NC0001422_Request for Correction of Typographical_20151217

i
DUKE Harry K.Sideris
ENERGY® RECEIVEDIDENRIDWR Senior Vice President
Environmental,Health&Safety
523 South Church Street
DEC
17 W5 Mail Code: ECUP
Charlotte,NC 28202
Water Quality 704-382-4303
Permitting Section
December 16, 2015
Mr.Jay Zimmerman, P.G., Director
Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1611
Subject: Request for Correction of Typographical and Other Errors in NPDES Permit
L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
NPDES Permit NC0001422
New Hanover County
Dear Mr. Zimmerman:
On December 3, 2015,the Division of Water Resources(the Division) issued the final NPDES permit for
Duke Energy's L.V.Sutton Energy Complex(Sutton Plant). The permit contains a number of errors.
Several of these errors were present in previous versions of the draft permit and were noted by Duke
Energy in its August 5, 2015 and November 17, 2015 written comments on the draft permits. The
Division has not provided responses to these comments,therefore Duke Energy is unable to determine
whether these constitute policy decisions or are just typographical errors. While many of the errors may
not directly affect Duke Energy's ability to comply with the permit,the following noted items can have
substantial ramifications for Sutton Plant and Duke Energy's ability to comply. Duke Energy requests
your correction of these errors and reissuance of the corrected permit as soon as possible.
1. The cover letter references the name and NPDES permit number(NC0004961)for Riverbend
Steam Station.
2. Condition A(18)of the permit requires that materials required by the Cooling Water Intake
- Structure Rule (40 CFR 125.95) be submitted "with the next renewal application".The permit
expires on December 1, 2016,therefore renewal materials are due July 31, 2016. As allowed by
the Rule, Duke Energy's February 23, 2015 NPDES application contained an Alternate Schedule
Request proposing that the Clean Water Act Section 316(b) materials be required with the
subsequent permit renewal application due after July 14, 2018. Therefore we request that the
final permit be corrected to clarify that the materials are due at the "subsequent permit renewal
due after July 14, 2018".
3. As noted in Duke Energy's November 17th comments on the draft permit, based on the
Division's own policies and procedures,the Division has erred in requiring a chronic toxicity test
on outfalls 002,004 and 008. The Division's Whole Effluent Toxicity Guidance clearly states that
"if the discharge is to a lake or lake arm where 7Q10 estimates are not meaningful, a 24-hr acute
'no significant mortality' limit will be applied with the fathead minnow as the test organism"
(emphasis added). Duke Energy has attached the 1999 policy which is currently available on the

Aquatic Toxicology Branch website.According to the policy,the permit should require an acute
toxicity test, identical to that which is required for outfall 001.
4. The Discharge Identification Plan included as Appendix A to the permit is outdated. The most
recent version of the plan is dated April 2015.
5. As noted in our November 17th comments,Condition A(10) contains references to quarterly
toxicity testing which should be corrected to read "monthly".
6. As discussed in Duke's November 17th comments,the NPDES permit incorrectly identifies Sutton
Lake as a Class C waterbody. In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0301(1),the lake is classified (by
rule) as C-Sw to align with the classification of the Cape Fear River at that location.
7. Duke Energy believes the permit inadvertently omitted a statement from the previous permit
acknowledging that instream monitoring in the Cape Fear River is provisionally waived as long as
Sutton Plant maintains its membership in the Lower Cape Fear River Basin Association. As the
Division is aware, and as posted on the website for the Monitoring Coalition Program, "If any
members of the monitoring coalitions are NPDES wastewater or drinking water permit holders,
the monitoring performed by this Program can be done in lieu of the in-stream monitoring
required by their individual permits." Furthermore,the waiver of instream monitoring
requirements is a condition of the Division's Memorandum of Agreement with the Lower Cape
Fear River Program Permittees (MOA). As stated in the MOA, "The permittees who are
participating in this Agreement... are exempted from any instream monitoring as specified in
their individual NPDES permits beginning on the effective date of this Agreement and continuing
for the duration of each permittee's participation in this agreement".The MOA allows a
permittee to terminate membership upon 60 days' written notice, but does not allow the
Division to terminate a specific permittee's membership in the Association.This item was
previously noted in both our August 5th and November 17th comments on the draft permits.
Duke Energy requests your prompt correction of the above items. Please provide a response to this
request as soon as reasonably possible so that we may continue our evaluation of permit conditions
within the 30 day administrative review period. If you have any questions pertaining to our request,
please contact Letoya Ogallo at(919)546-6647 or [e-mail]
Si/nc ely,
Harry Sideris
Senior Vice President
Environment, Health and Safety
Enclosures

