NC0004081_Renewal (Application)_20240523

•
ROY COOPERS _
Governor :� >C
ELIZABETH S.BISER •���.,�,,
Secretary
RICHARD E.ROGERS,JR. NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
May 23, 2024
Aurora Packing Company, Inc.
Attn: Glenn Williamson, President
655 Second St
Aurora, NC 27806
Subject: Permit Renewal
Application No. NC0004081
Aurora Packing Company
Beaufort County
Dear Applicant:
The Water Quality Permitting Section acknowledges the May 23, 2024, receipt of your permit renewal application and
supporting documentation. Your application will be assigned to a permit writer within the Section's NPDES WW permitting
branch. Per G.S. 150B-3 your current permit does not expire until permit decision on the application is made.
Continuation of the current permit is contingent on timely and sufficient application for renewal of the current permit. The
permit writer will contact you if additional information is required to complete your permit renewal. Please respond in a
timely manner to requests for additional information necessary to allow a complete review of the application and renewal
of the permit.
Information regarding the status of your renewal application can be found online using the Department of Environmental
Quality's Environmental Application Tracker at:
https://www.deq.nc.gov/permits-rules/environmental-application-tracker
If you have any additional questions about the permit, please contact the primary reviewer of the application using the
links available within the Application Tracker.
Sincerely,
is- !1'
Wren Thedford
Administrative Assistant
Water Quality Permitting Section
ec: WQPS Laserfiche File w/application
E Q O NorthW ashington CarolinaRegional DepartOfficement of1 9 Environmen43Washington tal QualitySquare I MDivisionallIW of Waterashington.Resources
North Carolina 27889
wa D /'� 252 946 6481

Aurora Packing Co., Inc.
PO Box 354
Aurora, North Carolina 27806
Phone[phone]
Aurora Packing Co., Inc. is requesting renewal of permit NC0004081. There have been no
changes to the facility since issuance of the last permit,
Enclosed is the cover letter, application EPA Form 1 and EPA Form 2B, description of
sludge management, map and diagram. RECEIVED
If you have any questions please call [phone] MAY 2 3 2024
Thank you NCDEQ/DWR/NPpES
Glenn Williamson, President

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
Form U.S.Environmental Protection Agency
1 =.EPA Application for NPDES Permit to Discharge Wastewater
NPDES GENERAL INFORMATION
SECTION 1.ACTIVITIES REQUIRING AN NPDES PERMIT(40 CFR 122.21(f)and(f)(1))
1.1 Applicants Not Required to Submit Form 1
Is the facility a new or existing publicly owned Is the facility a new or existing treatment works
1.1.1 12
treatment works? 1. . treating domestic sewage?
If yes,STOP.Do NOT complete J No If yes,STOP.Do NOT E❑ No
Form 1.Complete Form 2A. complete Form 1.Complete
Form 2S.
1.2 Applicants Required to Submit Form 1
1.2.1 Is the facility a concentrated animal feeding 1.2.2 Is the facility an existing manufacturing,
F. operation or a concentrated aquatic animal commercial,mining,or silvicultural facility that is
cu
o_ production facility? currently discharging process wastewater?
El Yes 4 Complete Form 1 El No ❑ Yes 4 Complete Form 0 No
z and Form 2B. 1 and Form 2C.
R 1.2.3 Is the facility a new manufacturing,commercial, 1.2.4 Is the facility a new or existing manufacturing,
mining,or silvicultural facility that has not yet commercial,mining,or silvicultural facility that
commenced to discharge? discharges only nonprocess wastewater?
dEl Yes 4 Complete Form 1 El No ❑ Yes 4 Complete Form No
and Form 2D. 1 and Form 2E.
w 1.2.5 Is the facility a new or existing facility whose
'— discharge is composed entirely of stormwater
associated with industrial activity or whose
discharge is composed of both stormwater and
non-stormwater?
Yes 4 Complete Form 1 Ei No
and Form 2F
unless exempted by
40 CFR
122.26(b)(14)(x)or
b 15 .
SECTION 2.NAME,MAILING ADDRESS,AND LOCATION(40 CFR 122.21(f)(2))
2.1 Facility Name
Aurora Packing Co Inc
0 2.2 EPA Identification Number
U
J
110006711095
2.3 Facility Contact
d Name(first and last) Title Phone number
Glenn Williamson President [phone]
Email address
[e-mail]
2.4 Facility Mailing Address
co Street or P.O.box
PO Box 354
City or town State ZIP code
Aurora North Carolina 27806
EPA Form 3510-1(revised 3-19) Page 1

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
d 2.5 Facility Location
o .. Street,route number,or other specific identifier
Q U 655 Second Street
co
c o County name County code(if known)
•R
U Beaufort
City or town State ZIP code
z13
R Aurora North Carolina 27806
SECTION 3.SIC AND NAICS CODES(40 CFR 122.21(f)(3))
3.1 SIC Code(s) Description(optional)
2092
v
0
CU
co
U
3.2 NAICS Code(s) Description(optional)
ccu 311710
SECTION 4.OPERATOR INFORMATION(40 CFR 122.21(f)(4))
4.1 Name of Operator
Glenn Williamson
4.2 Is the name you listed in Item 4.1 also the owner?
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 4.3 Operator Status
El Public—federal ❑ Public—state ❑Other public(specify)
o ❑✓ Private ❑Other(specify)
4.4 Phone Number of Operator
[phone]
4.5 Operator Address
Street or P.O.Box
E m 203 Pine Lane
o
•= City or town State ZIP code
o o Bayboro North Carolina 28515
ca
Email address of operator
0
SECTION 5.INDIAN LAND(40 CFR 122.21(f)(5))
o 5.1 Is the facility located on Indian Land?
c �' El Yes El No
EPA Form 3510-1(revised 3-19) Page 2

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
SECTION 6. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS(40 CFR 122.21(f)(6))
R 6.1 Existing Environmental Permits(check all that apply and print or type the corresponding permit number for each)
d ❑✓ NPDES(discharges to surface El RCRA(hazardous wastes) El UIC(underground injection of
water) fluids)
o NC0004081
w a ❑ PSD(air emissions) ❑ Nonattainment program(CM) ❑ NESHAPs(CM)
cp
LA,
❑ Ocean dumping(MPRSA) ❑ Dredge or fill(CWA Section 404) ❑Other(specify)
SECTION 7.MAP(40 CFR 122.21(f)(7))
7.1 Have you attached a topographic map containing all required information to this application?(See instructions for
specific requirements.)
co
❑r Yes ❑ No ❑CAFO—Not Applicable(See requirements in Form 2B.)
SECTION 8. NATURE OF BUSINESS(40 CFR 122.21(f)(8))
8.1 Describe the nature of your business.
Crab cooking and picking.Raw crabs are steamed in a retort,cooled,and meat is removed from the crabs by hand.
Meat is weighed into 1 lb containers and sold
w
0
SECTION 9.COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURES(40 CFR 122.21(f)(9))
9.1 Does your facility use cooling water?
G ❑ Yes ❑ No 4 SKIP to Item 10.1.
R 9.2 Identify the source of cooling water.(Note that facilities that use a cooling water intake structure as described at
a, 40 CFR 125,Subparts I and J may have additional application requirements at 40 CFR 122.21(r).Consult with your
c �' NPDES permitting authority to determine what specific information needs to be submitted and when.)
.O
O R
U =
SECTION 10.VARIANCE REQUESTS(40 CFR 122.21(f)(10))
10.1 Do you intend to request or renew one or more of the variances authorized at 40 CFR 122.21(m)?(Check all that
apply.Consult with your NPDES permitting authority to determine what information needs to be submitted and
when.)
CD
❑ Fundamentally different factors(CWA ❑ Water quality related effluent limitations(CWA Section
ce Section 301(n)) 302(b)(2))
❑ Non-conventional pollutants(CWA ❑ Thermal discharges(CWA Section 316(a))
co Section 301(c)and(g))
Not applicable
EPA Form 3510-1(revised 3-19) Page 3

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
SECTION 11.CHECKLIST AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT(40 CFR 122.22(a)and(d))
11.1 In Column 1 below,mark the sections of Form 1 that you have completed and are submitting with your application.
For each section,specify in Column 2 any attachments that you are enclosing to alert the permitting authority.Note
that not all applicants are required to provide attachments.
Column 1 Column 2
0 Section 1:Activities Requiring an NPDES Permit 0 wl attachments
El Section 2:Name,Mailing Address,and Location 0 w/attachments
El Section 3:SIC Codes ❑ w/attachments
El Section 4:Operator Information ❑ w/attachments
❑✓ Section 5:Indian Land ❑ w/attachments
El Section 6:Existing Environmental Permits ❑ w/attachments
❑ Section 7:Map ❑ P pographic ❑ w/additional attachments
co
o El Section 8:Nature of Business ❑ w/attachments
❑ Section 9:Cooling Water Intake Structures ❑ w/attachments
CI Section 10:Variance Requests ❑ w/attachments
0 Section 11:Checklist and Certification Statement 0 w/attachments
Y
11.2 Certification Statement
U
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision
in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the
information submitted.Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,or those persons
directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted is,to the best of my knowledge and
belief,true,accurate,and complete.I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name(print or type first and last name) Official title
Glenn Williamson President
Date signed
Ignature g
\ ---. 05/15/2024
EPA Form 3510-1(revised 3-19) Page 4

‘ -;
m . y-rsia - ....,
K
.. . 1.,
. `.. - s ".� "t, - .
.
S ? „! '" y - ,,yam. P• ; �
_ �4 '' ' -t '? �� y <-^. -� ^: ,Q., �, - +` ^ -"{ J jE- �� ? r.c-'c /'1. 1 < :! e,jY .< tr� n M1$ a . f r�
...�X - `' . tea a\..,. .. -t F. -:4 �a` n` �
Approximate - = � � ;,� _South Creek
Facility Boundary $ ,? `+�. t.. {tidal]
-, a = Outfall 001 & 002
. „t._ `'� , 4 - (tidal)
•
AS
-.< 1 /� -
_,. , ,,,.,.,r_., ,,,,,,,,,,,. . .,_<, . . ,.„__. _...
,____: ---_- - „
--.9111111r. ;
-' t__;;
=an,-
,1 ill!!itt-:11,14 4ii.r Alt —.. ,;•,.. ',- --..I• - - - 441/100,6 .
Lsoset =• - ' � , ---- -___
-- -----
is
aping�r' l ,ll'all,
. . ' ►
r•
•
/
ra ',._ .
- ti _
\
11.
- ter- r • -
w - .tea. 4 - _
ice ,
Aurora Packing Company, Inc. Facility
1 1 655 Second Street,Aurora 27806 Location
Receiving Stream: UT to South Creek Stream Segment 29-2844) Scale 1 Z4,000
Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico Rivet Basin Sub-Basin: 03-03-07
1 Latitude: 35°18'20" Longitude: 76°4T 00} NPDES Permit NC0004081
Stream Class: SC,NSW HUC: 03020104 North rt iarl.1fr-r+r elit11*FI7

44
,1 ,43 a
w
P
a
7
pe
kr'►;3i r
our,t 4................,_ [.. C., ;cc ago 3
-two C+ :'yip;
—0
001
tLtos
c 1 % V
� a

Aurora Packing Company, Incorporated
PO Box 354
Aurora, North Carolina 27806
Phone[phone]
Sludge Management
Crabs are cooked in the retort which is 001 and crabs are manually
picked in the processing room which is 002.
Best Management Practices are employed to ensure trace amounts
of solids are discharged into the receiving stream. 1/4 inch mesh
wire is used in the retort (001) to collect solid residual from the
crabs.
Dry Cleanup is used in the processing area to insure no solids are
discharged through outfall (002)
1

Identification Number Form Approved 03/05/19
EPANPDES Permit Number Facility Name P
OMB No.2040-0004
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc
U.S.Environmental Protection Agency
Form A Application for NPDES Permit to Discharge Wastewater
2B
NPDES CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS and
CONCENTRATED AQUATIC ANIMAL PRODUCTION FACIUTIES
SECTION 1.GENERAL INFORMATION(40 CFR 122.21(I)(1))
1.1 Indicate the facility/business type.(Check only one response.)
—
❑ CAFO 4 Complete Sections 1 through 6 and Section 8.
c El CARP 4 Complete Sections 1,7,and 8.
1.2 Indicate the operational status of the facility.(Check one.)
❑✓ Existing facility ❑ Proposed facility
SECTION 2. CAFO OWNER/OPERATOR CONTACT INFORMATION (40 CFR 122.21(f)(2)and(4)and 122.21(i)(1)(i))
2.1 Owner/Operator Contact
Name(first and last) Title
c
Io Phone number Email address
o`
o 2.2 Owner/Operator Mailing Address
Street or P.O.box
ac-)
City or town State Zip code
SECTION 3.CAFO LOCATION AND CONTACT INFORMATION(40 CFR 122.21(i)(1)(ii and iii))
3.1 CAFO Location and Contact
Name -------- ----- ---
0
.R
E
8 Address(street,route number,or other specific identifier) County
City or town State Zip code
CO
0 Facility contact name Phone number Email address
.173
0
0 3.2 LatitudelLongitude of Entrance to Production Area(see instructions)
a Latitude Longitude
EPA Form 3510-2B(revised 3-19) Page 1

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
ti 3.3 Integrator Name and Address
03
6' m Name
o c
(..) c
c O
cStreet address
0
O co
U co
O E
o ,o City or town State Zip code
u_ E
a
C)
SECTION 4. CAFO TOPOGRAPHIC MAP(40 CFR 122.21(i)(1)(iv))
0 4.1 Have you attached a topographic map containing all required information to this application?(See instructions for
o R , specific requirements.)
o El Yes 4 SKIP to Section 5. ❑ No
I—
SECTION 5.CAFO CHARACTERISTICS(40 CFR 122.21(i)(1)(v ix))
5.1 Provide information on the type and number of animals in the table below.
Number Number
Animal Type Number in Open Housed Animal Type Number in Open Housed
Confinement Under Roof Confinement Under Roof
❑ Mature dairy ❑ Sheep or
cows lambs
❑ Dairy heifers ❑ Chickens
(broilers)
El Veal calves ❑ Chickens
(layers)
❑ Cattle(not dairy 0 Ducks
or veal calves)
❑ Swine 0
Other
(55 lbs.or more) (specify)
❑ Swine ❑ Other
(under 55 lbs.) (specify)
in ❑ Horses ❑ Other
(specify)
en
'- ElTurkeys Total Animals
Ei 5.2 Indicate the type of containment and storage,total number of days,and total capacity for manure,litter,and
L process wastewater storage in the table below.
Total Total
0 Type of Containment Total Number of Capacity Type of Total Number of
p dY Capacity
Containment and
and Storage Days (specify gallons Storage Days (specify gallons
or tons) or tons)
❑ Anaerobic lagoon ❑ Belowground
storage tanks
❑ Evaporation ❑ Roofed
storage shed
❑ Aboveground ❑ Concrete pad
storage tanks
El pond ❑ Impervious
soil pad
❑ Underfloor pit ❑ Other
(specify)
5.3 Indicate the total number of acres drained and collected in the containment and storage structure(s)reported under
Item 5.2.
acres
EPA Form 3510-2B(revised 3-19) Page 2

