NC0021636_Fact Sheet_20230519

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO021636
Permit Writer/Email Contact Nick Coco,[e-mail]:
Date: 5/16/2023
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Municipal Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑ Renewal
❑X Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification(Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers,EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements,Engineering Alternatives Analysis,Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW),EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans,4 2"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: Harnett Regional Water/North Harnett Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP)
Applicant Address: P.O.Box 1119,Lillington,North Carolina 27546
Facility Address: 607 Edwards Drive,Lillington,North Carolina 27546
Permitted Flow: 7.5 MGD with proposed expansion to 16.5 MGD
Facility Type/Waste: MAJOR Municipal; 99.8%domestic, 0.2%industrial*
Facility Class: Grade IV Biological Water Pollution Control System
Treatment Units: Influent pump station,Aerated flow equalization,Mechanical and manual bar
screens, Grit classifier with auger,Instrumented influent and effluent flow
measurement, Dual oxidation ditches, Three centrifugal blowers, Two
434,000 gallon non-aerated tanks with submersible mixers,Dual clarifiers,
Four traveling bridge tertiary filters and four stainless steel disc filters,
Ultraviolet disinfection facility, Cascade post aeration,Backup generator
facility, Septage receiving station,Lime storage facility, Sludge lagoon
Pretreatment Program(Y/N) Y
County: Harnett
Region Fayetteville
*Based on permitted flows.
Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: Harnett Regional Water applied
on April 25,2022 for an NPDES permit renewal at 7.5 MGD for the North Harnett Regional WWTP,
with a request for a proposed expansion tier at 16.5 MGD. The newly proposed 16.5 MGD expansion
project is receiving funding via the American Rescue Plan Act(ARPA). An Engineering Alternatives
Analysis was submitted with the application. Flow projections and engineering alternatives are discussed
in detail below in Antidegradation Review. This facility serves a population of approximately 47,000
residents, as well as 2 significant industrial users(SIUs), including one categorical industrial user(CIU),
Page 1 of 19

via an approved pretreatment program and one industry under a local permit. Treated domestic and
industrial wastewater is discharged via Outfall 001 into the Cape Fear River, a class WS-IV waterbody in
the Cape Fear River Basin.
The facility was originally purchased from the Town of Lillington in 1999 as a 0.75 MGD facility. Since
that time,the facility has been upgraded from the 0.75 MGD secondary treatment facility to a 7.5 MGD
tertiary treatment facility. The NPDES permit for 7.5 MGD was initially issued on November 1,2017,
and expired July 31,2021.
The North Regional WWTP utilizes advanced wastewater treatment processes to treat the wastewater to
tertiary levels including denitrification via anoxic zones in the oxidation ditch for biological nutrient
removal. Recent upgrades at the WWTP included the installation of mixers located in the oxidation ditch
to increase the anoxic zone and the installation of stainless steel mesh,disc filters to supplement the
traveling bridge filters. The new disc filters have the capacity to treat the plant design flow.
The permit reissued in 2017 contained two flow tiers: 5.6 MGD and 7.5 MGD. The Division issued
Authorization to Operate 021636A03 and the facility began discharging under the expanded 7.5 MGD
flow tier in February 2018. In June of 2021, a request was made to the Division for speculative limits for
two flows, 15 MGD and 20 MGD. Speculative limits were provided on October 1,2021 with limits
provided for the 15 MGD flow only. The Division was unable to develop limits at the 20.0 MGD flow
while holding mass—loading constant as the resulting limits may not be achievable on a consistent basis
for current treatment technologies. During the period from the request for speculative limits and the
receipt of speculative limits,the actual expansion requirements for the North facility were determined,
with Harnett Regional Water landing on 16.5 MGD. MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A. (MBD)contacted
the Division on behalf of Harnett Regional Water in December 2021 and requested that a speculative
limits letter be issued based on a total flow of 16.5 MGD. The Division provided speculative limits for the
16.5 MGD flow tier on January 7,2022.
The proposed improvements to the facility as part of the upgrade to 16.5 MGD include the expansion of
the headworks facility, construction of a new secondary treatment system, expansion of the existing filters
system, expansion of the existing UV system,utilization of the existing post aeration, and installation of a
new sludge digestion and treatment system.
Sludge disposal: Currently sludge is removed from the treatment process and stored in a lagoon adjacent
to the facility. The sludge is removed from the facility currently using a floating dredge that has
capabilities to cross back and forth across the lagoon. Sludge that is removed from the existing lagoon is
transferred to a 600,000-gallon holding tank where it is continuously mixed before being pumped using
rotary lobe pumps to a centrifuge where it is dewatered. The proposed process will include the
modification of the existing secondary treatment process including the oxidation ditch and clarifiers to be
used for sludge handling. The existing oxidation ditches will be used for sludge digestion using a system
that will minimize the phosphorus return to the treatment train. The existing clarifiers will be used for
thickening and sludge holding. Sludge from the clarifier/sludge holding tanks will be transferred via new
rotary lobe pumps directly to the centrifuge for dewatering. Sludge is currently composted at McGill
Composting. Harnett Regional Water has the ability to send sludge to the Sampson County Landfill.
Page 2 of 19

2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s): Outfall 001 -Cape Fear River
Stream Segment: 18-(16.7)
Stream Classification: WS-IV
Drainage Area(mi2): 3464a
Summer 7Q10(cfs) 283a
Winter 7Q10(cfs): 304a
30Q2 (cfs): 506a
Average Flow(cfs): 3172a
IWC (%effluent): 4.0%at 7.5 MGD; 8.3%at proposed 16.5 MGDa
2022 303(d) listed/parameter: Not listedb
Subject to TMDL/parameter: Yes- State wide Mercury TMDL implementation
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC: Cape Fear River/03-06-07/HUC: 03030004
USGS Topo Quad: F23NE
'Based on updated USGS stream statistics provided on June 23,2021 (attached).
bThe stream segment of the Cape Fear River is not listed as impaired for any parameter in the 2022
Integrated Report. However, it does have downstream impairments of chlorophyll a from nutrient
enrichment and low dissolved oxygen.Nutrient criteria development and modeling are currently
underway to address these impairments and may affect future permit limits.
3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of June 2018 through December 2022.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Parameter Units Average Max Min Permit Limit
Flow MGD 4.8 22.456 2.228 MA 7.5
BOD summer mg/1 2.5 12 <2 WA 7.5
MA 5.0
BOD winter mg/1 4.4 55 <2 WA 15.0
MA 10.0
NH3N summer mg/1 1.0 5.39 < 1 WA 3.0
MA 1.0
NH3N winter mg/1 1.5 14.2 < 1 WA 6.0
MA 2.0
TSS mg/1 2.7 21 0.9 WA 45.0
MA 30.0
pH SU 7.2 7.59 6.53 6.0>pH<9.0
(geometric)
Fecal coliform #/100 ml (geo 2 an) 673 < 1 WA 400
MA 200
DO mg/1 8.7 11.24 5.94 DA>5.0
Conductivity umhos/cm 516 774 222 Monitor&
Report
Temperature ° C 20.5 27 12 Monitor&
Report
Page 3 of 19

TN* mg/1 6.7 17.9 1.66 Monitor&
Report
TN Load* lb/mo 6807 13174 4309 Monitor&
Report
TN(summer mass)Load* lb/season 47,002 58,262 37,353 59,968
TP* mg/l 2.0 5.28 0.07 Monitor&
Report
TP Load* lb/mo 2116 2987 1298 Monitor&
Report
TP (summer mass)Load* lb/season 14,330 17,491 12,469 19,989
Total Silver ug/l < 1 < I < 1 Monitor&
Report
Total Hardness mg/1 132 182.4 72 Monitor&
Report
MA-Monthly Average,WA-Weekly Average,DM-Daily Maximum,DA=Daily Average
*TN and TP effluent concentration monitoring is conducted 3/week in the summer and monthly in the
winter. TN and TP loading limitations are for summer mass loadings.
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 be proposed for this
permit action: The current permit requires instream monitoring for dissolved oxygen,temperature and
conductivity upstream at the US Highway 401 Bridge and 1.3 miles downstream at the boat ramp. As the
permittee is a member of the Middle Cape Fear River Basin Association(MCFRBA) instream monitoring
requirements are provisionally waived. The nearest upstream MCFRBA monitoring station is B6370000,
located approximately 1 mile upstream of the outfall. The nearest downstream MCFRBA monitoring
station is B6840000, located approximately 10 miles downstream of the outfall. Confluences with
Poorhouse Creek,Buies Creek, Thorntons Creek,the Upper Little River and Juniper Creek, as well as the
outfall for the City of Dunn's water treatment plant(NC0078955) exist between the outfall and
downstream MCFRBA station B6840000. As such, a review of downstream data at B6840000 is not
considered representative of the natural characteristics downstream of the North Harnett Regional
WWTP. Upstream data from January 2017 through June 2022 from B6370000 has been summarized
below in Table 2.
Table 2. Upstream Monitoring Data Summary
Upstream Effluent
Parameter Units
Average Min Max Average Min Max
Temperature ° C 20.6 32.2 4.4 20.5 27 12
DO mg/1 8.1 12.3 5.7 8.7 11.24 5.94
Conductivity µmhos/cm 140 272 64 516 774 222
Page 4 of 19

Upstream temperature was greater than 32 degrees Celsius [per 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (18)] on one
occasion during the period reviewed. Effluent temperature did not appear to differ significantly from
upstream temperature.
Upstream DO did not drop below 5 mg/L [per 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (6)] during the period reviewed.
Effluent conductivity was observed at levels higher than the upstream sampling location during the period
reviewed.
Based on discussions with the Division's Basin Planning Branch, instream monitoring for TP, TKN,
NO2+NO3, and ammonia have been added to the permit at a monthly frequency. As the facility is
pursuing expansion that would over double its capacity, tracking downstream impact is critical. As such,
the provisional waiver for instream monitoring downstream of the facility has been revised and is only
applicable if the MCFRBA activates a downstream station and collects samples. Downstream sampling is
to be conducted by Harnett Regional Water in the event that MCFRBA not activate a downstream station.
Downstream sampling should be conducted at Wildlife Road.
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
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): The facility reported three
weekly average BOD5 exceedances, one weekly average ammonia exceedance and one monthly average
ammonia exceedance, each resulting in enforcement cases in 2018. In 2019,the facility reported two
weekly average BOD exceedances and one monthly average BOD exceedance, and two weekly average
ammonia exceedances and one monthly average ammonia exceedance, each resulting in notices of
violation(NOVs). The facility reported one weekly average BOD5 exceedance, one monthly average
BOD exceedance, one weekly geomean fecal coliform exceedance,two monthly average flow
exceedances, one weekly average ammonia exceedance and one monthly average ammonia exceedance,
each resulting in enforcement cases in 2021.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results
(past 5 years): The facility passed 21 of 21 quarterly chronic toxicity tests, as well as all 5 second species
chronic toxicity tests conducted from January 2018 to October 2022. The facility conducted chronic
toxicity testing at 1.6% effluent based on the 5.6 MGD flow through their April 2018 testing. However, as
the facility had begun operating at the 7.5 MGD flow tier in February 2018,this test should have been
conducted using the 2.1%effluent specified in the permit. Harnett Regional Water began conducting
toxicity testing at 2.1% effluent in the following quarter(July 2018),which resulted in a pass, and has
conducted their necessary testing at the appropriate percent effluent since.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The last facility inspection conducted
in February 2020 reported that the facility was compliant. The last pretreatment inspection conducted in
July 2021 reported that the facility was compliant.
Page 5 of 19

6. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
The Division provided speculative limits for the 16.5 MGD expanded flow tier on January 7,2022. These
limits, shown below, are proposed to be implemented in the permit.
Table 3. Speculative Limits for 16.5 MGD Expansion Tier
Effluent Characteristic Effluent Limitations
Monthly Weekly Daily
Average Average Maximum
Flow 16.5 MGD
BODS 2.1 m /L 3.1 m /L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 0.5 m /L 1.5 m /L
NH3 as N (Nov. -Mar.) 0.9 m /L 2.7 m /L
Dissolved Oxygen >5.0 mg/L
minimum daily average)
Total Nitrogen Load 59,968 Ibs/season
(Apr.-Oct.)
Total Phosphorus Load 19,989 lbs/season
(Apr.-Oct.)
TSS 15 m 22.5 m L
TRC 28
Fecal coliform 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
(geometric mean
Chronic Toxicity 7.5%
Pass/Fail (Quarterly test
Please note that percent effluent at which chronic toxicity testing shall be conducted as identified in the
January 7,2022 letter has not been adopted. More information regarding the 16.5 MGD expanded flow
tier chronic toxicity testing requirement may be found below in Toxicity Testing Requirements.
Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0206,the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow(acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow(chronic Aquatic
Life;non-carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow(aesthetics); annual average flow(carcinogen,HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered(e.g., based on CORMIX model results):NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
Oxygen-Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen-consuming waste(e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen(DO)water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD=30 mg/l for Municipals)may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Ifpermit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: The current permit
limitations for BOD at the 7.5 MGD flow tier are based on a 2008 revised Qual2E model. No changes are
proposed for the 7.5 MGD flow tier BOD limits.
Page 6 of 19

With current modeling of the Cape Fear River underway,no new models are being evaluated to develop
limits for facilities in the modeled segments. Therefore,mass-loading of oxygen consuming wastes have
been frozen based on current permit limits for the proposed 16.5 MGD expanded flow tier resulting in
monthly average and weekly average BOD limits of 2.1 mg/L and 3.1 mg/L,respectively. These limits
can be re-evaluated once current modeling is finished. These limits are expected to require advanced
treatment technologies.
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/1(summer)and 1.8 mg/1(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 ug/1)and capped at 28 ug/l(acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/1 are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The permit does
not currently set limits or monitoring requirements for TRC due to the facility employing UV treatment
for disinfection. However, in the event of an emergency where chlorination is required as a backup or
temporary means of disinfection at the facility, a TRC limit and monitoring requirement have been added
to the permit based on the review in the attached WLA spreadsheet. Please note that TRC monitoring is
only required in the event that chlorine is used at the plant and as part of the regular Effluent Pollutant
Scans.
The current permit limitations for ammonia at the 7.5 MGD flow tier are based on a 2008 revised Qual2E
model. No changes are proposed for the 7.5 MGD flow tier ammonia limits. The 7.5 MGD flow tier
ammonia limits have been reviewed in the attached WLA for toxicity and have been found to be
protective.No changes are proposed.
With current modeling of the Cape Fear River underway,no new models are being evaluated to develop
limits for facilities in the modeled segments. Therefore,mass-loading of oxygen consuming wastes have
been frozen based on current permit limits for the proposed 16.5 MGD expanded flow tier. This results in
monthly average and weekly average summer ammonia limits of 0.5 mg/L and 1.5 mg/L,respectively,
and monthly average and weekly average winter ammonia limits of 0.9 mg/L and 2.7 mg/L,respectively.
These limits can be re-evaluated once current modeling is finished. These limits are expected to require
advanced treatment technologies.
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 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.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between June 2018 and
November 2022. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water
Page 7 of 19

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
• MonitoringOnly.nly. 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: Total Arsenic, Total Cadmium, Total Chromium, Total Copper,Total Lead, Total
Molybdenum, Total Nickel, Total Selenium, Total Silver, Total Zinc,Nitrate
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Four effluent pollutant scans (2017, 2018,2019 and
2020)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
o The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since they did not
demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria and
the maximum predicted concentration was<50%of the allowable concentration: Total
Beryllium, Total Cyanide
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.
As this facility discharges to WS-IV waters, analysis of the parameters listed in 15A NCAC 02B .0216
was conducted.No chlorinated phenolic compound was reported as detected in the effluent pollutant
scans. Total dissolved residue was not reported at levels greater than 500 mg/L in the effluent pollutant
scans. Effluent hardness was greater than 100 mg/L on 57 occasions during the period reviewed. Average
upstream hardness data from MCFRBA monitoring station B6370000 from January 2017 through June
2022 was reported as 29.3 mg/L(range 20 mg/L—44 mg/L). While effluent hardness is generally higher
than the standard listed for WS-IV surface waters in 15A NCAC 02B .0216, combined hardness, as
calculated in the attached RPA, is considerably lower than the standard. As such, it does not appear that
effluent hardness is influencing the hardness of the stream to an extent where excursions above the stream
hardness standard would be observed.
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, chronic WET testing will continue
on a quarterly frequency. However,based on updated stream statistics provided by USGS,the percent
effluent specified for the 7.5 MGD toxicity testing has been revised from 2.1%effluent to 4.0%effluent.
Page 8 of 19

Additionally,while the 2022 speculative limits propose chronic toxicity testing be conducted at 7.5%
effluent for the 16.5 MGD expanded flow tier,based on the instream wastewater concentration percentage
at the summer 7Q10, chronic toxicity testing shall be conducted at 8.3%effluent at the 16.5 MGD
expanded flow tier. Chronic toxicity testing shall be conducted during the months of January,April, July
and October for both flow tiers.
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/1)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/1) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL
value of 47 ng/1
Table 4. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
#of Samples 2 4 4 4 4
Annual Average Conc.n /L 0.5 0.7 1.5 0.95 1.175
Maximum Conc.,n /L 0.5 1.1 3.9 2.3 2.4
TBEL,n /L 47
WQBEL,n /L 304.13 A 7.5 MGD& 144.79 16.5 MGD
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>2.0 MGD and reported quantifiable levels of mercury(> 1 ng/1),
the mercury minimization plan(MMP)condition has been maintained.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation
within this permit: The Division is continuing to work towards the development of a nutrient
management strategy,permitting strategy,TMDL, and/or criteria for nutrients in the Cape Fear River
Basin. Strategies were implemented in the current permit based on the 2005 Cape Fear River Basinwide
Water Quality Plan which address nutrients and oxygen-demanding wastewater discharges in this basin,
and included monitoring and reporting of total nitrogen(TN),monthly mass TN load,total phosphorous
(TP)and monthly mass TP load. In addition,new summer(April-October)TN and TP seasonal load
limits were calculated and implemented in the current limit based on an allowable TN concentrations of 6
mg/1 and TP concentrations of 2 mg/l,resulting in summer mass limits of 59,968 lbs for TN and 19,989
lbs for TP. To address nutrients load limits for the previous expansion to 7.5 MGD,the Division froze
the summer TN and TP mass load limits for this expansion which resulted in the equivalent concentration
of TN of 4.48 mg/1 and of TP of 1.49 mg/l.
On January 31, 2023,Harnett Regional Water submitted a letter(attached)to the Division requesting a
transfer of 55,582 lbs/year of total nitrogen loading and 18,525 lbs/year of total phosphorous loading from
the South Harnett Regional WWTP (NC0088366)to the North Harnett Regional WWTP to accommodate
for the increase in treated flow at the North Harnett Regional WWTP. The proposed transfer of loading is
summarized below in Table 5.
Page 9 of 19

Table 5. Nutrient Transfer Request
TN TP
ROW % CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT PROPOSED
NORTH 16.5 MGD 52.4% 59,968 LBS 115,550 LBS 19,989 LBS 39,517 LBS
SOUTH 15-0 M60 47.6% 150,628 LBS 105.046 LBS 53,543 LBS 35 O1S LSS
TOTAL 31.S MG0 L00D 220 S96 LBS 220,596 LBS 73 S32 LBS 73 32 LBS
The transfer of loading has been included in the permit as effective upon expansion to the 16.5 MGD flow
tier.NCO088366 is up for renewal and will be issued with the same effective date so that the nutrient
loading transfer is completed with this renewal.
The permit will be reopened if the Division requires additional monitoring or limitations to support its
water quality protection and restoration efforts in the Cape Fear River Basin.
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: NA
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
If NO,provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit
must document an effort to consider non-discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all
cases, existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is
maintained and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: The proposed expansion is funded via the
American Rescue Plan Act(ARPA) and is not subject to review under the National Environmental Policy
Act(NEPA). As this project is not receiving more than$10 million in funds at this time,the State
Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) does not apply.
Page 10 of 19