• t
Division of Water Quality
August 2, 1999
MEMORANDUM
To: Regional Supervisors
Bill Reid
Jimmie Overton
From: Coleen Sullins
Subject: Whole Effluent Toxicity
Permit Limits and Monitoring Requirements
This communication clarifies the Water Quality Section's positions concerning the
application of whole effluent toxicity (WET) limits in NPDES permits.
All NPDES permits issued to "Major" facilities or any facility discharging "complex
wastewater (contains anything other than domestic waste) will contain appropriate whole
effluent toxicity limits and monitoring requirements. Minor discharges that fall into the
following categories will not routinely be assigned whole effluent toxicity limits unless
toxicity screening tests predict a toxic effect under critical design conditions:
- 100 percent domestic wastewater with only chlorine as an additive
- Non-contact cooling water
- Swimming pool filter backwash
- Water filtration backwash
- Mine dewatering
- Sand dredging
- Seafood packing
- Laundromats
- Car Washes
- Aquaculture facilities
- Rock quarries and gem mines
These facilities will be examined on a case-by-case basis by the Environmental Sciences
Branch, Point Source Branch, Modelling/TMDL Unit, Regional Offices, or the Section
Chief where necessary, prior to the establishment of an NPDES permit requirement.
These exclusions are made as a matter of regulatory evaluation resources and do not
inherently preclude assessment of any facility's compliance with water quality standards
for toxic substances.
Facilities discharging only non-contact cooling water must complete biocide worksheets
for any biocides employed and submit these to the NPDES Unit of the Point Source
Branch. This worksheet incorporates facility flow data, receiving stream flow data,
aquatic toxicity and half-life data of the biocides and amounts of the biocides used to
determine potential impacts to the receiving stream. If an impact is predicted, the facility
may adjust its application of current biocides, choose to employ a less toxic biocide, or
perform toxicity testing to document the absence of toxicity. Aquatic Toxicology Unit
personnel review each submitted worksheet for numerical accuracy and appropriateness
of all input data.

Whole effluent toxicity limitations and monitoring requirements will be based upon the
instream waste concentration (IWC) during conditions of maximum permitted effluent
flow and 7Q10 receiving stream flow. The IWC will be calculated using the following
formula:
IWC (%) _ (Qw / (Qw +Qu)) * 100
where: Qw = NPDES maximum permitted wasteflow
Qu = Upstream stream flow during 7Q 10 conditions
The use of maximum permitted wasteflow for the term Qw assumes the facility has the
right to discharge this volume of waste under the permit at any time.
All calculated IWC values should be rounded to the nearest percent except where the
IWC is <5%. For IWC values between 1 and 5 percent, round to the nearest tenth of one
percent, and for IWC values <1%, round to the nearest one hundredth of one percent. If it
is known that the discharge has a water supply intake upstream of the outfall, then the
IWC should be calculated as : Qw / Qu, to avoid underestimation.
The objective of whole effluent toxicity limits placed in NPDES permits is to prevent
discharge of toxic substances in amounts likely to cause chronic or acute toxicity to
wildlife in the receiving stream and represents the only feasible method of evaluating the
combined effects of constituents of complex waste streams. EPA has indicated that
chemical-specific limitations do not consider all toxicants present and that interactions of
mixtures are not accounted for [1]. Participants of the 1995 SETAC Pellston WET
workshop support that indication by recognizing that chemical monitoring alone does not
predict or measure biological effects in receiving water bodies [2], and does not cover all
toxicants and mixtures threatening biotic integrity [3]. The type of test employed to meet
this objective is based upon the magnitude of the facility's IWC. In general, the following
criteria are followed:
1) If the facility's IWC is greater than or equal to 0.25 percent. the facility will
perform the "North Carolina Ceriodaplinia Chronic Effluent Bioassay
Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or"North Carolina
Phase H Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure." (Revised February
1998) or subsequent versions on a quarterly basis. The limit will be stated as
"shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality" at the effluent concentration equivalent to the facility's IWC. The
maximum permit limit will be 90%.
2) If the facility's IWC is less than 0.25 percent, a 24-hour fathead minnow acute
"No Significant Mortality" limit will be applied. The procedure employed will be
"Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute Toxicity In A Single Effluent
Concentration," Revised July 1992.
3) If the facility discharge is episodic and/or only occurs in response to storm
events, acute toxicity monitoring is required for the first five discharge events
during the first year following permit issuance, with an annual monitoring
requirement thereafter. This requirement will be a 24 hour fathead minnow acute
test employing the procedure defined as "definitive" in Methods for Measuring
the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth
Edition. EPA/600/4-90/027 September 1991. Upon permit renewal, if five tests
have been performed, an annual monitoring requirement will be applied unless
2