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
Manure,Litter,and/or Process Wastewater Production and Use
5.4 How many tons of manure or litter and gallons of process wastewater are generated annually at the CAFO?
Manure tons
Litter tons
Process wastewater gallons
5.5 Is manure,litter,and/or process wastewater generated at the CAFO land applied?
❑ Yes ❑ No 4 SKIP to Item 5.8.
5.6 How many acres of land under the control of the applicant are available for applying the CAFO's manure,litter,
or process wastewater?
z acres
0 5.7 Check all land application best management practices that are being implemented.
❑ Buffers ❑ Infiltration field
y ❑ Setbacks ❑ Grass filter
❑ Conservation tillage ❑ Terrace
❑ Constructed wetlands ❑ Other(specify)
5.8 Is manure,litter,and/or process wastewater transferred to any other persons?
a ❑ Yes ❑ No 4 SKIP to Item 5.10.
5.9 How many tons of manure or litter and gallons of process wastewater,produced by the CAFO,are transferred
annually to other people?
Manure tons
Litter tons
Process wastewater gallons
5.10 Describe altemative use(s)of manure,litter,or process wastewater,if any.
SECTION 6. CAFO NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLANS(40 CFR 122.21(0(1)(x))
6.1 Has the applicant attached a nutrient management plan that satisfies the requirements at 40 CFR 122.42(e)
and,if applicable,the requirements at 40 CFR 412.4(c)?Note:A permit application is not complete until a
nutrient management plan is submitted to the NPDES permitting authority.
❑ Yes 4 SKIP to Item 6.3. ❑ No
6.2 Explain why a nutrient management plan is not attached to the application.
c
' 6.3 Is a nutrient management plan being implemented at the CAFO?
Z ❑ Yes ❑ No
a 6.4 What was the date of the last review
or revision of the nutrient Date
management plan?
EPA Form 3510-2B(revised 3-19) Page 3

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
SECTION 7.CAAP FACILITY CHARACTERISTICS(40 CFR 122.21(i)(2))
7.1 Is the CAAP facility located on land?
© Yes ❑ No 4 SKIP to Item 7.3.
7.2 Provide the maximum daily and maximum average monthly discharge at CAAP by outfall.
Outfall Discharge
Number Maximum Daily Discharge Maximum Average Monthly Discharge
001 490 gpd 210 gpd
002 500 gpd 50o gpd
gpd gpd
7.3 Indicate the type and number of discharge structures at the CAAP.Provide a brief description of each structure.
Also note the name of the receiving water and the source of the intake water for each structure.
Structure Receiving Water Source of Intake
Type Number of Each Description Name Water
Ponds
Raceways 1 oor drain in processing roor ned tributary on South Town of Aurora
'� Net pens Not applicable
a,
Submerged Not applicable
cages
Similar 1 Retort Discharge Blowdown pipe for crab unnamed tributary on Town of Aurora
— structures
— retort South Creek
(specify)
co
a
-
7.4 List the cold-water and/or warm-water aquatic species raised/produced in the table below.For each species
listed,indicate the total yearly and maximum harvestable weight(in pounds).
Cold Water Species Warm Water Species
Harvestable Weight Species Harvestable Weight
Species Total Yearly Maximum Total Yearly Maximum
Blue Crab
400,000 lbs. 400,000 lbs. lbs. lbs.
lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs.
lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs.
lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs.
7.5 Indicate the calendar month of maximum feeding and the total mass of food fed(in pounds)during that month.
Month of Maximum Feeding Total Mass of Food Fed
N/A
N/A lbs.
EPA Form 3510-2B(revised 3-19) Page 4

EPA Identification Number NPDES Permit Number Facility Name Form Approved 03/05/19
110006711095 NC0004081 Aurora Packing Co Inc OMB No.2040-0004
SECTION 8.CHECKLIST AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT(40 CFR 122.22(a)and(d))
8.1 In Column 1,below,mark the sections of Form 2B that you have completed and are submitting with your
application.For each section,specify in Column 2 any attachments that you are enclosing to alert the permitting
authority.Note that not all applicants are required to provide attachments.
Column 1 Column 2
0 Section 1:General Information ❑ w/attachments
❑ Section 2:CAFO Owner/Operator Contact Information ❑ w/attachments
❑ Section 3:CAFO Location and Contact Information ❑ wl attachments
❑ w/topographic map
❑ Section 4:CAFO Topographic Map
_ ❑ wl additional attachments
❑ Section 5:CAFO Characteristics ❑ w/attachments
cn
❑ wl nutrient management plan
s ❑ Section 6:CAFO Nutrient Management Plans
❑ w/attachments
❑� Section 7:CAAP Facility Characteristics ❑ w/attachments
`❑ Section 8:Checklist and Certification Statement ❑ w/attachments
8.2 Certification Statement
1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
c) supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted.Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief,true,accurate,and complete.I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information,including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name(print or type first and last name) Official title
Glenn Williamson President
Sig a re Date signed
05/15/2024
EPA Form 3510-2B(revised 3-19) Page 5

i , •-+i-{ � a -
i.
•
_ jt Ada aka rye H t~� ' ij
7. "'•,A` ? '� -z `;t4'_ ' �`. 1 f "!ram
Facilityit
Approxim
Boundary . South Creek .�'
-%"- --.-.,.....:1
[tidal} —41.41117 ; ...s
t - Outfall 001 & 002
: fj :
, " = (tidal)
Aurora(C) *COD
-. _ .ftr,t:77' ''-_d_:„iHloirahi,....._ _,--- ___--.411,'40114.111Itill.ke___G_I'' -
. ii
J- J ! • L t try _'
• - - Id, --''-`------ ---441480.6.,
.� ; st
it 1gib _ - PEA ¢
1 . . ;. a�rt�. s to A� •
Second Street MIN�� __ « ;� , S•
•
•
t . _
aping Rachati 1 ,-
CD
140
II/ qt.
--Is.. •,--lam a'•is-• -..
a 4, _4P. dam, _4.- 4, •
....._....)(
----.... -----.10tAliq-...-•-, • - .-,-.,..-„,,,,- • - --- J..—..f•-46-. 4
__ __._ - . - 7
I Aurora Packing Company, Inc. Facility
I 655 Second Street,Aurora 27806 Location
1
1 Receiving Stream: UT to South Creek Strum Segment 29-28-(4) Scale 1:24,000
! Drainage Basin: Tar-Pamlico River Basin Sub-Basin: 03-03-07
ILatitude: 35°18'20" Longitude: 76*4T 00" NPDES Permit NC0004081
Stream Class: SC;NSW HUC: 03020104 North '1 12o.o„ci..r4-r"lin4t.

Se rs.o csli Sb.
r r
9
et 0 t1 a
A r
p
� i'l
v /0
lb
v
--,
------------ —i
s
1.1
)
r
0
r> 1 lb'
C (). I
? C 0

Aurora Packing Company, Incorporated
PO Box 354
Aurora, North Carolina 27806
Phone[phone]
Sludge Management
Crabs are cooked in the retort which is 001 and crabs are manually
picked in the processing room which is 002.
Best Management Practices are employed to ensure trace amounts
of solids are discharged into the receiving stream. 1/4 inch mesh
wire is used in the retort (001) to collect solid residual from the
crabs.
Dry Cleanup is used in the processing area to insure no solids are
discharged through outfall (002)
1

DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
BEAUFORT
COUNTY
Richland Township WTP
NPDES PERMIT NC0084808
BEAUFORT COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
MAY 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.2 PURPOSE
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 SOURCE WELLS AND WTP
2.2 DISCHARGE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
2.3 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
3.0 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
3.1 CONNECT DISCHARGE TO A WWTP
3.2 OBTAIN A NON-DISCHARGE PERMIT
3.3 INSTALL WASTEWATER TREATMENT
3.4 USE ALTERNATIVE WATER TREATMENT SOURCE
3.5 USE ALTERNATIVE WATER TREATMENT METHOD
3.6 DISCHARGE TO A LARGER WATERBODY/PERFORM A DILUTION MODEL
3.7 COMBINATION OF ALTERNATIVES
3.8 DISCHARGE VARIANCE
4.0 ALTERNATIVES PRESENT WORTH COSTS
5.0 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
5.1 ALTERNATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
5.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE

INDEX OF FIGURES
FIGURE 2.1 NPDES LOCATION MAP
FIGURE 2.2 TREATMENT & DISCHARGE SCHEMATIC
INDEX OF TABLES
TABLE 2.1 EXISTING WELL DATA
INDEX OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A NPDES PERMIT INFORMATION
APEPNDIX B BEAUFORT CO SOUTHSIDE LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX C SOUTH CREEK & TAR-PAMLICO STREAM CLASSIFICATION
APPENDIX D PAGE 8 OF NPDES PERMITTING STRATEGIES FOR POTABLE WTPS
APPENDIX E TOWN OF AURORA LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN
APPENDIX F ROUTE FOR ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE
APPENDIX G WET TESTING SUMMARY

1.0 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Richland Township Water Treatment Plant (WTP) is operated by the Beaufort
County Water Department to provide potable water for County customers. The WTP
treats groundwater from two wells screened in the Castle Hayne aquifer and pumps the
finished water into the County distribution system. The current treatment techniques
consist of aeration, filtration, softening, and disinfection.
As part of the filtration and softening process, the filter vessels must undergo a
backwash process and the softening vessels must undergo a regeneration cycle. The
filtration backwash process only utilizes raw water. The softener regeneration cycle also
utilizes raw water, and a salt (brine) is injected during a small portion of the cycle to
restore the softener resin.
The wastewater generated by the filtration backwash and softener regeneration is
discharged to South Creek in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, under NPDES Permit
NC0084808. Due to failed Whole Effluent Toxicity tests (WET) prior to issuance of the
1999 permit, the County is required by Part A. (4) of the permit to submit a Discharge
Alternatives Evaluation with the next permit renewal application.
Appendix A contains a copy of the existing discharge permit and the fact sheet for the
permit. According to permit requirements, the following options must be evaluated:
1. Connect Discharge to a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
2. Obtain a Non-discharge Permit
3. Install Wastewater Treatment
4. Use Alternative Water Treatment Source
5. Use Alternative Water Treatment Method
6. Discharge to a Large Waterbody/Perform a Dilution Model
7. Combination of Alternatives
This evaluation is to include a present worth cost analysis for all technically feasible
options in accordance with Division of Water Resources guideline "Engineering
Alternatives Analysis Guidance Document".

1.2 PURPOSE
This evaluation is being requested to determine whether there are any economical and
technologically feasible alternatives available to the County to address aquatic toxicity in
the plant effluent. Based upon the evaluation, please identify viable alternatives and
present an implementation schedule and project timeline for the preferred alternative.
The County shall submit the Discharge Alternatives Evaluation to the Division along with
the submission of their next permit renewal application (due 6 months prior to permit
expiration).
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Richlands Township WTP was designed to receive and treat groundwater pumped from two
wells (Well #1 and Well #2). The location of the wells, the WTP, and the NPDES discharge
location are shown in Figure 2.1. Information of the two wells supplying the WTP is shown in
Table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Richlands Township WTP
Well #1 Well #2
Chloride (mg/I) 6 mg/I (11/1/2021) 10 mg/I (11/1/2021)
Current Average Daily Pumped 0.0914 MGD 0.1337 MGD
The average daily demand for the County varies from 0.6891 MGD to 0.8844 MGD. This
information was obtained from monthly operational reports and the 2022 Local Water Supply
Plans submitted to NC DEQ Water Supply Section. Appendix B contains a copy of the 2022
Local Water Supply Plan for the Beaufort County Southside water system.
The current treatment train for the Richlands Township WTP is shown in Figure 2.2. The existing
treatment techniques utilized at the WTP are as follows (raw to finished):
• Aerator
• Raw Water Reservoir
• High Service Pumps
• Potassium Permanganate is added
• Filtration
• Cation Exchange Softener
• Chlorine and Ammonia are added for disinfection
• Discharge of Filter Backwash and Softener Regeneration water to South Creek

There are three existing filter vessels and three existing softeners at the WTP. The filters are
backwashed manually according to psi gauge. The cleaning of the filter starts with a filter
backwash with a flow rate of 780 gpm for approximately 10 minutes. It is then followed by a
filter rinse with a flow rate of 250 gpm for approximately 5 minutes. The softeners
regeneration cycles occur generally based on the amount of gallons that flow through each
vessel. The regeneration cycle of the softener includes a 5-minute ion exchange backwash with
a flow rate of approximately 200 gpm, a 30-minute brine injection with a flow rate of 23 gpm, a
25-minute ion exchange slow rinse, and 10-minute ion exchange fast rinse with a flow rate of
approximately 250 gpm. Raw water is used for most of the filter backwash and softener
regeneration cycles, but some finished water is utilized at the end of the softener regeneration.
The volume generated during the filter backwash and regeneration cycle are reported on
discharge monitoring reports.
2.1 SOURCE WELLS AND WTP
DISCHARGE OF REGENERATION WASTE WATER EFFLUENT TO MAULS
SWAMP
As stated earlier, water generated during the filter backwash and regeneration cycles is
currently discharged to South Creek in accordance with the NPDES permit issued. The
discharge location is show in Figure 2.1. Based on discussions with the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) and USGS, South Creek has no stream
gauging station. According to NC DEQ, South Creek has a SC, NSW classification.
Appendix C contains a copy of page 17 of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin hydro order that
documents this classification. Thus, the existing permit does not allow any dilution
factor for toxicity testing on the effluent at present.
2.2 DISCHARGE WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
The discharge from the filter backwash and softening regeneration process produces a
wastewater that is discharged to South Creek. Data from permit Discharge Monitoring
Reports (DMR) were reviewed for flowrate and water quality parameters to determine
the character of the discharges. It is important to note that discharge samples are
representative samples and thus reflect the filter backwash and regeneration cycle. The
routine compliance sampling data indicates that the discharge has TDS, chlorides and
conductivity values characteristic of a strong brine.
Compliance monitoring data has shown that the WET tests from January 7, 2014
through October 8, 2019 were all fail results. Shortly after this time period, operational
changes at the WTP took place that impacted the filter and softener vessels. These

changes impacted the ratio of filter backwashing to softener regeneration. This in turn
affected the discharge water quality. Effluent characteristics that can impact WET test
results like ammonia, salinity, TDS, conductivity, etc. were reduced. Therefore, all WET
test since 2000 have passed except for two (4/4/2020 & 1/4/2021).
Based upon existing data from the DMRs,the following data represents current
discharges from the WTP:
Filter Backwash and Softener Regeneration Volume —13,000 gpd
Total Dissolved Solids —7,000-8,000 mg/L
Salinity "7 ppt
Conductivity —4,000-21,000 umhos/cm
2.3 TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Toxicity testing is currently conducted on a composite sample of filter backwash and
softener regeneration discharge water. Due to the rating of South Creek as a zero-flow
stream, 90% effluent strength is used in the toxicity testing procedure. Toxicity tests are
conducted using Mysidopsis bahia (mysid shrimp). The test is an Acute 24-hour
Pass/Fail since it has tidal effects and is not modeled. This is based on the NPDES
PERMITTING STRATEGIES FOR POTABLE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS dated October
2009. Page 8 of this document that documents Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing is
included in Appendix D.
It will be discussed in a later section of this document, but the discharge pipe into South
Creek has an existing diffuser. This diffuser was installed during the original construction
of the WTP and its accompanying discharge pipe. The attached Authorization to
Construct letter dated May 31, 1996 discusses the construction of a discharge line and
subaqueous diffuser. It does not appear that modeling of this discharge was conducted
at the time. It is surmised that it was not conducted because WET testing was not part
of the compliance monitoring at the time.

