NC0021181_Fact Sheet_20240823

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCOO21181
Permit Writer/Email Contact Urva Patel,[e-mail]
Date: August 20,2024
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Municipal Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑X Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification(Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis,Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans,4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers(Non-POTW),EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name: City of Belmont/Belmont WWTP
Applicant Address: P.O. Box 431, Belmont,NC 28212
Facility Address: 298 Parkdale Drive,Belmont,NC 28212
Permitted Flow: 5.0 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:' Major Municipal; 81.2%Domestic, 18.8%Industrial
Facility Class/Grade: Grade IV Biological Water Pollution Control System
Treatment Units: Bar Screen, Grit removal,Aeration, Clarification, Chlorination,
Dichlorination
Pretreatment Program(Y/N) Yes
County: Gaston
Region Mooresville
1 Based on permitted flow.
Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The City of Belmont has
submitted an NPDES permit renewal application at 5.0 MGD for the Belmont WWTP on December 6,
2023.This facility serves approximately population of 9,500 residents and operates a pretreatment program
with two Significant Industrial Users (SIU): Spartan Dyer (textile), US Cotton. Treated domestic
wastewater is discharged via Outfall 001 Catawba River (arm of Lake Wylie), a Class WS-IV; B; CA in
the Catawba River Basin.
Inflow and Infiltration (I h The permittee reported approximately 20,000 gallons per day of I/I is
experienced at the facility.
Page 1 of 13

Sludge Management Plan: After the sludge holding process, before being sent to the permitted land sites
by a certified contracted company, sludge sampling is conducted per our Land Application Permit No.
WQ003281 and/or 503 regulations.
The sampling,testing, and monitoring is conducted by Southern Soil Builders. The City of Belmont has a
continuous contract with them to perform the above procedures. The contract also includes hauling the
sludge, soil testing, land preparation,record keeping and State reporting.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
The Belmont WWTP discharges into the Catawba River downstream of Mountain Island Lake,which has
a nominal year-around regulated release of 80 cfs.An adjusted control release of 95 cfs was determined
b adding the flow from the drainage area downstream of the dam 15 cfs).
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s): Outfall 001 —Catawba River(arm of Lake Wylie)
Stream Segment: ll-(122)
Stream Classification: WS-IV, B; CA
Drainage Area(mi2): 2015
Summer 7Q10(cfs) 95 (control release)
Winter 7Q10(cfs): 95 (control release)
30Q2 (cfs): 95 (control release)
Average Flow(cfs): 95 (control release)
IWC (%effluent): 8%
303(d) listed/parameter: This segment is listed as impaired for PCB Fish Tissue
Advisory on the NC 2022 Final 303(d)list.
Subject to TMDL/parameter: Lake Wylie TMDL/nutrients (TN/TP).TP mass limits
effective January 2015,TN mass limits effective April 2017
due to Chlorophyll-a impairment. State-wide Mercury TMDL
Basin/HUC: Catawba/03050101
USGS Topo Quad: G14NE,Belmont,NC
The receiving water lies in the Lake Wylie Chlorophyll-a TMDL Management Area. The TMDL was
approved by the EPA in 1996 to address eutrophication of the lake and its major tributaries along the
Catawba River. See Section 6: Water Quality Based Effluent Limitations for information regarding nutrient
limits related to the TMDL.
3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of December 2019 through April 2024.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Parameter Units Average Max Min Permit
Limit
Flow MGD 1.66 6.98 0.55 MA 5.0
Total Monthly Flow MG 50.80 74.864 30.961 Monitor&
Report
BOD5 mg/I 4.78 66 1.6 WA 45.0
MA 30.0
Page 2 of 13

TSS mg/I 12.25 260 1 WA 45.0
MA 30.0
NH3N mg/l 2.54 39 0.1 Monitor&
Report
DM 28
Total Residual Chlorine µg/l 29.94 174.5 0.028 (<50
compliance)
Fecal coliform(geometric (geometric)
#/100 ml 32.53 5717 1 WA 400
mean) MA 200
DO mg/1 8.77 16.1 3.22 Monitor&
Report
Temperature ° C 19.76 36.6 7 Monitor&
Report
PH SU 6.99 7.8 6.1 6.0>pH<
9.0
TN mg/l 12.36 33 1.03 Monitor&
Report
TP mg/1 2.06 7.2 0.17 Monitor&
Report
Cyanide µg/L 0.010 0.014 0.008 Monitor&
Report
Total Hardness mg/L 50.83 74 34 Monitor&
Report
MA-Monthly Average,WA-Weekly Average,DM-Daily Maximum,DA=Daily Average
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations,for example: 1)to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/1 of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also Monitoring
Coalitions established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case
instream monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action: The current permit requires instream monitoring for Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Fecal Coliform,
Temperature,and Conductivity.Instream monitoring locations are at the US Hwy 74 bridge(upstream)and
one mile downstream of the discharge.
Table 2. Instream Monitoring Data Summary December 2019-April 2024
Upstream Downstream
Parameter Units
Average Max Min Average Max Min
O g/l 8.56 14 2.17 8.49 13.9 2.6
Temperature 0C 22.87 32.3 7.5 1 23.02 32.5 7.5
Conductivity µmhos/cm 60.14 179 6.2 59.74 93.1 45.2
Fecal Coliform /100ml 90.65 17500 1 49.86 8000 1
eomean eomean
Page 3 of 13

Students t-tests were run at a 95% confidence interval to analyze relationships between instream
samples.A statistically significant difference is determined when the t-test p-value result is<0.05.
It was concluded that no statistically significant difference exists between upstream and downstream DO.
Average DO was above 5 mg/L [per 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (6)] both upstream and downstream of the
discharge during the period reviewed. Instream DO was observed at levels less than 4.0 mg/L on two
occasions upstream and two occasions downstream during the period reviewed. Monitoring has been
maintained.
Ambient temperature was slightly greater than 32 degrees Celsius [per 15A NCAC 02B .0211 (18)] one
time (08/08/2022) at upstream and three times at downstream (06/16/2022, 08/08/2022, and 08/09/2022)
during the period reviewed. The temperature difference between downstream temperature and upstream
temperature was below the standard increase of 2.8 degrees Celsius during the period reviewed. It was
concluded that no statistically significant difference exists between upstream and downstream temperature.
Monitoring has been maintained.
Conductivity is a parameter of concern due to industrial discharges; the Belmont WWTP has an active
pretreatment program with one SIU. Review of submitted instream data for the period above found
conductivity values to be similar overall between sites with averages of 60.14 µmhos/cm (range: 6.2-179
µmhos/cm) upstream and 59.74 µmhos/cm (range: 45.2-93.1 µmhos/cm) downstream. It was concluded
that no statistically significant difference exists between upstream and downstream conductivity.
Fecal Coliform is a parameter of concern for aquatic life and human health. Review of submitted instream
data for the period above found geometric mean coliform counts to be higher upstream (90.65/100 mL,
range: 1-17,500/100 mL))than downstream(49.86/100 mL, range: 1-8,000/100 mL). Concurrent effluent
coliform counts were lower on average than at either instream location(geomean= 32.53/100 mL, range:
< 1-5,717/100 mL). The downstream value is half of the upstream value.
Overall,instream data show no apparent impact from the effluent for any of the four monitored parameters.
No changes are proposed at this time.
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring(YIN):NO
Name of Monitoring Coalition:NA
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): The facility reported several
exceedances resulting in violation actions from July 2019 through June 2024.
Table 3. Effluent Limit Violation uly 2019—June 2024
Parameter Weekly Monthly Daily Notices of Notice of Enforcement
Average Average Maximum Deficiency Violations Cases
Exceedances Exceedances Exceedances
TSS 5 1 3
TRC 2 2
Fecal Coliform 5 24
Effluent
TSS 5 9
Effluent
Page 4 of 13

Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 17 of 18 quarterly chronic toxicity tests. One failed (August 2022) test was
followed by two successive tests,both of which passed.All 4 second species chronic toxicity tests passed.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The last facility inspection conducted
in March 2024 reported that the facility was found to be compliant with the permit except for the above
violations.A pretreatment compliance inspection was conducted in March 2024 with no issues reported.
6. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following stream flows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1 Q 10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q 10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life;non-carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow(aesthetics); annual average flow(carcinogen,HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered(e.g., based on CORMIX model results):NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
Oxygen-Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen-consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD= 30 mg/1 for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Ifpermit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: NA
Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/1(summer)and 1.8 mg/1(winter).Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria,utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non-Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 ug/1) and capped at 28 ug/1 (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/1 are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: Currently
the permit has a 28 µg/L daily maximum limit for TRC and no limits for N113-N. Both parameters were
reviewed in the attached NH3/TRC Wasteload Allocation(WLA)spreadsheet using the annual 7Q10 of 95
cfs. The spreadsheet calculated a TRC allowable concentration capped at 28 µg/L,which is maintained in
the permit as a limit.
The permit since the facility upgrade to 5.0 MGD in 1991 has not included ammonia limits,based on DWQ
Technical Support review that year. The spreadsheet calculated NH3-N allowable discharge concentrations
of 10.6/31.8 mg/L monthly/weekly average. Per 15A NCAC 02B .0404(b), Division staff may on a case-
by-case basis develop seasonal limitations on the discharge of oxygen-consuming wastes when a treatment
facility complies with applicable limitations on these wastes in the summer season but does not consistently
Page 5 of 13

comply in the winter season due to the effects of cooler temperatures or other seasonal factors beyond its
control. Review of DMR data from December 2019 through April 2024 revealed that the facility reported
monthly averages of effluent ammonia that would exceed the calculated chronic NH3-N allowable
concentrations (monthly averages) on 4 occasions (March, April, May and June 2023) (Fig. 2). As such,
the inclusion of toxicity-based ammonia limits has been proposed. Discussion with the Mooresville
Regional Office informed staff that the temporary issues with ammonia were experienced due to solids
issues at the facility. However, since these occasions, the facility has treated ammonia in consistent
compliance with the calculated NH3-N allowable concentrations. As such, it appears that the City of
Belmont can consistently meet the new limits and a compliance schedule is not necessary. Additionally, as
the data review did not demonstrate consistent issues complying with the proposed limits during the winter,
seasonal limits have not been applied.
Proposed Ammonia-N (NH3-N)
35 -
30
25 •
•
20
J
E • •
15 •
10 -
5
0
8/23/2019 6/18/2020 4/14/2021 2/8/2022 12/5/2022 10/1/2023 7/27/2024
Wk Avg ♦ Mo Avg — — MA Limit WA Limit
Figure 2. Belmont WWTP effluent monthly average(MA) and weekly average(WA)Ammonia-N
concentrations(mg/L)with their respective proposed limits for potential compliance evaluation.
Reasonable Potential Analysis(RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of '/z detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) stream flows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards,dated June 10,2016.
Page 6 of 13

Current permit requires Total Hardness monitoring of the effluent and Instream-Upstream of the Outfall to
address hardness-dependent dissolved metals in their calculations to the total metals. The average total
hardness at the effluent is 50.83 mg/L and at the Upstream is 19.25 mg/L. The submitted hardness data is
used in the RPA. Since the upstream value is lower than the default value (25 mg/L), the default value is
used in RPA.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between December 2019
and April 2024. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated water
quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for this
permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality-based
effluent limit(WQBEL)since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria: None
• MonitoringOnly.nly. The following parameters will receive a monitor-only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria,but
the maximum predicted concentration was>50%of the allowable concentration: None
• No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria
and the maximum predicted concentration was <50% of the allowable concentration: Arsenic,
Beryllium, Cadmium, Total Phenolic Compounds, Total Chromium, Copper, Cyanide, Lead,
Molybdenum,Nickel, Selenium, Silver,Zinc
o Note: Several parameters are required pretreatment monitoring as toxicants and will continue
to be monitored accordingly.
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans were evaluated for
additional pollutants of concern.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a water quality-based effluent limit (WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set, two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration:None
o The following parameter(s) will receive a monitor-only requirement, since as part of a
limited data set,one sample exceeded the allowable discharge concentration:None
If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.
Toxici , Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste)will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements,with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests,with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This is a Major POTW, and a chronic WET limit at 8%
effluent will continue on a quarterly frequency.
Page 7 of 13

Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year), and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (^-2% of total load),the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities>2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury(>1 ng/1)will receive
an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case-by-case basis,depending if mercury is a pollutant
of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed the WQBEL
value(based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/1)and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value of 47 ng/l.
The current permit has MMP requirements, and the summary was submitted with the permit application.
Table 4. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
#of Samples 4 5 4 5 1
Annual Average Conc.n /L 2.4 2.2 1.1 2.3 1.1
Maximum Conc.,n /L 2.98 4.57 2.50 6.48 1.09
TBEL,n /L 7
WQBEL,n /L JV9.1
IF
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since no annual average mercury
concentration exceeded the WQBEL, and no individual mercury sample exceeded the TBEL, no mercury
limit is required. However, since the facility is>2 MGD and reported quantifiable levels of mercury (> 1
ng/1), a mercury minimization plan(MMP)has been maintained to the permit.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their
implementation within this permit: The Belmont WWTP is subject to the Lake Wylie Nutrient TMDL,
which was approved by the USEPA in 1996. The TMDL states that all facilities must meet a summer limit
of 6 mg/L Total Nitrogen(TN)and an annual limit of 1 mg/L Total Phosphorus(TP).These limits translate
to load allocations of 74,960 lb/summer TN and 21,309 lb/yr TP for Belmont WWTP.
A nutrient allocation transfer agreement between the City of Charlotte and City of Belmont became
effective May 3, 2018. This agreement allows for a multi-step process of allocation transfers from three
WWTPs(Belmont,Mt. Holly and the former Clariant Corp. WWTPs)to one future regional WWTP under
the Lake Wylie TMDL.The agreement allows Charlotte Water to transfer TN and TP load allocations from
the Clariant Corp. WWTP to Belmont and Mt. Holly WWTPs until Charlotte's regional WWTP is
constructed and the connections from Belmont and Mt. Holly collection systems are tied to it. After
construction of the regional WWTP and connections to it are made, all nutrient allocations will be
transferred from Belmont and Mt. Holly to the new plant.
In light of the allocation transfer agreement, the following nutrient limits will be added to the permit as
implementation of the TMDL: TN seasonal load limits of 88,656 lb/summer and 115,449 lb/winter,and TP
annual load limit of 21,309 lb/yr. These load limits represent nutrient allocations established in the TMDL
plus those Charlotte Water transferred from the former Clariant Corp. WWTP. A special condition further
describing the load limits has been maintained in the permit.
Page 8 of 13

To calculate nutrient loading,monthly monitoring of TN Load and TP Load as well as Total Monthly Flow
will be added to the permit. A special condition describing calculation and reporting of nutrient loads will
also be added to the permit. Monitoring of TN and TP concentrations will be increased from 2/month to
weekly as recommended in the 2010 Catawba River Basin Plan. To check TN calculations, weekly
monitoring of TN constituents Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and Nitrate + Nitrite (NO3-N + NO2-N)
concentrations has been maintained in the permit.
A review of submitted data from December 2019—April 2024 and calculated nutrient loads revealed that
TN and TP loads are below their respective limits with calculated monthly loading (Table 3). The facility
should be able to meet the proposed limits without difficulty.
Table 5. Effluent Nutrient Loading Summary.
TN Summer TN Winter TP Annual
lb/season lb/season (lb/year)
Maximum 55,677 36,881 16,727
Proposed Limit 88,656 115,449 21,309
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: As required
by Session Law 2018-5, Senate Bill 99, Section 13.1(r),every applicant shall submit documentation of any
additional pollutants for which there are certified methods with the permit application if their discharge is
anticipated via a Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application table.In their application,the Town provided
the chemical addendum and informed the Division that no additional sampling had been conducted.
To identify PFAS concentrations in waters classified as Water Supply (WS) waters, monitoring
requirements are to be implemented in NPDES permits with pretreatment programs that discharge to WS
waters. Since the discharges to WS waters and as the facility receives wastewater from industries
recognized as potential sources of PFAS via a pretreatment program, monitoring of PFAS chemicals has
been added to the permit. Currently, EPA Method 1633 is finalized (as of January 31, 2024) but not yet
published in the Federal Register as an approved test method. Upon evaluation of laboratory availability
and capability to perform the analytical method, it was determined that the sampling may be conducted
using the 3rd draft method or more recent version of Method 1633. Influent and effluent quarterly
monitoring have been added to the permit with analysis using the method until Method 1633 becomes
approved via publication in the Federal Register. Sampling using the method shall take effect the first full
calendar quarter following 6 months after the effective date of the permit to provide the City of Belmont
time to select a laboratory, develop a contract, and begin collecting samples. Data shall submit data to the
Division via a spreadsheet provided by the Division. Effective 6 months after the final Method 1633 is
published in the Federal Register as part of 40 CFR 136, the City shall conduct influent and effluent
monitoring using the approved method and submit data via eDMR.
In addition to monitoring at the WWTP,the Belmont WWTP shall identify and monitor SIUs suspected of
discharging PFAS compounds [see A.(7.)(c.)(i.)]within 6 months of the permit effective date.The Belmont
WWTP shall update their Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) to identify indirect dischargers of PFAS
contributing to concentrations experienced at the Belmont WWTP. A summary of information learned
during this process will be provided as part of the 2025 Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR). Within 6
months of completion of the IWS, the Belmont WWTP shall begin sampling of indirect dischargers
identified as potential PFAS sources at a quarterly frequency. For a detailed outline of the specific PFAS
requirements, see Special Condition A.(7.)PFAS Monitoring Requirements.
Page 9 of 13

If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody:NA.
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H 0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo:NA.
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA
7. Technology-Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/1
BOD51TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg/l for BOD51TSS for Weekly Average). YES
If NO,provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Are 85%removal requirements for BOD51TSS included in the permit? YES
If NO,provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non-discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results:NA
f
9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed(e.g.,based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): NO, however Based on RPA,
Cyanide monitoring is removed from the permit as predicted maximum concentration is <50% allowable
concentration.Therefore,no monitoring is required.
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated:NA
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 213.0500; 2) NPDES
Page 10 of 13

Guidance,Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances(7/15/2010 Memo); 3)NPDES Guidance,Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance(10/22/2012 Memo);4)Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o)of the Clean Water Act,and therefore anti-backsliding prohibitions
would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
All monitoring frequencies are in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0508.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21,2015. Effective December
21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
electronically. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional NPDES
reports electronically effective December 21, 2020, EPA extended this deadline from December 21, 2020,
to December 21, 2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4, 2021, was extended as a final
regulation change published in the November 2, 2020 Federal Register This permit contains the
requirements for electronic reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.
12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
A. Table. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 5.0 MGD
Parameter Current Permit Proposed Change Basis for Condition/Change
Flow MA 5.0 MGD No change 15A NCAC 2B .0505
Total Monthly Monthly monitoring No change Required to calculate monthly based
Flow(MG/mo.) TN/TP nutrient mass for limits
compliance with Lake Wylie TMDL
permitting strategy.
BOD5 MA 30 mg/1 No change TBEL. Secondary treatment
WA 45 mg/1 standards: 40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
02B .0406 based on the results of a
Level B model run in 1988.
NH3-N Monitor Daily MA 10.6 mg/L WQBEL. Based on protection of
WA 31.8 mg/L State WQ criteria. 15A NCAC 02B
Monitor Daily .0500.
TSS MA 30 mg/l No change TBEL. Secondary treatment
WA 45 mg/1 standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
Monitor Daily 2B .0406
Fecal coliform MA 200/100ml No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
WA 400/100ml NCAC 213 .0200
Daily monitoring
Total Residual DM 28 µg/L No change WQBEL. Capped per NH3/TRC
Chlorine(TRC) WLA calculations.
DO Monitor Daily No change Protection of DO standard, 15A
NCAC 02B .0500.No limits are
required based on the results of a
Level B model run in 1988.
Page 11 of 13

pH 6-9 SU No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 213 .0500.
Temperature(°C) Monitor Daily No Change State WQ standard, 15A NCAC 02B
.0500.
Total Nitrogen Monitor weekly; No change Required to monitor N species and
(TN), Report TN,TKN and to calculate TN load for limit
NO2-N+NO3-N, NO2-N+NO3-N compliance per Lake Wylie TMDL
TKN(mg/L) separately. permitting strategy, and to comply
with NC Chlorophyll-a WQS. 15A
NCAC 02B .0200.
TN Load Monitor monthly; No change WQBEL. Required TN allocation
Seasonal Limits: per Lake Wylie TMDL permitting
88,656 lb/summer strategy plus transferred allocations
115,449 lb/winter from Clariant Corp.by City of
Charlotte to Belmont per agreement,
5/3/2018
Total Phosphorus Monitor weekly No change Required to calculate TP load for
(TP) limit compliance per Lake Wylie
TMDL permitting strategy, and to
comply with NC Chlorophyll-a
WQS. 15A NCAC 02B .0200
TP Load Monitor monthly. No change WQBEL. Required TP allocation per
YM 21,309 lbs Lake Wylie TMDL permitting
strategy plus transferred allocations
from Clariant Corp.by City of
Charlotte to Belmont per agreement,
5/3/2018
Cyanide Monitor Quarterly Monitoring removed Based on RPA,predicted max<50%
of allowable conc. Monitoring
removed.
Conductivity No Effluent monitoring, Add effluent 15A NCAC 02B .0500
Instream monitoring monitoring, The town has two industrial
Daily dischargers.
Toxicity Test Quarterly Ceriodaphnia No change WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
dubia Pass/Fail at 8% amounts. 15A NCAC 0213.0200 and
effluent(Chronic limit) 15A NCAC 0213.0500
Effluent Pollutant Three times per permit Update years (2025, 40 CFR 122
Scan cycle; Second species 2026, 2027)
toxicity testing
Total Hardness Monitor effluent and No change Revised water quality standards and
instream,upstream of EPA's guidance on hardness-
discharge dependent metals
Mercury MMP Special Condition No change WQBEL. Consistent with 2012
Minimization Plan Statewide Mercury TMDL
(MMP) Implementation.
Electronic Electronic Reporting No change In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Special Condition Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD—Million gallons per day,MA- Monthly Average,WA—Weekly Average,DM—Daily Max
Page 12 of 13

13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 08/20/2024
Per 15ANCAC 2H .0109 & .0111,The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice.Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact
If you have any questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit,please
contact Urva Patel at(919) 707-3628 or via email at [e-mail].
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed(Yes/No): NO
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:NA
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards—Freshwater Standards
• NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
• BOD&TSS Removal Rate Calculations
• Mercury TMDL Calculations =Wbbl
• WET Testing and Self-Monitoring Summary
• Water Compliance Inspection Report
• Water Compliance Inspection Report with Pretreatment
• Chemical Addendum
• Mercury Minimization Plan Submittal
• Applicable special correspondences/Additional Request Information
Page 13 of 13