the previous monitoring has indicated potential toxic impacts to the receiving
stream. These situations will be examined on a case-by-case basis and a limit or
monitoring requirement placed in the permit based on the best professional
judgment of the Environmental Sciences Branch, Point Source Branch,
Modelling/TMDL Unit, Regional Offices, or Section Chief where necessary
4) If the discharge is to a tidally influenced receiving water, the same criteria as
above should be applied using the estimate of 7Q10 flow into the discharge zone.
If no 7Q10 flow estimate is available, a 24 hour acute "No Significant Mortality"
limit will be applied. This requirement may also be applied where flow estimates
are available, if in the best professional judgment of the Point Source Branch
these estimates are not applicable in the "real world." If the tidal zone is well
flushed, the fathead minnow should be employed as the test organism, otherwise,
in a poorly flushed zone, a Daphnid should be used.
5) If the discharge is to a lake or lake arm where 7Q 10 estimates are not
meaningful, a 24 hour acute "No Significant Mortality" limit will be applied with
the fathead minnow as the test organism.
6) If a facility discharges to a receiving stream classified as "High Quality Waters"
as per North Carolina Administrative Code T15: 02B .0201(d), any whole
effluent chronic toxicity limit will be established at an effluent concentration
equal to twice the IWC_ If the IWC is greater than or equal to 45%, the chronic
limit will be 90%. All dischargers to such waters will have acute limits of"No
Significant Mortality" as determined by the "Pass/Fail Methodology For
Determining Acute Toxicity In A Single Effluent Concentration."
Freshwater organisms may be substituted in permit requirements for dischargers to
estuarine and salt receiving waters where an evaluation has been made by Aquatic
Toxicology Unit staff that the freshwater organism provides the same level of protection
as saltwater organisms.
Generally; twenty-four hour composite sampling will be the preferred sampling method
for whole effluent toxicity monitoring. Depending on consideration of exposures. arab
samples or other special sampling regimes may be appropriate based on the best
professional judgment of the Regional Water Quality and Point Source personnel.
Appropriate sampling regimes other than grabs would be based on time of occurrence and
duration of predictable intermittent discharge events.
Permittees with acute toxicity requirements may request the use of a test organism other
than that specified by the permit upon documentation that the alternate test organism
would be a more sensitive indicator of toxic substances in the facility's discharge. Such
documentation would consist of:
1) A demonstration that viable and standardized culture techniques are available for
that organism and standardized testing methodologies have been developed and
validated. This demonstration should meet guidance provided by EPA.
2) Three consecutive "side-by-side" tests with results indicating that the alternate
organism is as or more sensitive to the facility's effluent. Each test series would
consist of two separate toxicity tests conducted on the same sample of effluent
with the length of exposure specified by the permit, the only difference between
tests being the organism used.
z
3