3.0 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
3.1 Connect discharge to a WWTP: Determine whether the wastewater can be
discharged to a wastewater treatment plant. Approval or disapproval from the plant
operator should be acquired.
This alternative would eliminate the surface water discharge by connection to a
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). If a discharge line to the sanitary sewer system
were constructed, this line would accept the discharge effluent flows from both the
filter backwash and the softener regeneration. Beaufort County does not own or
operate a WWTP.
The Town of Aurora owns and operates a Wastewater Treatment Plant WWTP under
Permit Number NC0021521. The WWTP has a permitted capacity of 0.12 MGD and
discharges into South Creek in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Based on limited capacity,
and a review of the compliance history, addition of the discharge from the WTP to the
sanitary sewer system may create further issues with the WWTP effluent. It is therefore
not recommended as a viable alternative.
3.2 Obtain a Non-discharge permit: Eliminate the surface water discharge by
obtaining a non-discharge permit for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal
(on-site drain field, infiltration gallery, injection wells).
This option eliminates the surface water discharge by obtaining a non-discharge permit
for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal. In accordance with the
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance Document provided by NCDEQ, waste
streams from ion exchange treatment units do not have to be evaluated for land
application. Discharge high in salt concentration is typically not suitable for land
application, as excess salts can adversely affect plants via osmotic effect; specific ion
toxicity; and soil particle dispersion, which reduces soil permeability and the water
infiltration rate. Chloride levels above 350 mg/I and conductivity levels above 3,000
umhos/cm are considered severe potential irrigation problems for land application.
Wastewater reuse disposal alternatives include agricultural and landscape irrigation,
industrial activities, groundwater recharge, non-potable urban uses (i.e.: toilet flushing,
construction water). As explained previously, the waste brine is not suitable for
irrigation or landscape irrigation. State of North Carolina code 15A NCAC 02U.1101
prohibits discharge to saltwater wetlands, so this discharge alternative is not available.

Additionally, the quality of the discharge would prohibit the use of the discharge for
non-potable uses. The brine content does not allow the beneficial use of this waste
stream for reuse application. Wastewater reuse is not a feasible alternative for disposal
of this discharge.
3.3 Install wastewater treatment: Install improved wastewater treatment to enable
the facility effluent to consistently pass the WET test. If this is not technically feasible or
cost prohibitive, please explain and provide estimated costs.
This alternative requires installation of a wastewater treatment method to enable the
facility effluent to consistently pass the WET test. A candidate treatment technology for
removal of chlorides is reverse osmosis (RO) technology. However, with such a high
chloride content in the feed water, the RO system would need very high pressure and
the percent recovery through the process would be 75%or less. Thus, RO process
would produce a discharge with a concentrate still requiring discharge to a large water
body. There are evaporative type systems that could evaporate the water off the brine
wastewater to produce a solid (salt), but they are energy intensive and expensive. Thus,
the RO treatment and/or brine evaporation option does not solve the original discharge
problem and is not economically feasible.
3.4 Use Alternative Water Treatment Source: Obtain drinking water from another
source (nearest County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity
problem is eliminated.
This alternative explores the possibility of obtaining drinking water from another source
(nearest County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity problem is
eliminated. Based upon the 2022 Local Water Supply Plan,the Beaufort County average
daily use ranged from 0.6891 to 0.8844 MGD and had a maximum day use of 1.62 MGD
(September 2022). The 2022 Local Water Supply Plan also estimated the County will
have a 2060 average daily demand (ADD) of 1.6809 million gallons per day (MGD).
Please note that the Richlands Township WTP is one of two WTPs that supply water for
the Beaufort County Southside water system.
The Beaufort County Southside water system currently has a 6" emergency
interconnection with the Town of Aurora water system (NC0407020). Appendix E
contains a copy of the Town of Aurora water system Local Water Supply Plan for 2021.
The Town of Aurora WTP has a permitted capacity of 0.2160 MGD. Due to the limited
capacity of the Town of Aurora WTP it could not provide an adequate source of water to
replace the Richland Township WTP demand and still provide safe potable water to the
residents of the Town of Aurora.

The Beaufort County Water Department utilizes groundwater sources that are in the
Castle Hayne aquifer and are currently not subject to withdrawal reductions based on
the Central Coastal Capacity Use Area (CCPCUA) Rules. The Division of Water Resources
may not permit new groundwater sources located in deeper aquifers that are subject to
the CCPCUA Rules. Since there are no public water supply wells located in the deeper
aquifers in this area of Beaufort County, it is not known what raw water quality may
exist or what treatment may be required. This alternative would require two new
groundwater wells being installed along with the possible construction of a new water
treatment plant that would have a discharge. Due to the amount of required
infrastructure, this alternative is not financially feasible.
3.5 Use Alternative Water Treatment Method: Install alternative and/or innovative
water treatment methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic
wastewaters. For example, install a recycle iron/manganese filtration system with no
discharge or combine discharge with WWTP or cooling water effluents.
This category includes evaluating alternative and/or innovative water treatment
methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic wastewaters. In
effect,this would mean eliminating the softener (and ion exchange) and using a
different technology that does not produce the brine/salt discharge in the form of
reverse osmosis (RO). However, these technologies produce a brine/saline discharge in
the form of concentrate stream that must be disposed of. Thus, use of nanofiltration or
RO would need to be combined with a large water body discharge to be applicable. This
alternative does not solve the original discharge problem and is not economically
feasible.
3.6 Discharge to a Larger waterbody/Perform a dilution model: Relocate the
facility's discharge to a larger receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts
to the receiving waterbody given the increased dilution. If applicable, perform a dilution
model to receive allowance for steam dilution in WET test.
In this alternative, the WTP's discharge line would be either lengthened or rerouted to a
larger receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts to the receiving
waterbody given the increased dilution. For any receiving body, a dilution mixing model
would be needed to receive allowance for dilution in WET test and other parameters.
Due to the salty nature of the discharges, the best choice for a new discharge location
would be to the Pamlico River where the salinity of the discharge will not have an
impact. The difference between the existing discharge and the Pamlico River is the

discharge condition. South Creek (Index No. 29-28-(4)) is considered tidal saltwater not
modeled and the Pamlico River is just saltwater. Appendix C contains a copy of page 17
of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin hydro order that documents these classifications. A
discharge to the Pamlico River would not appear to change the WET test requirements,
but would be considered a larger receiving waterbody. A new discharge force main
from the WTP would be approximately 10.5 miles to the Pamlico River. Appendix F
contains a map showing the route required. An extension of the existing discharge force
main from South Creek to the Pamlico River would be approximately 8.5 miles.
Appendix F also contains a map showing the route required. Movement of the discharge
would also require a dilution model to be performed so that an allowance for stream
dilution could be secured. Due to the amount of required infrastructure, this alternative
is not financially feasible.
3.7 Combination of Alternatives: Employ any combination of the alternatives listed
above that would result in eliminating or decreasing toxicity until a more feasible
solution becomes available.
Each of the alternatives stated above either do not solve the original discharge problem
and/or are not financially feasible for Beaufort County. Therefore, a combination of
these alternatives would also not solve the original discharge problem and/or would not
be financially feasible.
3.8 Discharge Variance
Beaufort County may apply to the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) for a
variance to the NPDES permit discharge requirements under State Statute 143-215.3 (e).
This statute reads as follows:
"Variances. —Any person subject to the provisions of G.S. 143-215.1 or 143-214.1, 143-
215, or 143-215.107. The Commission may grant such variance, for fixed or indefinite
periods after public hearing on due notice, or where it is found that circumstances so
require, for a period not to exceed 90 days without prior hearing and notice. Prior to
granting a variance here under, the Commission shall find that: (1) The discharge of
waste or the emission of air contaminants occurring or proposed to occur do not
endanger human health or safety; and (2) Compliance with the rules, standards, or
limitations from which variance is sought cannot be achieved by application of best
available technology found to be economically reasonable at the time of application for
such variances, and would produce hardship without equal or greater benefits to the
public, provided that such variances shall be consistent with the provision of the Federal

Water Pollution Control Act as amended or the Clean air Act as amended; and provided
further, that any person who would otherwise be entitled to a variance or modification
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended or the Clean Air Act as
amended shall also be entitled to the same variance from or modification in rules,
standards, or limitations established pursuant to G.S. 143-214.1, 143-215, and 143-
215.107, respectively."
If NPDES variances were to be granted for the WTPs by the DWR, the variance must be applied
for, re-evaluated by DWR, and granted every five years for each NPDES permit renewal. It is
not clear at this point what cost would be incurred for the variance requests for the WTP in the
future as the requirements are determined on a case by case basis.
4.0 ALTERNATIVES PRESENT WORTH COSTS
A present worth costs analysis was not completed because the alternatives would either not
solve the original discharge problem and/or would not be financially feasible for Beaufort
County.
5.0 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
This study has been conducted to meet NPDES permit requirements to assess methods for
treatment/discharge of wastewater from the WTP to avoid the toxicity impact on South Creek.
The feasibility of alternative methods was presented in Section 3. The cost of the alternatives is
significant and most do not solve the original discharge problem.
Based on the most recent compliance data,the WET test results have been a "pass" for the last
three years. The last "fail" was on 1/4/2021. This historical sampling is documented in
Appendix G. Since the County has been passing the WET tests for at least three years, the
preferred alternative is to continue operations and testing as is since compliance is being
achieved.
If in the future compliance for the WET testing is not being achieved, the County would then
prefer to investigate modeling credit for the existing diffuser. Initial talks with NC DEQ Central
Office staff have indicated that a meeting of the permittee, staff, and consultant should take
place to discuss the viability of a dilution model as well as the modeling process. This would
give NC DEQ staff an opportunity to search their files to determine if modeling took place with
the initial submittal in 1996 and was just not utilized for sampling credit.

5.1 ALTERNATIVE IMPLEMENTATION
It is important to note that the preferred alternative is not part of the seven (7) alternative
choices that are listed on page 5 of 7 of the permit. The recommended implementation steps
are as follows:
1. Continue to operate the WTP as is, collect and analyze WET test samples from the
discharge per existing permit conditions, and maintain compliance.
2. If future compliance is not achieved, a meeting with NC DEQ staff to determine the
process for receiving dilution credit from the existing diffuser. The County would
then secure a firm to complete the modeling for the existing diffuser.
5.2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The project schedule for implementation steps 1 & 2 are dependent on the results of future
WET testing. The schedule for step 1 would be current. If step 1 cannot be maintained strictly
based on the WET test compliance monitoring, then a meeting will be scheduled (step 2) to
start the process of modeling for dilution credit at the existing diffuser.

Appendix A
NPDES PERMIT INFORMATION

DocuSign Envelope ID:C6331383-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REGAN
6 y,1-. 1 ,.. .._...,
\Ale}
‘110, LINDA CULPEPPER
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
10/21/2019
Mr. Brian Alligood
Beaufort County
121 West Third Street
Washington,NC 27889
Subject: NPDES PERMIT ISSUANCE
NPDES Permit NC0084808
Richland WTP
Grade I Physical Chemical WPCS
Beaufort County
Dear Mr. Alligood:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordingly,we are forwarding the attached final NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant
to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 15,2007 (or as
subsequently amended).
The final permit includes the following significant changes from the existing permit:
1. Language has been updated in Sections A. (1)and A. (6)to require electronic submission of effluent
data. Federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs).
2. Regulatory citations have been added to the permit.
3. Outfall map has been updated.
4. Receiving stream characteristics have been updated on the Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet and a
components list has been added.
5. The facility grade has been added in Section A. (1).
6. Monitoring for flow has been changed to continuous in Section A. (1)per the current water treatment
plant guidance.
7. The units for salinity were changed from mg/L to ppth in Section A. (1).
8. Monitoring for temperature has been removed in Section A. (1)per the current water treatment plant
guidance.
9. Instream monitoring for salinity,conductivity,pH, and DO have been added in Section A. (1)per the
current water treatment plant strategy.
10. The effluent sample type for conductivity, salinity, and total nitrogen has been changed to composite
in Section A. (1)per the current water treatment plant strategy.
11. Limits for Total Copper and Total Zinc have been added and monitoring increased to monthly in
Section A. (1)based a reasonable potential to exceed water quality standards. A compliance schedule
has been added as Section A. (3).
12. Monitoring for ammonia nitrogen has been increased to monthly in Section A. (1)per the current
water treatment plant strategy.
L Q
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
919-707-9000

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Mr. Brian Alligood
NC0084808 Issued Permit
13. Footnotes have been updated in Section A. (1).
14. Toxicity test language has been updated in Section A. (2).
15. A discharge alternatives analysis has been added as Section A. (4)to address toxicity failures.
Thank you for submitting comments on the draft permit. Concerning your comment that the close proximity
of a wastewater discharge from the Town of Aurora would make instream sampling unrepresentative of the
Richland WTP discharge wastewater,after discussion with the Washington Regional Office,the Division has
concluded instream monitoring will remain in the permit. In regards to the question concerning instream
sampling locations,please contact the Washington Regional Office to determine appropriate locations.
Please note that the practical quantitation limit(PQL)for Total Copper is 2 µg/L and the PQL for Total Zinc
is 10 µg/L(per the Inorganic Chemistry Branch of the Division of Water Resources Water Sciences Section)
and monitoring data should be reportable down to these levels.Limits for water treatment plants are
determined by evaluating DMR data submitted to the Division,along with a dilution factor(if applicable)
and the maximum monthly average flow reported in the previous 3 years at the time the review is completed.
Whole Effluent Toxicity test results submitted during the past three years have demonstrated that the Water
Treatment Plant's effluent is showing potential for causing aquatic toxicity in the receiving stream.As a
result,Beaufort County shall perform a Discharge Alternatives Evaluation as described in Section A. (3)of
this permit.This evaluation is being requested to determine whether there are any economical and
technologically feasible alternatives available to Beaufort County to comply with all NC Water Quality
Standards.The permittee will be given approximately one permit cycle to evaluate and document possible
treatment/discharge alternatives to eliminate aquatic toxicity.The evaluation shall be submitted with the
permittee's next permit renewal application and will be carefully reviewed by the Division and the results
will be used in the development of a compliance schedule or possible variance request for Beaufort County.
If any parts,measurement frequenciessampling
or sam lin requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable
to you,you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty(30)days following
receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,conforming to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes,and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings(6714 Mail
Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-6714).Unless such demand is made,this permit shall be
final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may require
modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit.This permit does not affect the legal requirements
to obtain any other Federal, State,or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions or need additional information,please do not hesitate to contact Brianna Young of
my staff at(919)707-3619.
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by:
8328B44CE9EB4A1...
Linda Culpepper
Director,Division of Water Resources

