge is taken to a landfill, if yes which landfill:
43
❑
8) other
44
Sludge Disposal Plan:
Wasted sludge is digested, dewatered, collected in boxes, then picked up by McGill for offsite composting.
45
46
47
Sludge Permit No:
Page 1 63096 POC Review Form

A
B C D E F G H I I J I K I L M N O P
48
4. LTMP/STMP and HWA Review
49
PW: Find USTMP document, HWA spreadsheet, DMR, previous and new NPDES permit for next section.
50
a
Cn
c
U
a
Parameter of Concern
(POC) Check List
New
NPDES
POC
Previous
NPDES
POC
Required by
EPA PT(1)
POC due to
Sludge (2)
POC due to
SIU (3)
POTW
POC (4)
o
/a
Removal
Rate
L/STMP
Effluent Freq
NPDES
Effluent Freq
PQLs review
Comment
51
PQL from
L/STMP, ug/I
Required PQL
per NPDES
permit
Recomm.
PQL, ug/I
52
0
Flow
❑
0
0
❑
53
p
BOD
Li
0
0
❑
2.0 mg/L
54
0
TSS
❑
0
0
❑
2.5 mg/L
55
0
NH3
❑
❑r
❑r
❑
0.1 mg/L
56
0
Arsenic
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
2.0
57
❑
Barium
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
58
❑
Beryllium(5)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
59
p
Cadmium(1)
❑
❑
p
❑
❑
❑
0.5
0.5
60
p
Chromium(1)
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
2.0
10.0
61
0
Copper(1)
❑
❑
p
❑
❑
❑
2.0
2.0
62
p
Cyanide
❑
❑
❑
p
❑
5.0
63
0
Lead(1)
❑
p
p
❑
❑
❑
2.0
2.0
64
0
Mercury(5)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
0.001
0.001
65
0
Molybdenum
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
10.0
10.0
66
p
Nickel(1)
❑
❑
p
❑
❑
❑
2.0
5.0
67
p
Selenium
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
1.0
68
0
Silver
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
1.0
1.0
69
0
Zinc(1)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
10.0
10.0
70
❑
Sludge Flow to Disposal
❑
❑
❑
71
❑
% Solids to Disposal
❑
❑
❑
72
❑
Oil & Grease
❑
❑
73
0
TN
❑
0
0
❑
74
0
T P
❑
0
❑�
❑
75
0
Orthophosphate
❑
p
❑
❑
76
0
Chlorides
❑
p
0
❑
2 mg/L
77
❑r
1,4-Dioxane
0
❑
❑
❑
Recommend adding parameter
78
0
PFAS
0
❑
❑
❑
Recommend adding parameter with delayed
im lementation per NPDES permit
79
❑
❑
❑
❑
80
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
81
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
82
Footnotes:
(1) Always in the LTMP/STMP due to EPA -PT requirement
(2) Only in LTMP/STMP if listed in sludge permit
(3) Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW
(4) Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
(5) In LTMP/STMP, if sewage sludge is incinerated
Please use blue tont for the into updated by pw
Please use red font for POC that need to be added/modified in L/STMP sampling plan
ease use orange font and strikethrough for PDX that may be removed from USTIVIP POC listisampling plan
Blue shaded cell (D60:1-182): Parameters usually included under that POC list
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
5. Comments
93
Facility Summary/background information/NPDES-PT regulatory action:
POC to be added/modified in L/STMP:
94
ORC's comments on IU/POC:
95
POC submitted through Chemical
Addendum or Supplemental Chemical
Datasheet:
96
Additional pollutants added to L/STMP due
to POTW s concerns:
97
NPDES pw's comments on IU/POC:
98
6. Pretreatment updates in response to NPDES permit renewal
99
NPDES Permit Effective Date
1180 days after effective (date):
I Permit writer, please add list of required/recommended PT updates in NPDES permit cover letter.
Page 2 63096 POC Review Form

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Holly Springs WWTP-Utley Crk
NCO063096/001 County:
Wake
Ceri7dPF
Begin:
11/1/2017 chr lim: 90% (at 6 or
NonComp: Single
J
F M
A M
2019
-
Pass -
- Pass
2020
-
>100 Pass -
- Pass 100(P)
2021
-
Pass -
- Pass
2022
-
Pass -
- Pass
Hospira, Inc.
NC0001589/003 County:
Nash
Fthd24PF
Begin:
8/1/2021 Ac P/F Monit: 90% Ft
NonComp:
J
F M
A M
2019
H
H
H
2020
H
2021
2021
H
2022
H
2022
-
- Pass
- -
House of Raeford -
Wallace Division
NC0003344/001
County: Duplin
Ceri7dPF
Begin: 3/1/2019
chr lim: 57% @ 1.5M
NonComp: Single
J
F M
A M
2019
-
- Fail
>88 >88
2020
-
- Pass
- -
2021
-
- Pass
- -
2022
-
- Pass
- -
Hubert WTP
NCO083321/001
County: Onslow
Mysd24PF
Begin: 7/1/2020
Ac P/F: 90% Mysd
NonComp:
J
F M
A M
2019
-
- Fail
- -
2020
-
- Fail
- -
2021
-
- Pass
- -
2022
Fail
Fail Fail INVALID
Fail Fail Fail
Huffman Finishing
NCO025135/001
County: Caldwell
Ceri7dPF
Begin: 5/1/2016
chr lim: 0.96%
NonComp: Single
J
F M
A M
2019
-
- Pass
- -
2020
-
- Pass
- -
2021
-
- Pass
- -
2022
-
- Pass
- -
Region: RRO
7Q10: 0.11
J J
Region: RRO
7Q10:
l J
H
H
H
H
Pass
Region: WIRO
7Q10: 1.77
J J
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Region: WIRO
7Q10:
J J
Fail
Pass
Pass
Pass
Region: ARID
7Q10: 40
J l
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Basin: CPF07 Feb May Aug Nov
PF: 8 IWC: 95 Freq: Q
A S O
Pass
>100(P) Pass - -
Pass
Pass
Basin: TAR02 Mar Jun Sep Dec
PF: IWC: Freq: Q
A S O
H
H
Pass
H
Pass
Basin: CPF22
Mar Jun Sep Dec
PF: 1.5 IWC:
57 Freq: Q
A
S
O
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
Basin: WOK01
Mar Jun Sep Dec
PF: 0.518 IWC:
Freq: Q
A
S
O
Fail
-
Pass
Fail
Fail
Pass
-
Basin: CTB32
Mar Jun Sep Dec
PF: 0.25 IWC:
0.96 Freq: Q
A
S
O
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
SOC JOC:
N
Pass>100
Pass
Pass
Pass
SOC—JOC:
N
SOC JOC:
N
C
D
H
H
Pass
H
Pass
D
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
SOC JOC:
N D
Fail
Pass
Fail Pass
Pass
SOC JOC:
N
D
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Leizend: P= Fathead minnow (Pimohales Dromelas). H=No Flow (facilitv is active), s = Split test between Certified Labs Page 44 of 98