Any facility which has been assigned a chronic limit with Ceriodaphnia dubia as the test
organism may request a permit modification that specifies the EPA full range chronic
methodology. Major differences between this methodology and the "North Carolina
Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" are the use of a minimum of
three samples instead of two and daily test solution changes as opposed to two changes
over the seven day test period.
Minor facilities which discharge only domestic waste applying for renewal of their
permits may be given an option of a new lower ammonia limit based on a mass balance
calculation or performing a whole effluent toxicity test.
Should a quarterly toxicity limit be waived in favor of a "monitoring only" requirement
as in the case of a special order, it is recommended that the frequency of the analysis be
increased to monthly. In the case of a pass/fail limit, the use of a multiple concentration
test for the monitoring requirement in a special order will allow tracking of toxicity
reductions.
All whole effluent toxicity tests performed to meet NPDES monitoring must be
conducted by laboratories certified to perform the specific analysis required as specified
by Administrative Code Section: 15 NCAC 2H .1100, Biological Laboratory
Certification.
Toxicity testing results will be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no later
than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made. The results
will be recorded on the monthly monitoring report form MR-1. Facilities will also be
required to complete one of the three tonicity test report forms, AT-1, AT-2, or AT-3, and
submit these to the Environmental Sciences Branch. No test result will be considered
valid until reviewed by Aquatic Toxicology Unit personnel.
All permits that specify quarterly evaluation of acute toxicity will be written to require
monthly monitoring upon any single failure to meet specified limits, until such time as
those limits are met. Additionally, if a test result is determined to be invalid for any
reason, monthly monitoring will be required until the limit is met. All permits that specify
quarterly evaluation of chronic toxicity will be written to require monitoring at least once
during each of the two months following a noncompliance. The facility may perform as
much additional monitoring as it desires.
Any single failure to meet established limitations will be considered a non-compliant
event. Following this initial non-compliance, each subsequent single failure will be
considered an additional non-compliant event.
The following is offered as pertinent information concerning the quality assurance of
submitted toxicity data:
1) No effluent sample shall be over 72 hours old at the time of its use to initiate a
chronic toxicity test or renew solutions of a chronic toxicity test. No effluent
sample shall be over 36 hours old at the time of its use to initiate an acute
toxicity test. Sample ages will be calculated beginning from the sampling time of
a grab sample or from the time of the last sub-sample of a composite sample.
"Use" is defined as placement of organisms into the test solutions.
2) Composite samples shall be cooled during collection and all samples iced during
shipment such that they arrive at the laboratory at temperature between 0 and 4
4

degrees Celsius. The only exception shall be that of a arab sample used for
testing within four hours of collection. Again, "use" will be defined as
introduction of the organisms to the test solutions.
3) At times, facilities "split" effluent toxicity monitoring samples between two or
more laboratories. If such analyses produce differing results, a"paper trail"
investigation of all of the analyses by the Aquatic Toxicology Unit will ensue.
Critical components of such an investigation will include sample chain-of-
custody, sample preparation, test protocols, and health of the organism cultures
of the subject laboratories at the time of the analyses.
Appropriate standardized permit language is attached. If there are any questions
concerning any of the above policies or issues, please contact Matt Matthews or Kevin
Bowden at 733-2136.
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991.Technical Support Document For Water Quality-Based
Toxics Control.EPA/505/2-90-001. Office of Water,Washington, DC, p. 21.
2. Dorn,Philip B. 1996. An Industrial Perspective on Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing. In DR Grothe. KL
Dickson,and DK Reed-Judkins. eds., Whole Effluent ToxicitY Testing:An Evaluation of Methods and
Prediction of Receiving System Impacts. SETAC Pellston Workshop on Whole Effluent Toxicity; 1995
Sep 16-25.SETAC Press,Pensacola,FL,USA,p. 16.
3. Heber,Margarete A.,Donna K. Reed-Judkins,and Tudor T.Davies. 1996. USEPA's Whole
Effluent Toxicity Testing Program: A National Regulatory Perspective. In DR Grothe.KL Dickson,and
DK Reed-Judkins.eds.. Whole Effluent Toxicin•Testing:An Evaluation of Methods and Prediction of
Receiving System Impacts. SETAC Pellston Workshop on Whole Effluent Toxicity; 1995 Sep 16-25.
SETAC Press.Pensacola. FL, USA, p. 10.
Attachments
cc: Matt Matthews
Kevin Bowden
Kristie Robeson
David Goodrich
Shannon Langley
5

NCDENR
Memorandum of Agreement
Between
The State of North Carolina's Division of Water Quality
And
The Lower Cape Fear River Program (LCFRP) Permittees
{ VIA S, nn Q�%R a�
UNCw
Effective:
July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2016