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Mr. Brian Alligood
NC0084808 Issued Permit
cc: NPDES Files
Washington Regional Office
WSS/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
Erick Jennings,Water Systems Manager,Beaufort County

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
• NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES)
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Beaufort County
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Richland Township WTP
7643 Old Sandhill Road
Edward
Beaufort County
to receiving waters designated as South Creek in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin in accordance with
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV
hereof.
This permit shall become effective December 1,2019.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on November 30, 2024.
Signed this day 10/21/2019
—DocuSigned by:
8328B44CE9EB4A1...
Linda Culpepper
Director, Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby
revoked. As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer
effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the
permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Beaufort County
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a water treatment plant with a discharge of backwash and brine-recharge
wastewater from ion exchange and greensand units. This water treatment plant currently has a design
potable flowrate of 0.900 MGD and a maximum, monthly average wastewater discharge of
approximately 0.0837 MGD. This facility is located at the Richland Township WTP at 7643 Old
Sandhill Road in Edward in Beaufort County. Water and wastewater treatment consists of:
• Aeration
• Raw water reservoir
• Three(3)greensand filters
• Three(3)ion exchange softeners
• Wastewater holding tank
• Dechlorination
• Chemicals utilitzed include:
o Potassium permanganate
o Chlorine
o Ammonia
o Calcium thiosulfate
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into South Creek
[Stream Segment: 29-28-(4)], a waterbody currently classified SC;NSW in subbasin 03-03-07
[HUC: 030201040206] in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
Page 2 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
PART I.
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
Grade I Physical Chemical WPCS [15A NCAC 08G .0302]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored 1
by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Type Sample Parameter Code Average Maximum Frequency Location 2
Flow(MGD) 50050 Continuous Recording Effluent
Total Suspended Solids C0530 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L 2/Month Composite Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine 3 50060 13 pg/L 2/Month Grab Effluent
pH 00400 >_6.8 s.u. and<_8.5 s.u. 2/Month Grab Effluent
pH 00400 Monitor&Report Monthly Grab U&D
Turbidity(NTU) 00070 Monitor&Report Monthly Grab Effluent
Salinity(ppth) 00480 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Salinity(ppth) 00480 Monitor&Report Monthly Grab U&D
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 00094 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Conductivity(pmhos/cm) 00094 Monitor&Report Monthly Grab U&D
Dissolved Oxygen(mg/L) 00300 Monitor&Report Monthly Grab Effluent
U&D
Total Dissolved Solids(mg/L) 70295 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Total Copper 4 01042 3.70 pg/L 5.80 pg/L Monthly Composite Effluent
Total Zinc 4 01092 85.6 pg/L 95.1 pg/L Monthly Composite Effluent
Ammonia Nitrogen(mg/L) C0610 Monitor&Report Monthly Composite Effluent
Total Nitrogen(mg/L) C0600 Monitor&Report Quarterly Composite Effluent
(NO2-N+NO3-N+TKN)
Total Phosphorus(mg/L) C0665 Monitor&Report Quarterly Composite Effluent
Whole Effluent Toxicity 5 TGE3E Monitor&Report Quarterly Composite Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The permittee shall submit discharge monitoring reports electronically using the NC DWR's eDMR
application system[see Section A. (6)].
2. Sampling locations: U=at least 50 feet upstream of discharge location, D=at least 100 feet downstream of
discharge location.
3. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 µg/L to be in compliance with the
permit. However,the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported by a North Carolina
certified laboratory(including field certified),even if these values fall below 50 µg/L.
Page 3 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
4. See Section A. (3) for compliance schedule.
5. Acute Toxicity 24-hour static test [Mysid Shrimp(Mysidopsis bahia)] at 90%concentration during the
months of January,April,July and October. See Section A. (2).
All samples must be collected from a typical discharge event.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 4 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
A. (2) ACUTE TOXICITY PASS/FAIL MONITORING ONLY (QUARTERLY)
[15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq.]
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a quarterly basis using protocols defined in the North
Carolina Procedure Document entitled"Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute Toxicity In A
Single Effluent Concentration"(Revised-December 2010 or subsequent versions). The monitoring shall
be performed as a Mysid Shrimp (Mysidopsis bahia)24 hour static test. The effluent concentration at
which there may be at no time significant acute mortality is 90% (defined as treatment two in the
procedure document).. The tests will be performed during the months of January,April,July, and
October. These months signify the first month of each three month toxicity testing quarter assigned to
the facility. Effluent sampling for this testing must be obtained during representative effluent discharge
and shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form(MR-1)for the month in which it was performed,using the parameter code
TGE3E. Additionally,DWR Form AT-2 (original)is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than 30
days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine
of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of
the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity(AT)test
form indicating the facility name,permit number,pipe number, county, and the month/year of the report
with the notation of"No Flow"in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the
Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then
monthly monitoring will begin immediately. Upon submission of a valid test,this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will
require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following
the month of the initial monitoring.
Page 5 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
A. (3) SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE (OUTFALL 001)
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
1. Within one year from the effective date of the permit the Permittee shall submit to the Division of
Water Resources a Corrective Action Plan summarizing the actions or strategy to be taken to achieve
compliance with the Total Copper and Total Zinc limits at Outfall 001. Specific dates for completion
or implementation of each action shall be included.
2. Within two years from the effective date of the permit submit a report to the Division summarizing
actions taken in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan.
3. Within three years from the effective date of the permit submit a report to the Division summarizing
actions taken in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan.
4. Within four years from the effective date of the permit submit a report to the Division summarizing
actions taken in accordance with the Corrective Action Plan.
5. Achieve compliance with Total Copper and Total Zinc limits specified in Section A. (1)within five
years of the permit effective date.
Upon approval of the Corrective Action Plan by the Division, the report and actions become an
enforceable part of this permit. Any modifications to the schedule shall be requested to the Division at
least ninety (90) days before the deadline. Modifications to the schedule in excess of four months will be
subject to public notice.
A. (4) DISCHARGE ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
[15A NCAC 02H .0105]
The Permittee shall assess potential alternatives to eliminate Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)test failures.
This evaluation shall assess the feasibility of all the following alternatives.
1. Connect discharge to a WWTP: Determine whether the wastewater can be discharged to a wastewater
treatment plant. Approval or disapproval from the plant operator should be acquired.
2. Obtain a Non-discharge permit: Eliminate the surface water discharge by obtaining a non-discharge
permit for spray irrigation, infiltration, or subsurface disposal (on-site drainfield, infiltration gallery,
injection wells).
3. Install Wastewater Treatment: Install improved wastewater treatment to enable the facility effluent to
consistently pass the WET test. If this is not technically feasible or cost prohibitive, please explain and
provide estimated costs.
4. Use Alternative Water Treatment Source: Obtain drinking water from another source (nearest
County, City, or Town or other wells) so the discharge or toxicity problem is eliminated.
5. Use Alternative Water Treatment Method: Install alternative and/or innovative water treatment
methods or operational improvements that do not produce toxic wastewaters. For example, install a
recycle iron/manganese filtration system with no discharge or combine discharge with WWTP or
cooling water effluents.
6. Discharge to a Larger waterbody/Perform a dilution model: Relocate the facility's discharge to a
larger receiving waterbody to eliminate or reduce toxic impacts to the receiving waterbody given the
increased dilution. If applicable,perform a dilution model to receive allowance for stream dilution in
WET test.
Page 6 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
7. Combination of Alternatives: Employ any combination of the alternatives listed above that would
result in eliminating or decreasing toxicity until a more feasible solution becomes available.
The evaluation shall include a present value of costs analysis for all technologically feasible options as
outlined in the Division's"Engineering Alternatives Analysis Guidance Document."This Document can be
found at:tb ;l/portal., tb 'ga(ne+teb/gVtisivirpipcesfper.
This evaluation is being requested to determine whether there are any economical and technologically
feasible alternatives available to the Permittee to address aquatic toxicity in the plant effluent. Based upon
the evaluation,please identify viable alternatives and present an implementation schedule and project
timeline for the preferred alternative. The Permittee shall submit the Discharge Alternatives Evaluation to the
Division along with the submission of their next permit renewal application (due 6 months prior to permit
expiration on November 30, 2024)to:
NC DENR/Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting
NPDES, Wastewater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
A. (5) NUTRIENT REDUCTION REQUIREMENT
Dischargers to the Tar-Pamlico River are subject to the requirements,terms, and conditions of the Tar-
Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) Implementation Strategy: Phase III adopted April 14, 2005. Non-
members of the Tar-Pamlico Association will maintain or receive permit effluent limits for Total Nitrogen
and for Total Phosphorus concentrations as defined in the Strategy. Any revisions to the Strategy during the
life of this permit are applicable.
If requirements other than those listed in this permit are adopted as part of a revision to the Strategy, the
Division reserves the right to reopen this permit and include those requirements.
If requirements other than those listed in this permit are adopted to prevent localized adverse impacts to
water quality, the Division reserves the right to reopen this permit and include those requirements.
A. (6) ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF MONITORING REPORTS
[NCGS 143-215.1 (b)]
Federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and program
reports. The final NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was adopted and became effective on December
21, 2015.
NOTE: This special condition supplements or supersedes the following sections within Part II of this
permit(Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits):
• Section B. (11.) Signatory Requirements
• Section D. (2.) Reporting
• Section D. (6.) Records Retention
• Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
Page 7 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
1. Reporting Requirements (Supersedes Section D. (2.)and Section E. (5.)(a)l
The permittee shall report discharge monitoring data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic
Discharge Monitoring Report(eDMR)internet application.
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s)shall be summarized for each month and
submitted electronically using eDMR. The eDMR system allows permitted facilities to enter monitoring
data and submit DMRs electronically using the internet. Until such time that the state's eDMR
application is compliant with EPA's Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation(CROMERR),
permittees will be required to submit all discharge monitoring data to the state electronically using
eDMR and will be required to complete the eDMR submission by printing, signing, and submitting one
signed original and a copy of the computer printed eDMR to the following address:
NC DEQ/Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
If a permittee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a demonstrated hardship or due to the facility
being physically located in an area where less than 10 percent of the households have broadband access,
then a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements may be granted and
discharge monitoring data may be submitted on paper DMR forms (MR 1, 1.1,2, 3)or alternative forms
approved by the Director. Duplicate signed copies shall be submitted to the mailing address above. See
"How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting" section below.
Regardless of the submission method,the first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the
issuance of the permit or in the case of a new facility, on the last day of the month following the
commencement of discharge.
Starting on December 21,2020,the permittee must electronically report the following compliance
monitoring data and reports,when applicable:
• Sewer Overflow/Bypass Event Reports;
• Pretreatment Program Annual Reports; and
• Clean Water Act(CWA) Section 316(b)Annual Reports.
The permittee may seek an electronic reporting waiver from the Division (see"How to Request a
Waiver from Electronic Reporting"section below).
2. Electronic Submissions
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.41(1)(9),the permittee must identify the initial recipient at the time of
each electronic submission. The permittee should use the EPA's website resources to identify the initial
recipient for the electronic submission.
Initial recipient of electronic NPDES information from NPDES-regulated facilities means the entity
(EPA or the state authorized by EPA to implement the NPDES program)that is the designated entity for
receiving electronic NPDES data [see 40 CFR 127.2(b)].
Page 8 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
EPA plans to establish a website that will also link to the appropriate electronic reporting tool for each
type of electronic submission and for each state. Instructions on how to access and use the appropriate
electronic reporting tool will be available as well. Information on EPA's NPDES Electronic Reporting
Rule is found at:Maps://www.fe t cott(dose> I2 2t21 ISffr &4inl tiat 11
Falliwkitb i#eaiergi }i 91odebaciume ittisl /1422l2
Electronic submissions must start by the dates listed in the"Reporting Requirements" section above.
3. How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting
The permittee may seek a temporary electronic reporting waiver from the Division. To obtain an
electronic reporting waiver,a permittee must first submit an electronic reporting waiver request to the
Division. Requests for temporary electronic reporting waivers must be submitted in writing to the
Division for written approval at least sixty(60)days prior to the date the facility would be required
under this permit to begin submitting monitoring data and reports. The duration of a temporary waiver
shall not exceed 5 years and shall thereupon expire. At such time,monitoring data and reports shall be
submitted electronically to the Division unless the permittee re-applies for and is granted a new
temporary electronic reporting waiver by the Division. Approved electronic reporting waivers are not
transferrable. Only permittees with an approved reporting waiver request may submit monitoring data
and reports on paper to the Division for the period that the approved reporting waiver request is
effective.
Information on eDMR and the application for a temporary electronic reporting waiver are found on the
following web page:
4. Signatory Requirements [Supplements Section B. (11.)(b) and Supersedes Section B. (11.)(d)1
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in Part II,
Section B. (11.)(a)or by a duly authorized representative of that person as described in Part II, Section
B. (11.)(b). A person, and not a position,must be delegated signatory authority for eDMR reporting
purposes.
For eDMR submissions,the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR user account
and login credentials to access the eDMR system. For more information on North Carolina's eDMR
system,registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account,please visit the following web
page:
111ThirdidegAtCgoVitibattligdiviSiOriSiWatersnieettiteitir
Certification. Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall make the
following certification [40 CFR 122.22].NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL BE
ACCEPTED:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons
who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
Page 9 of 10

DocuSign Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472
Permit NC0084808
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of
fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
5. Records Retention [Supplements Section D. (6.)]
The permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports, including eDMR submissions.
These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the report.
This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time [40 CFR 122.41].
Page 10 of 10

FACT SHEET FOR EXPEDITED PERMIT RENEWALS
This form must be completed by Permit Writers for all expedited permits which do not require
full Fact Sheets.Expedited permits are generally simple 100%domestics(e.g.,schools,mobile
home parks,etc)that can be administratively renewed with minor changes,but can include
facilities with more complex issues(Special Conditions, 303(d)listed water,toxicity testing,
instream monitoring,compliance concerns).
Basic Information for Expedited Permit Renewals
Permit Writer/Date Brianna Young 10/17/19
Permit Number NC0084808
Facility Name/Facility Class Richland Township WTP/PC-1
Basin Name/Sub-basin number Tar-Pamlico/03-03-07
Receiving Stream/HUC South Creek/030201040206
Stream Classification/Stream Segment SC;NSW/29-28-(4)
Does permit need Daily Maximum NH3 N/A
limits?
Does permit need TRC limits/language? Already present
Does permit have toxicity testing?IWC(%)if Yes;IWC=90%
so
Does permit have Special Conditions? Yes—nutrient condition
Does permit have instream monitoring? Instream monitoring added for salinity,
conductivity,pH,and DO during renewal
Is the stream impaired(on 303(d)list)? No
Any obvious compliance concerns? None
Any permit mods since last permit? None
New expiration date 11/30/2024
Comments on Draft Permit? Yes(see below)
Facility Overview:
The Richland Township WTP operates a greensand and ion exchange WTP designed for
a potable flowrate of 0.900 MGD. The facility generates backflow with an intermittent
discharge. The maximum,monthly average discharge between July 2016 and June 2019
was approximately 0.084 MGD.
Compliance History (July 2014 -July 2019):
• No NODs,NOVs, or enforcements
• Failed 12 of last 12 toxicity tests
RPA:
The maximum monthly average flow between July 2016 and June 2019 was
approximately 0.084 MGD.