An Engineer's Alternatives Analysis(EAA)was submitted by MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A. (MBD),
the consulting firm hired by Harnett Regional Water(HRW), on April 25,2022. In their EAA,MBD
noted that Harnett Regional Water has contractual agreements with three municipal systems for treatment
of wastewater at the North Harnett Regional WWTP including Fuquay-Varina,Angier, and Lillington.
MBD provides background information related to the flows tributary to the facility from these contracts:
• The North Regional WWTP began with the acquisition of the existing Lillington WWTP and has
expanded through growth in the HRW service area and through agreements for capacity in the
collection and treatment system from the municipal partners. To address the need for wastewater
treatment capacity,HRW constructed the 5.6 MGD North Regional WWTP adjacent to the
existing facility, and then expanded the facility to 7.5 MGD in 2017 to accommodate the
completion of a 20-inch force main that resulted in the addition of flows from the Town of Erwin
and the Swift Industrial WWTP. The role and capacity of each of the participants in the system is
discussed below.
• In 1999,HRW purchased the existing Lillington WWTP from the Town. At that time,the facility
had a capacity of 0.75 MGD. Included with the treatment facility was the 52-acre site,providing
area for future expansions. In exchange for the WWTP and the 52-acre site,the Town of
Lillington received 1.2 MGD in capacity in the new WWTP and sewer revenue credits.
• In 2000,Fuquay-Varina and Harnett County agreed to the joint construction of the
Hamett/Fuquay-Varina wastewater interceptor following Kenneth/Neills Creek to a new regional
5.6 MGD WWTP. At that time,Fuquay-Varina purchased 2.6 MGD of capacity in the new
wastewater treatment facility.
• In 2006,the Town of Angier agreed to purchase 1.08 MGD of wastewater capacity in the plant
and 1 MGD of transmission capacity in the wastewater interceptor line. HRW and Angier also
agreed to jointly participate in the construction of a wastewater transmission line along
Chalybeate Springs Road. Angier extended the line to Highway 55,near the Wake County line.
• MBD notes that the towns of Lillington,Fuquay-Varina and Angiers have each requested
additional flows be added to their contractual agreements with Harnett Regional Water for the
North Harnett Regional WWTP (see attached requests).
In their EAA,MBD noted that based on data from the NC Office of State Budget and Management
(OSBM),Harnett County grew at a rate of 16.4%from April 1, 2010 to April 1,2020. MBD has noted the
belief that growth experienced in this area was impacted by the growth in the neighboring Wake County,
which grew at a rate of 38%in the same period.
Based on a 20-year growth projection at 16.4%,MBD projects the population of Harnett County will
increase by over 47,000 residents by 2042. MBD also notes that it is anticipated that the majority of
growth experienced will occur in planned communities that provide water and sewer service. MBD
assumed that 40%of the population growth will occur in the northern Harnett Regional Water service
area,handled by the North Harnett Regional WWTP, and projects that based on a household population
of 2.3 residents per service, the service area will likely expand by at least 8,000 connections.
MBD provides a snapshot of estimated flow projections for Fuquay-Varina,Lillington,Angier, and
Harnett Regional Water, including current contracted capacity in the North Regional WWTP facility and
the requested additional allocation in the WWTP, in the table below.
Page 11 of 19

NORTH HARNETT R1111TP
Ci"RRENT USAGE AND NEED
P_-',,RTN- ER/SYSTEM CURRENT CURRENT COMMITTED TOTAL USAGE
CAPACITY USAGE NOT YET PLUS
TRIBUTARY CONflv1ITTED
FUQUAY-VARINA 2.60 MGD 1.50 MGD 0.65 MGD 2.15 MGD
LILLINGTON 120 MGD 0.85 MGD 0.02 MGD 0.87 MGD
ANGIER 1.08 MGD 0.75 MGD 0.55 MGD 130 MGD
HARNETT REGIONAL
WATER 2.62 MGD 2.50 MGD 0.50 MGD 3.00 MGD
TOTAL. 7.50!%iGD 5.60'-%IGD 1.72 JIGD 7.32 NIGD
NORTH HARNETT R'«ZV?P
CI-RRENT AND REQUIRED CAPACITY
PARTNER/SYSTEM CURRENT REQUESTED TOTAL
CAPACITY ALLOCATION CAPACITY
FL-QUAY-VARINA 2.60 MGD 3.40 MGD 6.00 MGD
LILLINGTON 1.20 MGD 0.50 MGD 1.70 MGD
ANGIER 1.08 MGD 1.25 MGD 2.33 MGD
H.KN-E TT REGIONAL
WATER 2.62 MGD 3.85 MGD 6.47 MGD
TOTAL. 7.50 '-%IGD 9.00 MGD 16.50 AIGD
NC OSBM population growth data was reviewed by Division staff to accompany the submitted
information. Review of Harnett County echoed the population growth of 16.6%indicated by MBD.
Review of population growth from April 2010 to April 2020 for the Towns of Lillington(48.5%),Angier
(9.2%), and Fuquay-Varina(89.2%)reported significant growth. The NC OSBM projects the population
of Harnett County to reach approximately 182,000 residents by 2040,representing a roughly 36%growth
rate from 2020 (134,000 residents). Based on the existing 7.5 MGD flow tier, and the projected growth of
service population, a flow rate of 70 gallons per person per day, and a 15%reserve flow for potential
industrial and commercial users,the Division concurs with the proposal of a facility upgrade to 16.5
MGD.
The following alternatives were evaluated for the proposed discharge:
Alternative Description 20-year NPV*
Connection to an Existing
$92,000,000
WWTP
Land Application $106,000,000
Wastewater Reuse Deemed infeasible
Surface Discharge NPDES $65,000,000
Combination of Alternatives $98,000,000
*Shown costs do not include operation and maintenance costs provided in the analysis.
Page 12 of 19

Connection to an Existing WWTP: The alternative of connecting to an existing WWTP for treatment
would require the construction of a new raw sewage pump station and force main to transfer the untreated
wastewater from the North Regional WWTP to another treatment plant for treatment and disposal. There
are two systems downstream from the North Regional WWTP that have discharges into the Cape Fear
Basin: the HRW South Regional WWTP and the two City of Fayetteville WWTPs (Cross Creek WWTP
and Rockfish Creek WWTP). In order to transfer flow to either of these facilities, an additional pipeline
would need to be constructed and additional capacity would be required in the treatment facilities.
The closest plant and most likely facility to receive flow from the North facility would be the HRW South
Regional WWTP. The South Regional WWTP is a 15 MGD facility that serves southern Harnett County
along the border with Cumberland County and also provides wastewater treatment for Fort Bragg. The 15
MGD capacity is committed to existing systems including 10 MGD dedicated to Fort Bragg.Any
additional flow would require an expansion of the NPDES permit and a capital expansion of the WWTP.
Two evaluations were performed including an expansion of 5 MGD(or roughly half the flow needed) and
an expansion of 10 MGD to accommodate the two options for addressing the additional flows from the
North facility. Evaluation of expansion of the South Regional WWTP by 5 MGD is discussed below in
Combination of Alternatives. The construction cost to upgrade the South Regional WWTP to accept a
flow of 9 MGD would be approximately$55 million. The construction cost for the pump station and
pipeline to transfer up to 4.5 MGD of flow to the South facility would be approximately$28 million. The
total cost for transferring 9.0 MGD from the North Regional WWTP to the South Regional WWTP for
treatment and discharge would be approximately$87 million not including all soft costs.
Land Application: Harnett Regional Water previously utilized a portion of the existing WWTP site for
land application of treated wastewater. The permit has since been rescinded but the loading rates for the
site provide useful data in discussing this option. The previous site was approximately 8 acres and the
permit allowed for the application of up to 20,000 gpd of treated wastewater. This equated to
approximately 2,500 gpd of discharge per acre of available land or a discharge rate of 0.65 inches per acre
per week. Based on a 0.65 inches per acre per week application rate,the application of 9 MGD would
require approximately 3,600 acres not including buffers. Thirty days of storage for wet periods would also
be required. Based on a depth of 15 feet,the storage pond would have a surface area of 36 acres. Some
assumptions made with regard to pricing this alternative include the assumption that suitable application
sites will be located 15,000 LF from the WWTP,the property will be contiguous(to reduce application
costs), and the cost for the property would be $2,500 per acre. Based on these assumptions,the cost was
generated considering the construction of a pump station and force main,the purchase of land and
storage, installation of irrigation equipment and the planting land cover crops. The total construction cost
for increasing the treatment capacity of the North WWTP to16.5 MGD and land applying 9.0 MGD from
the North Regional WWTP would be$88 million without soft costs and the cost for land which is
estimated to be $10 million.
Wastewater Reuse: Wastewater reuse was deemed an infeasible option since there are no reuse options
available(no customers) for the treated effluent from the North Regional WWTP.
Direct Discharge to Surface Waters: The total construction cost to expand the North treatment process
to 16.5 MGD is $61 million not including soft costs associated with the project.
Combination of Alternatives: The total construction cost to upgrade the South Regional WWTP to
accept half the proposed upgrade to the North Regional WWTP(4.5 MGD)would be approximately$34
million. The construction cost for the pump station and pipeline to transfer up to 4.5 MGD of flow to the
South facility would be approximately$28 million. The North Regional WWTP would also require an
expansion by 4.5 MGD with an estimated construction cost of$36 million for a total construction cost of
$98 million not including all soft costs.
Page 13 of 19

The most economically feasible and chosen option was the expansion of the North Harnett Regional
WWTP. The Division has reviewed the alternatives and concurs with this decision.
9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4)of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1)prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit,with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed(e.g.,based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit(YES/NO): NO
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated:NA
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following
regulations and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.0500;2)
NPDES Guidance,Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances(7/15/2010 Memo); 3)NPDES Guidance,
Reduced Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance(10/22/2012 Memo); 4)Best
Professional Judgement(BPJ). Per US EPA(Interim Guidance, 1996),monitoring requirements are not
considered effluent limitations under Section 402(o)of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti-
backsliding prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
For instream monitoring,refer to Section 4.
Harnett Regional Water was granted 2/week monitoring for BOD, ammonia, TSS and fecal coliform
based on 2012 DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits
for Exceptionally Performing Facilities during their 2017 renewal. Harnett Regional Water has requested
continuation of this monitoring frequency reduction as part of their renewal application. The last three
years of the facility's data for these parameters have been reviewed in accordance with the criteria
outlined in the guidance. Based on this review, 2/week monitoring frequency has been maintained for
BOD, ammonia, TSS and fecal coliform at the 7.5 MGD flow tier. Upon expansion to 16.5 MGD,BOD,
ammonia, TSS and fecal coliform shall be monitored daily in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0508 to
appropriately monitor these parameters during the startup phase of the upgraded facility.
In 2019,based on the EPA's Third Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule indicating elevated
concentrations of PFAS and 1,4-dioxane in the Cape Fear River Basin,the Division required facilities in
the basin with pretreatment programs conduct investigative monitoring of their influents for PFAS and
1,4-dioxane.
Harnett Regional Water participated in this investigation and found the presence of PFAS in their North
Harnett Regional WWTP influent samples.As such,monitoring of PFAS chemicals will be added to the
permit at a frequency of quarterly. Since an EPA method for sampling and analyzing PFAS in wastewater
is not currently available,the PFAS sampling requirement in the Permit includes a compliance schedule
which delays the effective date of this requirement until the first full calendar quarter beginning 6 months
after EPA has a final wastewater method in 40 CFR136 published in the Federal Register. This date may
be extended upon request and if there are no NC-certified labs.
Harnett Regional Water also found the presence of 1,4-dioxane in their North Harnett Regional WWTP
influent samples. As only 3 influent samples from 2019 are available for this parameter, further
investigation into the concentrations of 1,4-dioxane present in the facility's effluent is required to better
characterize the waste. Influent concentration is anticipated to reflect effluent concentrations based on
existing components at the treatment facility. As the maximum reported influent concentration of 1,4-
Page 14 of 19

dioxane was observed at a concentration greater than 10 µg/L but less than 35 µg/L, and the facility
discharges to WS waters,this facility is considered Action Level Tier 3 based on the 2022 DWR NPDES
Strategy for 1,4-dioxane.As such,Monthly monitoring has been added to the permit. Please note that
chronic allowable discharge concentrations have been calculated for this facility's two effluent flow tiers
based on a 1 X 10-6 risk level Instream Target Value (ITV) for water supply waters of 0.35 µg/L and an
annual average flow(AAF)of 3172 cfs. These calculations resulted in chronic allowable discharge
concentrations of 95.8 µg/L and 43.7 µg/L for the 7.5 MGD and 16.5 MGD flow tiers,respectively.
Limits may be necessary after effluent data is collected and a reasonable potential analysis is conducted.
As such, a 1,4-dioxane reopener condition has been added to the permit.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21,2015. Effective
December 21, 2016,NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports
(DMRs) electronically. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional
NPDES reports electronically effective December 21, 2020, EPA extended this deadline from December
21,2020,to December 21,2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4,2021,was extended as
a final regulation change published in the November 2, 2020 Federal Register. This permit contains the
requirements for electronic reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.
12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
Table 6. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 7.5 MGD flow tier
Parameter Current Permit Proposed Change Basis for Condition/Change
Flow MA 7.5 MGD No change 15A NCAC 2B .0505
TMF No requirement Monitor and Report For calculation of TN and TP loadings
Monthly
BOD5 Summer: No change WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model, Surface
MA 5.0 mg/1 Water Monitoring,2012 DWR
WA 7.5 mg/l Guidance Regarding the Reduction of
Winter: Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
MA 10.0 mg/l Permits for Exceptionally Performing
WA 15.0 mg/l Facilities
Monitor and report
2/Week
NH3-N Summer: No change WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model, 2023
MA 1.0 mg/l WLA review; Surface Water
WA 3.0 mg/l Monitoring, 2012 DWR Guidance
Winter: Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring
MA 2.0 mg/1 Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
WA 6.0 mg/l Exceptionally Performing Facilities
Monitor and report
2/Week
TSS MA 30.0 mg/l No change WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model, Surface
WA 45.0 mg/l Water Monitoring,2012 DWR
Monitor and report Guidance Regarding the Reduction of
2/Week Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
Permits for Exceptionally Performing
Facilities
Fecal coliform MA 200/100ml No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
WA 400/100ml NCAC 2B .0200; Surface Water
Monitoring, 2012 DWR Guidance
Page 15 of 19

Monitor and report Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring
2/Week Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Exceptionally Performing Facilities
DO > 5.0 mg/1 No change WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model; Surface
Monitor and report Daily Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.
0500
pH 6—9 SU No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
Monitor and report Daily NCAC 213 .0200; Surface Water
Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Conductivity Monitor and report Daily No change Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC
2B. 0500
Temperature Monitor and report Daily No change Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC
2B. 0500
Total Residual No requirement DM 28 ug/L WQBEL. 2023 WLA review and
Chlorine Monitor and report Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC
Daily(only when 2B. 0500
chlorine is used)
Total Nitrogen Monitor and report 3/week No change Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River
in summer Basin; Surface Water Monitoring, 15A
Monitor and report NCAC 2B. 0500
Monthly in winter
TN Loading Monitor and report No change WQBEL.Nutrient protection for Cape
lb/month Monthly Fear River Basin; Surface Water
Summer mass loading Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
59,968 lb/season; Monitor
and report annually
TKN No requirement Monitor and report For calculation of Total Nitrogen
Monthly
NO3+NO2 No requirement Monitor and report For calculation of Total Nitrogen
Monthly
Total Monitor and report 3/week No change Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River
Phosphorous in summer Basin; Surface Water Monitoring, 15A
Monitor and report NCAC 2B. 0500
Monthly in winter
TP Loading Monitor and report No change WQBEL.Nutrient protection for Cape
lb/month Monthly Fear River Basin; Surface Water
Summer mass loading Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
19,989 lb/season; Monitor
and report annually
Total Hardness Quarterly monitoring No change Hardness-dependent dissolved metals
Upstream and in Effluent water quality standards approved in
2016
Total Silver Monitor and report Remove requirement Based on results of RPA; All values
Quarterly non-detect< 1 ug/L-no monitoring
required
Monitor and Report Based on 2019 Investigation—1,4-
1,4-dioxane No requirement Monthly and dioxane present in influent and 2022
reo ener condition DWR NPDES Strategy for 1,4-dioxane
Page 16 of 19

Add Quarterly Based on 2019 Investigation—PFAS
PFAS No requirement monitoring with present in influent; Implementation
delayed delayed until after EPA certified
implementation method becomes available.
Add monthly
Monitor DO, conductivity monitoring for TKN, Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC
and temperature 3/Week NO2+NO3, TP and 2B. 0500; Based on discussion with
during June,July,August ammonia;Provisional basin planning branch; instream data
Instream and September and waiver for necessary for tracking impact of
monitoring 1/Week the remainder of downstream expanding facility; instream
the year;Provisional monitoring further monitoring waiver maintained if
waiver of instream conditioned upon MCFRBA activates a downstream
monitoring due to activation of station; instream monitoring waiver
membership in MCFRBA downstream station maintained for upstream sampling
by MCFRBA
Toxicity Test Chronic limit, 2.1% Chronic limit, 4.0% WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts.
effluent effluent 15A NCAC 213.0200 and 15A NCAC
213.0500;Updated USGS stream
statistics
Effluent Three times per permit No change; 40 CFR 122
Pollutant Scan cycle conducted in 2025,
2026, 2027
Mercury MMP Special Condition No change; revise WQBEL. Consistent with 2012
Minimization wording towards its Statewide Mercury TMDL
Plan(MMP) maintenance Implementation.
Electronic Electronic Reporting No change In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Special Condition Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD—Million gallons per day,MA- Monthly Average,WA—Weekly Average,DM—Daily Max
Table 7. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 16.5 MGD flow tier
Parameter Proposed Change Basis for Condition/Change
Flow MA 16.5 MGD 15A NCAC 2B .0505
TMF Monitor and Report Monthly For calculation of TN and TP loadings
BOD5 MA 2.1 mg/1 WQBEL. 2008 Qua12E model and frozen load of
WA 3.1 mg/1 oxygen consuming waste in expectation of current
Monitor and report Daily modeling efforts,2022 speculative limits; Surface
Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 02B .0508; 2012
Monitor and report 2/week if no DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduction of
effluent limit violation occurs during Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
first 6 months of 16.5 MGD flow tier Exceptionally Performing Facilities
NH3-N Summer: WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model and frozen load of
MA 0.5 mg/1 oxygen consuming waste in expectation of current
WA 1.5 mg/1 modeling efforts,2022 speculative limits; Surface
Winter: Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 02B .0508; 2012
MA 0.9 mg/1 DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduction of
WA 2.7 mg/1 Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Monitor and report Daily Exceptionally Performing Facilities
Monitor and report 2/week if no
effluent limit violation occurs during
first 6 months of 16.5 MGD flow tier
Page 17 of 19

TSS MA 15.0 mg/1 WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model and frozen load in
WA 22.5 mg/l expectation of current modeling efforts,2022
Monitor and report Daily speculative limits; Surface Water Monitoring, 15A
NCAC 02B .0508; 2012 DWR Guidance Regarding
Monitor and report 2/week if no the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
effluent limit violation occurs during permits for Exceptionally Performing Facilities
first 6 months of 16.5 MGD flow tier
Fecal coliform MA 200/100ml WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B .0200;
WA 400/100ml Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 02B .0508;
Monitor and report Daily 2012 DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduction of
Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Monitor and report 2/week if no Exceptionally Performing Facilities
effluent limit violation occurs during
first 6 months of 16.5 MGD flow tier
DO >5.0 mg/1 WQBEL. 2008 Qual2E model; Surface Water
Monitor and report Daily Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
pH 6—9 SU WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 2B .0200;
Monitor and report Daily Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Conductivity Monitor and report Daily Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Temperature Monitor and report Daily Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
Total Residual DM 28 ug/L WQBEL. 2023 WLA review and Surface Water
Chlorine Monitor and report Daily(only when Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
chlorine is used
Total Monitor and report 3/week in summer Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River Basin;
Nitrogen Monitor and report Monthly in winter Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
TN Loading Monitor and report lb/month Monthly WQBEL.Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River
Summer mass loading 115,550 Basin; Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.
lb/season upon revision and reissuance 0500
of South Harnett WWTP loadings
(NC88366);Monitor and report
annually
TKN Monitor and report Monthly N For calculation of Total Nitrogen
NO3+NO2 Monitor and report Monthly For calculation of Total Nitrogen
Total Monitor and report 3/week in summer Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River Basin;
Phosphorous Monitor and report Monthly in winter Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500
TP Loading Monitor and report lb/month Monthly WQBEL.Nutrient protection for Cape Fear River
Summer mass loading 38,517 lb/season Basin; Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.
upon revision and reissuance of South 0500
Harnett WWTP loadings (NC88366);
Monitor and report annually
Total Quarterly monitoring Upstream and in Hardness-dependent dissolved metals water quality
Hardness Effluent standards approved in 2016
Monitor and Report Monthly and Based on 2019 Investigation—1,4-dioxane present in
1,4-dioxane reopener condition influent and 2022 DWR NPDES Strategy for 1,4-
dioxane
Quarterly monitoring with delayed Based on 2019 Investigation—PFAS present in
PFAS implementation influent; Implementation delayed until after EPA
certified method becomes available.
Page 18 of 19

Monitor DO, conductivity and
temperature 3/Week during June, July,
August and September and 1/Week the Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B. 0500;
remainder of the year;monitoring for Based on discussion with basin planning branch;
Instream TKN,NO2+NO3,TP and ammonia; instream data necessary for tracking impact of
monitoring Provisional waiver of instream expanding facility; instream monitoring waiver
requirements monitoring due to membership in maintained if MCFRBA activates a downstream
MCFRBA; Provisional waiver for station; instream monitoring waiver maintained for
downstream monitoring further upstream sampling
conditioned upon activation of
downstream station by MCFRBA
Toxicity Test Chronic limit, 8.3%effluent WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts. 15A NCAC
2B.0200 and 15A NCAC 2B.0500;Updated USGS
stream statistics
Effluent Three times per permit cycle; conducted 40 CFR 122
Pollutant Scan in 2025,2026,2027
Mercury MMP Special Condition WQBEL. Consistent with 2012 Statewide Mercury
Minimization TMDL Implementation.
Plan(MMP)
Electronic Electronic Reporting Special Condition In accordance with EPA Electronic Reporting Rule
Reporting 1 1 2015.
MGD—Million gallons per day,MA- Monthly Average,WA—Weekly Average,DM—Daily Max
13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: xx/xx/xxxx
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice.Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact
If you have any questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit,please
contact Nick Coco at(919) 707-3609 or via email at [e-mail].
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed(Yes/No):NO
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:NA
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards—Freshwater Standards
• NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
• BOD&TSS Removal Rate Calculations
• Mercury TMDL Calculations
• WET Testing and Self-Monitoring Summary
• MFR spreadsheet
• Compliance Inspection Report
• Chemical Addendum
Page 19 of 19