This page was intentionally left blank

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made by and between the DIVISION OF WATER
QUALITY, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL,
RESOURCES, or its successor agency or department ("DWQ"), and the NPDES Dischargers
who have voluntarily approved this Agreement, known and referenced collectively as the
"PERMITTEES". The Agreement includes all the attached tables and appendices.
The purpose of this Agreement is to establish a formal agreement between DWQ and the
PERMITTEES whose responsibilities include surface water monitoring and reporting within
the Lower Cape Fear River Basin below Lock and Dam #1 to monitor strategically located
surface water sites and parameters to obtain information on water quality in the basin.
PERMITTEES shall subcontract with one organization to collect instream monitoring data
normally collected by the individual permittees. Monitoring sites and parameters have been
established by the PERMITTEES and DWQ such that the instream monitoring is more
efficient, effective, flexible, and basin-oriented.
The PERMITTEES who are participating in this Agreement, listed in Table 1, are exempted
from any instream monitoring as specified in their individual NPDES permits beginning on
the effective date of this Agreement and continuing for the duration of each permittee's
participation in this agreement. This Agreement does not affect any influent or effluent
monitoring requirement or any other of the NPDES permit requirements of individual permit
holders with the one exception of performing upstream and downstream water quality
monitoring. Subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, the DWQ will issue a letter to
each permittee notifying the permittee that the instream monitoring requirements of its permit
are not effective for as long as this Agreement is in place and the permittee remains a party to
this Agreement.
The PERMITTEES will contract for the performance of the monitoring activities described
herein with a DWQ-certified contract lab, organization, or agency, who shall subcontract, as
necessary, with a laboratory appropriately certified by DWQ for the required analysis.
Sample collection and field measurements will be made by the PERMITTEES, the contractee
or a sub-contractee who will act as agent(s) of the PERMITTEES. Each permittee has the
right to review and comment on work, data or reports prepared by any contractee on behalf of
the PERMITTEES prior to its submission to DWQ and to notify DWQ of any objection or
disagreement with any portion of the work, data, or reports. Unless such notice is made
within thirty (30) days of submission to DWQ, it shall be deemed to be waived and the work,
data and reports submitted shall be deemed to be approved by the PERMITTEES. It will be
the responsibility of the PERMITTEES or their contractee to coordinate the collection and
analyses of the water quality monitoring data at the locations, parameters, and frequencies
specified in Appendix A. Sample collection and field measurement methods shall follow
procedures outlined in Appendix B. The PERMITTEES or their contractor shall submit the
water quality data to DWQ using the format described in Appendix C, preferably Microsoft
Excel 2000 or a subsequent version, or the equivalent. The Permittees or their contractor shall
submit the water quality data to DWQ within 90 days of the end of the month in which the
sampling was performed. All data sheets shall be archived by the PERMITTEES or their
LCFRP MOA Page i of 17

contractee for a period of 5 years.
PERMITTEES, or their contractee shall submit an annual written report of its compliance or
non-compliance with the monitoring requirements as specified within this Agreement no later
than April 30`x' each year that this Agreement is in effect. The report shall include the NPDES
permit number of each actively participating permittee, the cause of any non-compliance with
stipulations of the Agreement, any remedial action taken and the probability of meeting the
next schedule requirements. Additional requirements for the reports are outlined in Appendix
C. Two signed copies of these and any other reports required herein, shall be submitted to the
DWQ Coalition Coordinator(s) at1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1621.
Failure by PERMITTEES or their contractee to collect the water quality data as described in
this Agreement or to provide the data to DWQ in the required format may result in the
revocation of this Agreement by DWQ and the return to individual upstream and downstream
monitoring requirements, as specified in individual NPDES permits of the PERMITTEES.
Stream sampling may be discontinued at such times as flow conditions in the receiving
waters or extreme weather conditions will result in a substantial risk of injury or death to
persons collecting samples. Sampling may also be discontinued when environmental
conditions, such as a dry stream, prevent sample collection. 1n such cases, for each day that
sampling is discontinued, DWQ Coalition Coordinator(s) shall be notified within one week of
the discontinuance and written justification for the discontinuance shall be submitted with the
monthly data submittal. This provision shall be strictly construed and may not be utilized to
avoid the requirements of this Agreement when performance of these requirements is
attainable. When there is a discontinuance pursuant to this provision, sampling shall be
resumed at the first opportunity after the risk period has ceased.
This Agreement may be modified by written consent of both parties. DWQ or the
PERMITEES may determine that it is necessary to request changes in monitoring frequency,
parameters or sites to be sampled. Any such changes can only be made by a written
amendment to this Agreement agreed to by DWQ and a majority of the PERMITTEES then
parties to the Agreement. The amendment shall be signed by PERMITTEES' primary contact
and by DWQ. Such amendments may be entered into at any time.
The parties may also desire to allow Dischargers 1) who, subsequent to the date of this
Agreement, receive NPDES permits within the Lower Cape Fear River Basin or 2) who have
NPDES permits within the Lower Cape Fear River Basin but are not parties to this
Agreement to enter into this Agreement subsequent to the effective date hereof. Any such
changes can only be made by a written amendment to this Agreement agreed to by DWQ and
a majority of the PERMITTEES then party to the Agreement. The amendment shall be signed
by PERMITEES' primary contact and by DWQ and, if appropriate, by an authorized officer
of any such Discharger who wishes to enter into the Agreement subsequent to the effective
date hereof. DWQ will consider modification of existing monitoring requirements for any
such discharger similar to those in effect for the existing PERMITTEES. Such amendments
may be made at any time that this Amendment is in effect.
LCFRP MOA Page 2 of 17