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 u 3 I NC0063096 111 121 22/12/19 I17 18 LC] I 19 I s I 20L]
21111I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I r6
Inspection
Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ---------------------- Reserved -------------------
67
I 72 I n, I 71 I 74 79 I I I I I I I80
701 I 71 I LL -1 I I
LJ
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
09:OOAM 22/12/19
17/11/01
Holly Springs WWTP
150 Treatment Plant Rd
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Holly Springs NC 27540
11:OOAM 22/12/19
21/07/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Terry Ray Foster/ORC/919-577-1090/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Seann Byrd,PO Box 8 Holly Springs NC 275400008//919-577-3151/9195772280
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenar Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Progran 0 Facility Site Review Compliance Schedules 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
Stephanie Goss DWR/RRO WQ/919-791-4200/
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#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
NCO063096 I11 12I 22/12/19 117 18 i c i
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page#

Permit: NCO063096 Owner -Facility: Holly Springs WWTP
Inspection Date: 12/19/2022 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Compliance Schedules Yes
No
NA
NE
Is there a compliance schedule for this facility? ❑
❑
❑
Is the facility compliant with the permit and conditions for the review period? 0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
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?
❑
❑
0
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Record Keeping
Yes
No
NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
■
❑
❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
0
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
Page# 3

Permit: NCO063096 Owner -Facility: Holly Springs WWTP
Inspection Date: 12/19/2022 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping
Yes
No
NA
NE
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified
0
❑
❑
❑
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
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?
0
❑
❑
❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Pipe
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Effluent
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual ❑
b.Mechanical
Page# 4

Permit: NC0063096 Owner -Facility: Holly Springs WWTP
Inspection Date: 12/19/2022 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
❑
❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
❑
❑
❑
■
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Grit Removal
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
❑
❑
❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
■
❑
❑
❑
Are weirs level?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of weir blockage?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is scum removal adequate?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the drive unit operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
❑
❑
❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/4 of the sidewall depth)
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary) Yes No NA NE
Type of operation: Cross flow
Is the filter media present? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Is the filter surface free of clogging? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 5

Permit: NCO063096
Inspection Date: 12/19/2022
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Is the filter free of growth?
Is the air scour operational?
Owner -Facility: Holly Springs WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Is the scouring acceptable?
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
Comment:
Disinfection - UV
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
Are UV bulbs clean?
Is UV intensity adequate?
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
Is there a backup system on site?
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
Comment:
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Comment:
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?
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NCO063096
Inspection Date: 12/19/2022
Owner -Facility: Holly Springs WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Laboratory
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
Is proper volume collected?
Is the tubing clean?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
representative)?
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches
Are the aerators operational?
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
Is the DO level acceptable?
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
•
❑
❑
❑
•
❑
❑
❑
•
❑
❑
❑
•
❑
❑
❑
•
❑
❑
❑
•
❑
❑
❑
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Comment: There was foa on approx. 50% of thesurface of basin #2 due to the basin iust being
brought into use and the empty basin had duckweek and some debris in it. Mr. Foster
stated they foam is being eliminated as the basin is in operation.
Page# 7

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF
Permit No. NC0063096
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 6
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 0.11
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 0.25
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS) 0.11
s7Q10 (CFS)
0.11
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 6
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 9.3
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
9.3
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1) 0
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%) 98.83
IWC (%)
98.83
Allowable Conc. (ug/1) 17
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
1.0
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform
w7Q10 (CFS)
0.25
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100ml
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6
(If DF >331; Monitor)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
9.3
(If DF<331; Limit)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
Dilution Factor (DF) 1.01
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
97.38
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
1.8
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/l, 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)