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information Table 2. Parameters of Concern
❑CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS Name WQs Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Facility Name Belmont WWTP Par01 Arsenic Aquactic Life C 150 FW 340 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class IV Par02 Arsenic Human Health C 10 HH/WS N/A ug/L
Water Supply
NPDES Permit NCO021181 Par03 Beryllium Aquatic Life NC 6.5 FW 65 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 Cadmium Trout NC 1.0015 TR 1.9412 ug/L
Flow,Qw(MGD) 5.000 Par05 Chlorides Aquatic Life NC 230 FW mg/L
Receiving Stream Catwba River Par06 Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Water Supply NC 1 A ug/L
HUC Number 03050101 Par07 Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A ug/L
Stream Class WS-IV,CA, B Par08 Chromium III Aquatic Life NC 117.7325 FW 905.0818 ug/L
❑Apply WS Hardness WQC Par09 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 11 FW 16 pg/L
Lentic or Lotic Par10 Chromium,Total Aquatic Life NC N/A FW N/A pg/L
7Q10s(cfs) 95.00 Par11 Copper Aquatic Life NC 7.8806 FW 10.4720 ug/L
7Q10w(cfs) 95.00 Par12 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 22 10 ug/L
30Q2(cfs) 95.00 Par13 Fluoride Aquatic Life NC 1,800 FW ug/L
QA(cfs) 90.00 Par14 Lead Aquatic Life NC 2.9416 FW 75.4871 ug/L
1Q10s(cfs) 77.57 Par15 Mercury Aquatic Life NC 12 FW 0.5 ng/L
Effluent Hardness 51.53 mg/L(Avg) Par16 Molybdenum Human Health NC 2000 HH ug/L
------------- -----------------
Upstream Hardness 18.38 mg/L(Avg) I Par17 Nickel Aquatic Life NC 37.2313 FW 335.2087 pg/L
Combined Hardness Chronic 25 m /L I Par18 Nickel Water Supply NC 25.0000 WS N/A pg/L
------------- -----------------
Combined Hardness Acute 25 mg/L I Par19 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 3.1 FW 56 ug/L
--------------------
Data Source(s) Par20 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.06 FW 0.2964 ug/L
❑CHECK TO APPLY MODEL Par21 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 126.7335 FW 125.7052 ug/L
Par22
Par23
Par24
Par25
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total meta ls_nodetects_limiteddefaults_fuII pred_2024_5_24,input
8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1 Use"PASTE SPECIAL H2 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Effluent Hardness Values"then"COPY" Upstream Hardness Values"then"COPY"
.Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 12/12/2019 48 48 Std Dev. 9.0131 1 12/2/2019 18 18 Std Dev. 8.3641
2 1/9/2020 84 64 Mean 51.5345 2 12/9/2019 14 14 Mean 18.3793
3 2/13/2020 46 46 C.V. 0.1749 3 12/16/2019 14 14 C.V. 0.4551
4 3/12/2020 70 70 n 58 4 12/23/2019 16 16 n 58
5 4/9/2020 64 64 10th Per value 42.00 mg/L 5 12/30/2019 22 22 10th Per value 14.00 mg/L
6 5/14/2020 68 68 Average Value 51.53 mg/L 6 1/6/2020 16 16 Average Value 18.38 mg/L
7 6/11/2020 50 50 Max.Value 74.00 mg/L 7 1/13/2020 40 40 Max.Value 70.00 mg/L
8 7/9/2020 58 58 8 1/20/2020 20 20
9 8/13/2020 54 54 9 1/27/2020 16 16
10 9/10/2020 50 50 10 2/3/2020 12 12
11 10/5/2020 46 46 11 2/10/2020 70 70
12 11/12/2020 42 42 12 2/17/2020 14 14
13 12/10/2020 44 44 13 2/24/2020 20 20
14 1/14/2021 48 48 14 3/2/2020 24 24
15 2/11/2021 50 50 15 3/9/2020 24 24
16 3/11/2021 62 62 16 3/16/2020 16 16
17 4/8/2021 54 54 17 3/23/2020 24 24
18 5/6/2021 42 42 18 3/30/2020 16 16
19 6/3/2021 44 44 19 4/6/2020 30 30
20 8/12/2021 40 40 20 4/13/2020 22 22
21 9/9/2021 50 50 21 4/20/2020 20 20
22 10/14/2021 46 46 22 4/27/2020 16 16
23 11/10/2021 54 54 23 5/4/2020 14 14
24 12/9/2021 42 42 24 5/11/2020 22 22
25 1/13/2022 53 53 25 5/18/2020 14 14
26 2/10/2022 55 55 26 5/26/2020 16 16
27 3/10/2022 52 52 27 6/1/2020 20 20
28 4/14/2022 48 48 28 6/8/2020 20 20
29 5/5/2022 48 48 29 6/15/2020 14 14
30 6/9/2022 46 46 30 6/22/2020 20 20
31 7/7/2022 46 46 31 6/29/2020 16 16
32 8/11/2022 48 48 32 7/6/2020 14 14
33 9/8/2022 54 54 33 7/13/2020 16 16
34 10/13/2022 63 63 34 7/20/2020 18 18
35 11/10/2022 52 52 35 7/27/2020 16 16
36 12/8/2022 50 50 36 8/3/2020 16 16
37 1/12/2023 52 52 37 8/10/2020 12 12
38 2/9/2023 52 52 38 8/17/2020 16 16
39 3/9/2023 60 60 39 8/24/2020 14 14
40 5/11/2023 50 50 40 8/31/2020 14 14
41 5/15/2023 42 42 41 9/8/2020 20 20
42 6/5/2023 70 70 42 9/14/2020 14 14
43 6/6/2023 74 74 43 9/21/2020 16 16
44 6/12/2023 63 63 44 9/28/2020 20 20
45 6/19/2023 63 63 45 10/5/2020 10 10
46 6/26/2023 65 65 46 10/12/2020 22 22
47 7/3/2023 47 47 47 10/19/2020 16 16
48 7/10/2023 42 42 48 10/26/2020 20 20
49 7/13/2023 42 42 49 11/2/2020 16 16
50 7/17/2023 63 63 50 11/9/2020 12 12
51 7/24/2023 43 43 51 11/16/2020 18 18
52 7/31/2023 48 48 52 11/23/2020 14 14
53 8/7/2023 41 41 53 11/30/2020 14 14
54 8/10/2023 42 42 54 12/7/2020 16 16
55 9/5/2023 58 58 55 12/14/2020 16 16
56 9/12/2023 50 50 56 12/21/2020 14 14
57 10/12/2023 37 37 57 12/28/2020 16 16
58 11/9/2023 34 34 58 1/4/2021 16 16
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to totalmetals_nodetects_limiteddefaults_full pred_2024_5_24,data
-1- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 &Par02
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Arsenic Values"then"COPY"
.Maximum data
points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/9/2020 < 2 1 Std Dev. 0.1577
2 4/9/2020 < 2 1 Mean 0.9474
3 7/9/2020 < 2 1 C.V. 0.1664
4 10/8/2020 < 2 1 n 19
5 1/7/2021 < 2 1
6 4/8/2021 < 2 1 Mult Factor= 1.10
7 7/8/2021 < 2 1 Max.Value 1.0 ug/L
8 10/7/2021 < 2 1 Max.Pred Cw 1.1 ug/L
9 1/6/2022 < 2 1
10 4/7/2022 < 2 1
11 7/7/2022 < 2 1
12 10/6/2022 < 2 1
13 1/5/2023 < 2 1
14 4/6/2023 < 2 1
15 7/5/2023 < 2 1
16 10/5/2023 < 2 1
17 1/4/2024 < 2 1
18 3/7/2024 < 1 0.5
19 4/4/2024 < 1 0.5
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to totalmetals_nodetects_limiteddefaults_full pred_2024_5_24,data
-2- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par04 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par10 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Cadmium Values"then"COPY" Chromium,Total Values"then"COPY"
.Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/9/2020 < 0.5 0.25 Std Dev. 0.0631 1 1/9/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.6306
2 4/9/2020 < 0.5 0.25 Mean 0.2289 2 4/9/2020 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.2895
3 7/9/2020 < 0.5 0.25 C.V. 0.2754 3 7/9/2020 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.2754
4 10/8/2020 < 0.5 0.25 n 19 4 10/8/2020 < 5 2.5 n 19
5 1/7/2021 < 0.5 0.25 5 1/7/2021 < 5 2.5
6 4/8/2021 < 0.5 0.25 Mult Factor= 1.17 6 4/8/2021 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.17
7 7/8/2021 < 0.5 0.25 Max.Value 0.250 ug/L 7 7/8/2021 < 5 2.5 Max.Value 2.5 pg/L
8 10/7/2021 < 0.5 0.25 Max.Fred Cw 0.293 ug/L 8 10/7/2021 < 5 2.5 Max.Fred Cw 2.9 pg/L
9 1/6/2022 < 0.5 0.25 9 1/6/2022 < 5 2.5
10 4/7/2022 < 0.5 0.25 10 4/7/2022 < 5 2.5
11 7/7/2022 < 0.5 0.25 11 7/7/2022 < 5 2.5
12 10/6/2022 < 0.5 0.25 12 10/6/2022 < 5 2.5
13 1/5/2023 < 0.5 0.25 13 1/5/2023 < 5 2.5
14 4/6/2023 < 0.5 0.25 14 4/6/2023 < 5 2.5
15 7/5/2023 < 0.5 0.25 15 7/5/2023 < 5 2.5
16 10/5/2023 < 0.5 0.25 16 10/5/2023 < 5 2.5
17 1/4/2024 < 0.5 0.25 17 1/4/2024 < 5 2.5
18 3/7/2024 < 0.1 0.05 18 3/7/2024 < 1 0.5
19 4/4/2024 < 0.1 0.05 19 4/4/2024 < 1 0.5
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total metals_nodetects_limiteddefau Its_full pred_2024524,data
-3- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Pall Use"PASTE SPECIAL Paf12 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Copper Values"then"COPY" Cyanide Values"then"COPY"
pp .Maximum data y .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/9/2020 14 14 Std Dev. 4.2474 1 1/9/2020 13 13 Std Dev. 4.9405
2 4/9/2020 7.9 7.9 Mean 9.3474 2 4/9/2020 < 10 5 Mean 8.06
3 7/9/2020 14 14 C.V. 0.4544 3 7/9/2020 22 22 C.V. 0.6133
4 10/8/2020 16 16 n 19 4 10/8/2020 11 11 n 18
5 1/7/2021 18 18 5 1/7/2021 < 10 5
6 4/8/2021 10 10 Mult Factor= 1.29 6 4/8/2021 13 13 Mult Factor= 1.42
7 7/8/2021 7.8 7.8 Max.Value 18.00 ug/L 7 7/8/2021 < 10 5 Max.Value 22.0 ug/L
8 10/7/2021 12 12 Max.Fred Cw 23.22 ug/L 8 10/7/2021 12 12 Max.Fred Cw 31.2 ug/L
9 1/6/2022 8 8 9 1/6/2022 < 10 5
10 4/7/2022 11 11 10 4/7/2022 14 14
11 7/7/2022 3.3 3.3 11 7/7/2022 8 5
12 10/6/2022 8.7 8.7 12 10/6/2022 < 10 5
13 1/5/2023 5.1 5.1 13 1/5/2023 < 10 5
14 4/6/2023 11 11 14 4/6/2023 < 10 5
15 7/5/2023 3.6 3.6 15 7/5/2023 < 10 5
16 10/5/2023 7.3 7.3 16 10/5/2023 < 10 5
17 1/4/2024 11 11 17 1/4/2024 < 10 5
18 3/7/2024 4.7 4.7 18 4/4/2024 8 5
19 4/4/2024 4.2 4.2 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total metals_nodetects_limiteddefau Its_full pred_2024524,data
-4- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par14 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par16 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Lead Values"then"COPY" Molybdenum Values"then"COPY"
.Maximum data .Maximum data
points=58 points=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 1/9/2020 < 2 1 Std Dev. 0.1577 1 1/9/2020 < 10 5 Std Dev. 1.4759
2 4/9/2020 < 2 1 Mean 0.9474 2 4/9/2020 < 10 5 Mean 4.4056
3 7/9/2020 < 2 1 C.V. 0.1664 3 7/9/2020 < 10 5 C.V. 0.3350
4 10/8/2020 < 2 1 n 19 4 10/8/2020 < 10 5 n 18
5 1/7/2021 < 2 1 5 1/7/2021 < 10 5
6 4/8/2021 < 2 1 Mult Factor= 1.10 6 4/8/2021 < 10 5 Mult Factor= 1.23
7 7/8/2021 < 2 1 Max.Value 1.000 ug/L 7 7/8/2021 3.3 3.3 Max.Value 5.0 ug/L
8 10/7/2021 < 2 1 Max.Fred Cw 1.100 ug/L 8 10/7/2021 < 10 5 Max.Fred Cw 6.2 ug/L
9 1/6/2022 < 2 1 9 1/6/2022 < 10 5
10 4/7/2022 < 2 1 10 4/7/2022 < 10 5
11 7/7/2022 < 2 1 11 7/7/2022 < 10 5
12 10/6/2022 < 2 1 12 10/6/2022 < 10 5
13 1/5/2023 < 2 1 13 1/5/2023 < 10 5
14 4/6/2023 < 2 1 14 4/6/2023 < 10 5
15 7/5/2023 < 2 1 15 7/5/2023 < 10 5
16 10/5/2023 < 2 1 16 10/5/2023 < 10 5
17 1/4/2024 < 2 1 17 3/7/2024 < 1 0.5
18 3/7/2024 < 1 0.5 18 4/4/2024 < 1 0.5
19 4/4/2024 < 1 0.5 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total metals_nodetects_limiteddefau Its_full pred_2024524,data
-5- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par17&Par18 Par19 Use"PASTE
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Values"then"COPY" SPECIAL-Values"
Nickel .Maximum data Selenium then"COPY".
points=58 Maximum data
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results points=58
1 1/9/2020 2.4 2.4 Std Dev. 0.7353 1 1/9/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.4730
2 4/9/2020 2.2 2.2 Mean 1.2211 2 4/9/2020 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.3421
3 7/9/2020 < 2 1 C.V. 0.6022 3 7/9/2020 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.2019
4 10/8/2020 < 2 1 n 19 4 10/8/2020 < 5 2.5 n 19
5 1/7/2021 < 2 1 5 1/7/2021 < 5 2.5
6 4/8/2021 < 2 1 Mult Factor= 1.39 6 4/8/2021 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor= 1.13
7 7/8/2021 < 2 1 Max.Value 3.6 pg/L 7 7/8/2021 < 5 2.5 Max.Value 2.5 ug/L
8 10/7/2021 3.6 3.6 Max.Fred Cw 5.0 pg/L 8 10/7/2021 < 5 2.5 Max.Fred Cw 2.8 ug/L
9 1/6/2022 < 2 1 9 1/6/2022 < 5 2.5
10 4/7/2022 < 2 1 10 4/7/2022 < 5 2.5
11 7/7/2022 < 2 1 11 7/7/2022 < 5 2.5
12 10/6/2022 < 2 1 12 10/6/2022 < 5 2.5
13 1/5/2023 < 2 1 13 1/5/2023 < 5 2.5
14 4/6/2023 < 2 1 14 4/6/2023 < 5 2.5
15 7/5/2023 < 2 1 15 7/5/2023 < 5 2.5
16 10/5/2023 < 2 1 16 10/5/2023 < 5 2.5
17 1/4/2024 < 2 1 17 1/4/2024 < 5 2.5
18 3/7/2024 < 1 0.5 18 3/7/2024 < 2 1
19 4/4/2024 < 1 0.5 19 4/4/2024 < 2 1
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total metals_nodetects_limiteddefau Its_full pred_2024524,data
-6- 8/16/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par20 Par21 Use"PASTE
Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Values"then"COPY" SPECIAL-Values"
Silver .Maximum data Zinc then"COPY".
points=58 Maximum data
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results points=58
1 1/9/2020 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0946 1 1/9/2020 110 110 Std Dev. 24.3699
2 4/9/2020 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.4684 2 4/9/2020 84 64 Mean 64.6737
3 7/9/2020 < 1 0.5 C.V. 0.2019 3 7/9/2020 71 71 C.V. 0.3768
4 10/8/2020 < 1 0.5 n 19 4 10/8/2020 59 59 n 19
5 1/7/2021 < 1 0.5 5 1/7/2021 120 120
6 4/8/2021 < 1 0.5 Mult Factor= 1.13 6 4/8/2021 68 68 Mult Factor= 1.24
7 7/8/2021 < 1 0.5 Max.Value 0.500 ug/L 7 7/8/2021 38 38 Max.Value 120.0 ug/L
8 10/7/2021 < 1 0.5 Max.Fred Cw 0.565 ug/L 8 10/7/2021 60 60 Max.Fred Cw 148.8 ug/L
9 1/6/2022 < 1 0.5 9 1/6/2022 90 90
10 4/7/2022 < 1 0.5 10 4/7/2022 79 79
11 7/7/2022 < 1 0.5 11 7/7/2022 43 43
12 10/6/2022 < 1 0.5 12 10/6/2022 68 68
13 1/5/2023 < 1 0.5 13 1/5/2023 61 61
14 4/6/2023 < 1 0.5 14 4/6/2023 66 66
15 7/5/2023 < 1 0.5 15 7/5/2023 49 49
16 10/5/2023 < 1 0.5 16 10/5/2023 62 62
17 1/4/2024 < 1 0.5 17 1/4/2024 10 10
18 3/7/2024 < 0.4 0.2 18 3/7/2024 54.8 54.8
19 4/4/2024 < 0.4 0.2 19 4/4/2024 56 56
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to total metals_nodetects_limiteddefau Its_full pred_2024524,data
-7- 8/16/2024