This Agreement shall be effective until June 30, 2016 unless extended by the consent of both
parties. Upon 60 days written notice, DWQ or a majority of the PERMITTEES then party to
the Agreement may terminate this Agreement for any reason. Upon termination of this
Agreement, the monitoring requirements contained in the individual NPDES permits of the
PERMITTEES shall become effective immediately.
An individual permittee may terminate and cancel its participation in this Agreement by
providing 60 days written notice to the PERMITTEES, the DWQ Coalition Coordinator(s),
the appropriate DWQ Regional Office, and the DWQ NPDES Unit. The monitoring
requirements contained in the individual NPDES permit shall become effective immediately
upon such cancellation or termination. In the event a permit holder terminates or cancels its
participation in this Agreement, the PERMITTEES may request that DWQ review the
monitoring plan described in this Agreement for a possible reduction in sampling effort or
requirements.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused the execution of this instrument by authority
duly given,to be effective as of the date executed by the DWQ.
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY LOWER CAPE FEAR RIVER PROGRAM
By: signed June 30, 2011 By: signed June 17, 2011
Coleen Sullins Chris May
Director Chairman
Division of Water Quality Lower Cape Fear River
Program
Date: Date:
LCFRP MOA Page 3 of 17

LCFRP PERMITTEE SIGNATURES
Permittee NPDES Number Signature
DAK Americas, LLC NC0000663 received May 2, 2011
Penny Mahoney
Operating Director
Invista S.A.L. NC0001112 received June 16, 2011
Bill King
Site Manager
Global Nuclear Fuels NC0001228 received June 9, 2011
Americas Shawn O'Connor
Environmental Specialist
Carolina Power and Light(CP&L) received May 19, 2011
d/b/a Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. NC0001422 Mark Frederick
Sutton Steam Electric Plant Plant Manager
International Paper Company NC0003298 received May4,?011
Riegelwood Mill Edward Kreul
Manager- Environment,
Health, Safety,and
Sustainability
LCFRP MOA Page 4 of 17

Momentive Specialty Chemicals NC0003395 received May 19, 2011
Ronald Bazinet
Site Leader
Elementis Chromium LP NC0003875 received May 16, 2011
Joel Barnhart
Vice President,Technical
Town of Mount Olive NCO020575 received April 27, 2011
Mt. Olive WWTP Charles Brown
Town Manager
Town of Burgaw NCO021113 received July 7, 2011
Burgaw WWTP Kenneth T. Cowan
Mayor
Town of Warsaw NCO021903 received May 4, 2011
Warsaw WWTP J. R. Steigerwald
Town Manager
Town of Carolina Beach NCO023256 received May 26, 2011
Carolina Beach WWTP Tim Owens
Town Manager
Cape Fear Public Utility Authority NCO023965 received April 29, 2011
Northside WWTP Matthew W. Jordan
General Manager
LCFRP MOA Page 5 of 17

Cape Fear Public Utility Authority NCO023973 received April 29, 2011
Southside WWTP Matthew W. Jordan
General Manager
Town of Beulaville NCO026018 received May 10, 2011
Beulaville WWTP Kenneth Smith
Mayor
Cape Fear Public Utility Authority NCO039527 received April 29, 2011
Walnut Hills Subdiv. WWTP Matthew W. Jordan
General Manager
Brunswick Regional Water NCO075540 received June 9, 2011
& Sewer H2GO Carl Antos
Belville WWTP Chairman
Brunswick County NCO086819 received May 20, 2011
NE Brunswick Regional WWTP Marty Lawing
County Manager
LCFRP MOA Page 6 of 17