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 Acute PQL Units
Facility Name North Harnett Regional WWTP Par01 Arsenic Aquactic Life C 150 FW 340 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class IV Par02 Arsenic Human Health C 10 HH/WS N/A ug/L
Water Supply
NPDES Permit NCO021636 Par03 Beryllium Aquatic Life NC 6.5 FW 65 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 Cadmium Aquatic Life NC 0.7424 FW 4.3592 ug/L
Flow, Qw (MGD) 16.500 Par05 Chlorides Water Supply NC 250 WS mg/L
Receiving Stream Cape Fear River Par06 Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Water Supply NC 1 A ug/L
HUC Number 03030004 Par07 Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A ug/L
Stream Class WS-IV Par08 Chromium III Aquatic Life NC 151.0272 FW 1195.6936 ug/L
❑J Apply WS Hardness WQC Par09 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 11 FW 16 Ng/L
7Q10s (cfs) 283.00 Par10 Chromium, Total Aquatic Life NC N/A FW N/A ug/L
7Q10w (cfs) 304.00 Par11 Copper Aquatic Life NC 10.2190 FW 14.4262 ug/L
30Q2 (cfs) 506.00 Par12 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 22 10 ug/L
QA(cfs) 3172.00 Par13 Fluoride Aquatic Life NC 1,800 FW ug/L
1Q10s (cfs) 229.33 Par14 Lead Aquatic Life NC 4.1388 FW 110.5644 ug/L
Effluent Hardness I default 99 mg/L-WS (Eff Hard Avg = 143.49 mg/L) Par15 Mercury Aquatic Life NC 12 FW 0.5 ng/L
Upstream Hardness 28 mg/L (Avg) I Par16 Molybdenum Water Supply NC 160 WS ug/L
Combined Hardness Chronic 33.88 mg/L I Par17 Nickel Aquatic Life NC 48.1541 FW 446.9245 dig/L
Combined Hardness Acute 35.12 mg/L - I Par18 Nickel Water Supply NC 25.0000 WS N/A pg/L
Data Source(s) Nitrate + Nitrite data was used for assessment of Par19 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 56 ug/L
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL nitrate allowable discharge concentration. Influent Par20 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.06 FW 0.5319 ug/L
1,4-dioxane used in assessment.
Par21 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 163.9786 FW 167.6734 ug/L
Par22 Nitrate Water Supply NC 10 WS mg/L
Par24
21636 rpa, input
5/9/2023

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 Acute PQL Units
Facility Name North Harnett Regional WWTP Par01 Arsenic Aquactic Life C 150 FW 340 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class IV Par02 Arsenic Human Health C 10 HH/WS N/A ug/L
Water Supply
NPDES Permit NCO021636 Par03 Beryllium Aquatic Life NC 6.5 FW 65 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 Cadmium Aquatic Life NC 0.6907 FW 3.9558 ug/L
Flow, Qw (MGD) 7.500 Par05 Chlorides Water Supply NC 250 WS mg/L
Receiving Stream Cape Fear River Par06 Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Water Supply NC 1 A ug/L
HUC Number 03030004 Par07 Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A ug/L
Stream Class WS-IV Par08 Chromium III Aquatic Life NC 139.6765 FW 1091.5617 ug/L
❑J Apply WS Hardness WQC Par09 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 11 FW 16 Ng/L
7Q10s (cfs) 283.00 Par10 Chromium, Total Aquatic Life NC N/A FW N/A ug/L
7Q10w (cfs) 304.00 Par11 Copper Aquatic Life NC 9.4190 FW 12.9906 ug/L
30Q2 (cfs) 506.00 Par12 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 22 10 ug/L
QA(cfs) 3172.00 Par13 Fluoride Aquatic Life NC 1,800 FW ug/L
1Q10s (cfs) 229.33 Par14 Lead Aquatic Life NC 3.7192 FW 97.6128 ug/L
Effluent Hardness I default 99 mg/L-WS (Eff Hard Avg = 143.49 mg/L) Par15 Mercury Aquatic Life NC 12 FW 0.5 ng/L
Upstream Hardness 28 mg/L (Avg) I Par16 Molybdenum Water Supply NC 160 WS ug/L
_Combined Hardness Chronic _________30.8 mg/L I Par17 Nickel Aquatic Life NC 44.4204 FW 406.7785 pg/L
Combined Hardness Acute 31.43 mg/L _ I Par18 Nickel Water Supply NC 25.0000 WS N/A pg/L
Data Source(s) Nitrate + Nitrite data was used for assessment of Par19 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 56 ug/L
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL nitrate allowable discharge concentration. Influent Par20 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.06 FW 0.4393 ug/L
1,4-dioxane used in assessment.
Par21 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 151.2457 FW 152.5897 ug/L
Par22 Nitrate I Water Supply NC 10 WS Img/L
Par24
21636 rpa, input
5/9/2023

North Harnett Regional WWTP Outfall 001
NCO021636 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators QW = 7.5 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) = 7.5000 WWTP/WTP Class: IV COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
1Q10S (cfs) = 229.33 IWC% @ 1Ql0S = 4.824552302 Acute = 31.43 mg/L
7Q10S (cfs) = 283.00 IWC% @ 7QIOS = 3.945693678 Chronic = 30.8 mg/L
7QIOW (cfs) = 304.00 IWC% @ 7Q10W= 3.683168317 YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
30Q2 (cfs) = 506.00 IWC% @ 30Q2 = 2.24583434 STREAM AS WATER SUPPLY
Avg. Stream Flow, QA(cfs) = 3172.00 IW%C @ QA= 0.36514979 Effluent Hard: 57 value > 100 mg/L
Receiving Stream: Cape Fear River HUC 03030004 Stream Class: WS-IV default 99 mg/L-WS (Eff Hard Avg = 143.49 mg/L)
PARAMETER NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA J co REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE Aplied Chronic Standa d Acute D n #Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 7,047.3
Arsenic C 150 FW(7Q10s) 340 ug/L ___
18 0 2.5 Chronic (FW) 3,801.6
-Max_MDL= 5___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Arsenic C 10 HH/WS(Qavg) ug/L NO DETECTS Chronic (HH) 2,738.6 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Max MDL 5 Monitoring required
Acute: 1,347.28
Beryllium NC 6.5 FW(7QI Os) 65 ug/L 4 0 1.30
Note: n<9 C.V. (default) Chronic: 164.74 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL= 1 Monitoring required
Acute: 81.993
Cadmium NC 0.6907 FW(7Q10s) 3.9558 ug/L 18 0 0.500
Chronic: 17.506 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL 1 Monitoring required
Acute: 22,625.1
Chromium III NC 139.6765 FW(7QIOs) 1091.5617 µg/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: ----3,540.0-- ---------------------------
Acute: 331.6
Chromium VI NC 11 FW(7Q10s) 16 µg/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: -----278.8--- ---------------------------
Tot Cr value(s) > 5 but<Cr VI Allowable Cw
Chromium, Total NC µg/L 18 1 33.4 Max reported value = 19 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.
Acute: 269.26
Copper NC 9.4190 FW(7Ql Os) 12.9906 ug/L 18 17 24.16
Chronic: 238.72 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 456.0
Cyanide NC 5 FW(7QI Os) 22 10 ug/L 4 0 13.0
Note: n<9 C.V. (default) Chronic: 126.7 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL= 10 Monitoring required
Acute: 2,023.251
Lead NC 3.7192 FW(7Ql Os) 97.6128 ug/L 18 0 2.500
Chronic: 94.261 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 5 Monitoring required
21636 rpa, rpa
Page 1 of 2 5/9/2023

North Harnett Regional WWTP Outfall 001
NCO021636 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 7.5 MGD
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum NC 160 WS(7Q10s) ug/L 18 0 5.0
Chronic: 4,055.1 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 10 Monitoring required
Acute (FW): 8,431.4
Nickel NC 44.4204 FW(7Q10s) 406.7785 µg/L ___
18 1 44.5 Chronic (FW) 1,125.8
No-value >Allowable Cw --- -----------------------------
Nickel NC 25.0000 WS(7Q10s) µg/L Chronic (WS) 633.6 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 1,160.7
Selenium NC 5 FW(7Q10s) 56 ug/L 18 0 5.0
Chronic: 126.7 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL 10 Monitoring required
Acute: 9.105
Silver NC 0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.4393 ug/L 18 0 0.500
Chronic: 1.521 All values non-detect< 1 ug/L - no monitoring
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 1 required
Acute: 3,162.8 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Zinc NC 151.2457 FW(7Q10s) 152.5897 ug/L 18 18 108.4 Monitoring required
-- ---- --- -- ---------------------------Chronic: 3
No value >Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
Nitrate NC 10 WS(7Q10s) mg/L 55 55 13.80000
Chronic: 253.44086 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
21636 rpa, rpa
Page 2 of 2 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1 H2 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Effluent Hardness Values"then"COPY" Upstream Hardness Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 11/22/2021 180.9 180.9 Std Dev. 18.4445 1 7/16/2018 44 44 Std Dev. 6.0222
2 11/29/2021 179 179 Mean 143.4897 2 10/16/2018 24 24 Mean 28.0000
3 12/6/2021 162.4 162.4 C.V. 0.1285 3 1/21/2019 24 24 C.V. 0.2151
4 12/13/2021 179.9 179.9 n 58 4 4/17/2019 24 24 n 16
5 12/20/2021 168.1 168.1 10th Per value 118.91 mg/L 5 7/11/2019 36 36 10th Per value 22.00 mg/L
6 12/28/2021 162.8 162.8 Average Value 99.00 mg/L 6 10/21/2019 28 28 Average Value 28.00 mg/L
7 1/3/2022 150 150 Max. Value 180.90 mg/L 7 1/14/2020 28 28 Max. Value 44.00 mg/L
8 1/10/2022 140 140 8 4/15/2020 28 28
9 1/11/2022 150 150 9 7/21/2020 24 24
10 1/18/2022 116 116 10 10/27/2020 32 32
11 1/24/2022 130 130 11 1/27/2021 28 28
12 1/31/2022 136 136 12 4/21/2021 28 28
13 2/7/2022 158 158 13 7/7/2021 32 32
14 2/14/2022 160 160 14 10/13/2021 28 28
15 2/21/2022 165 165 15 1/19/2022 20 20
16 2/28/2022 172 172 16 4/18/2022 20 20
17 3/7/2022 117.3 117.3 17
18 3/14/2022 108 108 18
19 3/21/2022 114.4 114.4 19
20 3/28/2022 131.9 131.9 20
21 4/4/2022 133.8 133.8 21
22 4/5/2022 138 138 22
23 4/11/2022 131.1 131.1 23
24 4/18/2022 131.8 131.8 24
25 4/25/2022 109.3 109.3 25
26 5/2/2022 122.5 122.5 26
27 5/9/2022 143.9 143.9 27
28 5/16/2022 163.6 163.6 28
29 5/23/2022 143.3 143.3 29
30 5/31/2022 147.6 147.6 30
31 6/6/2022 146.1 146.1 31
32 6/13/2022 154.7 154.7 32
33 6/20/2022 159.6 159.6 33
34 6/27/2022 163.8 163.8 34
35 7/5/2022 136.9 136.9 35
36 7/11/2022 125 125 36
37 7/12/2022 134 134 37
38 7/18/2022 144.4 144.4 38
39 7/25/2022 147.7 147.7 39
40 8/2/2022 121.4 121.4 40
41 8/8/2022 149.2 149.2 41
42 8/15/2022 144.8 144.8 42
43 8/22/2022 158.9 158.9 43
44 8/29/2022 147.1 147.1 44
45 9/6/2022 140.7 140.7 45
46 9/12/2022 138.3 138.3 46
47 9/19/2022 150.7 150.7 47
48 9/26/2022 145.7 145.7 48
49 10/3/2022 119.6 119.6 49
50 10/10/2022 135 135 50
51 10/11/2022 141 141 51
52 10/18/2022 144.4 144.4 52
53 10/24/2022 146.2 146.2 53
54 10/31/2022 153.6 153.6 54
55 11/7/2022 90.7 90.7 55
56 11/14/2022 136.2 136.2 56
57 11/23/2022 150.5 150.5 57
58 11/28/2022 149.6 149.6 58
21636 rpa, data
- 1 - 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 & Par02
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Arsenic Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data
points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 7/10/2018 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 10/2/2018 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 1/10/2019 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 4/1/2019 < 5 2.5 n 18
5 7/9/2019 < 5 2.5
6 10/8/2019 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 1/8/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 4/7/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/L
9 7/7/2020 < 5 2.5
10 10/6/2020 < 5 2.5
11 1/14/2021 < 5 2.5
12 4/8/2021 < 5 2.5
13 7/20/2021 < 5 2.5
14 10/12/2021 < 5 2.5
15 1/11/2022 < 5 2.5
16 4/5/2022 < 5 2.5
17 7/12/2022 < 5 2.5
18 10/11/2022 < 5 2.5
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
21636 rpa, data
-2 - 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par03 Par04
Use"PASTE SPECIAL Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Beryllium Values"then"COPY" Cadmium Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/8/2017 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 7/10/2018 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 11/8/2018 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000 2 10/2/2018 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000
3 2/1/2019 < 1 0.5 C.V. (default) 0.6000 3 1/10/2019 < 1 0.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 5/7/2020 < 1 0.5 n 4 4 4/1/2019 < 1 0.5 n 18
5 5 7/9/2019 < 1 0.5
6 Mult Factor= 2.59 6 10/8/2019 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 Max. Value 0.50 ug/L 7 1/8/2020 < 1 0.5 Max. Value 0.500 ug/L
8 Max. Pred Cw 1.30 ug/L 8 4/7/2020 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw 0.500 ug/L
9 9 7/7/2020 < 1 0.5
10 10 10/6/2020 < 1 0.5
11 11 1/14/2021 < 1 0.5
12 12 4/8/2021 < 1 0.5
13 13 7/20/2021 < 1 0.5
14 14 10/12/2021 < 1 0.5
15 15 1/11/2022 < 1 0.5
16 16 4/5/2022 < 1 0.5
17 17 7/12/2022 < 1 0.5
18 18 10/11/2022 < 1 0.5
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
21636 rpa, data
-3- 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par10 Pal
Use"PASTE SPECIAL Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Chromium, Total Values"then"COPY" Copper Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 7/10/2018 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 3.8891 1 7/10/2018 4 4 Std Dev. 3.5572
2 10/2/2018 < 5 2.5 Mean 3.4167 2 10/2/2018 6 6 Mean 4.7778
3 1/10/2019 < 5 2.5 C.V. 1.1383 3 1/10/2019 8 8 C.V. 0.7445
4 4/1/2019 < 5 2.5 n 18 4 4/1/2019 10 10 n 18
5 7/9/2019 < 5 2.5 5 7/9/2019 4 4
6 10/8/2019 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.76 6 10/8/2019 5 5 Mult Factor= 1.51
7 1/8/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 19.0 pg/L 7 1/8/2020 < 2 1 Max. Value 16.00 ug/L
8 4/7/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 33.4 pg/L 8 4/7/2020 5 5 Max. Pred Cw 24.16 ug/L
9 7/7/2020 < 5 2.5 9 7/7/2020 5 5
10 10/6/2020 < 5 2.5 10 10/6/2020 3 3
11 1/14/2021 < 5 2.5 11 1/14/2021 2 2
12 4/8/2021 < 5 2.5 12 4/8/2021 3 3
13 7/20/2021 < 5 2.5 13 7/20/2021 3 3
14 10/12/2021 < 5 2.5 14 10/12/2021 3 3
15 1/11/2022 < 5 2.5 15 1/11/2022 3 3
16 4/5/2022 19 19 16 4/5/2022 16 16
17 7/12/2022 < 5 2.5 17 7/12/2022 3 3
18 10/11/2022 < 5 2.5 18 10/11/2022 2 2
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
21636 rpa, data
-4- 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par12 Par14
Use"PASTE SPECIAL Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Cyanide Values"then"COPY" Lead Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/8/2017 < 5 5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 7/10/2018 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 11/8/2018 < 5 5 Mean 5.00 2 10/2/2018 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 2/1/2019 < 5 5 C.V. (default) 0.6000 3 1/10/2019 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 5/7/2020 < 5 5 n 4 4 4/1/2019 < 5 2.5 n 18
5 5 7/9/2019 < 5 2.5
6 Mult Factor= 2.59 6 10/8/2019 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 Max. Value 5.0 ug/L 7 1/8/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 2.500 ug/L
8 Max. Pred Cw 13.0 ug/L 8 4/7/2020 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 2.500 ug/L
9 9 7/7/2020 < 5 2.5
10 10 10/6/2020 < 5 2.5
11 11 1/14/2021 < 5 2.5
12 12 4/8/2021 < 5 2.5
13 13 7/20/2021 < 5 2.5
14 14 10/12/2021 < 5 2.5
15 15 1/11/2022 < 5 2.5
16 16 4/5/2022 < 5 2.5
17 17 7/12/2022 < 5 2.5
18 18 10/11/2022 < 5 2.5
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
21636 rpa, data
- 5- 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par16 use"PASTE Par17 & Par18 use"PASTE
SPECIAL-Values" SPECIAL-Values"
Molybdenum then"COPY". Nickel then"COPY".
Maximum data Maximum data
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results points=58 Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results points=58
1 7/10/2018 < 10 5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 7/10/2018 < 10 5 Std Dev. 5.4212
2 10/2/2018 < 10 5 Mean 5.0000 2 10/2/2018 < 10 5 Mean 6.2778
3 1/10/2019 < 10 5 C.V. 0.0000 3 1/10/2019 < 10 5 C.V. 0.8635
4 4/1/2019 < 10 5 n 18 4 4/1/2019 < 10 5 n 18
5 7/9/2019 < 10 5 5 7/9/2019 < 10 5
6 10/8/2019 < 10 5 Mult Factor= 1.00 6 10/8/2019 < 10 5 Mult Factor= 1.59
7 1/8/2020 < 10 5 Max. Value 5.0 ug/L 7 1/8/2020 < 10 5 Max. Value 28.0 fag/L
8 4/7/2020 < 10 5 Max. Pred Cw 5.0 ug/L 8 4/7/2020 < 10 5 Max. Pred Cw 44.5 fag/L
9 7/7/2020 < 10 5 9 7/7/2020 < 10 5
10 10/6/2020 < 10 5 10 10/6/2020 < 10 5
11 1/14/2021 < 10 5 11 1/14/2021 < 10 5
12 4/8/2021 < 10 5 12 4/8/2021 < 10 5
13 7/20/2021 < 10 5 13 7/20/2021 < 10 5
14 10/12/2021 < 10 5 14 10/12/2021 < 10 5
15 1/11/2022 < 10 5 15 1/11/2022 < 10 5
16 4/5/2022 < 10 5 16 4/5/2022 28 28
17 7/12/2022 < 10 5 17 7/12/2022 < 10 5
18 10/11/2022 < 10 5 18 10/11/2022 < 10 5
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
21636 rpa, data
-6- 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par19 use"PASTE Par20
SPECIAL-Values" Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Values"
Selenium then"COPY". Silver es"then"COPY"
Maximum data
Maximum data .
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 7/10/2018 < 10 5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 7/24/2018 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 10/2/2018 < 10 5 Mean 5.0000 2 10/23/2018 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000
3 1/10/2019 < 10 5 C.V. 0.0000 3 1/8/2019 < 1 0.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 4/1/2019 < 10 5 n 18 4 4/1/2019 < 1 0.5 n 18
5 7/9/2019 < 10 5 5 7/8/2019 < 1 0.5
6 10/8/2019 < 10 5 Mult Factor= 1.00 6 10/17/2019 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 1/8/2020 < 10 5 Max. Value 5.0 ug/L 7 1/8/2020 < 1 0.5 Max. Value 0.500 ug/L
8 4/7/2020 < 10 5 Max. Pred Cw 5.0 ug/L 8 4/7/2020 < 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw 0.500 ug/L
9 7/7/2020 < 10 5 9 7/8/2020 < 1 0.5
10 10/6/2020 < 10 5 10 10/6/2020 < 1 0.5
11 1/14/2021 < 10 5 11 1/12/2021 < 1 0.5
12 4/8/2021 < 10 5 12 4/6/2021 < 1 0.5
13 7/20/2021 < 10 5 13 7/20/2021 < 1 0.5
14 10/12/2021 < 10 5 14 10/11/2021 < 1 0.5
15 1/11/2022 < 10 5 15 1/11/2022 < 1 0.5
16 4/5/2022 < 10 5 16 4/5/2022 < 1 0.5
17 7/12/2022 < 10 5 17 7/12/2022 < 1 0.5
18 10/11/2022 < 10 5 18 10/11/2022 < 1 0.5
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
21636 rpa, data
-7- 5/9/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par21 Par22
Use"PASTE SPECIAL Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Zinc Values"then"COPY" Nitrate Values"then"COPY"
Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 7/10/2018 30 30 Std Dev. 13.9916 1 8/27/2018 8.44 8.44 Std Dev. 1.4300
2 10/2/2018 33 33 Mean 36.6667 2 8/28/2018 7.08 7.08 Mean 8.2929
3 1/10/2019 34 34 C.V. 0.3816 3 8/29/2018 8.36 8.36 C.V. 0.1724
4 4/1/2019 39 39 n 18 4 9/4/2018 7.72 7.72 n 55
5 7/9/2019 30 30 5 10/8/2018 12.1 12.1
6 10/8/2019 38 38 Mult Factor= 1.26 6 10/9/2018 9.4 9.4 Mult Factor= 1.00
7 1/8/2020 40 40 Max. Value 86.0 ug/L 7 10/10/2018 7.26 7.26 Max. Value 13.800000 mg/L
8 4/7/2020 44 44 Max. Pred Cw 108.4 ug/L 8 11/5/2018 13.8 13.8 Max. Pred Cw 13.800000 mg/L
9 7/7/2020 43 43 9 11/13/2018 8.32 8.32
10 10/6/2020 36 36 10 2/4/2019 7.49 7.49
11 1/14/2021 23 23 11 5/22/2019 7.33 7.33
12 4/8/2021 33 33 12 6/10/2019 7.39 7.39
13 7/20/2021 35 35 13 8/26/2019 7.21 7.21
14 10/12/2021 38 38 14 9/3/2019 7.5 7.5
15 1/11/2022 35 35 15 9/4/2019 7.26 7.26
16 4/5/2022 86 86 16 9/16/2019 7.7 7.7
17 7/12/2022 23 23 17 9/23/2019 9.24 9.24
18 10/11/2022 20 20 18 9/30/2019 11.94 11.94
19 19 10/7/2019 9.18 9.18
20 20 10/8/2019 8.4 8.4
21 21 10/9/2019 8.06 8.06
22 22 10/14/2019 12.16 12.16
23 23 10/15/2019 7.18 7.18
24 24 10/21/2019 8.96 8.96
25 25 10/23/2019 8.46 8.46
26 26 11/14/2019 7.15 7.15
27 27 12/9/2019 7.44 7.44
28 28 2/12/2020 7.34 7.34
29 29 2/19/2020 7.34 7.34
30 30 2/24/2020 7.86 7.86
31 31 3/9/2020 8.64 8.64
32 32 3/11/2020 7.1 7.1
33 33 7/1/2020 7.22 7.22
34 34 7/6/2020 8.14 8.14
35 35 7/13/2020 7.3 7.3
36 36 7/15/2020 8.96 8.96
37 37 8/26/2020 7.16 7.16
38 38 9/8/2020 7.29 7.29
39 39 9/9/2020 8.06 8.06
40 40 9/10/2020 9.6 9.6
41 41 9/14/2020 7.43 7.43
42 42 9/16/2020 9.22 9.22
43 43 11/12/2020 7.17 7.17
44 44 12/16/2020 8.56 8.56
45 45 12/23/2020 7.22 7.22
46 46 9/13/2021 7.2 7.2
47 47 9/15/2021 9.2 9.2
48 48 9/20/2021 7.3 7.3
49 49 12/1/2021 7.9 7.9
50 50 5/16/2022 7.74 7.74
51 51 5/17/2022 7.51 7.51
52 52 5/18/2022 7.38 7.38
53 53 6/13/2022 9.04 9.04
54 54 6/14/2022 9.1 9.1
55 55 6/20/2022 9.6 9.6
56 56
57 57
58 58
21636 rpa, data
-8- 5/9/2023