• Copper—RP; apply monthly monitoring with limit
• Zinc -RP; apply monthly monitoring with limit
NCG59 General Permit Eligibility:
• They have failed their last 12 tox tests,therefore they are not eligible by tox
standards
• They use IE treatment technology in addition to greensand treatment, therefore
they are not eligible
• Conclusion: They are not eligible for the NCG59
Changes from previous permit to draft:
• Updated eDMR footnote in A(1) and language in A(6)
• Updated outfall map
• Added regulatory citations
• Language on the Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet has been updated
• Added components list on Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet
• Added facility grade citation in A(1)
• Changed salinity units from mg/L to ppth in A(1)
• Removed temperature monitoring in A(1) as this is no longer required per 2012
WTP guidance
• Flow monitoring changed to continuous in A(1)per 2012 WTP guidance
o Maximum monthly average> 50,000 gpd
• Added instream monitoring for salinity, conductivity,pH, and DO in A(1)per
2009 WTP guidance
o Previous factsheets and permits do not show that monitoring was ever
included
• Effluent sampling for conductivity and salinity changed to composite in A(1)per
2009 WTP strategy
• Limits added for copper and zinc and monitoring increased to monthly in A(1)per
RPA, and compliance schedule added as A(3)
• Ammonia nitrogen monitoring increased from quarterly to monthly in A(1)per
2009 WTP strategy and 2012 WTP guidance
o Frequency was mistakenly reduced in previous renewal
• TN sample type changed from calculated to composite in A(1)per 2009 WTP
strategy
• Updated footnotes in A(1)
• Updated toxicity language in A(2)
• Added discharge alternatives analysis as new A(4)to address toxicity failures
Changes from draft to final:
• Instream pH monitoring separated from effluent—mistakenly kept in the same
line

Comments received on draft permit:
• Robert Tankard (WaRO,via email 8/21/19): We have no comments. Looks
good.
• Hanna Headrick(Aquatic tox,via email 8/23/19): Second page of cover letter—
Text references A (3.) for Discharge Alternatives Evaluation,but this is found in
A(4.)
o DWR response: The cover letter will be correct when the final goes out.
• Eric Jennings (Permittee representative; via phone and email 9/20/19):
o Concerns about instream monitoring because the Town of Aurora
discharge is only 1/4 mile away, so doesn't think that instream sampling
would be representative of what they put out—instream sampling was
removed in the previous permit for this reason
• DWR response: This will be reviewed and instream sampling may
potentially be removed.
o Asked where instream sampling would need to be taken, and if it could be
shoreline or if it would have to be in the stream(the pipe is out in the
middle of the river)
• DWR response: It may be able to be taken from the shoreline,but
would have to review the location and determine that is
appropriate.
o Via email: Upon review of the draft NPDES permit NC0084808 for
Richland Township WTP, it has come to our attention that requirements to
monitor salinity, conductivity,pH, and DO upstream and downstream of
the outfall have been added. These new monitoring requirements pose a
concern to us. The outfall for this permit is located in close proximity to
the town of Aurora's wastewater discharge point. We feel that any
samples taken upstream or downstream of our outfall will not be
representative of our discharge water. Please consider our concerns before
issuing the final permit.
• DWR response: After discussion with the Washington Regional
Office, instream monitoring will remain in the permit. WaRO does
not feel that the nearby dischargers will affect the instream
monitoring of the Richland WTP.

From: Erick Jennings<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 2:45 PM
To: Young, Brianna A
Cc: Christina Smith
Subject: [External] RE: Draft NPDES permit for Richland WTP (NC0084808)
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to [e-mail]
Dear Ms. Young:
Upon review of the draft NPDES permit NC0084808 for Richland Township WTP, it has come to our
attention that requirements to monitor salinity, conductivity,pH, and DO upstream and downstream of
the outfall have been added. These new monitoring requirements pose a concern to us. The outfall for
this permit is located in close proximity to the town of Aurora's wastewater discharge point. We feel
that any samples taken upstream or downstream of our outfall will not be representative of our
discharge water.
Please consider our concerns before issuing the final permit.
Sincerely,
Erick Jennings
Beaufort County Water Dept.
Water Systems Manager
252-402-6547
From: Young, Brianna A<[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 9:23 AM
To: Erick Jennings <[e-mail]>
Subject: Draft NPDES permit for Richland WTP (NC0084808)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Beaufort County system. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good morning Mr. Jennings,
Please find attached the draft NPDES permit for the Richland WTP (NC0084808). A copy of this permit
has been placed in the mail for Mr. Brian Alligood. Please provide any comments by September 20,
2019.
Thank you,
Brianna Young
Environmental Specialist II
Compliance and Expedited Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
Office: 919-707-3619

[e-mail]
Mailing address:
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and
may be disclosed to third parties.

Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Public Notice
North Carolina
COUNTY OF BEAUFORT Environmental Commission/NPDES
ent
Unit 1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Ann Potter, being duly sworn, on oath says she
is and duringall times herein stated has been an Notice of Intent to Issue a
NPDES Wastewater Permit
employee of Washington Newsmedia, Inc.publisher
and printer of the The Washington Daily News (the The North Carolina Environ-
"Newspaper"), has full knowledge of the facts herein mental Management Com-
stated as follows: mission proposes to issue a
NPDES wastewater discharge
permit to the person(s) listed
1. The Newspaper printed the copy of the matter below. Written comments re-
attached hereto (the"Notice")was copied from the garding the proposed permit will
columns of the Newspaper and was printed and be accepted until 30 days after
published in the English language on the followingthe publish dateof of this notice.
Division
9� The Director of the NC Division
days and dates: of Water Resources(DWR)may
hold a public hearing should
there be a significant degree
of public interest. Please mail
08/22/19 comments and/or information
requests to DWR at the above
2. The sum charged by the Newspaper for said address. Interested persons
ma visit the DWR at 512
publication is the actual lowest classified rate paid Salisbury Street,Raleigh,NC N.
by commercial customer for an advertisement of review information on file. Ad-
similar size and frequency in the same newspaper ditional information on NPDES
in which the Notice was published. permits and this notice may be
found on our website: htto://
3. There are no agreements between the News- deo r-res o rceslw tt r-res o rc-
water-resources/water-resou rc-
paper, publisher, manager or printer and the officer es-permits/wastewater-branch/
or attorney charged with the duty of placing the at- nodes-wastewater/public-notic-
tached legal advertising notice whereby any advan- Beau Bor eaufort lung y91has request-
tage, gain or profit accrued to said officer or attorney ed renewal of its NPDES per-
SIGNED:. mit for the Richland Township
WTP (NC0084808) in Beaufort
County. This facility discharg-
es wastewater to South Creek
in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
o...,,,,,, Pato\ This discharge may affect future
allocations in this portion of the
basin.
Ann Potter, Employee
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
22nd Day of August, 2019
VVrj "',
Amy M.Whitaker, Notary Public "� ` —°"� ��`'
Beaufort County, NC ?%
My commission expires 08-25-2023 �`
Account #WNL00006744WNULOC
Ad# 877128
NCDENR (WNL)
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699

MB
Saltwater RPA 95% Probablity/95% Confidence
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS=58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information Table 2. Parameters of Concern
❑CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS ___1�_ Name WCIS Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Facility Name Richland WTP Par01 Arsenic Aqualic Life C 36 SW 69 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class PC-1 Par02 Arsenic Human Health C 10 HH ug/L
NPDES Permit NC0084808 Par03 Cadmium Aquatic Life NC 8.9 SW 40.2 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 y Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A . 10 ug/L
Flow,Qw(MGD) 0.084 Par05 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 50.4 SW 1107.8 ug/L
Receiving Stream South Creek Par06 Chromium,Total Aquatic life NC N/A SW N/A ug/L
Stream Class SC; NSW Par07 Copper Aquatic Life NC 3.7 SW 5.8 ug/L
7Q10s(cfs) Tidal. IWC= 100% Par06 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 1 SW 1 10 ug/L
7Q10w(cfs) Tidal, IWC=100% Par09 Lead Aquatic Life NC 8.5 SW 220.8 ug/L
30Q2(cfs) Tidal, IWC=100% Par10 Mercury Aquatic life NC 25 SW 0.5 ;,:iii
QA(cfs) Tidal, IWC=100% Par11 Molybdenum Human Health NC 2.0 HH mg/L
1Q10s(cfs) Tidal, IWC=100% Par12 Nickel Aquatic Lae NC 8.3 SW 74.7 ug/L
Par13 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 71 SW ug/L
Par14 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.1 SW 2.2 ug/L
Data Source(s) • Par15 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 85.6 SW 95.1 ug/L
Par16
Par17
Par18
Saltwater streams are tidal resulting in all IWC%=100%. Par19
If an approved model is conducted then a chronic dilution Par20
factor is determined and can be applied to a discharge to - - -
calculate its IWC%.If a stream is classified as a SA or Par21
ORW then its is also classified as a HOW.The appropriate Par22
IWC%must be defined to properly calculate WQS-based
limits. NOTE:The aquatic life chronic and acute WQS for several metals are calculated based on EPA conversi
see"Diss.SW stds.As TM"for more details and summary of calculated WQS..
NC0084808 Saltwater RPA 2019,input
10/17/2019

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS - DATA
Copper Lead :"s Zinc
•
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 6/8/2016 < 10 5 Std Dev. 9.7168 1 11/4/2014 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 11/4/2014 51 51 Std Dev. 29.8078
2 7/6/2016 < 10 5 Mean 7.6250 2 12/2/2014 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000 2 12/2/2014 93 93 Mean 54.2093
3 8/10/2016 13 13 C.V. 1.2743 3 7/6/2016 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.0000 3 1/13/2015 28 28 C.V. 0.5499
4 9/12/2016 < 10 5 n 24 4 8/10/2016 < 5 2.5 n 19 4 2/5/2015 27 27 n 43
5 10/4/2016 < 10 5 5 9/12/2016 < 5 2.5 5 3/11/2015 95 95
6 11/10/2016 < 10 5 Mult Factor= 1.5700 6 10/4/2018 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.00 6 4/7/2015 90 90 Mult Factor= 1.0800
7 12/7/2016 52 52 Max.Value 52.00 ug/L 7 11/10/2016 < 5 2.5 Max.Value 2.50 ug/L 7 5/5/2015 88 88 Max.Value 135.0 ug/L
8 1/10/2017 13 13 Max.Pred Cw 81.64 ug/L 8 12/7/2016 < 5 2.5 Max.Pred Cw 2.50 ug/L 8 6/3/2015 62 62 Max.Pred Cw 145.8 ug/L
9 2/8/2017 < 10 5 9 1/10/2017 < 5 2.5 9 7/14/2015 132 132
10 3/16/2017 < 10 5 10 2/8/2017 < 5 2.5 10 8/11/2015 51 51
11 4/12/2017 < 10 5 11 3/16/2017 < 5 2.5 11 9/9/2015 59 59
12 5/9/2017 < 10 5 12 4/12/2017 < 5 2.5 12 10/6/2015 45 45
13 6/9/2017 < 10 5 13 5/9/2017 < 5 2.5 13 11/10/2015 43 43
14 7/11/2017 < 10 5 14 6/9/2017 < 5 2.5 14 12/11/2015 33 33
15 8/3/2017 < 10 5 15 7/11/2017 < 5 2.5 15 1/12/2016 23 23
16 9/13/2017 < 10 5 16 8/3/2017 < 5 2.5 16 2/17/2016 28 28
17 10/3/2017 < 10 5 17 9/13/2017 < 5 2.5 17 3/8/2016 48 48
18 11/9/2017 < 10 5 18 10/3/2017 < 5 2.5 18 4/5/2016 118 118
19 1/9/2018 < 10 5 19 11/9/2017 < 5 2.5 19 5/5/2016 44 44
20 4/3/2018 < 10 5 20 20 6/8/2016 83 83
21 7/10/2018 < 10 5 21 21 7/6/2016 135 135
22 10/3/2018 < 10 5 22 22 8/10/2016 87 87
23 1/8/2019 < 10 5 23 23 9/12/2016 29 29
24 4/2/2019 < 10 5 24 24 10/4/2016 52 52
25 25 25 11/10/2016 29 29
28 26 26 12/7/2016 55 55
27 27 27 1/10/2017 17 17
28 28 28 2/8/2017 30 30
29 29 29 3/16/2017 34 34
30 30 30 4/12/2017 26 26
31 31 31 5/9/2017 66 66
32 32 32 6/9/2017 50 50
33 33 33 7/11/2017 55 55
34 34 34 8/3/2017 51 51
35 35 35 9/13/2017 57 57
36 36 36 10/3/2017 30 30
37 37 37 11/9/2017 41 41
38 38 38 1/9/2018 17 17
39 39 39 4/3/2018 36 36
40 40 40 7/10/2018 84 84
41 41 41 10/3/2018 43 43
42 42 42 1/8/2019 42 42
43 43 43 4/2/2019 24 24 i
44 44 44
45 45 45
46 46 46
47 47 47
48 48 48
49 49 49
50 50 50
51 51 51
52 52 52
53 53 53
54 54 54
55 55 55
56 56 56
57 57 57
58 58 58
NC0084808 Saltwater RPA 2019,data
Date)