Table 1. LCFRP Permittees
a. .�`�- r, I „�B. :,.r` f°ao:�”L -�., °,i'�'" f.- - :d.° .°is ti ��i. o�r t�4�',t .-
;•IDPSP•ermit�.�;rI�� Permittaes•• ��, AuthorizedReareseriiati� a��d �' r� '' �, + �- °; � �^� -std 8{D�igif
$ x�s� . ,•a d -.a e n 1 a, .� �.-;' . =:Count�,0 `�" egion° u asi •!
� _�Nwmter a Mtiv�wnersii end alif «° '�f,•.: fit'°�';''o �Title:.� �?mss: a;e.:.�,., z .}m.',��C e..
NC0000663 DAK Americas,LLC Penny Mahoney Brunswick Wilmington 030617 03030005
Operating Director
Rick Bayless
NC0001112 Invista S.6 R.L. Environmental Health and Safety New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030005
Manager
NC0001228 Global Nuclear Fuels— Shawn O'Connor New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030007
Americas Environmental Specialist
Carolina Power and Light
NC0001422 (CP&L)d/b/a Progress Energy Mark Frederick New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030005
Carolinas,Inc. Plant Manager
Sutton Steam Electric Plant
International Paper Company Edward Kreul
NC0003298 Riegelwood Mill Manager—Environment,Health, Columbus Wilmington 030617 03030005
Safety,and Sustainability
NC0003395 Momentive Specialty April Hanson Columbus Wilmington 030617 03030005
Chemicals Environmental Engineer
NC0003875 Elementis Chromium LP Joel Barnhart New Hanover Wilmington 030623 03030007
Vice President,Technical
NCO020575 Town of Mount Olive Charles Brown Wayne Washington 030621 03030007
Mt.Olive WWTP Town Manager
NCO021113 Town of Burgaw Kenneth Cowan Pender Wilmington 030623 03030007
Burgaw WWTP Mayor
NCO021903 Town of Warsaw J.R.Steigerwald Duphn Wilmington 030619 03030006
Warsaw WWTP Town Manager
NCO023256 Town of Carolina Beach Tim Owens New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030005
Carolina Beach WWTP Town Manager
Cape Fear Public Utility Matthew W.Jordan
NCO023965 Authority General Manager New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030005
Northside WWTP
Cape Fear Public Utility Matthew W.Jordan
NCO023973 Authority General Manager New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030005
Southside WWTP
NCO026018 Town of Beulaville Kenneth Smith Duplin Wilmington 030622 03030007
Beulaville W W TP Mayor
Cape Fear Public Utility
NCO039527 Authority Matthew W.Jordan New Hanover Wilmington 030617 03030007
Walnut Hills Subdivision General Manager
WWTP
Brunswick Regional Water& Carl Antos
NCO075540 Sewer H2GO Chairman Brunswick Wilmington 030617 03030005
Belville WWTP
Brunswick County Marty Lawing
NCO086819 NE Brunswick Regional County Manager Brunswick Wilmington 030617 03030005
WWTP
LCFRP MOA Page 7 of 17