Belmont WWTP - Outfall 001
NCO021181 Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 5 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw(MGD)= 5.0000 WWTP/WTP Class: IV COMBINED HARDNESS(m2/L)
1Q10S(cfs)= 77.57 IWC% @ 1Q10S = 9.083450539 Acute=25 mg/L
7Q10S(cfs)= 95.00 IWC% @ 7Q10S= 7.542579075 Chronic=25 mg/L
7Q10W(cfs)= 95.00 IWC%@ 7Q10W= 7.542579075
30Q2(cfs)= 95.00 IWC%@ 30Q2= 7.542579075
Avg.Stream Flow,QA(cfs)= 90.00 IW%C @ QA= 7.928388747
Receiving Stream: Catwba River HUC 03050101 Stream Class:WS-IV,CA,B
PARAMETER NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA J F REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE Chronic Appli d Acute a D n #Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
StandAcute(FW): 3,743.1
Arsenic C 150 FW(7Q10s) 340 ug/L _ _ _ _ _
- - --------------------------19 0 1.1 Chronic(FW)--—1
Max MDL=2
Arsenic C 10 RH/WS(Qavg) ug/L NO DETECTS Chro_nic(HH)_ 126.1 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Max MDL=2 Monitoring required
Acute: 715.59
Beryllium NC 6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65 ug/L 0 0 N/A -Chronic:
— ronic: -----86__18--- ---------------------------
Acute: 21.371
Cadmium NC 1.0015 TR(7Q10s) 1.9412 ug/L 19 0 0.293
Chronic: 13.278 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
NO DETECTS Max MDL=0.5 Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides NC 230 FW(7Q10s) mg/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: ----3,049.4-- ---------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds NC 1 A(30Q2) ug/L 0 0 N/A _ _
Chronic: -----13.3 --- ---------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds NC 300 A(30Q2) ug/L 0 0 N/A
--Chronic: ----3,977.4-- ---------------------------
Acute: 9,964.1
Chromium III NC 117.7325 FW(7Q10s) 905.0818 µg/L 0 0 N/A _ _ _ --- _-_
-- ------- -----------------Chronic: —1
,560.9
Acute: 176.1
Chromium VI NC 11 FW(7Q10s) 16 µg/L 0 0 N/A _ _
Chronic: -----145.8--- ---------------------------
Chromium,Total NC µg/L 19 0 2.9 Max reported value=2.5
NO DETECTS Max MDL=5
Acute: 115.29
Copper NC 7.8806 FW(7Q10s) 10.4720 ug/L 19 19 23.22
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to totalmetals_nodetects_limiteddefaults_full pred_2024 5_24,rpa
Page 1 of 3 8/16/2024

Belmont WWTP - Outfall 001
NCO021181 Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Qw_ _= 5_ M_G_D
Chronic: 104.48 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 242.2
Cyanide NC 5 FW(7Q10s) 22 10 ug/L 18 8 31.2 Ch_ _ron_
ic: 66.3 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride INC 1800 FW(7Q10s) ug/L 0 0 N/A -Chronic:
— ronic: — 23,864.5 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Acute: 831.040
Lead NC 2.9416 FW(7Q10s) 75.4871 ug/L 19 0 1.100
Chronic: 39.000 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
NO DETECTS Max MDL=2 Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury INC 12 FW(7Q10s) 0.5 ng/L 0 0 N/A -Chronic:
— ronic: -----159.1--- ---------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum NC 2000 HH(7Q10s) ug/L 18 1 6.2 _ _
Chronic: 26,516.1 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute(FW): 3,690.3
Nickel NC 37.2313 FW(7Q10s) 335.2087 µg/L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
19 3 5.0 Chronic(FW) 493.6
No value>_Allow_a_bl_e_Cw----------------------------------
Nickel NC 25.0000 WS(7Q10s) µg/L Chronic(WS) 331.5 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 616.5
Selenium INC 3.1 FW(7Q10s) 56 ug/L 19 0 2.8 ------------------------------------------------
Chronic: 41.1 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
NO DETECTS Max MDL=5 Monitoring required
Acute: 3.263
Silver NC 0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.2964 ug/L 19 0 0.565 _ _ _
Chronic: 0.795 All non-detects<1 ug/I or<0.4 ug/I-No monitoring
NO DETECTS Max MDL=1 is required
Acute: 1,383.9
Zinc INC 126.7335 FW(7Q10s) 125.7052 ug/L 19 19 148.8
Chronic: 1,680.2 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute:
0 0 N/A
Chronic: ----------- ---------------------------
Acute:
0 0 N/A _ _ _
Chronic:-----------------------------------------
Acute:
0 0 N/A _ _ _ _
Chronic: ---------- --------------------------
Acute:
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to totalmetals_nodetects_limiteddefaults_full pred_2024 5_24,rpa
Page 2 of 3 8/16/2024

Belmont WWTP I Outfall 001
NCO021181 Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 5 MGD
0 0 N/A
--Chronic: ---------------------------
copy 9595 Final FW RPA w_upstream avg data column_diss to totalmetals_nodetects_limiteddefaults_full pred_2024_5_24,rpa
Page 3 of 3 8/16/2024