Richland WTP Outfall 001
NC0084808 Saltwater RPA 95% Probablity/95% Confidence Qw = 0.0836805 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw(MGD)= 0.08 WWTP/WTP Class: PC-1
1Q1OS(cfs)= Tidal,IWC=100% IWC% @ IQIOS = 100
7Q10S(cfs)= Tidal,IWC=100% IWC% @ 7Q1 OS= 100
7Q10W(cfs)= Tidal,IWC=100% IWC%@ 7Q10W= 100
30Q2(cfs)= Tidal,IWC=100% IWC%@ 30Q2= 100
Avg.Stream Flow,QA(cfs)= Tidal,IWC=100% IWC%@ QA= 100
Receiving Stream: South Creek Stream Class: SC;NSW
PARAMETER NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA coREASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
TYPTM)E Applied od z RECOMMENDED ACTION
Chronic Standard Acute n #Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute: 5.80 RPA for non-AL-apply Monthly Monitoring
Copper NC 3.7 SW(7QI Os) 5.8 ug/L 24 3 81.64 _ _ _ _ _ _ _with Limit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic_ 3._70 RPA for non-AL-apply Monthly Monitoring
_ 24 value(s) Allowable Co with Limit
Acute: 220.80 No RPA,Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw
Lead NC 8.5 SW(7Q1Os) 220.8 ug/L 19 0 2.5 _ _ _ _ _ _-No_Monitoringrequired _ _ _ _ _ _
C_hronic: 8._50 No RPA,Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw
NO DETECTS MaxMDL 5 -NoMonitoringrequired
Acute: 95.1 RPA for non-AL-apply Monthly Monitoring
Zinc NC 85.6 SW(7Q1Os) 95.1 ug/L 43 43 145.8 _ _ _ _ _ _with Limit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 85.6— RPA for non-AL-apply Monthly Monitoring
caluclso%Allowahlc Cw with Limit
NC0084808 Saltwater RPA 2019,rpa
Page 3 of 27 10/17/2019

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: Richland WTP
PermitNo. NC0084808
Prepared By: Brianna Young
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 0.083681
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 0
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 0
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ugh!) Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/I)
s7Q10 (CFS) 0 s7Q10 (CFS) 0
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.083681 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.08368
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 0.129705 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 0.1297
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/I) 0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I) 0.22
IWC (%) 100.00 IWC (%) 100.00
Allowable Conc. (ug/I) 17 Allowable Conc. (mg/I) 1.0
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit(mg NH3-N/I)
Fecal Coliform w7Q10 (CFS) 0
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.08368
(If DF >331; Monitor) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 0.1297
(If DF<331; Limit) STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
Dilution Factor(DF) 1.00 Upstream Bkgd (mg/I) 0.22
IWC (%) 100.00
Allowable Conc. (mg/I) 1.8
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc> 35 mg/I, 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)

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Rhodia,Inc.-Solvay-CH2M Hill NC0084638/001 County: Gaston Region: MRO Basin: CTB37 Mar Jun Sep Dec SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 5/1/2016 chr lim:90% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 0.0 PF: 0.194 IWC: 100 Freq: Q
1 F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2015 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2016 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - H
2017 H Pass Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2018 - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass
2019 - - H - - H - - H - - -
Richland Township WTP N00084808/001 County: Beaufort Region: WARO Basin: TAR07 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 1/1/2015 Ac P/F Monit:90%M NonComp: 7Q10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
1 F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2015 Pass - - Fail - - Fail - - Fail - -
2016 Fail - - Fail - - Fail - - Fail -
2017 Fail - - Fail . - Fail - - Fail - -
2018 Fail - - Fail - - Fail - - Fail -
2019 Fail - - Fail - - - - - - - -
Richmond County WTP NC0081281/001 County: Richmond Region: FRO Basin: YAD16 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 6/1/2014 Chr Monit: 90% NonComp: 7010: PF: 0.50 IWC: Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2015 H - H - - - - H H - -
2016 H - - H - - H - - H - -
2017 H - - H - - H - - H - -
2018 H - - H - - H - - H - -
2019 H - - H - - - - - - - -
Ridgeview Acres Mobile Home Park NC0060283/001 County: Buncombe Region: ARO Basin: FRB02 Feb May Aug Nov SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 3/1/2016 chr lim:90% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 0.0 PF: 0.007 IWC: 100 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2015 Pass - - Pass - - H - - Pass -
2016 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - H -
2017 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2018 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2019 - Pass - - Pass - - - - - - -
River Bend WTP 001 NC0086797/001 County: Craven Region: RRO Basin: NEU11 Mar Jun Sep Dec SOC_JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 8/1/2018 Mysid 24hr PF Monit: NonComp: 7Q10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2018 - - - - - - - Pass - - Pass
2019 - - Pass - - - - - - -
River Bend WTP 002 NC0086797/002 County: Craven Region: RRO Basin: NEU11 Mar Jun Sep Dec SOC_JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 8/1/2018 Mysid 24hr PF Monit: NonComp: 7Q10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
1 F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2018 - - - - - - - - - - - Pass
2019 - - Pass - - - - - - - - -
Leeend: P=Fathead minnow(Pimohales oromelasl.H=No Flow(facility is activel.s=Solit test between Certified Labs Page 96 of 125

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/31/19 Page: 1 of 5
Permit: nc0084808 MRs Between 7 - 2014 and 7 - 2019 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:
Facility Name:% Param Name % County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NC0084808 FACILITY: Beaufort County Water System-Richland WTP COUNTY:Beaufort REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
07-2014 001 Effluent . Chlorine,Total Residual 07/08/14 2 X month ug/I 13 33 153.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/06/14 2 X month ug/I 13 31 138.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/20/14 2 X month ugh! 13 26 100 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
09-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 09/03/14 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
09-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 09/17/14 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
10-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 10/07/14 2 X month ugh' 13 23 76.9 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
10-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 10/21/14 2 X month ug/I 13 22 69.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
11-2014 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 11/04/14 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/13/15 2 X month ug/I 13 24 84.6 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/27/15 2 X month ugh' 13 31 138.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
02-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 02/05/15 2 X month ug/I 13 22 69.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
02-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 02/18/15 2 X month ugh' 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
03-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 03/25/15 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
04-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 04/07/15 2 X month ug/I 13 28 115.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
04-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 04/21/15 2 X month ugh! 13 18 38.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
05-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 05/05/15 2 X month ug/I 13 40 207.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/31/19 Page: 2 of 5
Permit: nc0084808 MRs Between 7 - 2014 and 7 - 2019 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:%
Facility Name:0/0 Param Name % County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:0/0
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NC0084808 FACILITY: Beaufort County Water System-Richland WTP COUNTY:Beaufort REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
05-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 05/19/15 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
06-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/17/15 2 X month ug/I 13 35 169.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
07-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 07/14/15 2 X month ug/I 13 38 192.3 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
07-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 07/28/15 2 X month ug/I 13 43 230.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/11/15 2 X month ug/I 13 33 153.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/25/15 2 X month ug/I 13 20 53.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
09-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 09/09/15 2 X month ug/I 13 17 30.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
10-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 10/06/15 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
11-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 11/10/15 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
12-2015 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 12/30/15 2 X month ug/I 13 14 7.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/29/16 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
02-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 02/17/16 2 X month ug/I 13 17 30.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
04-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 04/05/16 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
04-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 04/19/16 2 X month ug/I 13 23 76.9 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
05-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 05/19/16 2 X month ug/I 13 21 61.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
06-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/08/16 2 X month ug/I 13 17 30.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/31/19 Page: 3 of 5
Permit: nc0084808 MRs Between 7 - 2014 and 7 - 2019 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:
Facility Name:% Param Name % County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NC0084808 FACILITY: Beaufort County Water System-Richland WTP COUNTY:Beaufort REGION: Washington
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/22/16 2 X month ug/I 13 40 207.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
07-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 07/06/16 2 X month ug/I 13 30 130.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/24/16 2 X month ug/I 13 29 123.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
10-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 10/18/16 2 X month ug/I 13 33 153.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
12-2016 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 12/20/16 2 X month ug/I 13 20 53.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/24/17 2 X month ug/I 13 26 100 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
02-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 02/08/17 2 X month ugh' 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
03-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 03/30/17 2 X month ug/I 13 27 107.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
06-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/09/17 2 X month ug/I 13 14 7.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
07-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 07/11/17 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
07-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 07/25/17 2 X month ug/I 13 39 200 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/03/17 2 X month ug/I 13 14 7.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
08-2017 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 08/18/17 2 X month ug/I 13 14 7.7 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
03-2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 03/20/18 2 X month ug/I 13 24 84.6 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
06-2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/26/18 2 X month ug/I 13 32 146.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
09-2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 09/12/18 2 X month ug/I 13 16 23.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/31/19 Page: 4 of 5
Permit: nc0084808 MRs Between 7 - 2014 and 7 - 2019 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:%
Facility Name:% Param Name % County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NC0084808 FACILITY: Beaufort County Water System-Richland WTP COUNTY:Beaufort REGION: Washington
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 Chlorine,Total Residual 09/25/18 2 X month ug/I 13 21 61.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
11-2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 11/08/18 2 X month ug/I 13 15 15.4 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
11-2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 11/26/18 2 X month ug/I 13 17 30.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
12_2018 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 12/19/18 2 X month ug/l 13 29 123.1 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/08/19 2 X month ug/I 13 18 38.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
01-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 01/25/19 2 X month ug/I 13 20 53.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
02-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 02/21/19 2 X month ug/I 13 23 76.9 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
03-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 03/06/19 2 X month ug/I 13 19 46.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
03-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 03/20/19 2 X month ug/I 13 17 30.8 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
04-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 04/02/19 2 X month ug/I 13 21 61.5 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
05-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 05/09/19 2 X month ug/I 13 35 169.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
05-2019 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 05/29/19 2 X month ug/I 13 22 69.2 Daily Maximum No Action,BPJ
Exceeded
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09-2015 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Total- 09/30/15 Quarterly mg/I Frequency Violation No Action,Facility
Concentration Reporting Error
Reporting Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/31/19 Page: 5 of 5
Permit: nc0084808 MRs Between 7 - 2014 and 7 - 2019 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:%
Facility Name:% Param Name % County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action:%
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NC0084808 FACILITY: Beaufort County Water System-Richland WTP COUNTY:Beaufort REGION: Washington
Reporting Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
02-2016 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Total- 02/29/16 Quarterly mg/I Parameter Missing No Action, Invalid
Concentration Permit

Appendix B
BEAUFORT COUNTY SOUTHSIDE LOCAL
WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Beaufort Co (Southside) 2023
The Division of Water Resources(DWR)provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan(LWSP)as a courtesy and service to our
customers.DWR staff does not field verify data.Neither DWR,nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is
completely free of errors and omissions.Furthermore,data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR
staff.Subsequent review may result in significant revision.Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the
water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Water System Name: Beaufort Co(Southside) PWSID: 04-07-040 Complete
Mailing Address: 111 West Second Street Ownership: County
Washington,NC 27889
Contact Person: Erick Jennings Title: Water Systems Manager
Phone: [phone] Cell/Mobile: --
Secondary Contact: Christina Smith Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 111 West Second Street Cell/Mobile: —
Washington,NC 27889
Line Type Size Range(Inches) Estimated%of lines
Ductile Iron 4-16 5.00%
Polyvinyl Chloride 2-12 95.00%
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 363 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 2023? 428 Feet
How many feet of new water mains were added during 2023? 0 Feet
How many meters were replaced in 2023? 70
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 26 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use,such as irrigation,are not billed for sewer services? 0
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 2.0000 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update?Line breaks that were repaired quickly should not be included. No
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydrants? Yes,As Needed
Does this system have a valve exercise program? No
Does this system have a cross-connection program? Yes
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yes
Does this system have a plumbing retrofit program? No
Does this system have an active water conservation public education program? Yes
Does this system have a leak detection program? Yes
Educational tips on water conservation are included in our annual Consumer Confidence Reports.
In-field leak detection is performed by Beaufort County personnel via visual inspection as well as services performed by NCRWA.
When a leak is discovered it is repaired by Beaufort County personnel or approved contractor.

What type of rate structure is used? Flat/Fixed
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
2. Water Use Information
Sub-Basin(s) %of Service Population County(s) %of Service Population
Pamlico River&Sound(15-3) 90% Beaufort 100%
Neuse River(10-1) 7%
Tar River(15-1) 3%
What was the year-round population served in 2023? 9,369
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No
Type of Use Metered Metered Non-Metered Non-Metered
Connections Average Use(MGD) Connections Estimated Use(MGD)
Residential 4,021 0.3940 0 0.0000
Commercial 13 0.0081 1 0.0000
Industrial 3 0.0209 0 0.0000
Institutional 0 0.0000 0 0.0000
How much water was used for system processes(backwash,line cleaning,flushing,etc.)? 0.1815 MGD
Bay City Crab Company has an unmetered connection for a fire sprinkler system at 6921 NC Hwy 306 South.
Water Sales
Average Contract Required to Pipe
Purchaser PWSID Daily Days comply with Size(s) Use
Sold Used Type
MGD Expiration Recurring water (Inches)
(MGD) use restrictions?
Aurora 04-07-
020 0.0000 0 0.0000 Yes No 6 Emergency
Beaufort Co 04-07-
0.2711 183 0.9600 Yes Yes 12 Regular
Northside 035
Chocowinity 0257 0.0000 0 Yes Yes 6 Emergency
3. Water Supply Sources
Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day
Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD)
Jan 0.7416 1.1450 May 0.7480 1.0860 Sep 0.9387 1.6350
Feb 0.7006 1.0800 Jun 0.8500 1.2500 Oct 0.8990 1.4640
Mar 0.6791 1.0480 Jul 0.8904 1.2680 Nov 0.8534 1.3080
Apr 0.6585 0.9070 Aug 0.9332 1.2920 Dec 0.7547 1.3580
Average Daily Withdrawal 12-Hour
Name or (MGD) Max Day Withdrawal Supply CUA Year Use
Number (MGD) Reduction Offline Type
MGD Days Used (MGD)

1 0.0852 288 0.2800 0.5400 CUAO Regular
2 0.1231 281 0.3480 0.5400 CUAO Regular
61 0.1788 345 0.4240 0.4320 CUAO Regular
62 0.1502 346 0.4190 0.2880 CUAO Regular
63 0.1866 351 0.4090 0.4320 CUAO Regular
64 0.1574 352 0.3400 0.2880 CUAO Regular
65 0.0000 0 0.4320 CUAO Regular
66 0.0000 0 0.2880 CUAO Regular
Casing Depth Screen Depth(Feet)
Name or Number Well Depth(Feet) Well Diameter(Inches) Pump Intake Depth(Feet) Metered?
(Feet) Top Bottom
1 244 199 239 12 150 Yes
2 247 202 242 12 183 Yes
61 184 139 179 12 127 Yes
62 323 288 318 12 279 Yes
63 168 121 163 12 113 Yes
64 276 241 271 12 234 Yes
65 200 145 195 12 130 Yes
66 345 300 340 12 261 Yes
Are ground water levels monitored? Yes,Monthly
Does this system have a wellhead protection program? Yes
Well 65 and 66 as shown are under construction and are not online.
Average Days Contract Required to pipe Size(s) Use
Seller PWSID Daily Purchased Used comply with water (Inches) Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration Recurring use restrictions?
Aurora 04-07-020 0.0000 0 0.0000 Yes No 6 Emergency
Chocowinity 04-07-025 0.0000 0 Yes Yes 6 Emergency
Plant Name Permitted
Capacity Is Raw Water Metered? Is Finished Water Ouput Metered? Source
Beaufort Co District VII 0.7460 Yes Yes Ground
Southside WTP 1.1000 Yes Yes Ground
Did average daily water production exceed 80%of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2023? No
If yes,was any water conservation implemented?
Did average daily water production exceed 90%of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2023? No
If yes,was any water conservation implemented?
Are peak day demands expected to exceed the water treatment plant capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Average Daily Average Daily Average Daily
Discharge(MGD) Discharge(MGD) Discharge(MGD)
Jan 0.0419 May 0.0317 Sep 0.0769
Feb 0.0403 Jun 0.0529 Oct 0.0562
Mar 0.0386 Jul 0.0426 Nov 0.0721
Apr 0.0249 Aug 0.0520 Dec 0.0313