North Harnett Regional WWTP Outfall 001
NCO021636 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators QW = 16.5 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) = 16.5000 WWTP/WTP Class: IV COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
1Q10S (cfs) = 229.33 IWC% @ 1Q10S = 10.0331496 Acute = 35.12 mg/L
7Q10S (cfs) = 283.00 IWC% @ 7QIOS = 8.288098517 Chronic = 33.88 mg/L
7QIOW (cfs) = 304.00 IWC% @ 7Q10W= 7.759993932 YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
30Q2 (cfs) = 506.00 IWC% @ 30Q2 = 4.81117434 STREAM AS WATER SUPPLY
Avg. Stream Flow, QA(cfs) = 3172.00 IW%C @ QA= 0.799824867 Effluent Hard: 57 value > 100 mg/L
Receiving Stream: Cape Fear River HUC 03030004 Stream Class: WS-IV default 99 mg/L-WS (Eff Hard Avg = 143.49 mg/L)
PARAMETER NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA J co REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE Aplied Chronic Standa d Acute D n #Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute (FW): 3,388.8
Arsenic C 150 FW(7Q10s) 340 ug/L
18 0 2.5 Chronic (FW)--- 1,809.8 -- ---------------------------
-Max_MDL= 5___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Arsenic C 10 HH/WS(Qavg) ug/L NO DETECTS Chronic (HH) 1,250.3 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Max MDL 5 Monitoring required
Acute: 647.85
Beryllium NC 6.5 FW(7QI Os) 65 ug/L 4 0 1.30
Note: n<9 C.V. (default) Chronic: 78.43 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL= 1 Monitoring required
Acute: 43.448
Cadmium NC 0.7424 FW(7Q10s) 4.3592 ug/L 18 0 0.500
Chronic: 8.957 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL 1 Monitoring required
Acute: 11,917.4
Chromium III NC 151.0272 FW(7Q10s) 1195.6936 µg/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: ---- 1,822.2 -- ---------------------------
Acute: 159.5
Chromium VI NC 11 FW(7Q10s) 16 µg/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: -----132.7--- ---------------------------
Tot Cr value(s) > 5 but<Cr VI Allowable Cw
Chromium, Total NC µg/L 18 1 33.4 Max reported value = 19 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.
Acute: 143.79
Copper NC 10.2190 FW(7Q10s) 14.4262 ug/L 18 17 24.16
Chronic: 123.30 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 219.3
Cyanide NC 5 FW(7QI Os) 22 10 ug/L 4 0 13.0
Note: n<9 C.V. (default) Chronic: 60.3 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL= 10 Monitoring required
Acute: 1,101.991
Lead NC 4.1388 FW(7Q10s) 110.5644 ug/L 18 0 2.500
Chronic: 49.937 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 5 Monitoring required
21636 rpa, rpa
Page 1 of 2 5/9/2023

North Harnett Regional WWTP Outfall 001
NCO021636 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 16.5 MGD
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum NC 160 WS(7Q10s) ug/L 18 0 5.0
Chronic: 1,930.5 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 10 Monitoring required
Acute (FW): 4,454.5
Nickel NC 48.1541 FW(7Q10s) 446.9245 µg/L _____
18 1 44.5 Chronic (FW) 581.0
No-value >Allowable Cw --- -----------------------------
Nickel NC 25.0000 WS(7Q10s) µg/L Chronic (WS) 301.6 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 558.1
Selenium NC 5 FW(7Q10s) 56 ug/L 18 0 5.0
Chronic: 60.3 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
NO DETECTS Max MDL 10 Monitoring required
Acute: 5.302
Silver NC 0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.5319 ug/L 18 0 0.500
Chronic: 0.724 All values non-detect< 1 ug/L - no monitoring
NO DETECTS Max MDL= 1 required
Acute: 1,671.2 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
Zinc NC 163.9786 FW(7Q10s) 167.6734 ug/L 18 18 108.4 Monitoring required
-- ---- --- -- ---------------------------Chronic: 1
No value >Allowable Cw
Acute: NO WQS
Nitrate NC 10 WS(7Q10s) mg/L 55 55 13.80000
Chronic: 120.65494 No RP, Predicted Max< 50% of Allowable Cw- No
No value >Allowable Cw Monitoring required
21636 rpa, rpa
Page 2 of 2 5/9/2023

Permit No. NCO021636
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/l Chronic FW, µg/l Acute SW, µg/1 Chronic SW, µg/1
(Dissolved) (Dissolved) (Dissolved) (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
2B.0200(e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/1 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^10.9151 [ln hardness]-3.1485}
Cadmium,Acute Trout waters WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9151[In hardness]-3.62361
Cadmium,Chronic WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} •e^{0.7998[ln hardness]-4.445 11
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]-1.460}
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. NCO021636
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/WOBELs 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.
1. To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness-dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q10(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. NCO021636
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)+s7Q10, cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness,mg/L)
(Permitted Flow,cfs+s7Q10,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 I + { [Kpo] [ss('+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)—(s7Q 10) (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:
IQ 10=used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0021636
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.
8. 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) 143.49 Average from November 2021 to
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)] November 2022 samples
Average Upstream Hardness (mg/L) 25 Default value used
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)]
7Q 10 summer(cfs) 283 2021 USGS Stream Stats
1Q10(cfs) 229.33 Calculated in RPA
Permitted Flow(MGD) 7.5 & 16.5 NPDES Files
Date: 1/25/2023
Permit Writer: Nick Coco
Page 4 of 4

CONSULTING
ENGINEERS, P.A.
Design Memorandum
Date: Thursday,March 31,2022
Project: 321001-North Regional WWTP Expansion NPDES No. NC 0021636
321022-South Regional WWTP Expansion NPDES No.NC 0088366
To: Michael Montebello,Supervisor,Municipal Permitting Unit
Doug Dowden,Environmental Program Supervisor II
From: Joseph W. McGougan,P.E.
Subject: Nutrient Sharing-North Regional and South Regional WWTPs
The North Regional WWTP (North) and the South Regional WWTP (South) are reviewing options for
increasing the treatment capacity. The North facility has proposed to expand the NPDES discharge from
7.5 MGD to 16.5 MGD to address growth in northern Harnett County and southern Wake County. An
EAA was submitted on February 17,2022,for this project. The South facility has proposed to expand the
existing NPDES discharge from 15 MGD to 17.5 MGD to address the need to accept flow from the existing
Spring Lake WWTP. An EAA is currently being prepared.
The North and South NPDES permits were issued with seasonal nutrient limits for total nitrogen (TN)
and total phosphorus (TP). The North NPDES permit includes 59,968 lbs. TN and 19,989 lbs.TP for the
period between April 1 and October 31.The South NPDES permit includes 160,628 lbs.TN and 53,543 lbs.
TP for the same period. With the decommissioning of the Spring Lake WWTP, additional nutrients
should be available to be transferred to the South facility.
North Carolina has allowed nutrient sharing between facilities, in effect, allowing multiple wastewater
treatment plants to combine the permitted discharge(pounds)and split the amount between the different
facilities.The goal being for the combined discharge to meet the total TN and TP limit. A similar approach
is requested for the Harnett North and South facilities.
The total allowable seasonal nutrient discharge for North and South combined is 220,596 lbs. TN and
73,532 lbs. TP. This does not include the loading that may be transferred from the Spring Lake WWTP
when that facility is decommissioned.The total proposed discharge between the North and South facilities
would be 34 MGD. Based on the design capacity of both facilities, the calculated concentration for each
facility would be 3.65 mg/l TN and 1.22 mg/1 TP.The North and South facilities currently have the required
treatment technology to achieve the seasonal limits for TN and TP at the expanded capacity.
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

Design Memorandum
March 31,2022
Page 2
SUMMARY
Nutrient sharing between the North and South facility will not increase the nutrient loading on the Cape
Fear River and will provide Harnett Regional Water with flexibility in the design and operation of the two
wastewater treatment plants. The ability to share the nutrients will reduce the technological requirements
that would be required for the North facility, reducing overall construction cost. Nutrient sharing will
also reduce total operational costs between the two facilities.
The South EAA and cover letters for the submittal of the North and South NPDES permits will include
this request. The South EAA and NPDES permit application will also include a request to transfer the
nutrient loading from the Spring Lake plant to the South Regional facility.
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
PermitNo. NC0021636
Prepared By: Nick Coco
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 7.5
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 283
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 304
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1) Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS) 283 s7Q10 (CFS) 283
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 7.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 7.5
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 11.625 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 11.625
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1) 0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 3.95 IWC (%) 3.95
Allowable Conc. (ug/1) 431 Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 20.0
Cap at 28 ug/L. Less stringent than current limit.Maintain limit.
Apply limit.
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform w7Q10 (CFS) 304
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100ml DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 7.5
(If DF >331; Monitor) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 11.625
(If DF<331; Limit) STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
Dilution Factor(DF) 25.34 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 3.68
Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 43.1
Less stringent than current limit.Maintain limit.
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)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit(Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 =400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non-Muni)

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
PermitNo. NC0021636
Prepared By: Nick Coco
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 16.5
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 283
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 304
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1) Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS) 283 s7Q10 (CFS) 283
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 16.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 16.5
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 25.575 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 25.575
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1) 0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 8.29 IWC (%) 8.29
Allowable Conc. (ug/1) 205 Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 9.6
Cap at 28 ug/L. Less stringent than speculative limit.Maintain limit.
Apply limit.
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform w7Q10 (CFS) 304
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100ml DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 16.5
(If DF >331; Monitor) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 25.575
(If DF<331; Limit) STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
Dilution Factor(DF) 12.07 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 7.76
Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 20.6
Less stringent than speculative limit.Maintain limit.
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)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit(Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 =400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non-Muni)

NCO021636 North Harnett Regional WWTP 1/25/2023
BOD monthly removal rate TSS monthly removal rate
Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%)
June-18 97.97 December-20 96.18 June-18 98.72 December-20 98.28
July-18 97.12 January-21 82.51 July-18 98.79 January-21 95.22
August-18 93.47 February-21 96.60 August-18 98.30 February-21 97.95
September-18 93.96 March-21 96.05 September-18 98.35 March-21 97.89
October-18 97.08 April-21 98.08 October-18 98.27 April-21 99.29
November-18 96.09 May-21 97.44 November-18 97.69 May-21 98.61
December-18 90.35 June-21 97.94 December-18 93.48 June-21 98.71
January-19 96.94 July-21 98.09 January-19 97.74 July-21 98.42
February-19 97.56 August-21 98.29 February-19 98.11 August-21 98.54
March-19 97.06 September-21 98.64 March-19 97.88 September-21 98.82
April-19 97.13 October-21 98.43 April-19 97.88 October-21 98.76
May-19 97.63 November-21 98.81 May-19 98.25 November-21 98.77
June-19 97.98 December-21 98.79 June-19 98.13 December-21 99.03
July-19 98.36 January-22 96.00 July-19 98.59 January-22 97.41
August-19 98.34 February-22 96.95 August-19 98.66 February-22 97.90
September-19 98.18 March-22 97.46 September-19 98.50 March-22 97.96
October-19 98.22 April-22 97.54 October-19 98.80 April-22 98.06
November-19 95.09 May-22 97.52 November-19 96.26 May-22 98.27
December-19 83.02 June-22 98.80 December-19 98.21 June-22 98.56
January-20 96.79 July-22 98.63 January-20 97.80 July-22 99.00
February-20 98.01 August-22 98.44 February-20 97.86 August-22 99.05
March-20 97.96 September-22 98.59 March-20 98.55 September-22 98.88
April-20 96.86 October-22 98.60 April-20 98.43 October-22 98.76
May-20 98.15 November-22 - May-20 98.45 November-22 -
June-20 98.07 December-22 - June-20 97.80 December-22 -
July-20 96.87 January-23 - July-20 98.48 January-23 -
August-20 95.44 February-23 - August-20 97.76 February-23 -
September-20 97.92 March-23 - September-20 98.43 March-23 -
October-20 97.03 April-23 - October-20 98.26 April-23 -
November-20 97.00 May-23 - November-20 98.53 May-23 -
Overall BOD removal rate 96.72 Overall TSS removal rate 98.17

EPA Identification Number NPDES Number FaciGky Name Outfall Number
NC 0021636 N.Harnett Reg.WWTP 001
Method Number Estimated Concanraiion (If
Pollutant(Re ulred) CAS number if Applicable) Reason PQllutattt Believed present in Discharge Known)
No Additional Pollutants Sampled
Signed:
Kenneth W.Fail,W istewater Sup arintendent,Harr eft Regional Water

Weaver, John C
From: Weaver, John C
Sent: Wednesday,June 23, 2021 12:13 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Hill, David A; [e-mail]; Montebello, Michael J; Albertin, Klaus P; Weaver,John C
Subject: USGS response to DWR USGS Low Flows request# 2021-126 (dated 2021/06/15) for Cape Fear River
Harnett County...RE: [EXTERNAL] Low-flow request approval
Mr. Bromby,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics for the USGS continuous-record streamgage on the Cape
Fear River at Lillington (station id 02102500, NWIS drainage area 3,464 sqmi) in central Harnett County,the following
information is provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center (SAWSC, Raleigh office) indicates two
previous low-flow determinations recently completed for the point of interest, identified by the lat/long coordinates
(35.40611, -78.81333) provided via email dated 06/15/2021 from the DWR USGS Low Flow portal following your request
submission. Completed in October and November 2019,the low-flow characteristics for the point of interest (station id
02102500, NWIS drainage area 3,464 sqmi)were estimated based on a provisional low-flow analysis completed for this
streamgage in early October 2019. Responses to these two previous low-flow requests were provided via emails dated
10/07/2019 and 11/25/2019.
A basin delineation completed using the online USGS StreamStats application for North Carolina
(https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/) indicates the drainage area for the point of interest(StreamStats adjusted 35.40687, -
78.81292 NAD83) is 3,470 sqmi.
For streams in Harnett County, low-flow characteristics published by the USGS are provided in the following reports:
(1)The first is a statewide report completed in the early 1990's. It is USGS Water-Supply Paper 2403, "Low-flow
characteristics of streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993). An online version of the report is available at
http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/2403/report.pdf. The report provides the low-flow characteristics (based on data through
1988)via regional relations and at-site values for sites with drainage basins between 1 and 400 sqmi and not considered
or known to be affected by regulation and/or diversions.
(2)The second is a basin-wide report for the Cape Fear River basin published in 2001. It is USGS Water-Resources
Investigations Report 01-4094, "Low-flow characteristics and discharge profiles for selected streams in the Cape Fear
River Basin, North Carolina,through 1998 " (Weaver and Pope, 2001). An online version of the report is available
through http://nc.water.usgs.gov/reports/wri0l4094/. The report provides the low-flow characteristics (based on data
through 1998)for continuous-record gaging stations and partial-record sites within the Cape Fear River basin. The
report also provides low-flow discharge profiles (7Q10, 30Q2, winter 7Q10, and 7Q2)for the Cape Fear River and
selected tributaries within the basin.
(3)The third is a statewide report published in March 2015. It is USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5001, "Low-
flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for selected USGS continuous-record streamgaging stations in North
Carolina through 2012" (Weaver, 2015). The report is available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2015/5001/. The
report provides updated low-flow characteristics and flow-duration statistics for 266 active (as of 2012 water year) and
discontinued streamgages across the state where a minimum of 10 climatic years discharge records were available for
flow analyses.
1

Low-flow characteristics for USGS Sta. 02102500 Cape Fear River at Lillington
Streamflows in the Cape Fear River at this point of interest have been regulated since September 1981 by B. Everett
Jordan Lake, located upstream on the Haw River upstream of its confluence with the Deep River(Weaver and McSwain,
2012).
Please note low-flow characteristics for this and two other USGS streamgages on the Cape Fear River were not published
in the recent statewide low-flow update for selected continuous-record streamgages across North Carolina (Weaver,
2015). The statistics were not published because of changes during the 2000's in the operational guidance used by U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers for its operation of B. Everett Jordan Lake during drought periods. Between 1998 and 2006,
there were deviations in the flow releases used to maintain target flows at the Lillington streamgage, all of which
resulted in refinement of the Drought Contingency Plan (DCP). Formally approved in 2008,the final adjustments to the
flow deviations to be used for drought periods were in effect during the 2007 climatic year. This information is
documented on pages 15-16 of the recent statewide low-flow update (Weaver, 2015).
Going forward,the new periods for low-flow analyses for the USGS streamgages on the Cape Fear begin with the 2007
climatic year. As a historical note and reference, previous low-flow analyses completed for the Cape Fear streamgages
prior to the updated DCP began with the 1982 climatic year, reflective of regulated flow releases from Jordan Lake
(Weaver and Pope, 2001).
At the present time, provisional low-flow analyses at this streamgage are available for the 2007-20 climatic years (period
of analysis). Please note this is a short-term period of record for low-flow analyses,with potential positive (upward)
trends noted in the series of annual 7-day annual minimums (via Kendall tau trend tests).
Annual 7Q10= 283 cfs (with 95%confidence intervals between 168 and 354 cfs)
Annual 30Q2 = 506 cfs (with 95%confidence intervals between 405 and 619 cfs)
Winter 7Q10= 305 cfs (with 95%confidence intervals between 203 and 389 cfs)
Annual 7Q2 =446 cfs (with 95%confidence intervals between 358 and 530 cfs)
Average annual discharge =3,172 cfs, based on provisional period of analysis since 2008
Internal notes,for follow-up as needed:
Provisional analyses completed 06-21-2021 using the USGS SW Toolbox(version 1.0.5)
Internal note: Output files available in C: USGS-SWToolbox�data�03030004�Sta 02102500 asof-20210621
Please note:
(1)The estimated flows are provided in units of cubic feet per second (cfs).
(2)The climatic year is the standard period used for low-flow analyses at USGS continuous-record streamgages. The
climatic year is from April 1 through March 31, designated by the year in which the period begins. For example,the
2020 climatic year is from April 1, 2020,through March 31, 2021.
(3)The information provided in this message is based on a preliminary assessment and considered provisional, subject
to revision pending collection of future data and further analyses.
These provisional streamflow statistics are provided via the DWR USGS Low Flows cooperative agreement between the
USGS and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources.
Hope this information is helpful.
2