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF
Permit No. NC0063096
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 8
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 0.11
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 0.25
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1)
Ammonia (Summer)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS)
0.11
s7Q10 (CFS)
0.11
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
8
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
8
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
12.4
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
12.4
STREAM STD (UG/L)
17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1)
0
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
99.12
IWC (%)
99.12
Allowable Conc. (ug/1)
17
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
1.0
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform
w7Q10 (CFS)
0.25
Monthly Average Limit:
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
8
(If DF >331; Monitor)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
12.4
(If DF<331; Limit)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
Dilution Factor (DF)
1.01 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
98.02
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
1.8
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/l to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, 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/l
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information Table 2. Parameters of Concern
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS Name WQS Type Chronic Modifier
Facility Name
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfal I
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF
Grade IV
NCO063096
001
6.000
Utley Creek
03030004
C
❑ Apply WS Hardness WQC
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q10w (cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
QA (cfs)
1 Q10s (cfs)
0.11
0.25
0.32
0.82
0.09
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
Combined Hardness Chronic
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Combined Hardness Acute
135.23 mg/L (Avg)
24.35 mg/L (Avg)
133.94 mg/L
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
134.17 mg/L
Data Source(s)
Data sources include permittee-submitted DMRs and
PPAs.
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06E
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
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
2.0943
FW
14.0173
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
mg/L
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
465.4930
FW
3583.6348
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
33.0717
FW
50.9995
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
18.7823
FW
482.8924
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
154.0306
FW
1388.8440
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
5.3331
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
525.4573
FW
521.9635
ug/L
Antimony
Aquatic Life
NC
640
FW
pg/L
Thallium
Aquatic Life
NC
2
FW
pg/L
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, input
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Effluent Hardness I
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
1 /6/2020
132
132
2/3/2020
116
116
3/2/2020
109
109
4/8/2020
118
118
5/4/2020
139
139
6/2/2020
136
136
7/7/2020
130
130
8/3/2020
129
129
9/2/2020
123
123
10/7/2020
150
150
11 /2/2020
140
140
12/9/2020
132
132
1 /6/2021
94.9
94.9
2/1 /2021
104
104
3/1/2021
89.2
89.2
3/31 /2021
110
110
4/7/2021
122
122
5/3/2021
122
122
6/2/2021
92.5
92.5
7/7/2021
154
154
8/4/2021
165
165
9/1 /2021
175
175
10/6/2021
151
151
11 /3/2021
132
132
12/1 /2021
160
160
1 /5/2022
136
136
2/10/2022
114
114
3/2/2022
122
122
4/6/2022
128
128
5/3/2022
139
139
6/8/2022
131
131
7/6/2022
174
174
8/3/2022
173
173
9/6/2022
193
193
10/5/2022
152
152
11 /9/2022
172
172
12/14/2022
144
144
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
10th Per value
Average Value
Max. Value
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
24.5860
135.2324
0.1818
37
107.00 mg/L
135.23 mg/L
193.00 mg/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Upstream
Hardness
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
11 /14/2017
20
20
Std Dev.
3.1628
1 /31 /2018
28
28
Mean
24.3458
4/17/2018
28
28
C.V.
0.1299
6/6/2018
24
24
n
24
7/5/2018
24
24
10th Per value
20.64 mg/L
9/5/2018
28
28
Average Value
24.35 mg/L
11/8/2018
28
28
Max. Value
29.30 mg/L
2/13/2019
25.7
25.7
5/6/2019
23
23
5/20/2019
23
23
8/6/2019
20.1
20.1
11 /4/2019
23.3
23.3
2/5/2020
27.1
27.1
5/4/2020
24.1
24.1
8/3/2020
15.5
15.5
11 /2/2020
24.2
24.2
2/1 /2021
21.9
21.9
5/26/2021
24.3
24.3
8/4/2021
23.9
23.9
11 /2/2021
23.3
23.3
2/9/2022
29.3
29.3
5/2/2022
23
23
8/3/2022
24.6
24.6
11 /7/2022
28
28
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-2- 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 & Par02
Date Data
1
2 2/6/2018 <
3 5/23/2018
4 8/14/2018 <
5 8/3/2022 <
6 9/6/2022 <
7 11 /9/2022 <
8 12/14/2022 <
9 2/6/2018 <
10 5/16/2019 <
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
Arsenic
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY".
Par03
Beryllium
Maximum data points
= 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Std Dev.
0.3909
1
8/14/2018
<
0.5
0.25
Std Dev.
2 1
Mean
1.0556
2
5/16/2019
<
0.5
0.25
Mean
2 2
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
2/6/2018
<
0.5
0.25
C.V. (default)
2 1
n
9
4
8/1 /2020
<
1
0.5
n
1 0.5
5
2 1
Mult Factor =
1.81
6
Mult Factor =
2 1
Max. Value
2.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
2 1
Max. Pred Cw
3.6 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
2 1
9
2 1
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
0.1250
0.3125
0.6000
4
2.59
0.50 ug/L
1.30 ug/L
-3-
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par04
Par05
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Cadmium
Values" then "COPY".
Chlorides
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points = 58
= 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
12/20/2017
<
2
1
Std Dev.
0.1962
1
12/20/2017
97
97
Std Dev.
11.6708
2
2/6/2018
<
0.15
0.075
Mean
0.1553
2
2/6/2018
90
90
Mean
78.1
3
5/23/2018
0.15
0.15
C.V.
1.2635
3
5/23/2018
94
94
C.V.
0.1494
4
8/14/2018
<
0.15
0.075
n
33
4
8/14/2018
66
66
n
30
5
11 /8/2018
<
0.15
0.075
5
11 /8/2018
70
70
6
2/5/2019
<
0.15
0.075
Mult Factor =
1.32
6
2/5/2019
63
63
Mult Factor =
1.1
7
5/16/2019
<
0.15
0.075
Max. Value
1.000 ug/L
7
5/16/2019
75
75
Max. Value
99.3 mg/L
8
8/6/2019
<
1
0.5
Max. Pred Cw
1.320 ug/L
8
6/28/2019
76
76
Max. Pred Cw
104.3 mg/L
9
11 /6/2019
<
1
0.5
9
8/6/2019
83.9
83.9
10
2/3/2020
<
0.1
0.05
10
11 /6/2019
81.3
81.3
11
5/4/2020
<
0.1
0.05
11
2/3/2020
62
62
12
8/3/2020
<
0.1
0.05
12
5/6/2020
72.6
72.6
13
11 /2/2020
<
0.1
0.05
13
8/3/2020
82
82
14
2/1 /2021
<
0.1
0.05
14
11 /2/2020
58.3
58.3
15
3/31 /2021
<
0.2
0.1
15
2/1 /2021
54.1
54.1
16
4/7/2021
<
0.2
0.1
16
3/31 /2021
76
76
17
5/3/2021
<
0.2
0.1
17
4/7/2021
87.7
87.7
18
7/7/2021
<
0.2
0.1
18
5/3/2021
91
91
19
8/4/2021
<
0.2
0.1
19
8/4/2021
99.3
99.3
20
10/6/2021
<
0.2
0.1
20
10/6/2021
81
81
21
11 /3/2021
<
0.2
0.1
21
11 /3/2021
72.6
72.6
22
12/1 /2021
<
0.2
0.1
22
12/1 /2021
74.6
74.6
23
1 /5/2022
<
0.2
0.1
23
1 /5/2022
64.6
64.6
24
2/10/2022
<
0.2
0.1
24
2/10/2022
92.9
92.9
25
3/2/2022
<
0.2
0.1
25
3/2/2022
92.2
92.2
26
4/6/2022
<
0.2
0.1
26
4/6/2022
78.4
78.4
27
5/3/2022
<
0.2
0.1
27
5/3/2022
74.3
74.3
28
6/8/2022
<
0.5
0.25
28
6/8/2022
83.4
83.4
29
8/3/2022
<
1
0.5
29
8/3/2022
74.3
74.3
30
9/6/2022
<
0.15
0.075
30
11 /9/2022
75.4
75.4
31
10/5/2022
<
0.15
0.075
31
32
11 /9/2022
<
0.15
0.075
32
33
12/14/2022
<
0.15
0.075
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-4- 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par06 Par07
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds values" then "COPY
Maximum data points
= 58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Total Phenolic Compounds
1
Date Data
2/6/2018
NO DATA
NO DATA
2
5/16/2019 <
NO DATA
3
8/1/2020 <
0
4
5
N/A
6
N/A ug/L
7
N/A ug/L
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
BDL=1/2DL
Results
22 22
Std Dev.
10 5
Mean
20 10
C.V. (default)
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
8.7369
12.3333
0.6000
3
3.00
22.0 ug/L
66.0 ug/L
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-5- 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par10
Chromium, Total
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
12/20/2017
<
5
2.5
Std Dev.
2
2/6/2018
2.5
2.5
Mean
3
5/23/2018
3.13
3.13
C.V.
4
8/14/2018
2.9
2.9
n
5
11 /8/2018
<
2
1
6
2/5/2019
2.45
2.45
Mult Factor =
7
5/16/2019
<
2
1
Max. Value
8
8/6/2019
<
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
9
11 /6/2019
<
5
2.5
10
2/3/2020
<
5
2.5
11
5/4/2020
<
5
2.5
12
8/3/2020
<
5
2.5
13
11 /2/2020
<
5
2.5
14
2/1/2021
<
5
2.5
15
3/31 /2021
<
5
2.5
16
4/7/2021
<
5
2.5
17
5/3/2021
<
5
2.5
18
7/7/2021
<
5
2.5
19
8/4/2021
<
5
2.5
20
10/6/2021
<
5
2.5
21
11 /3/2021
<
5
2.5
22
12/1/2021
<
5
2.5
23
1 /5/2022
<
5
2.5
24
2/10/2022
<
5
2.5
25
3/2/2022
<
5
2.5
26
4/6/2022
<
5
2.5
27
5/3/2022
<
5
2.5
28
6/8/2022
<
5
2.5
29
8/3/2022
<
1
0.5
30
9/6/2022
<
2
1
31
10/5/2022
<
2
1
32
11 /9/2022
<
2
1
33
12/14/2022
<
2
1
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
Pall
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
0.6850
2.1964
0.3119
33
1.09
3.1 Ng/L
3.4 dig/L
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Copper Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
12/20/2017
4
4
Std Dev.
2
2/6/2018
2.63
2.63
Mean
3
5/23/2018
2.57
2.57
C.V.
4
8/14/2018
2.52
2.52
n
5
11 /8/2018
3.58
3.58
6
2/5/2019
8.71
8.71
Mult Factor =
7
5/16/2019
2.71
2.71
Max. Value
8
8/6/2019
<
2.5
1.25
Max. Pred Cw
9
11 /6/2019
1.3
1.3
10
2/3/2020
0.8
0.8
11
5/4/2020
0.52
0.52
12
8/3/2020
1.2
1.2
13
11 /2/2020
0.78
0.78
14
2/1 /2021
1.1
1.1
15
3/31 /2021
<
2
1
16
4/7/2021
<
2
1
17
5/3/2021
<
2
1
18
7/7/2021
<
2
1
19
8/4/2021
<
2
1
20
10/6/2021
<
2
1
21
11 /3/2021
<
2
1
22
12/1 /2021
<
2
1
23
1 /5/2022
<
2
1
24
2/10/2022
<
2
1
25
3/2/2022
<
2
1
26
4/6/2022
<
2
1
27
5/3/2022
<
2
1
28
6/8/2022
<
5
2.5
29
8/3/2022
1.26
1.26
30
9/6/2022
<
2
1
31
10/5/2022
<
2
1
32
11 /9/2022
<
2
1
33
12/14/2022
<
2
1
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
1.5246
1.6494
0.9243
33
1.25
8.71 ug/L
10.89 ug/L
-7-
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par12
Date Data
1 12/20/2017 <
2 2/6/2018 <
3 5/23/2018 <
4 8/14/2018 <
5 11 /8/2018 <
6 2/5/2019 <
7 5/16/2019 <
8 8/6/2019 <
9 11 /6/2019 <
10 2/3/2020 <
11 5/6/2020 <
12 8/3/2020 <
13 11 /2/2020 <
14 2/1/2021 <
15 3/31 /2021 <
16 4/7/2021 <
17 5/3/2021 <
18 8/4/2021 <
19 10/6/2021 <
20 11 /3/2021 <
21 12/1/2021 <
22 1 /5/2022 <
23 2/10/2022 <
24 3/2/2022 <
25 4/6/2022 <
26 5/3/2022 <
27 6/8/2022 <
28 8/3/2022 <
29 9/6/2022 <
30 10/5/2022 <
31 11 /9/2022 <
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
Par13
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Cyanide
Values" then "COPY".
Fluoride
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points
= 58
= 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
5 5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
5 5
Mean
5.00
2
Mean
NO DATA
5 5
C.V.
0.0000
3
C.V.
NO DATA
5 5
n
31
4
n
0
5 5
5
5 5
Mult Factor =
1.00
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
5 5
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
N/A ug/L
5 5
Max. Pred Cw
5.0 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
N/A ug/L
5 5
9
5 5
10
5 5
11
5 5
12
5 5
13
5 5
14
5 5
15
5 5
16
5 5
17
5 5
18
5 5
19
5 5
20
5 5
21
5 5
22
5 5
23
5 5
24
5 5
25
5 5
26
5 5
27
5 5
28
5 5
29
5 5
30
5 5
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
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-8- 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par14
Date
1 1 /6/2020 <
2 2/3/2020 <
3 3/2/2020 <
4 4/8/2020 <
5 5/4/2020 <
6 6/2/2020 <
7 7/7/2020 <
8 8/3/2020 <
9 9/2/2020 <
10 10/7/2020 <
11 11 /2/2020 <
12 12/9/2020 <
13 1 /6/2021 <
14 2/1/2021 <
15 3/1/2021 <
16 3/31 /2021 <
17 4/7/2021 <
18 5/3/2021 <
19 6/2/2021 <
20 7/7/2021 <
21 8/4/2021 <
22 9/1/2021 <
23 10/6/2021 <
24 11 /3/2021 <
25 12/1/2021 <
26 1 /5/2022 <
27 2/10/2022 <
28 3/2/2022 <
29 4/6/2022 <
30 5/3/2022 <
31 6/8/2022 <
32 7/6/2022 <
33 8/3/2022 <
34 9/6/2022 <
35 10/5/2022 <
36 11 /9/2022 <
37 12/14/2022 <
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Par15
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Lead
Values" then "COPY".
Mercury
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points
= 58
= 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
0.1
0.05
Std Dev.
1.1345
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
0.1
0.05
Mean
1.6311
2
Mean
NO DATA
0.1
0.05
C.V.
0.6955
3
C.V.
NO DATA
0.1
0.05
n
37
4
n
0
0.1
0.05
5
0.1
0.05
Mult Factor =
1.15
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
0.1
0.05
Max. Value
2.500 ug/L
7
Max. Value
N/A ng/L
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
2.875 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
N/A ng/L
5
2.5
9
5
2.5
10
5
2.5
11
5
2.5
12
5
2.5
13
5
2.5
14
5
2.5
15
5
2.5
16
5
2.5
17
5
2.5
18
5
2.5
19
5
2.5
20
5
2.5
21
5
2.5
22
5
2.5
23
5
2.5
24
5
2.5
25
5
2.5
26
5
2.5
27
5
2.5
28
5
2.5
29
5
2.5
30
1
0.5
31
1
0.5
32
1
0.5
33
0.5
0.25
34
0.5
0.25
35
0.5
0.25
36
0.5
0.25
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-9- 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par16
Date Data
1 12/20/2017 <
2 2/6/2018 <
3 5/23/2018
4 8/14/2018
5 8/3/2022 <
6 9/6/2022
7 10/5/2022
8 11 /9/2022 <
9 12/14/2022 <
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
Par17 & Par18
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Molybdenum
Values" then "COPY".
Nickel
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points
= 58
= 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
5
2.5
Std Dev.
2.4306
1
Std Dev.
0.5069
2
1
Mean
2.9100
2
2/6/2018
2.63
2.63
Mean
2.4391
3.48
3.48
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
5/23/2018
2.98
2.98
C.V.
0.2078
8.71
8.71
n
9
4
8/14/2018
2.59
2.59
n
32
5
2.5
5
11 /8/2018
4.53
4.53
2
2
Mult Factor =
1.81
6
2/5/2019
2.01
2.01
Mult Factor =
1.06
4
4
Max. Value
8.7 ug/L
7
5/16/2019
2.04
2.04
Max. Value
4.5 Ng/L
2
1
Max. Pred Cw
15.8 ug/L
8
8/6/2019
<
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
4.8 Ng/L
2
1
9
11 /6/2019
<
5
2.5
10
2/3/2020
<
5
2.5
11
5/4/2020
<
5
2.5
12
8/3/2020
<
5
2.5
13
11 /2/2020
<
5
2.5
14
2/1 /2021
<
5
2.5
15
3/31 /2021
<
5
2.5
16
4/7/2021
<
5
2.5
17
5/3/2021
<
5
2.5
18
7/7/2021
<
5
2.5
19
8/4/2021
<
5
2.5
20
10/6/2021
<
5
2.5
21
11 /3/2021
<
5
2.5
22
12/1 /2021
<
5
2.5
23
1 /5/2022
<
5
2.5
24
2/10/2022
<
5
2.5
25
3/2/2022
<
5
2.5
26
4/6/2022
<
5
2.5
27
5/3/2022
<
5
2.5
28
6/8/2022
<
5
2.5
29
8/3/2022
1.37
1.37
30
9/6/2022
2
2
31
10/5/2022
2.1
2.1
32
11 /9/2022
1.9
1.9
33
12/14/2022
1.4
1.4
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
-10-
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par19
Date Data
1
2 2/6/2018 <
3 5/23/2018
4 8/14/2018 <
5 12/9/2020 <
6 8/3/2022 <
7 9/6/2022 <
8 10/5/2022 <
9 11 /9/2022 <
10 12/14/2022 <
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
Par20
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Selenium
Values" then "COPY".
Silver
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points
= 58
= 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Std Dev.
0.7906
1
Std Dev.
0.1208
5
2.5
Mean
0.9167
2
2/6/2018
<
0.5
0.25
Mean
0.2563
2
2
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
5/23/2018
0.5
0.5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
2
1
n
9
4
8/14/2018
<
0.5
0.25
n
8
0.5
0.25
5
8/3/2022
<
0.1
0.05
1
0.5
Mult Factor =
1.81
6
9/6/2022
<
0.5
0.25
Mult Factor =
1.90
1
0.5
Max. Value
2.5 ug/L
7
10/5/2022
<
0.5
0.25
Max. Value
0.500 ug/L
1
0.5
Max. Pred Cw
4.5 ug/L
8
11/9/2022
<
0.5
0.25
Max. Pred Cw
0.950 ug/L
1
0.5
9
12/14/2022
<
0.5
0.25
1
0.5
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
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
- 11 - 4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par21
Date Data
1 12/20/2017
2 2/6/2018
3 5/23/2018
4 8/14/2018
5 11 /8/2018
6 2/5/2019
7 5/16/2019
8 8/6/2019
9 11 /6/2019
10 2/3/2020
11 5/4/2020
12 8/3/2020
13 11 /2/2020
14 2/1/2021
15 3/31 /2021
16 4/7/2021
17 5/3/2021
18 7/7/2021
19 8/4/2021
20 10/6/2021
21 11 /3/2021
22 12/1 /2021
23 1 /5/2022
24 2/10/2022
25 3/2/2022
26 4/6/2022
27 5/3/2022
28 6/8/2022
29 8/3/2022
30 9/6/2022
31 10/5/2022
32 11 /9/2022
33 12/14/2022
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
Par22
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
ZInC Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
BDL=1/2DL Results
44
44
Std Dev.
37.4
37.4
Mean
42
42
C.V.
42.7
42.7
n
33.3
33.3
95.5
95.5
Mult Factor =
43
43
Max. Value
37.1
37.1
Max. Pred Cw
47.4
47.4
66.6
66.6
37
37
26.1
26.1
40.5
40.5
50.1
50.1
53.8
53.8
48.6
48.6
49.6
49.6
48.6
48.6
48
48
62
62
79.4
79.4
52.4
52.4
130
130
56
56
46.9
46.9
45.5
45.5
41.7
41.7
37.7
37.7
27.9
27.9
31
31
25
25
24
24
26
26
21.1218
47.7818
0.4420
33
1.13
130.0 ug/L
146.9 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Antimony
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
8/14/2018
0.65
0.65
Std Dev.
2/6/2019
0.79
0.79
Mean
5/16/2019 <
0.5
0.25
C.V. (default)
8/1 /2020 <
5
2.5
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
= 58
0.9950
1.0475
0.6000
4
2.59
2.500000 pg/L
6.475000 pg/L
-12-
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
4/28/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par23
Par24
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Thallium
Values" then "COPY".
O
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points
Maximum data points
= 58
= 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
1
8/14/2018
<
0.5
0.25
Std Dev.
2.3750
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
2
2/6/2018
<
0.5
0.25
Mean
1.4375
2
Mean
NO DATA
3
5/16/2019
<
0.5
0.25
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V.
NO DATA
4
8/1/2020
<
10
5
n
4
4
n
0
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
2.59
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
7
Max. Value
5.000000 dig/L
7
Max. Value
N/A
8
Max. Pred Cw
12.950000 dig/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
N/A
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, data
-13- 4/28/2023

Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF Outfall 001
NCO063096 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) =
6.0000
1Q10S (cfs) =
0.09
7Q10S (cfs) =
0.11
7Q10W (cfs) =
0.25
30Q2 (cfs) =
0.32
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) =
0.82
Receiving Stream: Utley Creek HUC 03030004
WWTP/WTP Class: Grade IV
IWC% @ 1Q10S =
99.04153355
IWC% @ 7Q10S =
98.83103082
IWC% @ 7Q10W =
97.38219895
IWC% @ 30Q2 =
96.67359667
IW%C @ QA =
91.8972332
Stream Class: C
Qw = 6 MGD
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 134.17 mg/L
Chronic = 133.94 mg/L
PARAMETER
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE
J
Applied
Chronic Acute0.
n # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Standard
Acute (FW): 343.3
Arsenic
C
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
ug/L
9 1
3.6
_____
Chronic (FW) 151.8
C.V. (default)
Nw o value > Allowable
Arsenic
C
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
Note: n < 9
__ ___ _ _ _
Chronic (HH) 10.9
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 65.63
Beryllium
NC
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
ug/L
4 0
1.30
___ _ ______ ____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 6.58
No detects. No monitoring required.
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 14.153
Cadmium
NC
2.0943 FW(7Q10s) 14.0173
ug/L
33 1
1.320
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 2.119
All nondetects with one detection at 0.15 ug/L. No
No value > Allowable Cw
limits or monitoring required.
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides
NC
230 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
30 30
104.3
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 232.7
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
1 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
--Chronic: ----- 1-0---
---------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
300 A(30Q2)
ug/L
3 1
66.0
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 310.3
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 3,618.3
Chromium III
NC
465.4930 FW(7Q10s) 3583.6348
µg/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----- -_ -- _
----
Chronic:
---------------------------
Acute: 16.2
Chromium VI
NC
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
µg/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----- _ - _
-Chronic: ---
---------------------------
Tot Cr value(s) < 5 and < Cr VI Allowable Cw
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
33 4 3.4 Max reported value = 3.13
a: No monitoring required if all Total Chromium
samples are < 5 pg/L or Pred. max for Total Cr is <
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, rpa
Page 14 of 16 4/28/2023

Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF Outfall 001
NCO063096
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Qw = 6 MGD
Acute: 51.49
Copper
NC
33.0717 FW(7Q10s) 50.9995
ug/L
33 14
10.89
Chronic: 33.46
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: 22.2
Cyanide
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
10
ug/L
31 0
5.0
-_ _ ----- ----
-Chronic: 5 1
---------------------------
No detects. No monitoring required.
NO DETECTS
Max MDL 10
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride
NC
1800 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----_ _
-Ch--
Chronic: 1,8-
---------------------------
Acute: 487.566
Lead
NC
18.7823 FW(7Q10s) 482.8924
ug/L
37 0
2.875
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 19.004
No detects. No monitoring required.
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 5
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury
NC
12 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
N/A
--Chronic: ----- ---
---------------------------
12.1
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum
NC
2000 HH(7Q 1 Os)
ug/L
9 4
15.8
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 2,023.7
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 1,402.3
Nickel
NC
154.0306 FW(7Q10s) 1388.8440
µg/L
32 11
4.8
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic (FW) 155.9
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
N_o value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Nickel
NC
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
µg/L
Chronic (WS) 25.3
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 56.5
Selenium
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
ug/L
9 1
4.5
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 5.1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 5.385
Silver
NC
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 5.3331
ug/L
8 1
0.950
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 0.061
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects at < 0.5 - < 0.1 ug/L with 1 detect at
Limited data set
7 values > Allowable Cw
0.5 ug/L (< PQL of 1 ug/L). No monitoring.
Acute: 527.0
Zinc
NC
525.4573 FW(7Q10s) 521.9635
ug/L
33 33
146.9
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 531.7
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Antimony
NC
640 FW(7Q10s)
µg/L
4 2
6.47500
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 647.56989
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
Thallium
NC
2 FW(7Q lOs)
µg/L
4 0
12.95000
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 2.02366
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects with one at < 10 ug/L (PQL < 2.0 ug/L).
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 10
No monitoring required, but analyze to PQL
Acute:
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, rpa
Page 15 of 16 4/28/2023

Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF Outfall 001
NCO063096
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Qw = 6 MGD
0 0
N/A
_ _
-------------
Chronic:
---------------------------
Acute:
0 0
N/A
--Chronic:-----------
---------------------------
63096 RPA 6.0 MGD, rpa
Page 16 of 16 4/28/2023

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Table 1. Project Information
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Facility Name
Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF
WWTP/WTP Class
Grade IV
NPDES Permit
NCO063096
Outfal I
001
Flow, Qw (MGD)
8.000
Receiving Stream
Utley Creek
HUC Number
03030004
Stream Class
❑ Apply WS Hardness WQC
C
7Q10s (cfs)
0.11
7Q10w (cfs)
0.25
30Q2 (cfs)
0.32
QA (cfs)
0.82
1 Q10s (cfs)
135.23 mg/L (Avg)
Effluent Hardness
Upstream Hardness
24.35 mg/L (Avg)
Combined Hardness Chronic
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
134.26 mg/L
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Combined Hardness Acute
134.43 mg/L
Data Source(s)
Data sources include permittee-submitted DMRs and
PPAs.
i EL
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06E
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Par18
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
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
2.0981
FW
14.0413
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
mg/L
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
466.4070
FW
3589.4042
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
33.1394
FW
51.0940
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
18.8309
FW
483.9162
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
154.3431
FW
1391.1538
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
5.3512
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
526.5248
FW
522.8329
ug/L
Antimony
Aquatic Life
NC
640
FW
pg/L
Thallium
Aquatic Life
NC
2
FW
pg/L
63096 RPA 8.0 MGD, input
4/28/2023

Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF Outfall 001
NCO063096 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) =
8.0000
1Q10S (cfs) =
0.09
7Q10S (cfs) =
0.11
7Q10W (cfs) =
0.25
30Q2 (cfs) =
0.32
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) =
0.82
Receiving Stream: Utley Creek HUC 03030004
WWTP/WTP Class: Grade IV
IWC% @ 1Q10S = 99.27942354
IWC% @ 7Q10S = 99.12070344
IWC% @ 7Q10W = 98.02371542
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 97.48427673
IW%C @ QA = 93.79727685
Stream Class: C
Qw = 8 MGD
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 134.43 mg/L
Chronic = 134.26 mg/L
PARAMETER
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE
J
CY
Applied
Chronic Acutea.
D
n # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Standard
Acute (FW): 342.5
Arsenic
C
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
ug/L
9 1
3.6
_____
Chronic (FW) 151.3
C.V. (default)
Nw o value > Allowable
Arsenic
C
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
Note: n < 9
__ ___ _ _ _
Chronic (HH) 10.7
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 65.47
Beryllium
NC
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
ug/L
4 0
1.30
___ _ ______ ____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 6.56
No detects. No monitoring required.
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 14.143
Cadmium
NC
2.0981 FW(7Q10s) 14.0413
ug/L
33 1
1.320
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 2.117
All nondetects with one detection at 0.15 ug/L. No
No value > Allowable Cw
limits or monitoring required.
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides
NC
230 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
30 30
104.3
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 232.0
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
1 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
--Chronic: ----- 1-0---
---------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
300 A(30Q2)
ug/L
3 1
66.0
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 307.7
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 3,615.5
Chromium III
NC
466.4070 FW(7Q10s) 3589.4042
µg/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----- -_ -- _
----
Chronic:
---------------------------
Acute: 16.1
Chromium VI
NC
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
µg/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----- _ - _
-Chronic: ---
---------------------------
Tot Cr value(s) < 5 and < Cr VI Allowable Cw
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
33 4 3.4 Max reported value = 3.13
a: No monitoring required if all Total Chromium
samples are < 5 pg/L or Pred. max for Total Cr is <
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
63096 RPA 8.0 MGD, rpa
Page 2 of 3 4/28/2023

Town of Holly Springs - Utley Creek WRF Outfall 001
NCO063096
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Qw = 8 MGD
Acute: 51.46
Copper
NC
33.1394 FW(7Q10s) 51.0940
ug/L
33 14
10.89
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 33.43
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: 22.2
Cyanide
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
10
ug/L
31 0
5.0
-_ _ ----- -O ---
-Chronic: 5
---------------------------
No detects. No monitoring required.
NO DETECTS
Max MDL 10
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride
NC
1800 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
-_ _ ----_ -_
-Ch--
Chronic: 1,
---------------------------
Acute: 487.428
Lead
NC
18.8309 FW(7Q10s) 483.9162
ug/L
37 0
2.875
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 18.998
No detects. No monitoring required.
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 5
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury
NC
12 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
N/A
--Chronic: ----- ---
---------------------------
12.1
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum
NC
2000 HH(7Q 1 Os)
ug/L
9 4
15.8
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 2,017.7
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 1,401.3
Nickel
NC
154.3431 FW(7Q10s) 1391.1538
µg/L
32 11
4.8
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic (FW) 155.7
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
N_o value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Nickel
NC
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
µg/L
Chronic (WS) 25.2
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 56.4
Selenium
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
ug/L
9 1
4.5
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 5.0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 5.390
Silver
NC
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 5.3512
ug/L
8 1
0.950
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 0.061
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects at < 0.5 - < 0.1 ug/L with 1 detect at
Limited data set
7 values > Allowable Cw
0.5 ug/L (< PQL of 1 ug/L). No monitoring.
Acute: 526.6
Zinc
NC
526.5248 FW(7Q10s) 522.8329
ug/L
33 33
146.9
------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 531.2
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Antimony
NC
640 FW(7Q10s)
µg/L
4 2
6.47500
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 645.67742
No RP, limited dataset. No monitoring requred.
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
Thallium
NC
2 FW(7Q I Os)
µg/L
4 0
12.95000
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 2.01774
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
All nondetects with one at < 10 ug/L (PQL < 2.0 ug/L).
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 10
No monitoring required, but analyze to PQL
63096 RPA 8.0 MGD, rpa
Page 3 of 3 4/28/2023

Permit No. NC0063096
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard (WQS) Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6, 2016, with some exceptions. Therefore, metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6, 2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards - as
approved.
Table 1. NC Dissolved Metals Water Q ality Standards/A uatic Life Protection
Parameter
Acute FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic FW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Acute SW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Chronic SW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Arsenic
340
150
69
36
Beryllium
65
6.5
---
---
Cadmium
Calculation
Calculation
40
8.8
Chromium III
Calculation
Calculation
---
---
Chromium VI
16
11
1100
50
Copper
Calculation
Calculation
4.8
3.1
Lead
Calculation
Calculation
210
8.1
Nickel
Calculation
Calculation
74
8.2
Silver
Calculation
0.06
1.9
0.1
Zinc
Calculation
Calculation
90
81
Table 1 Notes:
1. FW= Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
2. Calculation = Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
213.0200 (e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/l for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2. Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness -Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph (11)(d)
Metal
NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium, Acute
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9151 [In hardness]-3.1485{
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9151[In hardness]-3.6236}
Cadmium, Chronic
WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.7998[ln hardness]-4.4451}
Chromium III, Acute
WER*0.316 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}
Chromium III, Chronic
WER*0.860 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}
Copper, Acute
WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700}
Copper, Chronic
WER*0.960 e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}
Lead, Acute
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-1.4601
Lead, Chronic
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-4.705}
Nickel, Acute
WER*0.998 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}
Nickel, Chronic
WER*0.997 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO063096
Silver, Acute
WER*0.85 • e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59)
Silver, Chronic
Not applicable
Zinc, Acute
WER*0.978 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884)
Zinc, Chronic
WER*0.986 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884)
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness -dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness -based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream (upstream) hardness
and so must be calculated case -by -case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge -specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal (more on that
below), but it is also possible to consider case -specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WQBELs for Hardness -Dependent Metals - Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations, based on applicable
standards and the critical low -flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value (chronic or acute), the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard, which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present (i.e. consistently below
detection level), then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness -dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q 10 (the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1 Q 10 using the formula 1 Q 10 = 0.843 (s7Q 10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site -specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness -dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge, the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream) hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values, upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available, the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L (CaCO3 or (Ca + Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L, respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness -dependent metal showing reasonable
potential, the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site -specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO063096
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
_ (Permitted Flow, cfs *Avg. Effluent Hardness, mg/L) + (s7Q 10, cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness, mg/L)
(Permitted Flow, cfs + s7Q 10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the IQ 10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal, using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients (DPCs) or site -specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the "Fraction Dissolved" converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in -stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-B-96-007, June 1996) and the
equation:
Cdiss = 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [ss(I+a)] [10-6] }
Where:
ss = in -stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1], minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a = constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness -dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient (or
site -specific translator) to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases, where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist (ie. silver), the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals. For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca = (s7Q 10 + Qw) (Cwgs)-(s7Q10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca = allowable effluent concentration (µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs = NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria (µg/L or mg/L)
Cb = background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw = permitted effluent flow (cfs, match s7Q 10)
s7Q 10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
1 Q 10 = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0063096
QA = used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2 = used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application (40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations, the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit (Total allowable
concentration) is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate, permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10, 2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure, total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases, the projected maximum concentration (95th %) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness -dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter
Value
Comments (Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness, mg/L
135.2
Permittee submitted DMRs
(Total as CaCO3)
Average Upstream Hardness, mg/L
24.3
Permittee submitted DMRs
(Total as CaCO3)
7Q10 summer (cfs)
0.11
Reported in previous permit Fact
Sheet
1Q10 (cfs)
0.09
Calculated in RPA spreadsheet
Permitted Flow (MGD)
6018.0
Design flow
Date: February 28, 2023
Permit Writer: Gary Perlmutter
Page 4 of 4