Permit No. NCO021181
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards-Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard(WQS)Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission(EMC)on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6,2016,with some exceptions. Therefore,metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6,2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards- as
approved.
Table 1.NC Dissolved Metals Water Q ality Standards/A uatic Life Protection
Parameter Acute FW, µg/l Chronic FW, µg/1 Acute SW, µg/l Chronic SW, µg/1
(Dissolved) (Dissolved) (Dissolved) (Dissolved)
Arsenic 340 150 69 36
Beryllium 65 6.5 --- ---
Cadmium Calculation Calculation 40 8.8
Chromium III Calculation Calculation --- ---
Chromium VI 16 11 1100 50
Copper Calculation Calculation 4.8 3.1
Lead Calculation Calculation 210 8.1
Nickel Calculation Calculation 74 8.2
Silver Calculation 0.06 1.9 0.1
Zinc Calculation Calculation 90 81
Table 1 Notes:
1. FW=Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
2. Calculation=Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
213.0200(e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/l for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2.Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio(WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph(11)(d)
Metal NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium,Acute WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^10.9789 [In hardness]-3.4431
Cadmium,Acute Trout waters WER*11.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9789[ln hardness]-3.866}
Cadmium,Chronic WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.7977[ln hardness]-3.909}
Chromium III,Acute WER*0.316 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}
Chromium III,Chronic WER*0.860 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}
Copper,Acute WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.7001
Copper,Chronic WER*0.960 e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}
Lead,Acute WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} •e^f 1.273[ln hardness]-1.4601
Lead,Chronic WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)) •ell{1.273[ln hardness]-4.705}
Nickel,Acute WER*0.998 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255}
Nickel,Chronic WER*0.997 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584}
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO021181
Silver,Acute WER*0.85 • e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.591
Silver,Chronic Not applicable
Zinc,Acute WER*0.978 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.8841
Zinc,Chronic WER*0.986 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.8841
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness-dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness-based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream(upstream)hardness
and so must be calculated case-by-case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge-specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal(more on that
below),but it is also possible to consider case-specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WQBELs for Hardness-Dependent Metals -Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations,based on applicable
standards and the critical low-flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value(chronic or acute),the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard,which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present(i.e. consistently below
detection level),then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
1. To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness-dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q 10(the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1Q10 using the formula 1Q10=0.843 (s7Q10, cfs)0.99'
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site-specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness-dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge,the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream)hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's,Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values,upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available,the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L(CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L,respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness-dependent metal showing reasonable
potential,the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site-specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO021181
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
_(Permitted Flow, cfs *Avg. Effluent Hardness,mg2)+(s7Q 10, cfs *Avg.Upstream Hardness,mg2)
(Permitted Flow, cfs+s7Q10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the IQ 10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal,using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients(DPCs)or site-specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the"Fraction Dissolved"converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in-stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion(EPA 823-B-96-007, June 1996)and the
equation:
Cdiss - 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [ss(I+a)] [10-6] }
Where:
ss=in-stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1],minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a=constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness-dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient(or
site-specific translator)to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases,where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist(ie. silver),the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals.For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca=(s7Q 10+Qw) (Cwgs)-s7Q10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca=allowable effluent concentration(µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs=NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria(µg/L or mg/L)
Cb=background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw=permitted effluent flow(cfs,match s7Q 10)
s7Q 10=summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens(cfs)
*Discussions are on-going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
1 Q 10=used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0021181
QA=used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2=used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application(40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations,the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit(Total allowable
concentration)is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate,permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10,2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
8. The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure,total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases,the projected maximum concentration(95th%) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling,upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness-dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter Value Comments(Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness (mg/L) 66.5 Effluent pollutant scans—2018,
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)] 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023
Average Upstream Hardness(mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)] 18.38 Default value
7Q10 summer(cfs) 95 Previous Fact Sheet
1Q10(cfs) 77.57 RPA calculation
Permitted Flow(MGD) 5 Previous permit/Fact Sheet
Date: _August 16,2024
Permit Writer: Urva Patel
Page 4 of 4

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: Belmont WWTP
PermitNo. NC0021181
Prepared By: Urva Patel
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 5
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 95
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 95
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1) Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS) 95 s7Q10 (CFS) 95
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 5
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 7.75 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 7.75
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1) 0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 7.54 IWC (%) 7.54
Allowable Conc. (ug/1) 225 Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 10.6
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform w7Q10 (CFS) 95
Monthly Average Limit: 2001100ml DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 5
(If DF >331; Monitor) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 7.75
(If DF<331; Limit) STREAM STD (MG/L) 1.8
Dilution Factor(DF) 13.26 Upstream Bkgd (mg/1) 0.22
IWC (%) 7.54
Allowable Conc. (mg/1) 21.2
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals)
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)

NCO021181 Belmont WWTP 8/16/2024
BOD monthly removal rate TSS monthly removal rate
Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%)
December-19 99.07 June-22 97.56 December-19 97.11 June-22 95.85
January-20 98.53 July-22 98.23 January-20 97.53 July-22 97.16
February-20 98.48 August-22 98.12 February-20 96.23 August-22 95.09
March-20 98.31 September-22 98.86 March-20 96.58 September-22 98.37
April-20 98.05 October-22 98.09 April-20 93.92 October-22 95.87
May-20 97.65 November-22 97.29 May-20 94.40 November-22 94.51
June-20 99.22 December-22 97.49 June-20 97.73 December-22 95.34
July-20 98.90 January-23 95.03 July-20 95.06 January-23 93.15
August-20 98.54 February-23 94.20 August-20 93.26 February-23 92.87
September-20 98.93 March-23 88.98 September-20 94.70 March-23 87.94
October-20 97.98 April-23 90.78 October-20 96.16 April-23 87.93
November-20 98.34 May-23 88.94 November-20 96.32 May-23 82.05
December-20 97.76 June-23 89.92 December-20 95.68 June-23 77.39
January-21 98.00 July-23 96.14 January-21 94.30 July-23 95.60
February-21 98.84 August-23 97.44 February-21 0.00 August-23 95.22
March-21 97.96 September-23 95.94 March-21 94.19 September-23 95.85
April-21 98.97 October-23 98.83 April-21 97.22 October-23 97.49
May-21 97.32 November-23 97.49 May-21 89.71 November-23 90.79
June-21 98.71 December-23 98.28 June-21 97.07 December-23 95.80
July-21 98.83 January-24 94.63 July-21 95.97 January-24 93.92
August-21 99.07 February-24 97.28 August-21 96.75 February-24 95.31
September-21 99.17 March-24 96.92 September-21 96.21 March-24 92.70
October-21 99.09 April-24 95.36 October-21 96.89 April-24 93.54
November-21 98.43 May-24 November-21 96.78 May-24
December-21 98.29 June-24 December-21 96.76 June-24
January-22 96.84 July-24 January-22 87.57 July-24
February-22 98.47 August-24 February-22 96.50 August-24
March-22 99.26 September-24 March-22 98.33 September-24
April-22 98.18 October-24 April-22 97.86 October-24
May-22 98.58 November-24 May-22 98.00 November-24

Overall BOD removal rate 97.27 I Overall TSSD removal rate 92.61

8/16/24 WQS = 12 ng/L MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION V:2013-6
Facility Name
Belmont WWTP/ NC0021181 No Limit Required
/Permit No.
MMP Required
Total Mercury 1631E PQL=0.5 ng/L 7Q10s = 95.000 cfs WQBEL= 159.10 ng/L
Date Modifier Data Entry Value Permitted Flow= 5.000 47 ng/L
1/6/20 2.1 2.1
4/6/20 2.51 2.51
7/6/20 2.07 2.07
10/5/20 2.98 2.98 2.4 ng/L-Annual Average for 2020
1/4/21 1.9 1.9
4/5/21 1.66 1.66
5/6/21 < 0.0002 0.5
7/12/21 4.565 4.565
10/4/21 2.52 2.52 2.2 ng/L-Annual Average for 2021
1/3/22 2.5 2.5
4/4/22 0.56 0.56
7/5/22 0.432 0.5
10/3/22 0.889 0.889 1.1 ng/L-Annual Average for 2022
1/5/23 < 0.0002 0.5
2/9/23 < 0.0002 0.5
4/6/23 6.48 6.48
7/7/23 2.75 2.75
10/2/23 1.145 1.145 2.3 ng/L-Annual Average for 2023
4/1/24 1.09 1.09 1.1 ng/L-Annual Average for 2024

Belmont WWTP/NCO021181
Mercury Data Statistics (Method 1631E)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
#of Samples 4 5 4 5 1
Annual Average, ng/L 2.4 2.2 1.1 2.3 1.1
Maximum Value, ng/L 2.98 4.57 2.50 6.48 1.09
TBEL, ng/L 47
WQBEL, ng/L 159.1

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Belews Creek Steam Station(Duke Energ NCO024406/06A County: Stokes Region: WSRO Basin: ROA01 SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 4/1/2021 Chr Cer PF Lim:3.7% NonComp: 7Q10: 80 PF: IWC: Freq: M
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2020 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
2021 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
2022 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
2023 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
2024 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass - - - - - -
Belhaven(RO)WTP NCO086584/001 County: Beaufort Region: WARO Basin: TAR07 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 5/1/2021 Acu Mysid24hrPF Mo NonComp: 7Q10: 0.0 PF: 0.22 IWC: 100 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2020 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2021 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2022 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - -
2023 Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass NR - -
2024 Pass - - Pass - - - - - - - -
Belhaven WWTP NCO026492/001 County: Beaufort Region: WARD Basin: TAR07 Feb May Aug Nov SOC JOC:
Fthd24PF Begin: 5/1/2021 24hr p/f ac lim 90%ft + NonComp: Single 7Q10: Tidal PF: 1.0 IWC: NA Freq: Q
J F M A M I J A S O N D
2020 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2021 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2022 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2023 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2024 - Pass - - Pass - - - - - - -
Belmont WTP NCO077763/001 County: Gaston Region: MRO Basin: CTB34 Mar Jun Sep Dec SOC JOC: inactive status-tied
Ceri7dPF Begin: 6/1/2021 Chr Monit: 0.33% NonComp: 70.10: PF: IWC: Freq: Q into WWTP
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2020 - - H - - - - - - - - -
Belmont WWTP NCO021181/001 County: Gaston Region: MRO Basin: CTB34 Feb May Aug Nov SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 2/1/2006 chr lim:8% NonComp: Single 70,10: 95.0 PF: 5.0 IWC: 8.0 Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2020 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2021 - Pass - - Pass - - Pass - - Pass -
2022 - Pass - - Pass - - Fail >32 >32 Pass -
2023 - Pass >32(P) - >32(P)Pass - - >32(P)Pass - - >32(P)Pass -
2024 - Pass - - Pass - - - - - - -
Belvedere WTP Carolina Water Service NCO032221/001 County: Pender Region: WIRO Basin: CPF24 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
Mysd24PF Begin: 7/1/2012 Ac P/F Lim:90%Mys NonComp: 7Q10: Tidal PF: IWC: Freq: Q
J F M A M J J A S O N D
2020 H - - H - - H - - H - -
Leeend: P=Fathead minnow(Pimohales oromelas).H=No Flow(facility is active).s=Solit test between Certified Labs Page 9 of 113

STATE
ROY COOPER ~
Governor
ELIZABETH S.BISER
Secretary Q4AM
RICHARD E.ROGERS,JR. NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
March 4,2024
Jonathan Wilson,Public Works Director
City of Belmont
Post Office Box 431
Belmont,NC 28012
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Belmont WWTP
NPDES Permit No.NCO021181
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Enclosed is a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection(CEI)Report for the inspection conducted at the subject
facility on February 27,2024,by Mr. Wes Bell of this Office. This Office would like to thank all of the City's wastewater staff
for their cooperation and assistance that was provided throughout this inspection. Please advise the facility's
Operator-in-Responsible Charge(ORC)of our findings by forwarding a copy of the enclosed report.
Should you have any questions concerning this report,please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bell at(704)235-2192 or at
wes.bell(adeq.nc.gov.
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by: w •� __
L
27DF9ACF858043F...
Brandy Costner
Assistant Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Mooresville Regional Office
Division of Water Resources,NCDEQ
Enclosure:
Inspection Report
Cc: NPDES Program Files -Laserfiche
DRE --A North Carolina.Department of Environmental Quality l Division of Water Resources
Mooresville Regional Office 1 610 East Center Avenue,Suite 301 1 Mooresville.North Carolina 28115
Now=n�w
704.663.1699

United States Environmental Protection Agency Form Approved.
EPA Washington,D.C.20460 OMB No.2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 15 I 3 I NCO021181 111 121 24/02/27 I17 18 I r I 19 I G I 201 I
211IIIII IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII I IIIIII IIIIII �1IIII 166
Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ----------------------Reserved-------------------
67 2.0 701 Ld J I 71 I„ J I 72 I r Li I 73�I74 79 I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data J
Name and Location of Facility Inspected(For Industrial Users discharging to POTW,also include Entry Time/Date Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number) 09:30AM 24/02/27 19/12/01
Belmont WWTP
298 Parkdale Rd Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
Belmont NC 28012 01:45PM 24/02/27 24/06/30
Name(s)of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data
Tanya S Carter/ORC/704-825-3791/
Name,Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Miles Braswell,PO Box 431 Belmont NC 28012/City Manager/704-825-5586/
No
Section C:Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations&Maintenar Records/Reports
Self-Monitoring Progran 0 Sludge Handling Dispo: Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate
Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments(Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s)and Signature(s)of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Wes Bell D'Signed by: DWR/MRO WQ/704-235-2192/
�� 2j6& 3/4/2024
A61696DWCC3437...
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Brandy Costner DWR/MRO WQ/704-235-2185/ Docusignedby: 3/4/2024
EPA Form 3560-3(Rev 9-94)Previous editions are obsolete. 27DFMCFE58043F...
Page# 1