Thank you.
Curtis Weaver
J. Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE Email:icweaverOusas.nov
USGS South Atlantic Water Science Center Online:https://www.usas.nov/centers/sa-water
North Carolina -South Carolina -Georgia
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone; [phone] // Fax:[phone]
From: Albertin, Klaus P<[e-mail]>
Sent:Tuesday,June 15, 2021 10:43 AM
To:[e-mail]
Cc:Albertin, Klaus P<[e-mail]>; Hill, David A<[e-mail]>; [e-mail];
Weaver,John C<[e-mail]>; Montebello, Michael J <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Low-flow request approval
This email has been received from outside of DOI-Use caution before clicking on links,opening attachments,or responding.
Your request has been approved and will be forwarded to USGS.A response from USGS usually takes 7- 10 business
days.
Request Flow Statistic Approval
Request ID: 126
Requestor: William Bromby
Requestor e-mail: [e-mail]
Requestor Phone: [phone]
Local Government:
Public Water Supply:
Consultant:Jacobs Engineering
Contact: William Bromby
Reason: for concentration calculations
River/Stream: Cape Fear River
3

Drainage Area (sq. mi.): 3440
Latitude: 35.40611
Longitude: -78.81333
Other Information: USGS station 02102500 CAPE FEAR RIVER AT LILLINGTON, NC
Statististics: ["7Q10"]
Approved by: Hill, David A
4

DocuSign Envelope ID: BED9BF99-8B64-4593-BE52-692lE7737BOC
STATE o,
ROY COOPER s
Governor C
ELIZABETH S.BISER
Secretary *`$Qu4+
S.DANIEL SMITH NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
January 7, 2022
Joseph W. McGougan, P.E.
MBD Consulting Engineers, PA
1300 Second Ave., Suite 211
Conway, South Carolina 29526
Subject: Speculative Effluent Limits
N Harnett Regional WWTP
NCO021636
Harnett County
Cape Fear River Basin
Dear Mr. McGougan:
This letter provides speculative effluent limits for expanding the NE Regional WWTP located on
the Cape Fear River with a proposed flow of 16.5 MGD. These speculative limits supplement
those offered on October 1, 2021 for a proposed flow of 15.0 MGD. Speculative limits for 20
MGD were also requested, but the Division is unable to develop limits at that flow while holding
mass-loading constant as the resulting limits may not be achievable on a consistent basis for
current treatment technologies. Please recognize that speculative limits may change based on
future water quality initiatives.
Receiving Streams. The Cape Fear River at the outfall has a stream classification of WS-IV, and
waters with this classification have a best usage for aquatic life propagation and maintenance of
biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation, agriculture, and potable water use. The Cape
Fear River has a summer 7Q10 flow of 283 cfs, a winter 7Q10 flow of 304 cfs, a 30Q2 flow of
506 cfs, and an annual average flow of 3,172 cfs.
This segment of the Cape Fear River is not listed as an impaired waterbody on the 2020 North
Carolina 303(d) Impaired Waters List. The Cape Fear River does have downstream impairments
of chlorophyll a from nutrient enrichment and low dissolved oxygen. Nutrient criteria
development and modeling are currently underway to address these impairments and may affect
future permit limits.
Based upon a review of information available from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Online Map Viewer, there are Federally Listed threatened or endangered aquatic species
identified within a 5-mile radius of the proposed discharge location. If there are any identified
threatened/endangered species, it is recommended that the applicant discuss the proposed project
with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to determine whether the proposed discharge location
might impact such species.
D E Q2512 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
NORTH CAROLINA _
no.ro of �^m.w 0--Z r 919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: BED9BF99-8B64-4593-BE52-692lE7737BOC
Speculative Effluent Limits. Based on Division review of receiving stream conditions,
speculative limits for an expansion to 16.5 MGD are presented in Table 1. A complete
evaluation of these limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants, as well as
potential instream monitoring requirements, will be addressed upon review of the formal NPDES
permit application which is under review. Some features of the speculative limit development
include the following:
• BOD/NH3/Nutrient Limits. With current modeling of the Cape Fear River underway,
no new models are being evaluated to develop limits for facilities in the modeled
segments. Therefore, mass-loading of oxygen consuming wastes have been frozen
based on current permit limits. These speculative limits can be re-evaluated once
current modeling is finished. These limits are expected to require advanced treatment
technologies.
TABLE 1. Speculative Limits for North Harnett Regional WWTP proposed expansion.
Effluent Characteristic Effluent Limitations
Monthly Weekly Daily
Average Average Maximum
Flow 16.5 MGD
BOD5 2.1 mg/L 3.1 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr.-Oct.) 0.5 m /L 1.5 m /L
NH3 as N (Nov. -Mar.) 0.9 mg/L 2.7 mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen >5.0 mg/L
minimum daily average)
Total Nitrogen Load 59,968 lbs/season
(Apr.-Oct.
Total Phosphorus Load 19,989 lbs/season
(Apr.-Oct.
TSS 15 mg/L 22.5 mg/L
TRC 28 /L
Fecal coliform 200/100 mL 400/100 mL
(geometric mean
Chronic Toxicity 7.5%
Pass/Fail (Quarterly test)
En ing eerina Alternatives Analysis (EAA). Please note that the Division cannot guarantee
that an NPDES permit for a new or expanding discharge will be issued with these speculative
limits. Final decisions can only be made after the Division evaluates the formal permit
application for the expanded discharge. In accordance with North Carolina Administrative
Code 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c), the most environmentally sound alternative should be selected
from all reasonably cost-effective options. Therefore, as a component of all NPDES permit
applications for new or expanding flow, a detailed engineering alternatives analysis (EAA)
must be prepared (in this case we have this information which is under review). The EAA
DNorth Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources
EQ2�_ 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
NORTH CAROLINA
ro^a^^ � a• /� 919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID:BED9BF99-8B64-4593-BE52-6921E7737BOC
must justify requested flows and provide an analysis of potential wastewater treatment
alternatives.
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) EA/EIS Requirements. A SEPA EA/EIS document
may be required for projects that: 1) involve $10 Million or more of state funds; or 2) will
significantly and permanently impact 10 or more acres of public lands. Please check with the
DWR SEPA coordinator (David Wainwright, 919-707-9045) as to whether your project
requires SEPA review. For projects that are subject to SEPA, the EAA requirements
discussed above will need to be folded into the SEPA document. Additionally, if subject to
SEPA, the NPDES Unit will not process an NPDES permit application for a new/expanding
discharge until the Division has approved the SEPA document and sent a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) to the State Clearinghouse for review and comment.
Should you have any questions about these speculative limits or NPDES permitting
requirements, please feel free to contact me at michael.montebellokncdenr.gov
or(919) 707-3624.
Respectfully,
�AD.o'c'u,Siigne'd by,Aukh
-'e uh
C464531431144FE...
Michael Montebello
Supervisor, NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
Electronic Copy:
NC WRC, Eastern Piedmont Coordinator, gabriela. arrison e,ncwildlife.org
US Fish and Wildlife Service, sara wardkfws.gov
DWR/Water Quality Regional Office/Fayetteville
DWR/Basinwide Planning
DWR/Modeling and Assessment Branch
E Q�� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
_ 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
NORTH CAROLINA
DWro^a^u1�—m a�• /� 919.707.9000

Attachment A. Local Government Review Form
General Statute Overview: North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c)(6)allows input from local governments in the issuance
of NPDES Permits for non-municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) may not act on an application for a new non-municipal domestic wastewater discharge facility until it has
received a written statement from each city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the
proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be located. The written statement shall document whether the city or county has a
zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect and (if such an ordinance is in effect)whether the proposed facility is consistent with
the ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has determined to be
inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ordinances unless the approval of such application is determined to have statewide
significance and is in the best interest of the State.
instructions to the Applicant: Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for a proposed facility, the applicant
shall request that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The applicant must:
■ Submit a copy of the permit application(with a written request for this form to be completed)to the clerk of the city and
the county by certified mail,return receipt requested.
■ If either (or both) local government(s) fail(s) to mail the completed form, as evidenced by the postmark on the certified
mail card(s),within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant may submit the application to.
the NPDES Unit.
■ As evidence to the Commission that the local government(s) failed to respond within 15 days,the applicant shall submit a
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local government(s) failed to respond within
the 15-day period.
Instructions to the Local Government: The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of the land on which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local governmen
(City/County)
Does the city/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be
located? Yes [ ] No[ X] If no,please sign this form,have it notarized,and return it to the applicant.
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes [ ] No [ ]
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect,is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes [ ]
No [ J A� V
11
Date 'G /k�'r d ZOLZ Signature
(City Manager/County Manager)
State of MOrAl -6"LA& ,County of
On this — — day of ,0��,personally appeared before me,the said
name AC'PA"t• I COL ',' to me known and known to me to be the person described in
and who executed the foregoing document and he(or she)acknowledged that he(or she)executed the same and being duly sworn
by me,made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true.
My Commission expires (Signature of Notary Public) �AO,4,aAo&4y),
Notary Public(O`fi jW1$rpj ,,,'
\-\OTA
EAA Guidance Document Revision:October 2019
Page 1 of 1

Attachment A. Local Government Review Form
General Statute Overview: North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c)(6)allows input from local governments in the issuance
of NPDES Permits for non-municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) may not act on an application for a new non-municipal domestic wastewater discharge facility until it has
received a written statement from each city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the
proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be located. The written statement shall document whether the city or county has a
zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect and (if such an ordinance is in effect)whether the proposed facility is consistent with
the ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has determined to be
inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ordinances unless the approval of such application is determined to have statewide
significance and is in the best interest of the State.
Instructions to the Applicant: Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for a proposed facility, the applicant
shall request that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The applicant must:
■ Submit a copy of the permit application (with a written request for this form to be completed)to the clerk of the city and
the county by certified mail,return receipt requested.
■ If either (or both) local government(s) fails) to mail the completed form,as evidenced by the postmark on the certified
mail card(s),within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail,the applicant may submit the application to
the NPDES Unit.
■ As evidence to the Commission that the local government(s) failed to respond within 15 days,the applicant shall submit a
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local government(s) failed to respond within
the 15-day period.
Instructions to the Local Government: The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of the land on which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local government Town of Lillin.�ton.NC
(City/County)
Does the city/cou have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be
located? Yes [VT No[ ] If no,please sign this form,have it notarized,and return it to the applicant.
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes [V'No [ ]
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect,is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes LVJ
No[ ]
Date 2 1 20 2 Signature
4(C' anger/County Manager)
State of NOT-+V I C onl i n cl 'County of 4U r n-c i t
On this i V '—' day of S-JM ,impersonally appeared before me,the said
name J OS e�h J CRY i-C s to me known and known to me to be the person described in
and who execu d the foregoing document and he(or she)acknowledged that he(ors )executed the same and being duly sworn
by me,made oath that the statements in the foregoing L e.
M Commission a ire i a oo,���Noo ublic
y s �otYAOrl�"' .L's 4Not* ublic(Offi 1 Seal)
PUBO
00
'0V�,,�a�
EAA Guidance Document Revision:October 2019
Page 1 of 1

r ■ HARNETT
REGIONAL
■ WATER www.harnettwater.org
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Ullington, NC 27546
ph: 910-893-7575
February 1, 2023 fax: [phone]
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Water quality Permitting Section—NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Attention: Nick Coco
Re: NPDES NCO021636
North Harnett Regional WWTP
Request to continue Reduced Monitoring
Mr. Coco,
Harnett Regional Water respectfully requests to continue reduced monitoring as part of the ongoing
renewal process. 1 have included a copy of the original DWQ correspondence granting the permit
modification from back in 2015 along with a spreadsheet showing effluent monitoring results for these
parameters for the full compliance period 2017-2022.This data can be verified against NCDMR data
already in RIMS.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions regarding this application or needs for
additional information.
�R,(ess-pectflu-.11y, J-4//1
Kenneth W. Fail
Wastewater Supt.
Harnett Regional Water
910-814-6470(office)
[e-mail]

r ■ HARN ETT
REGIONAL
rWATER www.harnettwater.org
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Lillington, NC 27546
January 31, 2023 ph: 910-893-7575
fax: [phone]
Ms. Kristen Litzenberger
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section - NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
RE: Harnett Regional Water
North Regional WWTP NPDES No. NCO021636
South Regional WWTP NPDES No. NCO088366
Nutrient Sharing Request
Dear Ms. Litzenberger:
The North Regional WWTP and South Regional WWTP NPDES permits include seasonal nutrient limits in
total pounds during the winter months. The North Regional WWTP currently has a discharge volume of
7.5 MGD and the permit includes 59,968 lbs. of TN and 19,989 lbs. of TP for the period between April 1
through October 31 of each year. The South Regional WWTP permit has a discharge volume of 15 MGD
and the permit includes 160,629 lbs. of TN and 54,543 lbs. of TP for the same period of April 1 through
October 31. HRW has recently submitted a request to expand the North Regional WWTP permit from 7.5
MGD to 16.5 MGD.The speculative limits that were provided to HRW included the same poundage for TN
and TP as is currently listed in the NPDES permit.
In May 2022, HRW requested that the South Regional WWTP NPDES permit be expanded from 15 MGD
to 17.5 MGD but HRW recently withdrew that request and now requests that the permit be renewed for
a discharge volume of 15 MGD.
HRW is requesting that a nutrient sharing agreement be established between the two facilities where the
facilities have the ability to share a total of 220,596 lbs.TN and 75,532 of TP as a seasonal total poundage
limit for the two facilities.
Alternatives for sharing the nutrient load between the two facilities have been discussed with NCDEQ.
While the initial request would be for the ability to completely share between the two facilities, if that is
not possible at this time, HRW requests that a portion of the South Regional WWTP nutrient allocation be
transferred to the North Regional WWTP NPDES permit.The allocation would be based on the percentage
of flow as shown in the table below.

HARNETT REGIONAL WATER
NORTH REGIONAL WWTP NPDES NO.NC 0021636
SOUTH REGIONAL WWTP NPDES NO.NC 0088366
NUTRIENT TRANSFER REQUEST
TN TP
FLOW % CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT PROPOSED
NORTH 16.5 MGD 52.4% 59,968 LBS 115,550 LBS 19,989 LBS 38,517 LBS
SOUTH 15.0 MGD 47.69/c 160,628 LBS 105,046 LBS 53,543 LBS 35,015 LBS
TOTAL 31.5 MGD 1.000t 220,596 LBS 220,596 LBS 73,532 LBS 73,532 LBS
HRW requests that 55,582 lbs. of TN and 18,525 lbs.of TP be transferred from the South Regional WWTP
NPDES permit to the North Regional WWTP NPDES permit.
HRW appreciates the assistance from NCDEQ on this project. If we can provide any additional information,
please contact me at this office.
Sincerely,
J
Steve Ward
Director
cc: Michael Montebello, NCDEQ
Ken Pohlig, NCDEQ
Joe McGougan, MBD

B3J
CONSULTING
AENGINEERS, P.A.
February 8,2023
Mr.Nick Coco,P.E.
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh,NC,27604
RE: North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
MBD Project No.321001/300
Dear Mr.Coco:
We are in receipt of your comments on the above referenced project.I wanted to provide our response and
determine how you wanted these incorporated into the EAA.
Renewal Application
1. Please provide a narrative description of the process flow diagram/schematic for item 2.4 of the
application.
The existing North Harnett Regional WWTPis currently 75MGDextended aeration wastewater
treatment facility with tertiary treatment. The facility currently has a headworks that includes one
manual har screen and one automatic step screen,an automaticgrit removal system utilizing vortex
grit removal and flow metering. Return activated sludge is returned hack to the inlet for the
oxidation ditches prior to an influent splitter box. Flow is then divided between two oxidation
ditches each having a capacity of roughly 3.S million gallons. Mixed liquor is discharged into a
splitter box that was divided between two existing clarification units each having a capacity of
roughlyl.2MGD. ThesludgefromthehasingoestoanexistingRASIWASpump station thatreturns
it to the oxidation ditch and discharges into the existingsludge storage lagoon. The clarified effluent
from the two clarifiers is discharged to tertiarylUters.Ina recent upgrade,existing traveling bridge
filters were paralleled with the use of four new stainless steel disc filters. The combination of the
two units provides tertiary treatment for the discharge. Tertiary treated effluent is piped to the UV
system which currentlyincludes two channels of UVhulhs,through a flowmeter,and into a cascade
aerator for post aeration prior to discharge to the Cape Fear River. The sampling system is provided
at the base of the cascade aerator. Sludge is currently dewatered onsite using an in-lagoon dredge
system to remove the sludge and pump it into a 600,000gallon storage tank onsite where it is mixed
prior to being dewatered using a centrifuge.
The proposed improvements include.•
• Expansion of theheadworks facility
• Construction ofa new secondary treatment system
• Expansion of the existingfilters system
• Expansion of the existing UV system
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

Mr.Nick Coco,P.E.
February 8,2023
Page 2
• Utilization ofexistingpost aeration
• Installation ofa new sludge digestion and treatment system
There have been some design changes since the NPDFS permit was submitted last spring. The
description belowreflects the latest update.A revised schematic is provided with this letter.
A new parallel headworks is being designed that will include two new automatic screens similar to
the existing automatic screen. System flow will be balanced between the two. The existing manual
bar screen will remain in service. A parallel grit removal system will be installed as will a parallel
discharge flow meter.
The discharge from the existing headworks gravity feeds into a new secondary treatment system
using sequencing batch reactor(SBR)technology. The flowgoes into the primary splitter box that
spl7tsitintosixnew2.75MGD5BR treatmentsystems. Thefacilityisablebeexpandedin thefuture
to add two more 2.75MGD treatment trains.Decant from the SBR treatment system is collected in
a surge tank where low lift pumps will transfer the flow to a new tertiary filter facility. Returned
sludge from each ofthe SBR basins will be piped to the newsludge digestion system described later.
The low lift pump station located in the surges tanks consists of six new vertical turbine pumps
designed to pump the peak flow to the new tertiary treatment system. The existing disc filters will
be relocated and combined with new similar designed disc fdlters to provide treatment for the 16.5
MGD design capacity. The traveling bridge filters will not be utilized at all as apart of this design.
The UV system will be expanded with two additional channels, including new UV disinfection
systems. The existing channels will be modified to include a trough style level control device to be
similar to the new design. The Cascade aerator is adequately sized for the peak flow capacityfor the
treatment facility and will not be modified.
The sludge treatment system will consist of utilizing the two existing oxidation ditches as sludge
digestors. A sludge digestion system designed to minimize the return of phosphorus to the
treatment train is being designed. The decant from the sludge digestors will be piped to a drain
pump station that will pump the flow back to a location downstream of the headworks and flow
metering.Sludge removed from the two sludge digestors will be thickened and aerated continuously
in the existing clarifiers The thickened sludge from the two existing clarifiers will be pumped via
new rotary lobe pumps directly to the sludge dewatering system. The existing 600,000gallon tank
presently used for wastewater sludge holding will be used for processing the water treatment plant
sludge. It should be noted that the existing lagoon will be dredged, and the sludge stabilized or
removed. The lagoon will be filled in using material excavated for the new secondary treatment
system(SBR).
2. Please provide the pass/fail result sheets for the 5 additional species chronic toxicity tests conducted in
April 2018,April 2019,January 2020,January 2021,and Apri12022.
All of the pass/fail results for toxicity for 2018,2019,2020,20121,and 2022 are attached.
3. Please provide the documentation for the ownership name change. We have this permit owned and
operated in the system by Harnett County Public Utilities,but it appears a name change occurred to move
to Harnett Regional Water.
The documentation showing the request for ownership change for the North WWTPand the South
Regional WWTP are attached
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