4/28/23 WQS = 12 ng/L MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION V:2013-6
Facility Name Holly Springs - Utley Creek WWTP / NC0063096 No Limit Required
/Permit No.
MMP Required
Total Mercury 1631E PQL = 0.5 ng/L 7Q10s = 0.730 cfs WQBEL = 12.94 ng/L
Date Modifier Data Entry Value Permitted Flow = 6.000 47 ng/L
2/6/18
1.26
1.26
5/18/18
2.51
2.51
10/18/18
<
0.5
0.5
1.4 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2018
5/16/19
<
0.05
0.5
0.5 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2019
8/3/20
<
0.5
0.5
0.5 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2020
3/31/21
<
0.5
0.5
11/17/21
<
0.5
0.5
12/15/21
<
0.5
0.5
12/29/21
0.589
0.589
0.5 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2021
1/5/22
0.515
0.515
2/23/22
1.84
1.84
3/22/22
1.25
1.25
5/4/22
<
0.5
0.5
8/3/22
<
0.5
0.5
11/9/22
1.73
1.73
12/14/22
<
0.0002
0.5
1.0 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2022

EPA Identification Number NPDES Number Facility Name Outfall Number
NCO063096 Utley Creek Reclimation Facility 1
Method Number (if Estimated Concentration (If
Pollutant (Required) CAS number Applicable) Reason Pollutant Believed Present in Discharge Known)
We currently have no reason to believe any POC, with approved
methods, that are not covered in Permit NCO063096 are present in
the discharge from the facility.

A Enter a date to enable dropdowns for other columns
Analyte Name
Ana lyte Acronym
Date Results
(ng/L)
MMEN
NMePFOSAE
PFBA
PFPeA
PFHxA
PFHpA
PFOA
PFNA
PFDA
PFUnDA
PFTrDA
PFDoDA
PFTeDA
PFBS
PFPeS
PFHxS
PFHpS
PFOS
PFNS
PFDS
4:2 FTS
6:2 FTS
8:2 FTS
PFOSA
N-McFOSAA
N-EtFOSAA
HFPO-DA
PFMOAA
PFMOPrA
PF02HxA
PF030A
PF04DA
NMePFOSAE
ADONA
9CI-PF30NS
11CI-PF3OUdS
10:2 FTS
FBSA
NVHOS
N-EtFOSA
N-EtFOSE
NFDHA
N-McFOSA
N-McFOSE
PEPA
PFECA-G
PFEESA
PFHxDA
PFMOAA
PF05DA
JPMPA
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
7/28/2022
20.2
71.3
40.2
6.09
24.2
0.669
0.374
ND
ND
ND
ND
22.6
0.665
3.36
0.14
4.02
ND
ND
ND
0.899
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
5.48
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid
Perfluorobutanoic acid
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid
Perfluorohe tanoic acid
Perfluorododecanoic acid
Perfluoro 3,5,7,9-tetraoxadecanoic acid
Perfluorouodecanoic acid
Perfluorooctadecanoic
Perfluorododecanoic acid
Perfluorononanoic acid
N-meth 1 erfluoro-l-octanesulfonamide
Perfluorohexanoic acid
Perfluorodecanesulfonic acid
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid
Perfluorohexadecanoic acid
Perfluoroethox ethanesulfonic acid
Perfluoro-2-methox acetic acid
11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-l-sulfonate
2-(N-eth 1 erfluoro-l-octanesulfonamido)-ethanol
2- -Eth 1 erfluorooctanesulfonamido acetic acid
Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid
Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid
DFSA
9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-l-sulfonate
Perfluorodecanoic acid
Perfluorododecanesulfonic acid
Perfluoroethoxypropanoic acid
Perfluoroethoxypropionic acid
Perfluoroethox sulfonic acid
NaflonByproduct 1
2- -meth 1 erfluoro-l-octanesulfonamido -ethanol
9-Chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-l-sulfonic Acid (9C1-
MONS)
11-Chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-l-sulfonic Acid
11C1-PF3OUdS
10:2 fluorotelomersulfonic acid
Perfluorobut lsul honamide
Naflon Byproduct 2
Byproduct 6
F-53B Major
Nonafluoro-3,6-dioxahe tanoic acid
N-Meth 1- erfluorooctanesulfonamide
MMF
NEtFOSAA
Perfluoro-3-methox ro anoic acid
1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-2- erfluoroethox ethanesulfonic acid
Perfluorobutanoic acid
Perfluorodecanoic acid
Perfluorohe tanesulfonic acid
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid

Reduction in Frequency Evalaution
Facility:
Utley Cr WWTP
Permit No.
NC0063096
Review period (use 3
01/2020 - 12/2022
yrs)
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
# of non -
Monthly
3-yr mean
# daily
# daily
Reduce
Weekly
50%
200%
200%
monthly
#civil penalty
Data Review
Units
average
(geo mean
< 50%7
samples
<15?
samples
< 20?
> 2?
> 1?
Frequency?
average limit
limit
MA
for FC)
MA
>200%
WA
>200%
limit
asessment
(Yes/No)
violations
BOD (Weighted)
mg/L
10.63
7.08
1 3.5
1.00
Y
14.17
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
TSS
mg/L
45.00
30.00
15
1.23
Y
60.00
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
Ammonia (weighted)
mg/L
4.25
1.42
0.7
0.06
Y
2.83
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
Fecal Coliform
#/100
400.00
200.00
100
1 0.7044975
Y
800
1
Y
0
N
0
N
Y