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type 1
31 NC0021181 I11 12I 24/02/27 117 18 ICI
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
On-site Representatives:
The following City of Belmont staff were in attendance during the inspection: Mr. Jonathan Wilson,
Ms. Tanya Carter and Mr. Anthony Bain.
Page# 2

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
#Are there any special conditions for the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The City implements a Division-approved Industrial Pretreatment Program.
The Division received the City's permit renewal package on 12/6/23.
The last compliance evaluation inspection at this facility was performed by DWR staff
on 2/28/23.
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the chain-of-custody complete? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Dates, times and location of sampling ■
Name of individual performing the sampling ■
Results of analysis and calibration ■
Dates of analysis ■
Name of person performing analyses ■
Transported COCs ■
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
(If the facility is = or> 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 3

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Comment: The records reviewed during the inspection were organized and well maintained.
Discharge Monitoring Reports (eDMRs)were reviewed for the period January 2023
through December 2023. Effluent TSS limit violations were reported from May through
July 2023. In addition, effluent fecal coliform violations were reported from January
through July 2023. Upstream and downstream fecal coliform, conductivity, dissolved
oxygen and temperature monitoring violations were reported in September 2023. The
Division has previously addressed these violations through the issuances of either a
NOV or NOV/civil penalty assessment. The units of measurement of the quarterly
metals results will be corrected and the applicable eDMRs will be revised/resubmitted
starting January 2022.
Laboratory Yes No NA NE
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the facility using a contract lab? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
degrees Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Comment: Influent and effluent analyses (including field) are performed by Pace Analytical
Services.
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected above side streams? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The subject permit requires influent composite BOD and TSS samples.
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 4

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
representative)?
Comment: The subject permit requires composite and grab effluent samples.
Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
and sampling location)?
Comment:
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment: The wastewater treatment facility appeared to be adequately treating wastewater at the
time of the inspection. In-depth operation and maintenance records (including process
control measurements)were being performed and documented on-site.
The City contracted a company last year to reduce the solids inventory (via dewatering
and landfill disposal) at the WWTP. Additional dewaterinq to reduce the solids
inventory will be initiated within the near future.
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual ❑
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the unit in good condition? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual ❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 5

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Is the grit free of excessive odor? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance? N ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Screenings and grit are disposed at a permitted landfill.
Chemical Feed Yes No NA NE
Is containment adequate? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is storage adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are backup pumps available? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Is the site free of excessive leaking? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Sodium hydroxide is added (via gravity) into the influent waste stream prior to the
aeration basin. The sodium hydroxide tank is double-walled.
Aeration Basins Yes No NA NE
Mode of operation Ext. Air
Type of aeration system Surface
Is the basin free of dead spots? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are surface aerators and mixers operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the diffusers operational? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface? E ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/I) 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The City contracted a company in June 2023 to reduce the solids inventory in the
aeration basin. The contracted company used a belt press to dewater solids for
disposal at the CMS landfill. The City has re-hired the contracted company to reduce
the solids inventory due to limited storage capacity. The 30-minute settleabilty test
performed during the inspection revealed a high solids inventory (960 ml/L).
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are weirs level? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Is the site free of weir blockage? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is scum removal adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the drive unit operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately '/4 of the sidewall depth) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Comment: Both secondaries were operational and in service. The unlevel weirs did not create
short-circuiting conditions. The sludge blanket levels in the secondaries were
measured at seven and four feet.
Pumps-RAS-WAS Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are pumps operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Disinfection-Gas Yes No NA NE
Are cylinders secured adequately? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 Ibs of Chlorine (CAS No. ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
7782-50-5)?
If yes, then is there a Risk Management Plan on site? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000- - )
If yes, then when was the RMP last updated?
Comment: The accumulated sludge levels in the chlorine contact chamber were measured
between 3.5 ft. to 4 ft. The level of settleable solids should be kept at less than one
foot.
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ? Gas
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is storage appropriate for cylinders? ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 7

Permit: NCO021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
# Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Are the tablets the proper size and type? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Are tablet de-chlorinators operational? ❑ ❑ ❑
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Effluent Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the flow meter operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter? ❑ ❑ MEI
Comment: The flow meter is calibrated quarterly and was last calibrated on 1/1/24 by Experienced
Water Solutions, Inc.
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? ❑ ❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Comment: The effluent appeared clear with trace suspended solids and no foam. The effluent is
discharged into the receiving stream via submerged outfall.
Aerobic Digester Yes No NA NE
Is the capacity adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the mixing adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive foaming in the tank? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the odor acceptable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is tankage available for properly waste sludge? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Both aerobic digesters were operational and in service. Bio-solids are land applied by
a contract company under land application permit No. WQ0003281. Dewatered sludge
from the aeration basin is disposed at a permitted landfill.
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is automatically activated standby power available? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 8

Permit: NC0021181 Owner-Facility: Belmont WWTP
Inspection Date: 02/27/2024 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested under load? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The backup generator can power the entire plant with the exception of the blowers in
the aerobic digesters and three surface aerators in the aeration basin. The generator
is tested (automatically) under load weekly and serviced annually by City staff. The
City also participates in a Load Management program.
Page# 9

STATE
ROY COOPER ~
Governor
ELIZABETH S.BISER
Secretary Q4AM
RICHARD E.ROGERS,JR. NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
March 4,2024
Jonathan Wilson,Public Works Director
City of Belmont
Post Office Box 431
Belmont,North Carolina 28012
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Belmont
NPDES Permit No.NCO021181
Gaston County
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Enclosed is a copy of the Pretreatment Compliance Inspection(PCI)Report for the inspection of the City of Belmont's
Pretreatment Program on February 27,2024,by Mr.Wes Bell of this Office. Please advise the City's Pretreatment staff of our
findings by forwarding a copy of the enclosed report. This Office would also like to thank the City's Pretreatment staff for the
cooperation and assistance provided during the inspection.
Should you have any questions concerning this report,please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bell at(704)235-2192 or at
wes.bell(adeq.nc.gov.
Sincerely,
DocuSigned by:
C
27DF9ACF858043F...
Brandy Costner
Assistant Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Mooresville Regional Office
Division of Water Resources,NCDEQ
Enclosure:
Inspection Report
Cc: NPDES Program Files-Laserfiche
D_Of Q North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality l Division of Water Resources
Mooresville Regional Office 1 610 East Center Avenue,Suite 301 1 Mooresville.North Carolina 28115
Now=n�w
704.663.1699

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1. Control Authority(POTW)Name: City of Belmont
2. Control Authority Representative(s):Jonathan Wilson,Tanya Carter and Ric La Mere
3. Title(s):Public Works Director,Wastewater Superintendent-ORC,Pretreatment Coordinator
4. Last Inspection Date: 1/26/23 Inspection Type: ® PCI ❑ Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection and Program Info Sheet(s)? ®YES ❑NO
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑YES ®NO
Order Type,Number,Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑YES [—]NO ® NA
ICIS CODING
Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY
NCO021181 02/27/24
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users SIUs ? 2
8. Number of SIUs With No IUP,or With an Expired IUP 0
9. Number of SNs Not Inspected By POTW in the Last Calendar Year? 0
10.Number of SIUs Not Sampled By POTW in the Last Calendar Year? 0
11.Number of SNs In SNC For Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods 0
12.Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting During Either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods 0
13.Number of SNs in SNC with Pretreatment Schedule? 0
14.Number of SNs on Schedules? 0
15.Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users(CIUs)? 0
16.Number of CIUs in SNC? 0
POTW INTERVIEW
17. Since the Last PCI,has the POTW had any NPDES Limits Violations? ❑ YES ❑ NO
If Yes,What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed? See Comments
18. Since the Last PCI,has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial [:]YES ® NO
Discharge(Interference,Pass-Through,Blockage, Citizens' Complaints,Increased
Sludge Production,Etc.)?
If Yes,How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been in SNC for Limits or Reporting during SNC for Limits:None
either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods?Not Been Published for SNC for Reporting:None
Public Notice?(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC) Not Published: N/A
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders?For all SIUs on an
Order,Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division? N/A
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication?If Yes,Which ❑YES ®NO
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ®YES ❑NO
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ®YES ❑NO
24. Is LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ®YES ❑NO Is Table Adequate? ®YES ❑ NO
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ®YES ❑NO
26. If NO to 23 -26,list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to LTMP/STMP? ❑YES ®NO
NC DWR Pretreatment Compliance Inspection(PCI)Form Updated December 2016 Page 1

28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW
Program Element Last Submittal Received Last Approval Date Next Due,
Date In file? Date In file If Applicable
Headworks Analysis(HWA) 4/29/21 ®Yes❑ No 4/15/20 ®Yes❑ No In Review
Industrial Waste Survey IWS 7/8/20 ®Yes❑ No 10/12/20 ®Yes❑ No N/A
Sewer Use Ordinance(SUO) 5/20/13 ®Yes❑ No 5/28/13 ®Yes❑ No
Enforcement Response Plan(ERP) 11/5/19 ® Yes❑ No 2/5/20 ®Yes❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan(LTMP) 4/17/20 ® Yes❑ No 6/26/20 ®Yes❑ No
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT(IUP)FILE REVIEW
29. User Name 1.Spartan Dyers 2.US Cotton 3.
30. IUP Number 0009 0016
31. Does File Contain Current Permit? ®Yes ❑ No ®Yes ❑ NoI ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date 11/5/24 3/11/26
33. Categorical Standard Applied(I.E.40 CFR,Etc.)Or N/A 410.70 410.70
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior ®Yes ❑ No ®Yes ❑ No ❑Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year? I ®Yes ❑ No lZ Yes ❑ No ❑Yes ❑ No
36. a.Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan? a. ®Yes❑No a. ®Yes ❑No a. ❑Yes❑No
b.If No,is One Needed?(See Inspection Form from POTW) b. ❑Yes ❑No b. [-]Yes❑No b. []Yes []No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certification,Does File Contain a Toxic ❑Yes❑NoON/A ❑Yes❑NOON/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan(TOMP)?
38. a.Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division? a. ®Yes❑No a. ®Yes []No a. [-]Yes❑No
b.All Issues Resolved? b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Did the POTW Complete ®Yes ❑ No ❑Yes ® N/A ❑Yes ❑ No
its Sampling as Required by IUP,including flow?
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain-Of-Custody Forms? I ®Yes ❑ No ❑Yes ® N/A ❑Yes ❑ No
41a.During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Did the SIU Complete its ®Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑NoON/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required by IUP,including flow?
41b.During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Did SIU submit all reports ®Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No[D ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a.For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula(CWF),does ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b.For categorical IUs with Production based limits,does file include 0Yes0No[9 ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Did the POTW Identify ®Yes❑No❑NA ❑Yes❑NoON/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non-Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Did the POTW Identify ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑NOON/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Reporting Non-Compliance from SIU Sampling?
44. a.Was the POTW Notified by SIU(Within 24 Hours)of All Self- a.❑Yes❑No®N/A a.❑Yes❑No®N/A a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Monitoring Violations?
b.Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days? b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c.Did POTW resample within 30 days of knowledge of SIU limit c.❑Yes❑No®N/A c.❑Yes❑No®N/A c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
violations from the POTW sample event?
45. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Was the SIU in SNC? ❑Yes ® No 11 ❑Yes ® No 11 ❑Yes ❑ No
46. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period,Was Enforcement Taken ®Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
as Specified in the POTW's ERP(NOVs,Penalties,timing,etc.)?
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices? ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection? ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No®N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
49. a.Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders? a.❑Yes❑No®N/A a.❑Yes❑No®N/A a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.Is SIU in Compliance with Order? b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No®N/A b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This ❑Yes ® No ❑Yes ® No ❑Yes ❑ No
Requested Information For You?
NC DWR Pretreatment Compliance Inspection(PCI)Form Updated December 2016 Page 2

FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
7.The City has issued US Cotton an Industrial User Permit(IUP);however,the SIU has not initiated a discharge to date.
17. Effluent fecal coliform limit violations were reported from January through July 2023. In addition,effluent TSS limit violations were
reported from March 2023 through July 2023.These violations were attributed to an elevated solids inventory being maintained in the WWTP
due to challenges associated with the removal of solids(land application,etc.). The City contracted a company in June 2023 with a portable
belt press to lower the solids inventory via dewatering and landfill disposal. The WWTP returned to compliance in August 2023.
22.The City will revise the Long-Term Monitoring Plan(LTMP)to remove both the twice per year monitoring for uncontrollables and SIU
listings.
25. The City staff will need to revise and resubmit the April 2023 and any additional eDMRs to correct the units of measurement of all
applicable metals sampled during the LTMP sampling events.In addition,the quarterly effluent cyanide results(units of measurement)will need
to be revised(if applicable)starting with the January 2022 eDMR.
35.The City performed the SIU inspections on 12/8/23 (Spartan Dyers)and 8/17/23 (US Cotton).
39. The City performs monthly sampling in lieu of the SIU. The POTW contracts Pace Analytical Services to perform all LTMP and IUP
sampling and analyses.
46.The City issued Spartan Dyers a Notice of Violation(NOV)for an oil&grease limit violation in July 2023. Note:The NOV was not issued
within the timeframe listed in the Division-approved Enforcement Response Plan(ERP)due to staff changes.
SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
The City will update their LTMP to remove both the twice per year uncontrollable sampling and listing of SIUs. The City's Pretreatment staff
must ensure all enforcement actions(NOVs,etc.)are issued within the timeframes listed in the Division-approved ERP.The City staff must also
review and revise/resubmit all applicable eDMRs to ensure all LTMP and quarterly(cyanide)results have been properly reported starting with
the January 2022 eDMR.
The pretreatment records were organized and well maintained. Overall, the City's Industrial Pretreatment Program was being properly
implemented.
NOD: [—]YES ®NO
NOV: [—] YES ®NO
QNCR: ❑YES®NO
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory ® Marginal ❑ Unsatisfactory❑
rZ,
Signed by:
PCI COMPLETED BY:
B DATE: 3/4/2024
Wes Bell,Environmental Specialist II,DWR/WQROS,Mooresville Regional Office
DocuSigned by:
PCI REVIEWED BY: 5 C'"kt-M DATE: 3/4/2024
27DHACF858043F...
Brandy Costner,Assistant Regional Supervisor,DWR/WQROS,Mooresville Regional Office
NC DWR Pretreatment Compliance Inspection(PCI)Form Updated December 2016 Page 3

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 1 of 2
Permit: NCO021181 MRS Betweei 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: NPDES WW
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to NOV
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06-2022 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/06/22 5 X week ug/I 28 50 78.6 Daily Maximum Proceed to NOV
Exceeded
06-2022 001 Effluent Chlorine,Total Residual 06/09/22 5 X week ug/I 28 174.5 523.2 Daily Maximum Proceed to NOV
Exceeded
05-2020 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 05/02/20 5 X week mg/I 45 58.22 29.4 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
05-2020 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 05/16/20 5 X week mg/I 45 48.36 7.5 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
01-2021 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 01/09/21 5 X week mg/I 45 50.58 12.4 Weekly Average Proceed to NOV
Concentration Exceeded
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
09-2023 001 Downstream Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 09/30/23 3 X week #/100ml Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Broth,44.5 C
09-2023 001 Upstream Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 09/30/23 3 X week #/100ml Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Broth,44.5 C
09-2023 001 Downstream Conductivity 09/30/23 3 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
09-2023 001 Upstream Conductivity 09/30/23 3 X week umhos/cm Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
02-2021 001 Effluent Nitrite plus Nitrate Total(as 02/06/21 Weekly mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
N)
02-2021 001 Effluent Nitrogen, Kjeldahl,Total(as 02/06/21 Weekly mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
N)
02-2021 001 Effluent Nitrogen,Total- 02/06/21 Weekly mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Concentration
09-2023 001 Downstream Oxygen, Dissolved(DO) 09/30/23 3 X week mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
09-2023 001 Upstream Oxygen, Dissolved(DO) 09/30/23 3 X week mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 2 of 2
Permit: NCO021181 MRS Betweel 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: NPDES WW--'W
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to NOV
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED
REPORT OUTFACE LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
02-2021 001 Effluent Phosphorus,Total(as P)- 02/06/21 Weekly mg/I Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Concentration
09-2023 001 Downstream Temperature,Water Deg. 09/30/23 3 X week deg c Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Centigrade
09-2023 001 Upstream Temperature,Water Deg. 09/30/23 3 X week deg c Frequency Violation Proceed to NOV
Centigrade
Other Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
08-2022 08/09/22 Aquatic toxicity permit Proceed to NOV
limit violation

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 1 of 1
Permit: NC002118 MRs Betweel 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category:NPDES WW
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to NOD
Major Minor: % qr
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
12-2020 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 12/26/20 5 X week mg/I 45 47.77 6.1 Weekly Average Proceed to NOD
Concentration Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 1 of 3
Permit: NCO021181 MRS Betweei 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: NPDES WW
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to Enforcement
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
01-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 01/21/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 616.63 54.2 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
02-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 02/04/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 413.75 3.4 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
02-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 02/11/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,153.47 188.4 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
02-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 02/18/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,467.63 266.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
02-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 02/28/23 5 X week #/100ml 200 469.32 134.7 Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
03-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 03/11/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 2,102.26 425.6 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
03-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 03/18/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,306.82 226.7 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
03-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 03/25/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 884.67 121.2 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
03-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 03/31/23 5 X week #/100ml 200 1,308.25 554.1 Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 04/01/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 2,419.6 504.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 04/08/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,352.04 238.0 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 04/15/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 2,419.6 504.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 04/22/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 692.74 73.2 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 04/30/23 5 X week #/100m1 200 461.46 130.7 Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
05-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 05/06/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 566.4 41.6 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 2 of 3
Permit: NCO021181 MRS Betweel 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: NPDES WW
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to Enforcement
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
05-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 05/27/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 832.92 108.2 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
05-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 05/31/23 5 X week #/100ml 200 423.86 111.9 Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 06/03/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 2,419.6 504.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 06/10/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,566.82 291.7 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 06/17/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 2,419.6 504.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 06/24/23 5 X week #/100ml 400 1,391.67 247.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 06/30/23 5 X week #/100ml 200 1,699.89 749.9 Monthly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
07-2023 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 07/01/23 5 X week #/100m1 400 1,374.24 243.6 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2024 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 01/06/24 5 X week #/100ml 400 410.27 2.6 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
01-2024 001 Effluent Coliform, Fecal MF, MFC 01/13/24 5 X week #/100m1 400 1,063.54 165.9 Weekly Geometric Mean Proceed to
Broth,44.5 C Exceeded Enforcement Case
03-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 03/31/23 5 X week mg/I 30 30.83 2.8 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
04-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 04/08/23 5 X week mg/I 45 52 15.6 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
05-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 05/27/23 5 X week mg/I 45 78.8 75.1 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
05-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 05/31/23 5 X week mg/I 30 38.64 28.8 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 06/10/23 5 X week mg/I 45 47.8 6.2 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 06/17/23 5 X week mg/I 45 51.6 14.7 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case

MONITORING REPORT(MR)VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 07/24/24 Page 3 of 3
Permit: NCO021181 MRS Betweel 7 - 2019 and 6 - 2024 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: NPDES WW
Vr-
Facility Name:% Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin:% Violation Action: Proceed to Enforcement
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO021181 FACILITY: City of Belmont-Belmont WWTP COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville
Limit Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFALL LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
06-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 06/24/23 5 X week mg/I 45 76 68.9 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
06-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 06/30/23 5 X week mg/I 30 56.32 87.7 Monthly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case
07-2023 001 Effluent Solids,Total Suspended- 07/01/23 5 X week mg/I 45 57.8 28.4 Weekly Average Proceed to
Concentration Exceeded Enforcement Case

City of Belmont Wastewater Treatment Plant
MODEL MUNICIPAL MERCURY MINIMIZATION PLAN
[11/l/2023]
SECTION I-PURPOSE
The purpose of this Mercury Minimization Plan("MMP")is to describe best management practices
through which City of Belmont Wastewater Treatment Plant(WWTP)will seek to reduce the amount
of mercury discharged into its system and,ultimately,to the environment. The MMP compiles mercury
reduction-related efforts to-date and potential future action items. It is designed to be a working
document to help guide City of Belmont in its efforts to control mercury loadings discharged into its
Publicly-Owned Treatment Works(POTW)by users of the sewer system. Such a reduction in loadings to
the sewer system should translate to a reduction in the amount of mercury which is discharged from the
treatment plant. The management practices summarized below may also help control some of the
mercury reaching our storm sewer system as well.
SECTION II—FACILITY DESCRIPTION
The City of Belmont operates a publicly owned treatment works(POTW),including a collection system
and wastewater treatment plant(WWTP),that serves the City of Belmont,North Carolina.
The City of Belmont's WWTP is permitted to treat 5.0 MGD and breaks down/removes organic waste
through an Activated Sludge process. Our facility utilizes a three-step removal process intruding
preliminary treatment, secondary treatment,and sludge handling systems.
Our preliminary treatment begins when the wastewater enters our plant from various locations
throughout the City including both Residential and Industrial Users. The wastewater is received from the
collection system and is screened through an automatic bar-screen and grit chamber at the WWTP
Influent. The purpose of our preliminary treatment is to remove debris and inorganic matter from the
wastewater.
Secondary treatment is composed of two parts: biological nutrient removal and secondary clarification.
Biological nutrient removal begins when the wastewater travels from the preliminary treatment to the
aeration basins.Wastewater enters the aeration basins and microorganisms breakdown biodegradable
organic matter as the wastewater flows through the aeration basins.Aerators are used to sustain an
adequate level of oxygen for the survival of microorganisms as well to mix the wastewater. This process
aids in BOD,COD,Phosphorus,and Ammonia removals. Secondary clarification occurs when the water
travels from the aeration basins and splits off into one of two secondary clarifiers where settling occurs.
The wastewater then leaves the secondary clarifiers via v-notch weirs and travels to the chlorine contact
chambers for disinfection.After disinfection,the water is de-chlorinated and then discharged into the
Catawba River.
The settled solids either return to the aeration basins or the solids go to the aerobic digesters/sludge
holding tank for sludge removal. The aerobic digesters further break down organic material before the
solids are trucked offsite to be disposed of.

Most municipal treatment plants are not designed to remove mercury and it is exceedingly expensive to
do so to very low levels. Incidental mercury removal occurs through typical municipal treatment with
trace levels of mercury(and other metals)ending up in solids removed from the raw wastewater.
Mercury is not used in the treatment processes at the WWTP. Mercury may be introduced into the sewer
system through a variety of sources,such as from industrial users, laboratories, and other businesses.
Residual deposits of mercury are also possible in the sewer system from historic practices. Finally,trace
amounts from household products and atmospheric deposition(both wet and dry)contribute to sewer
system mercury loadings.
While there is typically some mercury contributed to public sewer systems statewide, it is usually in
minute quantities and comprises a tiny portion of the already insignificant statewide loading for all point
sources-just two percent of the annual mercury loadings to all State waters.
SECTION III—PROGRAM PLAN
A. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL NON-DOMESTIC SOURCES CONTRIBUTING
MERCURY TO THE POTW
Within 24 months from the NPDES required 180-day period for development of an MMP, ,the City of
Belmont will evaluate available information to assess the potential for non-domestic users of the sewer
system to contribute mercury to the system. The information to be reviewed may include: (1)POTW
influent and effluent mercury data and trends; (2)industrial user permits and associated mercury
monitoring data; (3)Toxics Release Inventory(TRI); (4)state hazardous site registry and the National
Priority List relating to mercury contamination;and(5)historical records of industrial sites which ffmy
have contributed mercury loadings to the sewer system.
The City of Belmont will also survey and evaluate the following common sources of mercury in its
service area: (1)dentist offices; (2)hospitals; (3)laboratories; (4)auto recyclers;and(5)other potential
sources of mercury based on existing information.
The City of Belmont will request that industrial users review mercury concentrations in high-volume
process chemicals and demonstrate that the mercury concentrations are below industry average. The City
of Belmont will request that alternative sources for chemicals be explored if the mercury levels are
determined to be significantly higher than would normally be expected.
The evaluation of potential non-domestic sources of mercury to the sewer system will be updated every
five years,as warranted by prior sampling results and any additional new potentially significant sources to
the system.
B. ADDITIONAL CONTROL MEASURES
This MMP identifies reasonable and cost-effective control measures to minimize mercury being
discharged into the POTW. Below is a listing of initial BMPs for this POTW.
Pollution Prevention
Substances used at the WWTP will be evaluated to determine if they contain mercury or mercury-based
compounds. Any such chemicals will be evaluated for substitution with non-mercury-containing
substances.