Mr.Nick Coco,P.E.
February 8,2023
Page 3
4. Harnett Regional Water(HRW)was granted 2/week monitoring for BOD,ammonia,fecal coliform and
TSS during the 2017 renewal for the North Harnett Regional WWTP based on 2012 DWR Guidance
Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing
Facilities. The renewal application does not include a request for continuation of this monitoring
frequency reduction. If this is a mistake,and HRW would like to continue 2/week monitoring for these
parameters,please submit a request to continue this requirement and include confirmation of the approval
criteria outlined in the attached guidance document.
A request to continue the reduced monitoring is attached.
5. Please describe how sludge is managed at this facility.
Currently sludge is removed from the treatment process and stored in a lagoon adjacent to the
facility. The sludgeisremovedfrom the fachity currently usinga floating dredge thathascapahilities
to cross hack and forth across the lagoon. Sludge that is removed from the existing lagoon is
transferred to a 600,000 gallon holding tank where it is continuously mixed before being pumped
using rotary lobe pumps to a centrifuge where it is dewatered. The proposed process will include
the modification of the existing secondary treatment process including the oxidation ditch and
clarifiers to he used for sludge handling. The existing oxidation ditches will he used for sludge
digestion using a system that will minimize the phosphorus return to the treatment train. The
existing clarifiers will he used for thickening and sludge holding. Sludge from the clarifier/sludge
holding tanks will he transferred via new rotary lobe pumps directly to the centrifuge for
dewatering.
6. Please submit the Mercury Minimization Plan developed for this facility. I am not aware of the plan.
A Mercury Minimization Plan was submitted previously. A copy of the plan will he forwarded to
your office under separate cover.
7. As required by Session Law 2018-5, Senate Bill 99, Section 13.1(r),every applicant shall now submit
documentation of any additional pollutants for which there are certified methods with the permit
application if their discharge is anticipated.The list of pollutants may be found in 40 CFR Part 136,which
is incorporated by reference. If there are additional pollutants with certified methods to be reported,
please submit the Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application table with your application and, if
applicable, list the selected certified analytical method used. If no additional sampling was conducted
and/or there are no additional pollutants to report, please note as much on the form itself. This
requirement applies to all NPDES facilities.The Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application will be
required for any type of facility with an NPDES permit,depending on whether those types of pollutants
are found in your wastewater.Please fill out, sign and submit the Chemical Addendum to NPDES
Application.
The Chemical Addendum will he signed and submitted.
8. Please provide the letter of request for a nutrient adjustment for transfer of loading from the South Harnett
Regional WWTP to the North Harnett Regional WWTP. MBD on behalf of HRW.
The letter ofrequest for nutrient adjustment has been forwarded to NCDEQ.A copy of the letter is
attached.
Expansion Request
1. In section 2.2 of the EAA,you note that Lillington,Fuquay-Varina and Angier have all made requests for
additional flows to be added to their contractual agreements with Harnett Regional Water.Please provide
these requests.
The letter request from each one of the participants in the system (Lillington, Fuquay Varina, and
Angier)are attached.
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

Mr.Nick Coco,P.E.
February 8,2023
Page 4
2. In section 2.3 of the EAA, please provide growth rates for the towns of Lillington, Fuquay-Varina and
Angier,and explain the implications of the growth of these towns on the service area/provide context for
the future flow needs outlined in Table 2.2.Additionally,please provide a 2042 projected population for
the county and service area.MBD with some discussions with Lillington,FV,and Angier.
Response for this item is Included with response for Item#3 below.
3. In section 2.4 of the EAA,please provide the calculated flow estimates for the service area.At this point,
the requested allocations are provided from each town, but a true flow calculation based on growth
projections is not provided.
In the expansion request items in the email that we received, there was a discussion about the
growth rates for the town of Lillington, Angier, and Fuquay Varina, and population projection as
well as information about Harnett County. In the original EAA document, MBD reviewed the
current contract flowallocation for each of the entities and the current average usage from each one
of the entities, as well as committed flow that is not yet tributary for each. This provided a total
current demand for each of the systems.
Each of the entities (Lillington, Fuquay Varina, and Angier) provided a letter of request for
additional flow into the North Regional wastewater treatment. Copies of those requests are
attached. Each of the entities and their request for flow, as well as their projected growth demand
is discussed below.
Town of Fuquay Varina
As is indicated in the chart enclosed in the original EAA document,Fuquay Varina's current usages
plus committed flow is 2.15 or 83%of their current allocation of2.6 MGD. In their letter to HR W,
Fuquay Varina requested an additional 3.4 MGD of capacity increasing their total capacity to 6.0
MGD.
According to OSBM data a vailable,as ofAprill,2020, the population for Fuquay Varina was 34,152.
Projected growth rates for Fuquay Varina are currently growing at a rate in excessive of 4%and
continuing to grow through 2029 at approximately 3.5%. Using a growth rate of 3.5%over the next
20 years, the current flow of2.15MGD will increase to 4.28 MGD or 70%of the requested 6.0 MGD
total capacity. Due to the rapid growth rate and the volatility of this area of Wake and Harnett
County, we feel that the requested expansion capacityis justified.
Town ofAnr
In Angier's letter to BR Wrequesting additional flow, theyprovided details as to the projects under
development and the current flow within their system and provided justification in theirletter for
the additional capacity. We request that you refer to the letter of request to Mr. Steve Ward from
July15,2021 from the Town ofAngier to validate their request for capacity.
Town ofLillington
Data from the Town ofLillington shows that the Town is currentlygrowingat a rate ofslightly over
3%annually. The current average usage for the Town of Lillington plus flow not tributary to this
system is.87MGD or 72.5%of the current capacity allocated to Lillington. Using a growth rate of
1.5% which is the projected growth rate for Lillington in the future, this increases the flow from.87
MGD to 1.14 MGD or 67%ofthe requested capacity of]7MGD. Once again, we feellike the request
from Lillington is justified by thegrowth rates and their current capacity.
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

Mr.Nick Coco,P.E.
February 8,2023
Page 5
Harnett County
The HR W allocation in the North Regional WWTP is currently 2.6 MGD with their current
demand plus committed non-tributary at over 3 MGD. The HRW capacity has been and will
continue to be the buffer for all of the systems, as well as the remaining service area for the North
Regional WWTP. This area includes a very volatile area of-northern Harnett County and southern
Wake County.Data available states that the county is growing at a rate ofl.38%and currentlyhas
a population of135,986. In data available from 2014 to 2021, Harnett County grew approximately
9%for a rate of].65%.
As a countywide system,HR Whas the ability to continue to expand their service area especiallyin
the northern area of the county where there are a number of open tracts that are not within the
jurisdiction of any of the cities or towns listed above. These undeveloped tracts are a potential for
growth in the future.
When calculating the demand for the county in the next 20 years, a growth rate of1.5% was used.
For this are of the county we believe the rate is lower than the potential growth rate for this area
over the next 20 years.Based on 1.5%,the flow would increase to 4.04 MGD or 62%ofthe requested
capacity. As is currently the case,reserve capacity needs to be available in the HR W allotment for
potential industrial growth, residential growth, and any increase in the needs from any of the
remaining entities.Based on the current and projected growth for Harnett County, the need to ha ve
reserve industrial capacity in the system, and their requirement to be a buffer for the growth of
volatile areas such as Angier and Fuquay Varina, the requested allocation of 6.47MGD is justified.
4. Is there any industrial growth that the County is aware of for this service area?
There is no known industrial growth proposed for the areas of the county;however, the county
should retain a reserve capacityforboth water and wastewater to facilitate anyindustrW expansion
in the county. Industrial reserve is included in the Harnett County request for capacity.
5. Please provide the permit number for the rescinded land application permit mentioned in section 3.2.2.
The permit number for the rescinded land application permit is WQ0028562.
We appreciate working with you on this project. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact this office.
Sincerely,
oseph W.McGougan,P.E.
President
MBD Consulting Engineers,P.A.
911 Norman Alley
Conway,SC 29526
843.488.0124

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
ATTACHMENTS
Renewal Application
1. Updated Schematic
2. Pass/Fail Documentation
3. Ownership Change
4. Reduced Monitoring Change
5. NA
6. NA
7. NA
8. Nutrient Request
Expansion Request
1. Participant Requests
2. NA
3. NA
4. NA
5. NA

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
RENEWAL REQUEST 1. UPDATED SCHEMATIC

OXIDATION CLARIFICATION
RAS
H EADWORKS RAS/WAS
BAR FLOW
SCREEN GRIT METER
INFLUENT FILTERS
INFLUENT � SPLITTER SPLITTER
FLOW BOX BOX
TRAVELING
BRIDGE FILTER RAS/WAS
FLOW
METER CASCADE
CLARIFIER TiUV AERATOR
EFFLUENT
UV L-L
CAPE FEAR
RIVER
WAS PUMP SLUDGE
DEWATERING
RAS/WAS
LH
INFLUENT
DISC FILTERS SPLITTER BOX
NORTH HARNETT REGIONAL WWTP
RAS PUMP EXISTING 7.5 MGD SCHEMATIC

EXISTING
HEADWORKS SPLITTER
BOX
BAR FLOW
SCREEN GRIT METER
TREATMENT
CHEMICALS
NEW NEW NEW FUTURE
INFLUENT SPLITTER
METAL SALT, 2.75mgd 2.75mgd 2.75mgd 2.75mgd
FLOW BOX CARBON SOURCE SBR SBR SBR SBR
BAR FLOW
SCREEN GRIT METER
SECONDARY
❑ EFFLUENT
TO FILTERS
SPLITTER
NEW H EADWO RKS BOX
WASTE PUMP NEW NEW NEW FUTURE
STATION 2.75mgd 2.75mgd 2.75mgd 2.75mgd
SBR SBR SBR SBR
WAS
TO
DIGESTERS J
TYP.
SPLITTER
BOX
NORTH HARNETT REGIONAL WWTP
NEW 16.5 MGD SCHEMATIC

NEW DISC FILTERS
FLOW
METER CASCADE
NEW UV AERATOR
SBR
EFFLUENT NEW UV
CAPE FEAR
UV RIVER
SPLITTER ICJ
BOX UV
NEW FLOW
METER
DISC FILTERS
NORTH HARNETT REGIONAL WWTP
NEW 16.5 MGD SCHEMATIC

SLUDGE
DEWATERING
SBR SPLITTER DRAIN PS
WAS BOX
SLUDGE
DEWATERING
SLUDGE DIGESTERS SLUDGE
THICKENERS
NORTH HARNETT REGIONAL WWTP
NEW 16.5 MGD SCHEMATIC

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
RENEWAL REQUEST 2. PASS/FAIL DOCUMENTATION

Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: 01/21/21
Facility: HARNETT CO. REGIONAL WWTP NPDES#: NC0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: HARNETT
,aboratory erf ing Test: MERITECH LABS, INC.
Comments:
X
Signature ,of Operator in Resp nsible Charge
Signature ot Laboratory Supervisor * PASSED: 1.19% Reduction
Work Order: Environmental Sciences Branch
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Div. of Water Quality
N.C. DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia
Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Chronic Test Results
Calculated t = 0.162
Tabular t = 2.508
CONTROL ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 % Reduction = 1.19
Mortality Avg.Reprod.
# Young Produced 24 21 23 17 17 21 25 25 23 20 15 22
0.00 21.08
Control Control
Adult (L)ive (D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L
0.00 20.83
Treatment 2 Treatment 2
Effluent %: 2.1%
TREATMENT 2 ORGANISMS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control CV
15.595% PASS FAIL
# Young Produced 24119124 24 23 17 22 14 13 26 23 21 % control orgs X
producing 3rd
brood Checkq0le
Adult (L)ive (D)ead L IL IL L L L L L L L L L 100
1st sample 1st sample 2nd sample Complete This For Either Test
pH Test Start Date: 01/13/21
Control 8.00 7.98 8.02 8.16 8.15 8.02 Collection (Start) Date
Sample 1: 01/11/21 Sample 2: 01/13/21
Treatment 2 7.94 8.02 7.69 8.10 8.13 8.06 Sample Type/Duration 2nd
1st P/F
s s s Grab Comp. Duration D
t e t e t e I S S
a n a n a n Sample 1 X 24.0 hrs L A A
r d r d r d U M M
t t t Sample 2 X 24.0 hrs T P P
1st sample 1st sample 2nd sample
D.O. Hardness(mg/1) 44
Control 8.22 7.93 8.14 7.91 8.05 7.88
Spec. Cond. (pmhos) 154 374 361
Treatment 2 7.73 7.88 8.14 7.94 8.12 7.90
Chlorine(mg/1) ,,,,,,,, <0.1 <0.1
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test Sample temp. at receipt(°C) ,,,,,,., 0.1 0.6
(Mortality expressed as %, combining replicates)
Note: Please
% % % Concentration Complete This
Section Also
% % % % % % % % % % Mortality
start/end start/end
LC50 = % Method of Determination Control
95% Confidence Limits Moving Average Probit
% -- % Spearman Karber - Other - High
Conc.
pH D.O.
Organism Tested: Ceriodaphnia dubia Duration(hrs) :
Copied from DWQ form AT-1 (3/87) rev. 11/95 (DUBIA ver. 4.41)

Effluent Toxicity Report Form-Chronic Fathead Minnow Multi-Concentration Test Date:1122/2021
F_��Laborato)j!
lity: North Harnett Regional NPDES#NC00 21636 Pipe#: County: Harnett
M,�effri)ech, I A' Comments
Signature of Operator in Respollsible Charg�.t
x
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Water Sciences Section
Aquatic Toxicology Branch
Division of Water Resources
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,N.C.27699-1621
Test Initiation Date/Time 1/12/2021 2:27 PM Avg Wt/Surv. Control.--0-5-30 Test Organisms
%Eff. Repl. 1 2 3 4 Surviving# Cultured In-House
Control 10 10 9 10 %Survival 97.5 17 Outside Supplier
Original# 10 10 10 10
Wt/original(mg) 0.528 0.557 0.470 0.511 Avg Wt(mg) 0.517 Hatch Date: 1/11/21
FO-5-257 Surviving# 10 10 10 10 %Survival 100.0 Hatch Time: s:oo 4:0o am CT
Original# 10 10 10 10
Wt/original(mg) 0.519 0.504 0.544 0.605 Avg Wt(mg) 0.543
1.05 Surviving# 9 10 10 9 %Survival 95.0
Original# 10 10 10 10
1t/original(mg) 0.474 0.561 0.484 0.504 Avg Wt(mg) 0.5 66
2.1 Surviving# 10 10 10 10 %Survival 100.0
Original# 10 10 10 10
Wt/original(mg) 0.562 0.521 0.531 0.479 Avg Wt(mg) 0.523
F-4-27 Surviving# 8 10 10 9 %Survival 92.5
Original# 10 10 10 10
Wt/original(mg) 0.505 0.536 0.537 EO.410 Avg Wt(mg) 0.497
8.4 Surviving# ffO.
10 10 10 °
/°Survival 100.0
Original# 10 10 10
Wt/original(mg) 0.483 0.542 0.563 Avg Wt(mg) 0.526
Water Quality Data Day
Control 0 1 2 3 4 5 g
pH(SU)Init/Fin 7.70 / 7.83 7.55 / 7.71 7.79 ! 7. 22 7.80 ! 7.77 8.02 / 7.68 7.90 / 7.72 7.89 / 7.29
DO(mg/L) Init/Fin 8.06 / 7.72 8.10 / 7.51 8.15 / 7.55 7.82 ! 7.60 8.02 / 7.47 EE
8.08 / 7.03
Temp(C)Init/Fin 25.6 / 24.0 24.2 / 24.2 25.0 / 24.4 24.3 / 24.3 24.6 / 24.2 24.2 / 24.8
High Concentration 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
pH(SU)Init/Fin 7.80 / 7.67 7.83 / 7.71 7.77 / 7.74 7.82 / 7.80 7.85 / 7.69 7.81 / 7.78 7.81 / 7.47
DO(mg/L) Init/Fin 8.13 / 7.62 8.04 / 7.50 7.99 / 7.22 7.79 / 7.63 7.96 / 7.51 8.03 / 7.72 8.13 / 7.24
Temp(C)Init/Fin 25.3 / 24.1 24.3 / 24.1 25.2 / 24.1 25.9 / 25.1 24.7 / 24.7 25.1 / 24.7 24.6 / 24.0
Sample 1 2 3 Survival Growth Overall Result
Collection Start Date 1/10/2021 1/12/2021 1/14/2021 Normal F-1 FV I ChV >8.4
Grab Hom.Var. Fl ICI
Composite(Duration) 24.0 1 24.0 24.0 NOEC 8.4 8.4
Hardness(mg/L) 86 92 100 LOEC >8.4 >8.4
Alkalinity(mg/L) 95 108 85 ChV >8.4 >8.4
Conductivity(umhos/cm) 355 402 328 Method Steel's Dunnett's
Chlorine(mg/L) <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Tempo.at Receipt(°C) 0.4 0.2 0.5 jStajE
l Growth
Calculated Critical Calculated
uilution H2O Batch# 1535 1536 151538 20 2.41 -0.8842
Hardness(mg/L) 44 42 44 44 160.3587
Alkalinity(mg/L) 32 30 30 33 20 2.41 0.2252
Conductivity(umhos/cm) 167 167 158 167 15.5 2.41 0.6506
8.4 20 2.41 -0.3003
D INQ Form AT-5(1/04)

PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form-Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date, May 20,2021
Facility: Environment 1,Inc. NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WVVTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing 5olutAns,4rjc.,Certificate 4 037 Comments
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge(0
RC):
ORC Phone/E-mail: Project#: 15979
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor, Sample#: 210512.10,210514,09
e-Mall to: ATForms.ATE1 Camcderingo
Or Mail Original to; North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum 1.545
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Talled Critical 2.509
%Reduction: 3.6
Percent Average
North Carolina Cerlodaphnfa Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Mortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 21 12 Control Control
Number of Young Produced 1 l �29 26 271 271 31 1 27 25 26 27 30 29 28 0.0 27.7
Treatment 2 Treatment 2 Adult (Uive,(D)ead L L L L L L L L L L I L I L
0.0 26,7
Effluent Percentage F2.1% Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 6.4 PASS FAIL
olwg�ftmp�dDeft
Number of Young Produced 1271281 241 251 27 126 128 128 1 27 1 281 25 1 q7 31d1­d
jAdult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead 11, 11- 11- 1 Ll LJLJ LIL11- 11 ILI L 1 100.0 X
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sam le 2nd Sam le Test Start Date: May 12,2021
F87.04 8.25 16 8.11
Control F7.93 .27T8
Treatment 2 1 7.8318.27 8.25 8.23 8.15 8-15 Collection(Start)Date:
t a V r a Sample 1 05-10-21 Sample 2 05-12-21
M C:
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sam le 2nd Sam le Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.8 7.8 7.7 9.0 7.6 7.6 Grab Comp. Duration
ITreatment7.5 7.6 7.6 E8,1 7.7 8.0 Sample 1 X 24.h
Sample 2 1 X 24.h E-L
5i
Alkalinity
LC j (mg CaCOIA) 59
�6te
91
Hardness(mg CaCO3/Q
(Mprtalit .x ....... a mbi
..
Conductivity(limhGsjCM) 310,314,312 584 633
Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L} <0.10 <0.10
1.9 0.6
at Receipt(*C)
Sample Temp.
.:'Method of bitlliinii nation
j.
arbe..r'
t
t SpearmanK
Me
0
7.7
0.
r
tm
Ot e
d
m Teste Orgapis -Durat onS..
DWR Report Form AT-1

PO Box 7565
Asheville, NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Envimnmenulf 1ingsuIudons.,nc. Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form-Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute I-Cso Date: July 31,2021
Facility: Environment 1, Inc. NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Solutio s,Inc,,Certificate#037 Comments
Signature of Operaato in Responsible Charge(ORQ:
ORC Phone/E-malt ( 'i - y (} I) =�. t;. Project#: 16147
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: / }1 , Sample#: 210721.11,210723.11
e-Mail to: ATForms.ATB(@nc8enr.gov
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources a�
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum -3.206
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2-508
%Reduction: -6.3
Percent Average
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Mortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control Control
Number of Young Produced 1 28 29 1 28 301 29 28 1 28 1 29 28 1 29 29 32 1 0.0 28.9
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L Treatment 2 Treatment 2
0.0 30.8
Effluent Percentage EE Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4.0 PASS FAIL
Number of Young Produced 29 3 3,d b
0 33 29 31 28 32 33 31 31 32 30 m^r°I -sproduoeg
rd brood v
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L 100.0 f7
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: July 21,2021
Control 7.92 8.07 8.03 8.15 8.07 7.95
Treatment 2 7.99 8.09 7.98 8.14 8.1017.981 Collection(Start) Date:
t t Sample 1 07-19-21 Sample 2 07-21-21
N UJ � � v1 lJJ
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.7 8.0 8.0 8.2 7.8 7.7 Grab Comp. Duration
Treatment 2 8.1 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.0 8.2 Sample 1 X 2a_n o
Sample 2 X za-n �_ 3 E E
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/L) 58
(Mortality expressed as%,combining replicates.) Hardness(mg CaCO3/1-) S3
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 321,303,304 518 496
Concentration(%) t I Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 <0.10
Mortality(%) Ill Sample Temp.at Receipt(°C) 1-7 2.0
LC50= Method of Determination
95%Confidence Limits Trimmed Spearman Karber t -a t
to Probit w w
Other: Control
High Conc.
Organism Tested: Duration: pH(S.U.) DO(mg/L)
DWR Report Form AT-1

PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form-Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: October 25,2021
Facility: Environment 1, Inc. NPDES NC 0007684 Pipe 4: 001 County: Harnett
Harnett County Regional WTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Solutions,1pc.,Certificate#037 Comments
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge(ORQ:
ORC Phone/E-mail: PIroject H: 26384
Sample 211013.06,211015.06
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor:
e-Mall to: ATFormsATB(@ngdenr..RQ
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-stat I Rank Sum -4.611
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2.508
%Reduction: -12.4
Percent Average
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass mortality Reproduction
Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 11 12 Control Control
111 ]
Number of Young Produced 331311321 32133 31 34 29 30 0.0 32.2
l
I—L — I L I Ll L I L I L I L-T-L I L Treatment 2 Treatment 2 Adult Survival: (L)i,e,(lD)ead L L L
0.0 36.2
Effluent Percentage F13% control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 11 12 5.8 PASS FAIL
Number of Young Produced 1 321371 381 37 1 40 1 3� 371 361 34T3 5 T��39�36
=X
jAdult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead I L I L I L I L I L I L I L L I L I L L L 100.0
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: October 13,2021
Control 17.6517.83 7.81 7.73 7.72 7-_86]
Treatment 2 7.57 7.68 7.6017.791 17.7117.751 Collection(Start)Date:
V Sample 1 10-12-21 Sample 2 10-14-21
M C
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sam le 2nd Sample Sample Type/Du ration
Control F7.7 Comp.Duration 7.6 7.9 7.7 1 7.9 Grab N
8.1 8. Sample 1 0
Treatment 2 2 [EEE CL
r- E
Sample 2 = 3:
Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/Q 63
LqdAcute.Toxicity Test.'�'..
(Mortality.pxpresseclas Hardness(mg CaCO3/Q 87
Conductivity pMhoS/cfn) 323,317,318 167 160
10
Total Residual chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 <0.
ookinthitionIN
LL7(,C)l
Sal ec -1 0.7 _j
Sample Temp.at Receipt
We thod of.Q.eterm!nat on
95%.Confidence Limits Trifininne d S06a rman.Ka13
_13
w:7
to
Probst
r: :::Control
O A:Duration
Organism Te d
DWR Report Form AT-1

POP"
PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Environmental Testing Solutions,Im. Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form -Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LCso Date: January 31,2022
Facility: Environment 1, Inc. NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Soluti9flis, I Cer ' ' to#037 comments
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge(ORC):
0
ORC Phone/E-mail: 9 10 .p6AProject#: 16649
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: Sample#: 220119.07,220121.07
e-Mail to: [e-mail]
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum -2.921
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2.508
%Reduction: -9.2
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Percent AverageMortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control Control
Number of Young Produced 1 33 1 291 341 291 341 35 1 301 32 33 311 30 30 0.0 31.7
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L I L Treatment 2 Treatment 2
0.0 34.6
Effluent Percentage 2.1% Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 6.6 PASS FAIL
Number of Young Produced 38 34 35 32 30 36 34 30 36 38 37135 bcon[ro crd'rood protlocing
3.e'rood �/
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L 100.0 X
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: January 19,2022
Control 7.83 7.61 7.56 7.78 7.83 7.70
Treatment 2 1 7.631 7.6,31 17.6117.7517.73 7.71 Collection(Start) Date:
0 1-1Sample 1 01-17-22 Sample 2 01-19-22
no C
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.8 7.8 7.6 7.8 7.8 7.7 Grab Comp. Duration
Treatment 2 7.9 8.0 7.9 8.2 8.2 8.0 Sam a`
ple 1 X za-n o ,
Sample 2 X 24 h 5 3 E E
o E
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/L) 60
(Mortality expressed as%,combining replicates.) Hardness(mg CaCO3/L) 88
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 293,303,325 452 454
Concentration Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 <0.10
Mortality(%) Sample Temp.at Receipt(°C) 0.8 0.6
LC50= Method of Determination
95%Confidence Limits Trimmed Spearman Karber t t
to Probit W
HOther: Control
High Conc.
R:�
Organism Tested: Duration: pH(S.U.) DO(mg/L)
DWR Report Form AT-1

E II(
PO Box 7565
Asheville, NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
En-nmemal Testing salutims,Inc. Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LCso Date: April 19, 2022
Facility: Environment 1, Inc. NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Soluti ns, Inc.,Certificate#037 Comments:
Signature of Operator in Responsible ChargeL(ORC): JJA 7
ORC Phone/E-mail: II0 si D Q/3_)4 1 r1 Q Vie - ueq Project#: 16856
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: Sample#: 220406.04,220408.03
e-Mail to: [e-mail]_
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum -5.091
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2.508
% Reduction: -13.1
Percent Average
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Mortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control Control
Number of Young Produced 31 33 30 32 29 30 33 31 30 301 341 32 1 0.0 31.3
Adult Survival: (L)ive, (D)ead L L L L L L L L I L I L I L I Lj Treatment 2 Treatment 2
0.0 35.3
Effluent Percentage K Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4.ism,
PASS FAIL
ng
Number of Young Produced 38 38 32 3rd b
34 34 36 34 38 32 38 36 34 "`°° '°='r°d°"
3rd brood v
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L 100.0 ^
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: April 06,2022
Control 7.68 7.80 7.67 7.82 7.67 7.79
Treatment 2 7.73 7.90 17.9117.83 7.82 7.91 Collection (Start) Date:
t: a t
Sample 1 04-04-22 Sample 2 04-06-22
m � m
w IN
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.7 17.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Grab Comp. Duration
Treatment 2 7.9 7.8 8.11 7.8 7.8 7.9 Sample 1 X 24-h o N
v v
Sample 2 X 24-h ' 3 E E
o � �
LCS0/Acute Toxicity Test Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/L) 63,63,58
(Mortality expressed as%,combining replicates.) Hardness(mg CaCO3/L) 90,86,86
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 316,305,303 480 575
Concentration(%) Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 <0.10
Mortality(%) Sample Temp.at Receipt(°C) I 1.5 L 0.8
LC50= Method of Determination
95%Confidence Limits Trimmed Spearman Karber
to Probit
Other: control
High Conc.
Organism Tested: Duration: pH(S.U.) DO(mg/L)
DWR Report Form AT-1

. PO Box 7565
Asheville,NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Envir--i T-in9 5olutlani Inc.
Effluent Toxicity Report Form-Chronic Fathead Minnow Multi-Concentration Test Date: April 20,2022
Facility: Environment 1,Inc. NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Solut* 5,I c., i icate#037 Comments:
Signature of Operator in Responsible Sharge(ORC): iZA
ORC Phone/E-mail: 19p•.V 4'J' 4 bflhumd-i .Q Project#: 16825
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: Qlli Sample#: 220405.04,220407.06,220409.07
e-Mail to: ATForms.ATB[[e-mail] Test Organisms: Pimephales promelas
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources supplier
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch In-house Culture
1621 Mail Service Center Begin hatch: 04-04-22 1458
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 End hatch: 1 04-05-22 0507
Test Start Date: April 05,2022
Replicate number
1 2 3 4
Control iSurviving number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Survival
Organisms loriginal number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Average wt(mg) 0.872
Weight/original(mg/larvae) 0.836 0.812 0.859 0.980 Average wt/ 0.872
surviving(mg)
•Effluent Isurviving number of larvae 10 10 10 10
0.525% I Original number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Survival
weight/original(mg/larvae) I 0.936 0.955 0.998 0.915 Average wt(mg) 0.951
•Effluent ISurviving number of larvae 1 10 10 10 10
1.05% Original number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Survival
Weight/original(mg/larvae) 0.946 0.970 1.015 1.031 Average wt(mg) f 0.991
^, %Effluent Isurviving numberof larvae 10 10 10 10
Original numberof larvae 10 10 10 10 survival
Weight/original(mg/larvae) 0.860 0.950 0.954 0.952 Average wt(mg) 0.929
•Effluent Isurviving number of larvae 10 10 10 10
I Original number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Survival
Weight/original(mg/larvae) 0.870 0.935 1.000 0.962 Average wt(mg) 0.942
•Effluent ISurviving number of larvae 10 10 10 10
Original number of larvae 10 10 10 10 Survival(%) 100.0
Weight/origina I(mg/larvae) 0.910 0.898 0.976 0.847 Average wt(mg) 0.908
Water Quality Data
Day 0 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final
Control
pH(SU): 7.75 7.70 7.68 7.55 7A7 7.54 7.67 7.69 7.53 7.42 .66 7.61 7.67 7.24
DO(mg/L): 7.7 7.8 7.7 7.7 7.9 7.2 7.8 7.0 7.7 7.0 7.9 7.7 7.8 6.5
Temp.(°C): 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.6 24.7 24.6 24.8 24.5 24.8 24.7 24.7 24.6 24.7 24.8
High Concentration
PH(SU): 7.64 7.64 7.77 7.46 7.68 7.47 7.84 7.53 7.78 7.36 7.84 7.56 7.79 7.18
DO(mg/L): 8.1 8.0 8.1 7.9 7.6 7.4 8.1 7.2 7.6 6.8 7.8 7.6 8.2 6.4
Temp.(°C): 24.7 24.9 24.8 24.7 24.9 24.5 25.0 24.7 25.0 24.6 24.9 24.8 24.9 24.7
Sample Information Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Control Analyses Survival Growth
Collection start date: D4-03-22 04-05-22 04-07-22 -� Normal: Yes Yes
Grab: _ n Hom.Var. Yes Yes
Composite duration: 24-h 24-h 24-h - NOEL 8.4% 8.4%
Alkalinity(mg/L CaCO,): 120 130 140 63,63,58 LOEC: >8.4% >8.4%
Hardness(mg/L CaCO3): 130 140 130 90,86,86 ChV: >8.4% >8.4%
Conductivity(µmhos/cm): 1 453 1 475 533 295-324 Method: Visual Insp. Dunnett's
Total residual chlorine(mg/L): <0.10 <0.10
Sample Temp.at Receipt(°C): 1.0 3.6 0.4 Survival Growth
%Effluent Critical Calculated Critical Calculated
i� 0.525% 2.410 -2.150
1.05% 2.410 -3.221
2.1% 2.410 -1.553
4.2% 2.410 -1.899
Overall Analysis: 8.4% 1 2.410 -0.977
Result: PASS LOEC: >8.4% NOEC: 8.4% ChV: >8.4%
DWR Report Form AT-5

PO Box 7565
Asheville, NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
EnOronmental Testing solutions.Inc. Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form - Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: July 28, 2022
Facility: Cameron Testing Services NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing Soluti s Inc.,Certificate#037 Comments:
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge(ORC):
ORC Phone/E-mail: Clio-'A?- ,(}s Project#: 17166
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: {LAf�.►r-� Sample#: 220719.03,220721.03
e-Mail to: ATForms.ATBCc6ncdenr.gov
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum -0.378
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2.508
%Reduction: -1.1
Percent Average
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Mortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control Control
Number of Young Produced 3S 28 29 1 341 291 32 1 301 29 1 33 1 32 132 131 1 0.0 31.2
Adult Survival: (L)ive, (D)ead L L L I L I L I L I L I L I L L L L Treatment 2 Treatment 2
0.0 31.5
Effluent Percentage 2.1% Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 7.1 PASS FAIL
- %control organisms producing
Number of Young Produced 35 34 32 31 30 28 31 30 32 34129132 3rd brood X
Adult Survival: (L)ive, (D)ead L L I L L L L I L L I L I L I L I L 100.0
PH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: July 20,2022
Control 17.4617.70 7.45 7.89 7.53 7.64
Treatment 2 1 7.67 7.831 7.80 7.77 7.72 7.87 Collection (Start) Date:
t✓ -0 t
Sample 1 07-18-22 Sample 2 07-20-22
in w N uJ N w
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.7 7.7 7.6 7.7 7.7 7.7 Grab Comp. Duration
Treatment 2 7.6 8.3 8.3 7.9 7.8 7.7 Sample 1 X 24_' o a` T a,
a a
Sample 2 X za-n ' 3
o � �
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/L) 59
(Mortality expressed as%,combining replicates.) Hardness(mg CaCO3/L) 86
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 300,30,29s 584 583
Concentration(%) Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 I <0.10
Mortality(%) Sample Temp.at Receipt(oQ 0.5 1.7
LC50= Method of Determination
95%Confidence Limits Trimmed Spearman Karber t _0 Y
4;; W N w
to Probit
Other: control
High Conc.
Organism Tested: Duration: pH(S.U.) DO(mg/L)
DWR Report Form AT-1

PO Box 7565
Asheville, NC 28802
Phone: [phone]
Environmental Testing Solutlons,Inc. Fax: [phone]
Effluent Toxicity Report Form -Chronic Pass/Fail and Acute LC50 Date: October 21,2022
Facility: Cameron Testing Services NPDES#: NC 0021636 Pipe#: 001 County: Harnett
North Harnett County Regional WWTP
Laboratory Performing Test: Environmental Testing SolutiorA Infi,Certifi ate#037 Comments:
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge(ORC):
ORC Phone/E-mail: 110 393- V Project#: 17376
Signature of Laboratory Supervisor: Sample#: 221011.24,221014.03
e-Mail to: ATF&ms.ATB(cDncde6 r.gov
Or Mail Original to: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch Chronic Test Results
1621 Mail Service Center t-Stat/Rank Sum -2.889
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621 1-Tailed Critical 2.508
%Reduction: -9.4
Percent Average
North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Pass/Fail Reproduction Toxicity Test Mortality Reproduction
Control Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Control control
Number of Young Produced 1 32 35 33 1 29 1 29 1 281 31 1 301 31 33 1 31 1 32 0.0 31.2
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead I L L L I L I L L I L I L I L I L I L I L Treatment 2 Treatment 2
0.0 34.1
Effluent Percentage 2.1% Control CV
Treatment 2 Organisms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 6.4 PASS FAIL
Number of Young Produced 34 38 36 3rd n 39 36 32 36 32 31 33 30 32 96 conVola brood$ms producing
v .
Adult Survival: (L)ive,(D)ead L L L L L L L L L L L L 100.0 n
pH(S.U.) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Test Start Date: October 12,2022
Control 17.4017.19 7.14 7.31 7.30 7.33
Treatment 2 17.1617.381 17.2817.161Collection (Start) Date:
t _0 t -0 t _0 Sample 1 10-10-22 Sample 2 10-12-22
0 C N C T C
H W N W N W
D.O.(mg/L) 1st Sample 2nd Sample 2nd Sample Sample Type/Duration
Control 7.6 7.9 7.7 7.9 7.6 7.9 Grab Comp. Duration
Treatment 2 8.1 7.8 7.6 7.7 7.5 8.0 Sample 1 X z4-n o - C N
.. v v
Sample 2 X 24-n 3 E E
o rn In
LC50/Acute Toxicity Test Alkalinity(mg CaCO3/L) 58
(Mortality expressed as%,combining replicates.) Hardness(mg CaCO3/L) 87
Conductivity(µmhos/cm) 312,303,307 530 591
Concentration(%) Total Residual Chlorine(mg/L) <0.10 I <0.10
Mortality(%) Sample Temp.at Receipt(*C) 1.1 1.2
LC50= Method of Determination
95%Confidence Limits Trimmed Spearman Karber t'
M C 0 C
to Probit W
Other: control
High Conc.
Organism Tested: Duration: pH (S.U.) DO(mg/L)
DWR Report Form AT-1

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
RENEWAL REQUEST 3. OWNERSHIP CHANGE

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
WATER QUALITY PERMITTING SECTION
NORTH CAROLINA NPDES PERMITTING
Envtronmentat Quality
PERMIT NAME/OWNERSHIP CHANGE FORM
I. CURRENT PERMIT INFORMATION:
Permit Number: NCOO 8/8/3/6/6 or NCGS_/_f_/_/_
1. Facility Name: South Harnett Waste Water Treatment Plant
II. NEW OWNER/NAME INFORMATION:
1. This request for a name change is a result of:
a. Change in ownership of property/company
_X b. Name change only
c. Other(please explain):
2. New owner's name(name to be put on permit):
Harnett Regional Water
3. New owner's or signing official's name and title: Brent Trout
(Person legally responsible for permit)
Harnett County Manager
(Title)
4. Mailing address: 455 McKinne, Parkway, PO Box 759 City: UllinRton
State: NC Zip Code: 27546 Phone:(910) 893-7555
E-mail address: btrout;a harnett.ore.
III. FACILITY AND DISCHARGE INFORMATION
1. Will the waste stream for the facility remain the same as under the previous owner? Yes❑ No❑
2. Will the treatment system and discharge location remain the same? Yes❑ No❑
"No Responses"
If either or both of these questions are answered"No"then more information will be needed to review the
request. Please attach documentation to describe and explain the changes to the facility activities, waste
stream,treatment process or outfall location. The Division may not be able to process the Permit
Name/Ownership Change request and may require that the new owner file a new permit application.
D_E Q� North Carolina Department of Environmental quality I Division of Water Quality
512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
919.707.9000

NPDES Name and Ownership Change
Page 2 of 2
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DIVISION UNLESS ALL OF THE
APPLICABLE ITEMS LISTED BELOW ARE INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL.
REQUIRED ITEMS:
1. This completed application form
2. Legal documentation of the transfer of ownership(such as a property deed,articles of
incorporation,or sales agreement)
3. Information to document facility,waste stream,treatment system or outfall changes as noted in
item III above(if appropriate)
Applicant's Certification:
I, Brent Trout attest that this application for
a name/ownership change has been reviewed and is accurate and complete to the best of my
knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this application are not completed and that if all
required supporting information and attachments are not included,this application package will be
returned as incomplete. I understand that Permit Name/Ownership Change can only take place throuvh
action taken by the Division of Water Resources and that no actions on my part or the part of my
company result in the automatic transfer of permit coverage.
Signature: Date: a -3-23
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE,INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION&MATERIALS,
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDDRESS:
NC DEQ/DWR/NPDES
1627 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Version 07/2021

�+v 5wE
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
•mo,;,,r:• WATER QUALITY PERMITTING SECTION
NORTH CAROLF!A NPDES PERMITTING
Ehvtronmental Qua'
PERMIT NAME/OWNERSHIP CHANGE FORM
I. CURRENT PERMIT INFORMATION:
Permit Number: NCOO 2/1/6/3/6 or NCGS_/_/_/_/
1. Facility Name: North Harnett Waste Water Treatment Plant
11. NEW OWNER/NAME INFORMATION:
1. This request for a name change is a result of.
a. Change in ownership of property/company
_X_b. Name change only
c. Other(please explain):
2. New owner's name(name to be put on permit):
Harnett Regional Water
3. New owner's or signing official's name and title: _ Brent Trout
(Person legally responsible for permit)
Harnett County Manager
(Title)
4. Mailing address: 455 McKinney Parkway, PO Box 759 City: Lillington
State: NC Zip Code: 27546 Phone:(910) 893-7555
E-mail address: btrout0. harnett.ow
Ilt. FACILITY AND DISCHARGE INFORMATION
1. Will the waste stream for the facility remain the same as under the previous owner? Yes❑ No 0
2. Will the treatment system and discharge location remain the same? Yes❑ No C7
"No Responses"
if either or both of these questions are answered"No"then more information will be needed to review the
request. Please attach documentation to describe and explain the changes to the facility activities, waste
stream,treatment process or outfall location. The Division may not be able to process the Permit
Nome/Ownership Change request and may require that the new owner file a new permit application.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of water Quality
D_E Q 512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
._ �...- -
919.707.9000

NPDES Name and Ownership Change
Page 2 of 2
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DIVISION UNLESS ALL OF THE
APPLICABLE ITEMS LISTED BELOW ARE INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL.
REQUIRED ITEMS:
1. This completed application form
2. Legal documentation of the transfer of ownership(such as a property deed,articles of
incorporation,or sales agreement)
3. Information to document facility,waste stream,treatment system or outfall changes as noted in
item III above(if appropriate)
Applicant's Certification:
I,_ Brent Trout attest that this application for
a name/ownership change has been reviewed and is accurate and complete to the best of my
knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this application are not completed and that if all
required supporting information and attachments are not included,this application package will be
returned as incomplete. I understand that Permit Name/Ownership Change can only take glace through
action taken by the Division of Water Resources and that no actions on my part or the part of my
company result in the automatic transfer of permit coverage.
Signature: GG �"'7, Date: c_�
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE,INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING INFORMATION&MATERIALS,
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDDRESS:
NC DEQ/DWR/NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Version 07/2021

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
RENEWAL REQUEST 4. REDUCED MONITORING CHANGE

r ■ HARNETT
REGIONAL
■ WATER www.harnettwater.org
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Ullington, NC 27546
ph: 910-893-7575
February 1, 2023 fax: [phone]
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Water quality Permitting Section—NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Attention: Nick Coco
Re: NPDES NCO021636
North Harnett Regional WWTP
Request to continue Reduced Monitoring
Mr. Coco,
Harnett Regional Water respectfully requests to continue reduced monitoring as part of the ongoing
renewal process. 1 have included a copy of the original DWQ correspondence granting the permit
modification from back in 2015 along with a spreadsheet showing effluent monitoring results for these
parameters for the full compliance period 2017-2022.This data can be verified against NCDMR data
already in RIMS.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions regarding this application or needs for
additional information.
�R,(ess-pectflu-.11y, J-4//1
Kenneth W. Fail
Wastewater Supt.
Harnett Regional Water
910-814-6470(office)
[e-mail]

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
RENEWAL REQUEST 8. NUTRIENT REQUEST

r ■ HARN ETT
REGIONAL
rWATER www.harnettwater.org
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Lillington, NC 27546
January 31, 2023 ph: 910-893-7575
fax: [phone]
Ms. Kristen Litzenberger
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section - NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
RE: Harnett Regional Water
North Regional WWTP NPDES No. NCO021636
South Regional WWTP NPDES No. NCO088366
Nutrient Sharing Request
Dear Ms. Litzenberger:
The North Regional WWTP and South Regional WWTP NPDES permits include seasonal nutrient limits in
total pounds during the winter months. The North Regional WWTP currently has a discharge volume of
7.5 MGD and the permit includes 59,968 lbs. of TN and 19,989 lbs. of TP for the period between April 1
through October 31 of each year. The South Regional WWTP permit has a discharge volume of 15 MGD
and the permit includes 160,629 lbs. of TN and 54,543 lbs. of TP for the same period of April 1 through
October 31. HRW has recently submitted a request to expand the North Regional WWTP permit from 7.5
MGD to 16.5 MGD.The speculative limits that were provided to HRW included the same poundage for TN
and TP as is currently listed in the NPDES permit.
In May 2022, HRW requested that the South Regional WWTP NPDES permit be expanded from 15 MGD
to 17.5 MGD but HRW recently withdrew that request and now requests that the permit be renewed for
a discharge volume of 15 MGD.
HRW is requesting that a nutrient sharing agreement be established between the two facilities where the
facilities have the ability to share a total of 220,596 lbs.TN and 75,532 of TP as a seasonal total poundage
limit for the two facilities.
Alternatives for sharing the nutrient load between the two facilities have been discussed with NCDEQ.
While the initial request would be for the ability to completely share between the two facilities, if that is
not possible at this time, HRW requests that a portion of the South Regional WWTP nutrient allocation be
transferred to the North Regional WWTP NPDES permit.The allocation would be based on the percentage
of flow as shown in the table below.