Beaufort Co (Southside)'s 2023 Monthly Discharges
1 -
p IN Avg Daily
c9
f
m
0
L
V
a
0
c
0
�o
c
0
U
4 4 c` -1 c,
1$r k� lac PQ� ��� \�C , P� O ?° CF
How many sewer connections does this system have? 0
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 4,025
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No
Beaufort County Southside provides water to 12 customers that have sewer service with the Town of Chocowinity.
Beaufort County has accepted funding from the State Drinking Water Reserve to upgrade the Southside Water Treatment Plant.This upgrade
includes the construction of one new sludge drying bed for wastewater treatment.
Permitted Design Average Annual Maximum Day
Permit Type Capacity Capacity Daily Discharge Discharge Receiving Receiving Basin
Number (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) Stream
NC0084808WTP 0.0000 0.1440 0.0070 0.1000 South Creek Pamlico River&Sound
(15-3)
NC0087491 WTP 0.0000 0.2880 0.0400 0.2000 Pamlico River Pamlico River&Sound
(15-3)
5. Planning
2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Year-Round Population 9,369 10,188 11,358 12,528 13,698 14,868
Seasonal Population 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0.3940 0.4289 0.4782 0.5274 0.5767 0.6259
Commercial 0.0081 0.0160 0.0160 0.0160 0.0160 0.0160
Industrial 0.0209 0.0300 0.0300 0.0300 0.0300 0.0300
Institutional 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
System Process 0.1815 0.1850 0.1850 0.1850 0.1850 0.1850
Unaccounted-for 0.0642 0.0701 0.0753 0.0805 0.0858 0.0910
2023 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Surface Water Supply 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Ground Water Supply 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400
Purchases 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Future Supplies 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total Available Supply(MGD) 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400 3.2400
Service Area Demand 0.6687 0.7300 0.7845 0.8389 0.8935 0.9479
Sales 0.1359 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600 0.9600

Future Sales 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total Demand(MGD) 0.8046 1.6900 1.7445 1.7989 1.8535 1.9079
Demand as Percent of Supply 25% 52% 54% 56% 57% 59%
i/�
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time.The per capita water demand
may actually be different than indicated due to seasonal populations and the accuracy of data submitted.Water systems that have calculated long-term per
capita water demand based on a methodology that produces different results may submit their information in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 42 gallons per capita per day.What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water
demand(i.e.conduct regular water audits,implement a plumbing retrofit program,employ practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)?If these
practices are covered elsewhere in your plan,indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs?
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet your future supply needs?
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above?
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? No
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning?
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources,any water system deficiencies or needed improvements(storage,treatment,
etc.)or your ability to meet present and future water needs.Include both quantity and quality considerations,as well as financial,technical,managerial,
permitting,and compliance issues:
The Division of Water Resources(DWR)provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan(LWSP)as a courtesy and service to our
customers.DWR staff does not field verify data.Neither DWR,nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is
completely free of errors and omissions.Furthermore,data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR
staff.Subsequent review may result in significant revision.Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the
water system and/or DWR.

Appendix C
SOUTH CREEK & TAR-PAMLICO STREAM
CLASSIFICATION

NC DENR-DIVISON OF WATER RESOURCES 2B.0300
.0316 TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN
Name of Stream Description Class Class Date Index No.
Gaylord Bay Entire Bay SC;NSW 01/01/90 29-24
Huddles Cut From source to Pamlico River SC;NSW 09/01/96 29-24.5
Huddy Gut From source to Pamlico River SC;NSW 01/01/90 29-25
Saint Clair Creek From source to N.C.Hwy.92 C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-26-(1)
Saint Clair Creek From N.C. Hwy.92 to Pamlico River SC;NSW 01/01/90 29-26-(2)
PAMLICO RIVER From a line across Pamlico River SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-(27)
from Cousin Point to Hickory Point to
a line across Pamlico River from
Roos Point to Persimmon Tree Point
South Creek From source to a point three-fourths C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-(1)
mile downstream from Beaufort
County SR 1924
Cypress Run From source to South Creek C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-2
Gum Swamp Run From source to South Creek C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-3
South Creek From a point three-fourths mile SC;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-(4)
downstream from Beaufort County
SR 1924 to Deephole Point
Broomfield Swamp Creek From source to South Creek C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-5
Bailey Creek From source to Atlantic Coast Line C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-6-(1)
Railroad
Bailey Creek From Atlantic Coast Line Railroad to SC;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-6-(2)
South Creek
South Creek From Deephole Point to Pamlico SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-(6.5)
River
Whitehurst Creek From source to N.C. Hwy.306 C;Sw,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-7-(1)
(Formerly Beaufort County SR 1940)
Whitehurst Creek From N.C.Hwy.306 to South Creek SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-7-(2)
Jacks Creek From source to a point 0.2 mile C;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-8-(1)
downstream from Beaufort County
SR 1942
Jacks Creek From a point 0.2 mile downstream SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-8-(2)
from Beaufort County SR 1942 to
South Creek
Little Creek From source to a point three-fourths C;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-9-(1)
mile above mouth
Little Creek From a point three-fourths mile above SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-9-(2)
mouth to South Creek
Jacobs Creek From source to a point 0.5 mile C;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-10-(1)
above mouth
Jacobs Creek From a point 0.5 mile above mouth to SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-10-(2)
South Creek
Drinkwater Creek From source to a point 0.5 mile C;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-10-3-(1)
above mouth
Drinkwater Creek From a point 0.5 mile above mouth to SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-10-3-(2)
Jacobs Creek
Short Creek From source to South Creek SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-11
Tooley Creek From source to a point 0.5 mile C;NSW 01/01/90 29-28-12-(1)
below Beaufort County SR 1945
Tooley Creek From a point 0.5 mile below Beaufort SA;HQW,NSW 01/01/90 29-28-12-(2)
County SR 1945 to South Creek
17

Appendix D
PAGE 8 OF NPDES PERMITTING STRATEGIES FOR
POTABLE WATER TREATMENT PLANTS

V.IMPLEMENTATION
5.1.Monitoring Frequency
In order to be consistent with the monitoring guidance employed for other permits across the state,monitoring
lations.frequencies will be based on the flow divisions used to define facility class in15A NCAC 08C .0302 re the gu
Requirements described in 15A NCAC 2B .0508(d)for water supply plants were used as guidance. Table 5 summarizes
the monitoring requirements. After sufficient data have been collected(eight to 12 data points over at least one year)the
permittee may petition for a reduction in monitoring.
Table 5.1: WTP Monitoring Requirements
If a parameter is not currently limited but requires a limitation based on reasonable potential,increase sampling
frequency by one degree. (Quarterly Monthly,Monthly 2 Month,2 Month-' Weekly)
Convent ai P, amete>s(except III ;
.Fae l�ty CIass and:To tear€ts €sk F
°. .. - -_b (Ef flueuttanklnsti ea r • -
If limited-2/Month
Permitted Flow<0.5 MGD
Not limited-Monthly
If limited-Weekly
Permitted Flow>_0.5 MGD
Not limited-2/Month
5.2. Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing
Membrane,ion exchange,and conventional WTPs should be required to conduct quarterly WET tests for monitoring
purposes. Eventually,the Division may choose to use this data to develop additional policy. The type of WET test
conducted will vary depending on receiving stream characteristics. In addition,the level of available dilution and tidal
effects will determine whether the facility should perform an acute or chronic test,while the type of water(freshwater or
saltwater)will determine which organism should be used. Table 1 summarizes WET-testing requirements. Appendix A
includes sample WET language.
Crreensand filter systems will not be required to monitor whole effluent toxicity.
Table 5.2: WET Test Re'uirements-Monitor Onl
IWC<0.25% Acute 24-hour Pass/Fail at 90%
Dilution IWC_>0.25%
° Chronic test at IWC(maximum 90%)
Tidal Effects Modeled Tidal discharge Chronic test at chronic mixing zone characteristics
Tidal Discharge-not modeled1 Acute 24-hour Pass/Fail at 90%
Freshwater Acute test organism:Fathead minnow
Chronic test organism:Ceriodaphnia dubia
Water Type Acute test organism:Fathead Minnow OR Mysid Shrimp
Saltwater OR Silverside Minnow(permittee's choice)
Chronic test organism:Mysid shrimp 2
Notes: -
1. Applies to existing dischargers only. -
2. Permittee may choose to conduct comparison studies showing Ceriodaphnia dubia to be greater than or equal to Mysid Shrimp in
degree of sensitivity to the facility's effluent.
-8-

I
1
Appendix E
TOWN OF AURORA LOCAL WATER SUPPLY PLAN

Aurora 2021 v
The Division of Water Resources(DWR)provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan(LWSP)as a courtesy and service to our
customers. DWR staff does not field verify data.Neither DWR,nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is
completely free of errors and omissions.Furthermore,data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR
staff.Subsequent review may result in significant revision.Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the
water system and/or DWR.
1. System Information
Water System Name: Aurora PWSID: 04-07-020 Complete
Mailing Address: PO Box 86 Ownership: Municipality
Aurora,NC 27806
Contact Person: Chuck Bonner Title: PWD
Phone: [phone] Cell/Mobile: [phone]
Secondary Contact: Mike Houston Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Cell/Mobile: --
,NC
Line Type Size Range(Inches) Estimated%of lines
Cast Iron 2-8 1.00%
Ductile Iron 2-10 36.00%
Galvanized Iron 1-2 1.00%
Polyvinyl Chloride 6-10 62.00
What are the estimated total miles of distribution system lines? 7 Miles
How many feet of distribution lines were replaced during 2021? 0 Feet
How many feet of new water mains were added during 2021? 0 Feet
How many meters were replaced in 2021? 7
How old are the oldest meters in this system? 18 Year(s)
How many meters for outdoor water use,such as irrigation,are not billed for sewer services? 0
What is this system's finished water storage capacity? 0.1000 Million Gallons
Has water pressure been inadequate in any part of the system since last update?Line breaks that were repaired quickly should not be included. No
Does this system have a program to work or flush hydrants? Yes,Quarterly
Does this system have a valve exercise program? Yes,Annually
Does this system have a cross-connection program? Yes
Does this system have a program to replace meters? Yes
Does this system have a plumbing retrofit program? No
Does this system have an active water conservation public education program? No
Does this system have a leak detection program? Yes
As employees ride throughout the system they are looking for leaks.Contact NCRWA for leak detection as needed.

i
What type of rate structure is used? Increasing Block
How much reclaimed water does this system use? 0.0000 MGD For how many connections? 0
Does this system have an interconnection with another system capable of providing water in an emergency? Yes
2. Water Use Information
Sub-Basin(s) %of Service Population County(s) %of Service Population
Pamlico River&Sound(15-3) 100% Beaufort 100%
What was the year-round population served in 2021? 502
Has this system acquired another system since last report? No
Type of Use Metered Metered Non-Metered Non-Metered
Connections Average Use(MGD) Connections Estimated Use(MGD)
Residential 258 0.0266 0 0.0000
Commercial 54 0.0081 0 0.0000
Industrial 0 0.0000 0 0.0000
Institutional 0 0.0000 0 0.0000
How much water was used for system processes(backwash,line cleaning,flushing,etc.)? 0.0150 MGD
•
Average Contract Required to Pipe
Purchaser PWSID Daily Days comply with Size(s) Use
Sold Used water Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration Recurring use restrictions? (Inches)
Beaufort Co 04-07-
0.0000 0 0.0000 Yes No 6 Emergency
(Southside) 040
3. Water Supply Sources
Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day Average Daily Max Day
Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD) Use(MGD)
Jan 0.1066 May 0.0539 Sep 0.0350
Feb 0.1361 Jun 0.0587 Oct 0.0350
Mar 0.1050 Jul 0.0494 Nov 0.0435
Apr 0.0523 Aug 0.0271 Dec 0.0457
Average Daily Withdrawal 12-Hour
Name or (MGD) Max Day WithdrawalSupply . CUA Year Use
Number (MGD) (MGD) Reduction Offline Type
MGD Days Used
1 0.0139 365 0.1250 CUAO Regular
2 0.0000 0 0.1250 CUAO Regular
Casing Depth Screen Depth(Feet)
Name or Number Well Depth(Feet) Well Diameter(Inches) Pump Intake Depth(Feet) Metered?
(Feet) Top Bottom
1 300 0 300 8 120 Yes

1
I2 329 318 328 8 150 Yes
Are ground water levels monitored? Yes,Weekly
Does this system have a wellhead protection program? Yes
Average Contract Required to
Daily Days comply with Pipe Use
Seller PWSID Purchased Used water Size(s) Type
(MGD) MGD Expiration Recurring use (Inches)
restrictions?
Beaufort Co 04-07- 0.0643 273 0.0000 Yes Yes 6 Emergency
(Southside) 040
The Town of Aurora rehabbed their water treatment plant last year which required them to utilize the emergency interconnection with Beaufort County
during construction.
Plant Name Permitted
Capacity Is Raw Water Metered? Is Finished Water Ouput Metered? Source
Aurora WTP 0.2160 No Yes Castle Hayne Aquifer
Did average daily water production exceed 80%of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2021? No
If yes,was any water conservation implemented? No
Did average daily water production exceed 90%of approved plant capacity for five consecutive days during 2021? No
If yes,was any water conservation implemented? No
Are peak day demands expected to exceed the water treatment plant capacity in the next 10 years? No
4. Wastewater Information
Average Daily Average Daily Average Daily
Discharge(MGD) Discharge(MGD) Discharge(MGD)
Jan 0.1121 May 0.0255 Sep 0.0352
Feb 0.1648 Jun 0.0963 Oct 0.0258
Mar 0.1013 Jul 0.0422 Nov 0.0244
Apr 0.0433 Aug 0.0691 Dec 0.0350
Aurora's 2021 Monthly Discharges
1 -
^0 ® Avg Daily
X
>.
lc
0
a
N
C
O
ID
C
0
0
c c '. ‘ a c.
lac QG �'� V. e 1� N V- 4. 0� t'°
How many sewer connections does this system have? 326
How many water service connections with septic systems does this system have? 14
Are there plans to build or expand wastewater treatment facilities in the next 10 years? No