Housekeeping,Spill Control and Collection,and Education
The City of Belmont will develop procedures to minimize the possibility of any spill or release at the
WWTP involving mercury containing substances. The City of Belmont will add mercury identification
and proper disposal to ongoing and future operator training procedures.
Public Outreach
The City of Belmont will make available educational information regarding sources of household
mercury and appropriate use/disposal practices. This information may be posted on the City of Behnont
WWTP's website and copies will be made available at the City of Belmont's WWTP. The availability of
this information will be highlighted in the City of Belmont's bi-annual outreach to the City of Belmont's
customers. The City of Belmont will also facilitate public awareness regarding community collection
points for mercury-containing products from residents/customers for proper disposal. Periodic reminders
of such collection programs will be provided as part of City of Belmont's ongoing public outreach.
C. TRACKING AND MONITORING
In order to assess the implementation of the control measures,the Belmont WWTP proposes to undertake
the following evaluations beginning after the first full year that this MMP is implemented:
1. Survey annually at least ten percent(10%)of any non-domestic users identified as
possible significant sources of mercury to the POTW;
2. Track the implementation of the programs outlined above;
3. Monitor influent mercury at least annually. Require significant non-domestic sources of
mercury to monitor periodically, as warranted; and
4. Measure effluent mercury as required by the NPDES permit.
These efforts will allow the Belmont WWTP to establish a baseline of influent and effluent mercury
levels to assist in identifying any trends in mercury contributions from domestic and non-domestic users
of the sewer system. This baseline will be tracked annually.
SECTION IV —IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTROL MEASURES
The City of Belmont monitors mercury levels on all industrial users. At this time,the City of Belmont
does not see a need for implementation of mercury limits for our industrial users.The pretreatment
department continues to monitor our influent mercury levels for potential elevated concentrations. The
City will remain vigilant towards environmental concerns with regards to increased mercury levels.
The Belmont WWTP will implement the control measures summarized in Section III over the permit term
and will update this MMP as warranted.
SECTION V- REPORTING

A summary of the MW activities will be submitted as part of the NPDE5 permit renewal process.

Patel, Urva P
From: Tanya Setzer <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 11:21 AM
To: Patel, Urva P
Cc: Jonathan Wilson
Subject: [External] RE:Additional info request for Belmont WWTP (NC0021181)
Attachments: Chemical-Addendum-to-NPDES-application 2024.xlsx; Chem Addendum - Supplemental
Datasheet 2024.xlsx
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
Attached is the additional information you requested. I have added the notes like discussed since we do
not do any additional sampling other than what is required by our permit and have already sent in with
the renewal.Also there have been no changes at the WWTP.
Thanks
Tanya
From: Patel, Urva P<Urva.Patel @deq.nc.gov>
Sent:Tuesday,August 13, 2024 9:34 AM
To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE:Additional info request for Belmont WWTP (NC0021181)
WARNING:This email originated from outside of the City of Belmont network.
Good morning Ms. Setzer,
This is follow-up email on email, sent on August 02, 2024.
Thankyou.
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.patel(a�deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center

Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
From: Patel, Urva P
Sent: Friday,August 2, 2024 3:09 PM
To: 'Tanya Setzer' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE:Additional info request for Belmont WWTP (NC0021181)
Hello Ms.Tanya,
As per our previous phone conversation:
A Chemical Addendum for any additional pollutants you may anticipate in the effluent (e.g., emerging contaminants 1,4-
Dioxane and PFAS class of chemicals). For the chemical addendum, I have attached two forms to complete: the
addendum proper is for those pollutants that have an EPA-approved method (e.g., 1,4-Dioxane), and a supplemental
spreadsheet for those that lack such a method (e.g., PFAS). More information can be found here:
https://www.deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/permitti ng/npdes-wastewater/npdes-permitting-
process/npdes-individual-permit-applications.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.patel(@deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
From: Patel, Urva P
Sent: Friday,August 2, 2024 2:19 PM
To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Subject:Additional info request for Belmont WWTP (NC0021181)
Good afternoon Ms.Tanya,
have couple of following requests:
• As required by Session Law 2018-5, Senate Bill 99, Section 13.1(r), every applicant shall now submit
documentation of any additional pollutants for which there are certified methods with the permit
application if their discharge is anticipated.The list of pollutants may be found in 40 CFR Part 136,which is
incorporated by reference. If there are additional pollutants with certified methods to be reported, please
submit the Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application table with your application and, if applicable, list
the selected certified analytical method used. If no additional sampling was conducted and/or there are no
additional pollutants to report, please note as much on the form itself. This requirement applies to all
NPDES facilities.The Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application will be required for any type of facility
with an NPDES permit, depending on whether those types of pollutants are found in your wastewater.
Please fill out, sign and submit the Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application.As you will probably see,
there isn't a signature block, but please sign anywhere on the form and that would be sufficient.
2

• Are there any changes in following list of components, operating at Belmont WWTP:
• Mechanical bar screen with bypass
• Caustic addition system
• Influent flow recorder with Parshall Flume Meter
• Influent composite sampler
• Mechanical grit removal system
• Dual aeration basins with mechanical aerators
• Dual secondary clarifiers
• RAS/WAS pumps
• Chlorine contact basin
• Dechlorination system
• Effluent flow recorder with Parshall Flume Meter
• Effluent composite sampler
• Dual aerobic sludge digestors
• Sludge holding tank with truck load out station
• Sludge drying beds
• Standby power generator
Thankyou.
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.Patel(cDdeg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
From:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday,August 2, 2024 9:31 AM
To: Patel, Urva P<Urva.Patel @deg.nc.gov>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
Attached is the DMR in the system. Those are times and not temps, I am not sure why that is coming up
on your end that way? If you need anything else, please let me know.
Thanks
Tanya Carter
From: Patel, Urva P<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday,August 1, 2024 5:36 PM
3

To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]6>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
WARNING:This email originated from outside of the City of Belmont network.
Hi Ms.Tanya,
Can you tell/send me Temperture on following dates, as you can see the values what I see in my database(below
screenshot)?
4

AutoSave • H 19 NCO021181 • Parameter Values Export-revised data • •. •
File Home Insert Page Layout Formulas Data Review View Automate Help Laserfiche
NE"I ARIAL 10 A^ Av - _ �J' c� Number
Paste V — — — p pp Conditic
Formattii
Clipboard ry; Font r Alignment r Number r
1306 - l 2023
I J K L Iv1
1 Year - Date Season - Comment Parameter ly F
297 2023 4/25,,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
298 2023 4/26,12023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
299 2023 4,2712023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
300 2023 4/28.2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
301 2023 5/11,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
302 2023 5/8:2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
303 2023 5/15:2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
304 2023 5/22:2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1 T
305 2023 5/30,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
306 2023 5/1/2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; 1 T
307 2023 5/8/2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
308 2023 5/15/2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
309 2023 5/22/2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
310 2023 5/30/2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1 T
311 2023 6/5.2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
312 2023 6/&2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
313 2023 6/8,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
314 2023 6/12,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
315 2023 6/13,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
316 2023 6/15.2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
317 2023 6/192023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
318 2023 6/20,,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
319 2023 6,22,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. �T
320 2023 6/2&2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
321 2023 6,27,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
322 2023 6/29,,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1T
323 2023 6/5.2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1 T
324 2023 6/&2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature. 1 T
325 2023 6/8,2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
326 2023 6/12.2023 Summer 00010 -Temperature; �T
197 9n?
Sheet1 Sheet3 O
Ready 3± of 24953 records found r,?Accessibility:Unavailable
0 Type here to search
Thank you.
Regards,
5

U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.patel(a)_deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
From:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday,August 1, 2024 11:45 AM
To: Patel, Urva P<U rva.Patel @deg.nc.Bov>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
You are welcome!
Hope you have a nice weekend!
From: Patel, Urva P<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday,August 1, 2024 11:44 AM
To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
WARNING:This email originated from outside of the City of Belmont network.
Thank you for quick response, Ms.Tanya!
Have a nice day!
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.patel(a)deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
6

From:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday,August 1, 2024 11:25 AM
To: Patel, Urva P<Urva.Patel @deg.nc.gov>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
Good morning!
Mytitle is the Wastewater Treatment Plant ORC/Superintendent and the person who signed should be
the City Manager (Miles Braswell).The signed copythat I have was signed on 11/29/2023.
Sincerely,
Tanya Carter
From: Patel, Urva P<[e-mail]>
Sent:Thursday,August 1, 2024 11:17 AM
To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
WARNING:This email originated from outside of the City of Belmont network.
Good morning,
Can you tell me your official title?
Please, provide name of the person who signed the permit renewal application, sent on December 6, 2024.
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.pate I(a)deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
From:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday,July 12, 2024 12:01 PM
To: Patel, Urva P<Urva.Patel @deg.nc.gov>
Subject: [External] RE: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
7

You don't often get email from [e-mail]. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
Good afternoon,
I just wanted to reach out to let you know I am pretty sure I have revised all the eDMR's you mentioned in
your email. Like we discussed yesterday the one with the temp 1200, on my end of the eDMR system that
was the sample time not temp result. I have checked over the Hg&Cn to make sure the units were
correct. I also checked the MO and as per your question about the <10 &<1.0, I contacted the lab on that
as well because the results were correct from the lab reports. He stated that sample <10 was diluted due
to matrix interferences, and the <1.0 did not have problems.
If I need to do anything else, please let me know. Hope you have a great weekend.
Thanks
Tanya
From: Patel, Urva P<Urva.Pate [e-mail]>
Sent:Tuesday,July 2, 2024 3:43 PM
To:Tanya Setzer<[e-mail]>
Subject: Belmont WWTP (NC0021181) DMR confirm and update...
WARNING:This email originated from outside of the City of Belmont network.
Good afternoon Ms. Carter
am review engineer for Belmont WWTP renewal permit application. During my review, I found following
discrepancies in the DMR(December 2019 to February 2024):
pH—700??
Temp—1200??
Cr—07.09.2020—Unit mg/1—sample grab?? 01.04.2024—50 mg/l real or mistake?
All Cn (Cyanide) data (DMR values)and their units??
Hg—Unit ng/or mg/l??confirm all data and their units
Mo—all data and their units- mainly 03.07.2024 and 04.04.2024 data—confirm
pH—700??
Temp—1200??
Please, address above issues and update DMR for December 2019 to February 2024.
Please, respond to this email by COB July 16, 2024.
Thankyou.
Regards,
U rva
Urva Patel
8

Environmental Engineer II
Division of Water Resources—Water Quality Permitting Section
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-707-3628
urva.patel(q)_deg.nc.gov (note new email address)
512 N. Salisbury Street
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized
state official.
9

EPA Identification Number NPDES Number Facility Name Outfall Number
Method Number Estimated Concentration (If
Pollutant(Required) CAS number (if Applicable) Reason Pollutant Believed Present in Dischar Known)
**No additional sampling was conducted-no additional pollutants to
report

Enter a date to enable dropdowns for other columns
Analyte Name Analyte Acronym Date Result Qualifier Type Qualifier Value Location
**No additional sampling was conducted-no additional pollutants to report

Do NOT use a formula for these cells
Grab/Composite DWR/Permittee Regional Office Permit Type Permit Number Permit Name River Basin