HARNETT REGIONAL WATER
NORTH REGIONAL WWTP NPDES NO.NC 0021636
SOUTH REGIONAL WWTP NPDES NO.NC 0088366
NUTRIENT TRANSFER REQUEST
TN TP
FLOW % CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT PROPOSED
NORTH 16.5 MGD 52.4% 59,968 LBS 115,550 LBS 19,989 LBS 38,517 LBS
SOUTH 15.0 MGD 47.69/c 160,628 LBS 105,046 LBS 53,543 LBS 35,015 LBS
TOTAL 31.5 MGD 1.000t 220,596 LBS 220,596 LBS 73,532 LBS 73,532 LBS
HRW requests that 55,582 lbs. of TN and 18,525 lbs.of TP be transferred from the South Regional WWTP
NPDES permit to the North Regional WWTP NPDES permit.
HRW appreciates the assistance from NCDEQ on this project. If we can provide any additional information,
please contact me at this office.
Sincerely,
J
Steve Ward
Director
cc: Michael Montebello, NCDEQ
Ken Pohlig, NCDEQ
Joe McGougan, MBD

North Regional WWTP Expansion
Harnett Regional Water
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Comments
EXPANSION REQUEST 1. PARTICIPANT REQUESTS

t1►G,�R'
Q" C�
o �m
Of crepe
Town of Angier
www.an ig er.
Robert K. Smith Gerry Vincent Veronica Hardaway
Mayor Town Manager Town Clerk
July 15,2021
Mr. Steve Ward
HRW Director
Harnett Regional Water
P.O.Box 1119
Lillington,NC 27546
Reference: NHWWTP Capacity Commitment
Dear Mr.Ward:
In response to your letter of April 23, 2021 regarding capacity commitments for a planned expansion to
the NHWWTP, the Town of Angier is requesting an additional 1.25 MGD of treatment capacity.
Furthermore, the Town of Angier is requesting that we amend the July 2006 Wastewater Agreement to
include language that sets parameters for the Town to purchase an additional 1.0 MGD of treatment
capacity within the next 5 to 10 years. As per our recent discussion, we are tracking 0.579 MGD of not
yet tributary wastewater flow via 12 active developments. We are also tracking another 0.091 MGD of
not yet tributary wastewater flow via 3 additional developments that are in the engineering phase but have
not submitted for permits. Including the 15 projects and our current average daily flow we are at 1.352
MGD without accounting for any new developments going forward. The additional 1.25 MGD of
capacity allocation puts the Town at 2.258 MGD of treatment capacity in the NHWWTP. Based on these
current flow totals and our internal assessment of growth patterns over the next 5 to 10 years, we believe
having a structure in place for the purchase of additional treatment capacity beyond our 1.25 MGD
commitment to be critical in our planning process. Please advise as to how we can move forward with
developing a structure for future capacity purchase and amending our 2006 Agreement.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF ANGIER,nNC
� V n
Gerry Vincent
Town Manager
Post Office Box 278 - Angier,North Carolina 27501-0278 - [phone]

i�
FJ0JA NAR 11 NA
north coro(ino
May 21,2021
Mr. Steve Ward,Director
Harnett Regional Water
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Lillington,NC 27546
Re: Letter of Intent-ATIRWWTP Treatment Capacity
Dear Mr. Ward,
In response to your April 23,2021 letter, and under the Agreement dated November 9, 2000,this
notice is to confirm the Town of Fuquay-Varina's decision to participate in the expansion of the
North Harnett Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant(NHRWWTP).
Currently,the Town is contracted with Harnett County to receive 2.6 MGD of treatment capacity
from the NHRWWTP. This notice is to affirm the Town's request to increase our capacity by 3.4
MGD for a total of 6.0 MGD of treatment capacity. Following the November 9,2000 Agreement,
this written notice serves as the Town's statement regarding our decision to participate in the
facility expansion. Upon completing this project's preliminary engineering reports,on the
condition that additional treatment capacity may be available for allocation,the Town would like
to discuss securing additional treatment capacity beyond its 4.0 MGD entitled treatment capacity
allotment.
We look forward to working with Harnett Regional Water on this very important project.In the
future,please coordinate this project's activities with Jim Seymour,Assistant Town Manager
(Development Services),jse_ mour wfuqua_y-varina.org 1 [phone].
Sincere ,
Adam Mitchell
Town Manager
Cc: Jim Seymour,Asst.Town Manager
Jay Meyers,Public Utility Director
James Adcock,Town Attorney
OFFICE OF THE TOWN MANAGER
Town of Fuquay-Varina =134 N Main Street, Fuquay-Varina, NC 27526=[phone] =fuquay-varina.org

TOWN OF LILLINGTON
July 9, 2021
Mr. Steve Ward, Director
Harnett Regional Water
PO Box 1119
700 McKinney Parkway
Lillington,NC 27546
Re: Letter of Intent—NHRWWTP Treatment Capacity
Dear Mr. Ward,
In response to your letter dated April 23, 2021,please accept this response as the Town of
Lillington notice of confirmation of participation in the expansion of the North Harnett
Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant(NHRWWTP).
This notice is to affirm the Town's request for up to 2 MGD treatment capacity. This written
notice serves as the Town's statement regarding the decision to participate in the facility
expansion. Also, the Town would like the option to secure additional treatment capacity from
the NHRWWTP in the future.
The Town looks forward to continuing the strong working relationship with Harnett Regional
Water for years to come.
Sincerely,
J eph Jeffrie
Town Manager
Cc: Lisa Young,Assistant Town Manager
Alicia Gregory,Management Analyst
Ashley Wimberly,Public Works Director
102 East Front Street•P.O.Box 296•Lillington,North Carolina 27546
Phone:[phone]•Fax[phone] •www.lillingtonnc.org

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 01/25/22 Page 2 of 2
Permit: NCO021636 MRS Betweel 1 - 2018 and 1 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:Limit Violation Program Category:
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021636 FACILITY: Harnett County-North Harnett Regional WWTP COUNTY: Harnett REGION: Fayetteville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
12-2018 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 12/31/18 2 X week mg/I 2 3.08 53.8 Monthly Average Proceed to
N)-Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
12-2019 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 12/21/19 2 X week mg/I 6 10.98 83 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
N)-Concentration Exceeded
12-2019 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 12/28/19 2 X week mg/I 6 11.66 94.4 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
N)-Concentration Exceeded
12-2019 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 12/31/19 2 X week mg/I 2 4.53 126.5 Monthly Average Proceed to NOV
N)-Concentration Exceeded
01-2021 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 01/09/21 2 X week mg/I 6 6.94 15.8 Weekly Average Proceed to
N)-Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2021 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 01/31/21 2 X week mg/I 2 2.57 28.7 Monthly Average Proceed to
N)-Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case

irciD
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Donald R. van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
May 1,2015
Mr. Kenneth Fail,Wastewater Manger
Harnett County Public Utilities
P. O. Box 1119
Lillington,NC 27546
Subject: NPDES Permit Modification
Permit Number NCO021636
North Harnett Regional WWTP
Harnett County
Dear Mr. Fail:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for minor modification of the subject
permit. Accordingly we are forwarding the attached modified permit page. Please remove the existing
"Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements"page and replace it with the one attached to this
letter.
This modification reduces the effluent monitoring frequencies for Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD5),Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Fecal Coliform and Ammonia Nitrogen(NH3-N) from daily
(5/week) to 2/week monitoring. The modification was based upon an evaluation of three years of
facility effluent monitoring data. The facility's performance satisfies the criteria established in the
"DWQ Guidance Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Exceptionally Performing Facilities"as approved by the Director of the Division of Water Resources on
October 22, 2012, and justifies reduced monitoring for these parameters. The modified monitoring
frequencies will become effective as of the date of this letter.
This modification is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1
and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal
requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Resources or
permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other
Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Phone:[phone]\Internet:www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—Made in part by recycled paper

Mr. Kenneth Fail
NC0021636 Monitoring Frequency Reduction
p. 2
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Bob Sledge at telephone number(919)
807-6398 or via e-mail at [e-mail].
Sin ely,
2?'
S. Jay Zimmerman, Dir or
Division of Water Resources
attachment
cc: Central Files
Fayetteville Regional Office- DWR/Water Quality
NPDES Permit File
ec: EPA Region 4

Permit NCO021636
A. (L) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on May 1,2015 and lasting until expiration,the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated
wastewater from outfall 001 subject to the following effluent limitations and monitoring requirements.
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS'
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Weekly Daily Measurement Sample Type Sample Location
____Average Average Maximum Frequency.
Flow 5.6 MGD Continuous Recording Influent or Effluent
BOD,5-day,20°C
(April 1-October 3 1)z 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L 2/Week Composite Influent&Effluent
BOD,5-day,20°C
z 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L 2/Week Composite hrfluent&Effluent
(November 1-March 31
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L 2/Week Composite Influent&Effluent
NH3 as N 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/l 2/Week Composite Effluent
(April 1—October 31
NH3 as N 2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/1 2/Week Composite Effluent
November 1—March 31
Dissolved Oxygen Daily Grab Effluent
4
Dissolved Oxygen See Footnote 4 Grab Upstream&Downstream
Temperature,°C Daily Grab Effluent
4
Temperature,°C See Footnote 4 Grab Upstream&Downstream
pH 6.0—9.0 standard units Daily Grab Effluent
Total Nitrogen 5 Monitor&Report (mg/L) 3/Week Composite
(April 1-October 31) Monitor&Report(lb/mo) Monthly Calculated Effluent
59,9681b/ summer mass loading) Annually Calculated
Total Ni-ogen
March 31(November 1 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Total Phosphorus 6 Monitor&Report(lb/mo) 3/Week Composite
(April 1-October 31) Monitor&Report(lb/mo) Monthly Calculated Effluent
19,989 lb/ (summer mass loading) Annually Calculated
Total Phosphorus(November 1-March 31 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Fecal Coliform 200/100 nil 400/100 nil 2/Week Grab Effluent
(geometric mean)
Chronic Toxicity Quarterly Composite Effluent
Effluent Pollutant Scan 8 Monitor and Report Footnote 8 Footnote 8 Effluent
Notes:
1. Upstream=at the US Highway 401 Bridge. Downstream=1.3 miles downstream at the boat ramp.Instream monitoring is
provisionally waived in light of the permittee's participation in the Middle Cape Fear River Basin Association. Instream
monitoring will be immediately reinstated should the permittee end its participation in the Association.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15%of the respective
influent value(85%removal).
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
4. Monitoring is to be conducted three times per week during June,July,August,and September,and once per week
during the rest of the year.
5. TN=TKN+NO3-N+NO2-N,where TN is Total Nitrogen,TKN is Total Kj eldahl Nitrogen,and NO3-N and NO2-N
are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen,respectively. See A.(3)
6. Total Phosphorus,see A.(4)
7. Chronic Toxicity(Ceriodaphnia)P/F @ 1.6%;January,April,July,and October. See Special Condition A.(2.)
8. The permittee shall perform three Effluent Pollutant Scans during the term of this permit[see A.(7)].
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

00
0 ;Tz- F*
0
00
HOLDW.TAW,
NM auvfW4
MACGE�NEW LOADW.Mjp
STATWN
&
o
L-V�Z- % NM
MOLDWS TAHI
NO.2
SITE LAYOUT MM
%
z
pal 19,
UPDATED:1-28-2019
FOR CONSTRUCTION

January 30,2023
NCDENR,
Non-Discharge Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Subject: Sludge Management Narrative
North Harnett Regional WWTP
NPDES#NCO021636
Dear Sir or Madam:
North Harnett Regional WWTP currently utilizes a 26 million gallon facultative lagoon for sludge
digestion and storage.Harnett Regional Water completed sludge handling upgrades in April 2020 that now
allows us to dewater our bio-solids.These upgrades included a new lagoon dredge,600k gallon holding
tank,pumpstation,sludge building and shelter.The sludge is dewatered through a 21 foot Centrysis
centrifuge producing a 26%cake product.
In an effort insure Harnett Regional Water has a reliable conduit for sludge disposal,we have signed
disposal agreements in place with Sampson Disposal(Sampson County Landfill)and McGill Composting.
Harnett Regional Water is not currently utilizing land application but did have its permit#WQ0007066
renewed as a third option for sludge disposal.This permit was issued May 27,2022 and has been included
with other additional information requested.
If you require any further information or clarification in this matter,please feel free to contact me.
Z77ly,�
Kenneth W.Fail
Wastewater Superintendent
Harnett Regional Water
[e-mail]
910.814.6470

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 NCO021636 I11 121 20/02/27 I17 18I� I 19 I G I 201 I
211IIIII 111111III II III III1 I I IIIII IIIIIIIII II r6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ----------------------Reserved-------------------
67 70 J 71 Ity 72 L-J 73 1 74 79 I I I I 80
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) 10:00AM 20/02/27 17/11/01
North Harnett Regional WWTP
607 Edwards Dr Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
Lillington NC 27546 01:OOPM 20/02/27 21/07/31
Name(s)of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data
Billy J Thomas/ORC/910-890-1493/
Name,Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Billy J Thomas,PO Box 1119 Lillington NC 275461119/Backup ORC/910-814-3042/
No
Section C:Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations&Maintenar Records/Reports
Self-Monitoring Progran 0 Sludge Handling Dispo: Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate
Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments(Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s)and Signature(s)of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Hughie White DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3300 Ext.708/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Mark Brantley DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3300 Ext.727/
EPA Form 3560-3(Rev 9-94)Previous editions are obsolete.
Page# 1

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type (Cont.) 1
31 NC0021636 I11 12I 20/02/27 I 17 18 ici
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
All records and log books were very well organized and maintained. A copy of the current NPDES
permit and the previous years annual report were available for review. The ORC visitation log
appeared to be complete and current. Calibration records appeared to be properly documented.
Laboratory data was reviewed and all data appeared to be correct as reported on the DMR's.
Construction is currently going on at this facility that inlcudes adding additional tertiary filters for
increased flow. Also the facility is in the process of bringing a newly installed belt press and
associated solids handling equipment on line. This facility appeared to be operated and maintained
satisfactorily. The effluent was very clear and appeared to be free of any visible solids.
Page# 2

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
#Are there any special conditions for the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
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? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
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? ❑ ❑ ❑
(If the facility is = or> 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified ❑ ❑ ❑
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility M ❑ ❑ ❑
classification?
Page# 3

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
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:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual ❑
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
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? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Are the aerators operational? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/I) ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Comment: This facility uses diffused air not surface aerators.
Page# 4

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are weirs level? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of weir blockage? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is scum removal adequate? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the drive unit operational? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
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:
Is the filter media present? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the filter surface free of clogging? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the filter free of growth? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the air scour operational? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the scouring acceptable? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Disinfection - UV Yes No NA NE
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:
Page# 5

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Disinfection - UV Yes No NA NE
Pumps-RAS-WAS Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are pumps operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is automatically activated standby power available? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested under load? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up ❑ ❑ ❑
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected above side streams? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Is sample collected below all treatment units? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2020 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# 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:
Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
and sampling location)?
Comment: Sampling is performed by the Middle Cape Fear Basin Association.
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Comment:
Page# 7

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 2 u 3 I NCO021636 111 121 21/07/22 I17 18 L D] 19 I G I 201 I
211IIIII 111111III II III III1 I I IIIII IIIIIIIII II r6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ----------------------Reserved-------------------
67 70LJ 71Ity 72 L-J 73 1 74 79 I I I I 80
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) 09:30AM 21/07/22 17/11/01
North Harnett Regional WWTP
607 Edwards Dr Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
Lillington NC 27546 12:30PM 21/07/22 21/07/31
Name(s)of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data
Kenneth Wayne Fai1/0RC/910-893-2424/
Name,Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Billy J Thomas,PO Box 1119 Lillington NC 275461119/Backup ORC/910-814-3042/
No
Section C:Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Other
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 Zorio DWR/FRO WQ/910-433-3322/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3(Rev 9-94)Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type 1
31 NCO021636 I11 12I 21/07/22 117 18 I D
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page# 2

Permit: NCO021636 Owner-Facility: North Harnett Regional WWTP
Inspection Date: 07/22/2021 Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Other Yes No NA NE
Comment:
Page# 3

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
North Cary WRF NCO048879/001 County: Wake Region: RRO Basin: NEU02 Feb May Aug Nov SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 1/1/2019 chr lim:90% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 0.30 PF: 12.0 IWC: 90 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2018 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - >100(P)Pass -
2019 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2020 - Pass - - >100(P)Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2021 - Pass 97.5(P) - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2022 - Pass - - >100(P)Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
North Durham WRF NCO023841/001 County: Durham Region: RRO Basin: NEU01 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 1/1/2020 chr lim:90% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 0.075 PF: 20.0 IWC: 99.5 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2018 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2019 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2020 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2021 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2022 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
North Harnett Regional WWTP NCO021636/001 County: Harnett Region: FRO Basin: CPF07 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 11/1/2017 chr lim 1.6%@ 5.6M + NonComp: Single 7Q10: 550.0 PF: 2.1 IWC: 1.6 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A 5 O N D
2018 Pass - - >8.4(P)Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2019 Pass - - Pass>8.4(P) - - Pass - - Pass - -
2020 >8.4(P)Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2021 >8.4(P)Pass - - INVALID/Pass Pass - Pass - - Pass - -
2022 Pass - - >8.4(P)Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
Norwood WWTP NCO021628/001 County: Stanly Region: MRO Basin: YAD14 Mar Jun Sep Dec SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 2/1/2009 chr lim:2.7% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 42.0 PF: 0.75 IWC: 2.68 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A 5 O N D
2018 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2019 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2020 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2021 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2022 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - -
NW WTP Hood Creek-Brunswick NCO057533/001 County: Brunswick Region: WIRO Basin: CPF17 Feb May Aug Nov SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 4/1/2018 Chr Monit: 90% NonComp: 7Q10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2018 - Fail - - Pass - - Fail - - Fail -
2019 - Pass - - Fail - - Pass - - Fail>100(P) -
2020 - Fail - - Fail - - Fail - - Pass -
2021 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Fail -
2022 - Fail - - Pass - - Fail - - Fail -
Leeend: P=Fathead minnow(Pimahales oromelas).H=No Flow(facility is active).s=Split test between Certified Labs Page 80 of 118

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 01/25/22 Page 1 of 2
Permit: NCO021636 MRS Betweel 1 - 2018 and 1 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:Limit Violation Program Category:
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021636 FACILITY: Harnett County-North Harnett Regional WWTP COUNTY: Harnett REGION: Fayetteville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09-2018 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 09/22/18 2 X week mg/I 7.5 10.5 40 Weekly Average No Action, BPJ
Concentration Exceeded
12-2018 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/15/18 2 X week mg/I 15 15.4 2.7 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
12-2018 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/22/18 2 X week mg/I 15 18 20 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
12-2018 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/31/18 2 X week mg/I 10 10.38 3.8 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
12-2019 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/21/19 2 X week mg/I 15 21 40 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
12-2019 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/28/19 2 X week mg/I 15 37 146.7 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
12-2019 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 12/31/19 2 X week mg/I 10 17.49 74.9 Monthly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
01-2021 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 01/16/21 2 X week mg/I 15 20 33.3 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2021 001 Effluent BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)- 01/31/21 2 X week mg/I 10 11.1 11.0 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2021 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 01/09/21 2 X week #/100ml 400 640.2 60.1 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2021 001 Effluent Flow,in conduit or thru 01/31/21 Continuous mgd 7.5 8.03 7.0 Monthly Average Proceed to
treatment plant Exceeded Enforcement Case
02-2021 001 Effluent Flow,in conduit or thru 02/28/21 Continuous mgd 7.5 9.75 30.0 Monthly Average Proceed to
treatment plant Exceeded Enforcement Case
09-2018 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 09/22/18 2 X week mg/I 3 4.63 54.3 Weekly Average No Action, BPJ
N)-Concentration Exceeded
09-2018 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 09/30/18 2 X week mg/I 1 1.16 15.8 Monthly Average No Action, BPJ
N)-Concentration Exceeded
12-2018 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as 12/22/18 2 X week mg/I 6 8.73 45.5 Weekly Average Proceed to
N)-Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case