Permit Permitted Design Average Annual Maximum Day Receiving
Type Capacity Capacity Daily Discharge Discharge Receiving Basin
Number Stream
(MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
NC0021521 WWTP 0.1200 0.3000 0.0639 South Creek Pamlico River&
Sound(15-3)
5. Planning
2021 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Year-Round Population 502 584 594 594 594 594
Seasonal Population 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential 0.0266 0.0309 0.0314 0.0314 0.0314 0.0314
Commercial 0.0081 0.0094 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095 0.0095
Industrial 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Institutional 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
System Process 0.0150 0.0150 0.0150 0.0150 0.0150 0.0150
Unaccounted-for 0.0123 0.0137 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138 0.0138
2021 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Surface Water Supply 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Ground Water Supply 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500
Purchases 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643 0.0643
Future Supplies 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total Available Supply(MGD) 0.3143 0.3143 0.3143 0.3143 0.3143 0.3143
Service Area Demand 0.0620 0.0690 0.0697 0.0697 0.0697 0.0697
Sales 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Future Sales 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total Demand(MGD) 0.0620 0.0690 0.0697 0.0697 0.0697 0.0697
Demand as Percent of Supply 20% 22% 22% 22% 22% 22%
s-
The purpose of the above chart is to show a general indication of how the long-term per capita water demand changes over time.The per capita water demand
may actually be different than indicated due to seasonal populations and the accuracy of data submitted.Water systems that have calculated long-term per
capita water demand based on a methodology that produces different results may submit their information in the notes field.
Your long-term water demand is 53 gallons per capita per day.What demand management practices do you plan to implement to reduce the per capita water
demand(i.e.conduct regular water audits,implement a plumbing retrofit program,employ practices such as rainwater harvesting or reclaimed water)?If these
practices are covered elsewhere in your plan,indicate where the practices are discussed here.
Are there other demand management practices you will implement to reduce your future supply needs?
What supplies other than the ones listed in future supplies are being considered to meet your future supply needs?
How does the water system intend to implement the demand management and supply planning components above?
Has this system participated in regional water supply or water use planning? Yes,CCPCUA
What major water supply reports or studies were used for planning? CCPCUA
Please describe any other needs or issues regarding your water supply sources,any water system deficiencies or needed improvements(storage,treatment,
etc.)or your ability to meet present and future water needs.Include both quantity and quality considerations,as well as financial,technical,managerial,
permitting,and compliance issues: N/A

The Division of Water Resources(DWR)provides the data contained within this Local Water Supply Plan(LWSP)as a courtesy and service to our
customers. DWR staff does not field verify data. Neither DWR,nor any other party involved in the preparation of this LWSP attests that the data is
completely free of errors and omissions.Furthermore,data users are cautioned that LWSPs labeled PROVISIONAL have yet to be reviewed by DWR
staff.Subsequent review may result in significant revision.Questions regarding the accuracy or limitations of usage of this data should be directed to the
water system and/or DWR.

Appendix F
ROUTE FOR ALTERNATIVE DISCHARGE

Beaufort County,NC
. 1 F ,.
«
figs yi0,414%,41r14%.
.
a� nY -�ai« Yt '. � , *0
``_ w
z
i i
441P * . .
le.1., t , _ 0‘,1 _,,•;-,: -., ', ''' '' I .,_
...00P` • * .•4.[ . r ,
F.
k l i t ti.sisa.� 1 ,�{
. i e tort . $ .
,.., :,is;....,1. ,
111:,, ,,,:.:..t:,..:::.,...:::: .,..,,:
.. tilt; f 4 4 . ,. ...': r _i..
aW-..�
A •
„fir.. .A"__ YY `,7T�^�f 7, , t 4i�y rE
f # it .'r
Ems' �k
k K
f
a✓ P n .. .r ._.is .„.,..,_ Cy x1.,v" .4
5/7/2024, 9:46:35 AM 1:72,224
0 0.5 1 2 mi
US/NC Highways r r , 1 T I
0 0.75 1.5 3 km
Duke University, State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, TomTom, Garmin,
SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, USDA,
USFWS
Free Copy
DISCLAIMER:Content is not intended to constitute a legal record.The County and Website Host disclaim all liability for information on this map.User agrees that the County and its Assigns shall be held harmless from all actions arising out of the use of County data.

Beaufort County,NC
r�'.' - '•
' � .
v
,•s• • .
} - • •• • r
t
• • • I. ;
•
• • • i ,. ...- ,
• .• • •: p ;qst- i = . I,
••O.
fte
r, a g
5/7/2024, 9:46:35 AM 1:72,224
0 0.5 1 2 mi
US/NC Highways I r I I . ' ' ' ' ' 1 I
0 0.75 1.5 3 km
Duke University, State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, TomTom, Garmin,
SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METIINASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, USDA,
USFWS
Free Copy
DISCLAIMER:Content is not intended to constitute a legal record.The County and Website Host disclaim all liability for information on this map.User agrees that the County and its Assigns shall be held harmless from all actions arising out of the use of County data.

Appendix G
WET TESTING SUMMARY

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Reidsville WTP(Outfall 002) NC0046345/001 County: Rockingham Region: WSRO Basin: CPF01 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 7/1/2017 Chr Lim: 90% NonComp: 7Q10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
I F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2020 Pass - - Fail Fail Pass Fail - - Pass - -
2021 Fail - Fail - - Fail - - Fail - -
2022 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - H - Fail
2023 94.9 >100 Fall >100 Fail 82.2 31.8 Fail 77.9 58.1 >100 Fail >100 >100
2024 Pass - - - - - - - - - - -
Reidsville WWTP NC0024881/001 County: Rockingham Region: WSRO Basin: CPF01 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 6/1/2013 chr lim:61% NonComp: Single 7Q10: 7.4 PF: 7.5 IWC: 61 Freq: Q
I F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2020 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2021 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2022 Pass - - Fail 21.6(NC) >100 Pass - - Pass - -
2023 Pass - Pass - - Pass - Pass -
2024 Pass - - - - - - - - -
Reverse Osmosis WTP(Tyrrell County) NC0086924/001 County: Tyrrell Region: WARO Basin: PAS53 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC_JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 11/1/2017 24hr p/f ac monit 90 NonComp: 7010: 0 PF: 0.216 IWC: 100 Freq: Q
J F M A M 1 I A S 0 N D
2020 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2021 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2022 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2023 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - Pass - -
2024 Pass - - - - - - - -
REXAM,Inc. NC0087874/001 County: Guilford Region: WSRO Basin: CPF02 Feb May Aug Nov SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 12/1/2004 chr lim 90% NonComp: 7Q10: 0 PF: 0.001 IWC: 100 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2020 - H - - H - - - - - - -
Richland Township WTP NC0084808/001 County: Beaufort Region: WARD Basin: TAR07 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC_JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 1/1/2015 Ac P/F Monit:90%M NonComp: 7010: PF: IWC: Freq: Q
1 F M A M J J A S 0 N D
2020 Pass - - Fail - - - - - Pass - -
2021 Fall - - Pass - - Pass - . Pass - -
2022 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2023 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2024 Pass - - . - . - - - - -
Richmond County WTP NC0081281/001 County: Richmond Region: FRO Basin: YAD16 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC_JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 6/1/2014 Chr Monit: 90% NonComp: 7Q10: PF: 0.50 IWC: Freq: Q
J F M A M J 1 A S 0 N D
2020 H - - H - - H - - H - -
2021 H - - - - - - - - - -
Legend: P=Fathead minnow(Pimohales oromelas).H=No Flow(facility is active),s=Split test between Certified Labs Page 83 of 111

Figure 2.1
NPDES LOCATION MAP

DoocuSignj{Envelope ID:C63313B3-E17C-44C4-A808-A7C52CBEC472 l
PI
f ki�,dr(� HoNand i 'b Ic \:1
elk"iJ i • ,'m
'__ ice. �'�'+.r , .. '^ �" v- �. g ♦ 6_
el
Starer(C)
( ......7„.7-.......
_= - N say . e '\•
_ _ K
II
•
• _,,_ .s a Mtn,/
x•Z- _ 4. is.,Q,,/,.,..,..,„..4°
i j
w ;Gne7ss i,— � t[p •
r Wsndly, k 0 o % •
• w
z.
" T "21tIti4elp`\,\`Piit , ` Y i 1 ff s •
1(
: , ,0 i..... jai 0,<#.4 I•1""''''• -
•
tr.-, .---:-..t.......................„..- \:. \, \ Li co,....,, r, oi-o .
° •
� �
,— u _. - 1 I Otflli aY1NNG S7MP `
! ..� - _ � Ias1l l'
-w
'" 1917
— i\ ` b IcOU—lip _
---\----..\_&\,..) ,,,_ _.)
_. __ \ ,0 St Pour
___...-.......c... taw , . stir: e - . -: .,- -.: ' - -.:. -44: ,7 ..., ..• -..,
Y -1I .
.. . Idalis s - _ a� iis
L-----„_
- Italia tt�
=- - '' - -- Copyright:©2013 National Geographic Society,i-cubed
f
Beaufort County Water System N qp2,11.11oxiimiliRIVEMP,
Richland WTP �ib�i�j�►,_1��I ��+��
NPDES Permit NC0084808 A i�,6�►ti':yli*VRl�I►`Jv v*voA
rr611•E i`�.
v

Figure 2.2
TREATMENT & DISCHARGE SCHEMATIC

WELLS PROCESS SCHEMATIC
0.900 MGD BEAUFORT COUNTY WATER DISTRICT VII
WATER TREATMENT PLANT 71
750 GPM GROUNDWATER TREATMENT PLANT
AERATION IRON REMOVAL AND ION EXCHANGE SOFTENING
0.900 MGD (BASED ON 20 HOURS PER DAY OPERATION)
STORAGE
0.900 MGD DISCHARGE
TO RIVER
PUMPS PUMPS 0.144 MGD
'
I
SAMPLING
STATION
o KMNO4 0.802 MGD 0.144 MGD
a o co
1n
0
(nD CDCIDFILTERS BACKWASH & RINSE WASTE HOLDING
0.089 MGD
3 0 0.793
•
o o BYPASS MGD BACKWASH, REGENERATION, & RINSE
m 0.154 MGD 0.639 0.055 MGD
MGD
c SOFTENERS I BRINE-0.002 MGD BRINEMAKER
0.614 MGD
>-
J
CHEMICALS _
zCO
oao
▪ En 0
CCo CLo
0.768 MGD • o
z Y O
Q Q
lit
Z
STORAGE
0.756 MGD
TREATMENT PLANT
DISTRIBUTION GENERAL USES
0.010 MGD
0.746 MGD
CUSTOMERS
Drawing N:\DBxx_gcn\DB4x_ang\0B45_oc\13-000B Beaufort County Retainer\0100 WTP Process Scnemotics\BCWD VI: — WTP 71 — Process Stematic.dwg
Layout: 20 Hours
Plotted: Saturday, December 15, 2012, 8:10:14am

_ ....
••" •,,,,1 oaaven mt.„,„I ,vc,..,,„,,I_ron•I i• ,..„,.
,N.......I40•ax'.1....s „15...
...,.....,•....,..3 ... ,
'3NI'S311/130SSV ainvasvg t4:.:43,3•6741, f
„„...„...,...... ,..... I
WM.OW.-IL.-6.011 IMMO MOW
SI/13431..1d111 MILS Mink-LI In.1./.411/. a:4'0101 •411 woR.1 on
5110PCIA14.1141 rel...6 IOWA II0J 1.33t0.11•1 KU.Man MI .''''f•1.4
.unnoo 1JO4flV3F1 JD ....... anneal niv la•al rano ..4 4.003 -.
.1.01W5I0 MAUS P..WIIVA,d11.15.0.1 Weill.' ''''''''.:47 ,4 4•41 M..4.44•1 4.•,...........N......•
IN 101L1.1510
Nirld 31.12 *4431: ....n**a.......--.....-
. .
,•—
. ...N.•••••MONA ME
— .... •y.•,... ‘ . \ an•••• I
ilanne,10 • I
• 4 IffaTIT
s s ,
no• \ .,•• \ r•• •••• / no* •••. n••
. • •
i I i•
/I • i
•S 1 I f -' I I I i 1 1, ....,. . .
- - - - - - - - - - - ,
. •'---,
, , ,,-', • . •
. . • .
. ,
. , , •
.." :,-... • . __ • .
..-••
..• • I \ •-• ,, 1-•
, . _..,- •
,_ • t 7 , • _ - .
, , , • 4 on)
.--' :"• --:----- ....... , i
. . .,'
7. •
N In• I..- .
.,.. .,,,•
• •
••••
. . .. • , _,. . , •
en3
.f
, • ,
.u......grAat. ;...
..... ,. /t01101310" ..•• 4 r••
IP..0•• Wag . 4
:. .1 . __...m.,,,„___ . __wit....... ,--: titm,•k, , ..
• I. , ---.:. . . .
Egg', -Atkars7-"--7"—'=119
• II
q.',...rr EIN• -.-'•" ---..::,-.-.1, a 1 . ,..... •/ : \ -MaNp_1111 i'... . .
T". f'•
. ...• 't ' I i=3 ..,',.... ..-• ' ' \ 11: 111111'-----
ma. 1 - . ) .:2..._ . - - - - :.„. i\ illitiffibmit‘ ki,_. ....-\"...Li .•_._„....,...1 , 1 con
. ... .
: \ : .0 i ''• "1"."r------'--- \VA •Iriiiiii—.r.------' 7g
;... ,. - ..,-. sv illid..0.44. ..... : . ss r.......r . -
aurao 0/. 14 I 114,111
.1.1311.0314 i NW= •'' ligEi.= . 1 • •s s''.
.." - - .' . 1'..1. - - Ill - ,, s 1 • • • . • - - - IIS;''-' •7-- 1 ' ---'... .- +r 72'. - - '- ;.........,-, ' '‘r ' -.' - • 4. - >,,-- • - .1 MO
.[_ ..... lug ....- .AIN. . ,, 2.7.9'. • ,
NI -- ..- • 14~ '7•1=r---,•/ i I _.....-----', '
• - i .... .-. •
'-'? ' I, ileIlligli-"021
; =pa-gill/1k
-nytittag - \
....
_ k,14,14
'11111e
'..----...--I •
t .I
• / -
•
., 1. • si, s.... ., ' 741:.-1.7nat . ..-•
,,„ . . . 1 1..._ . . . 5,_,,,..!. l'.! 'r.7. ..- . .N.1, ti.
'''a , '--..-.! A -, L . , s„ ----___,.___„-,3,,,_1 ,„- . , . •
• 1„, Nas o I....e, ...:I2:......!.4,
?'• 4! — 1' 'wair••• 101141M '7::
. I 1 ., I' j• 4- • 1
,.... L . ,
... .,..,
.., ... "• ....•
.„ ..._.., ._.„. .__ _.,.•_• .._ _____ _.....-__...„._......._
,. .:_......„, ,
- -ninowar-... '' •
.,
_..... ........--- --.....- ' ......... -.......-
•--- ..- .. .__
.....7.., Om vs.)<ma now.woo
.----.
_-
*.“.".'flglf.Z.VngrroxTiek=raise 9
4 MIMI
,,,,...•••,. IT. •4• 111=M'
•
-----
. 1111.1 1 1