APPENDIX A—LCFRP MONITORING PLAN
Table A-1 LCFRP Sampling Stations,Parameters and Sampling Frequency
�°ns' �{pa, ro°e9 a d8. •N.Qq`�i•,w'g°"g p. � eta- i3^ d�P.'1 �:."f�•,y�.�'c�'•L,'S° °°. e-e r�..�•.°�}1Pe',; j��gT!{y,!.x'+ idre iF°t':k'v�J_., rypv-r w. -. L '°'sv'nM` .y ^:Tej 4°^ '. "�,t��d°•'°",`a .t �-a
l°.7r°ti '1:CFRP o r'� a" �, .°� e r sr � �'�®° a� �� .�P ���[•8° er°,pmt ° � �eeB,B !�a,an 1�e4,h.eL.�.rRr"aa.
�, $
f�Statioo�; Station ., •"
m° e ° x y d k .,s r K a, °;,•."^ ; '=r+J,Aaa *LaituAe{ L'ongitirde '&u
"*'s ;SlDigit6� treIDm� �trF,ield{.• qCfiloroa`9 M 1 r �Fe al
oy°� e 1-a ,.r,4i4 r, �.=aME .:'X71
Numberi w_LD� a r!*u.vLocatioe'Drscn tionl4.-s 4 St6hon.Comments pdd.dddd-'dd:dddd'i Count ,Re on..`Inder.° eClass' s�ieasuremerits. Nutrients . M1fet"" ss Turbidity,TSS4 hull a"�°Entercocci,°.Colrfonn8
68340050 BRN Browns Creek at NC87 nr hog farm area 346136 -785848 Bladen FRO 18-45 03030005 CM M M M
Elizabethtown
68340200 HAM Hammond Creek Olive SR 1704 nr Mt
Olivhog farm area 345685 -785515 Bladen FRO 18-50 03030005 C M M M M
88360000 NC I I Cape Fear River at NC I I nr East Just this of Lock and Dam#1 343969 -782675 Bladen WIRO 18{59) 03030005 WS-IV M+2SM M EOM M M M M
Arcadia Sw
68441000 LVC2 Livingston Creek at Wright Corp DWQ ambient stn.this
Walkway nr Acme Wright Corp 343353 -782011 Columbus WIRD 18-64 03030005 C Sw M M EOM Al M
Cape Fear River at Nets Eddy I mile below IP.DWQ
88450000 AC Landing nr Acme ambient stn 143555 -78 1794 Columbus WIRO 18-(63) 03030005 C Sw M+2SM M M M
68465000 DP Cape Fear River at Intake nr Hooper At DAK intake,Just ups of
Hill Black River 343358 -780534 Brunswick WIRO 18-(63) 03030005 C Sw M+2SM M EOM M M
68470000 SR South River at US 13 nr Cooper dns Dunn runoff 35 1560 -786401 Sampson FRO 18-68 03030006 C Sw M M M M
12-05
Great Coharie Creek at SR 1214 ar 8 miles dns Chalon W WTP,
68604000 GCO 349186 -783887 Sampson FRO 18-68-1 03030006 C Sw D1 M EOM M M
Butler Crossroads nonpomt impacts
B8610001 LCO Little Colume Creek at SR 1207 nr Just ups Great Coharte Ck, 348347 -783709 Sampson FRO 18-68-1-103030006 C Sw M M M M
Ingold hog ops in watershed 17
B8740000 6RC Six Runs Creek at SR 1003 at Just ups Black River,hog 34 7933 -783113 Sampson FRO 18-68-2- 03030006 C Sw M M EOM M M
Ingold operations in watershed (11 5) ORW+
B8981000 COL Colly Creek at NC 53 at Cully Hog operations in watershed 344641 -782569 Bladen FRO I8-68-17 03030006 C Sw M M EOM M M
B9000000 B210 Black River at NC 210 at Still Bluff I'bridge ups of Cape Fear 344312 -78 1441 Pender WIRO 18-68 03030006 C Sw M M M M
River ORW+
B9030000 IC Cape Fear River ups Indian Creek tir Dns DAK,BASF.and 343021 -780137 Brunswick WIRO 18-(63) 03030005 C,Sw M+2SM M M M
Phoenix Fortron
Cape Fear River at Navassa dns of dns Progress Energy and
69050025 NAV RR bridge Leland Ind Pk 342594 -779877 Brunswick WIRO I8-(71) 03030005 SC M+2SM M EOM M M M
69050100 HB Cape Fear Rivat S end tUps NE Cape Fear River 342437 -779698 Brunswick WIRO 18-(71) 03030005 SC M+2SM M M M
Horseshoe Benendd n nr Wilmington Ups
B9090000 NC403 NE Cape Fear River at NC 403 nr Dns Mt Olive W WTP; 25 1784 77 9807 Duplin WIRO 18-74- 03030007 C Sw' M M M M
Williams DWQ ambient stn (1)
Sample Goin Bav Valley
18-74-
B9130000 PB Panther Branch(Creek)nr Faison access Rd.this Bay Valley 35 1345 -78 1363 Duplin WIRO 19 3 03030007 C Sw M M M M
wwl
89191000 GS Goshen Swamp at NC I 1 and NC Major trib to NE CFR,Ag 350281 -778516 Duplin WIRO 18-74-19 03030007 C Sw MM M M
903 nr Koine gav and Ho°o s in watershed
Field Measurements include Temperature.Dissolved Oxygen,pH,and Conductivity M=Monthly,M+2SM=Monthly with twice monthly
summer sampling.Summer includes the months of May.June.July.August,and September Twice monthly samples are to be collected at least
ten days apart except when extenuating conditions anse
Nutnent Sampling includes Ammonia as N(NH3),Nrtmte/Nante as N(NO2/NO3).Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen(TKN),and Total
Phosphorus as P(TP)
3 Metals Sampling EOM=Even'Other Month sample collection(February,April.June,August.October,and December)for the following metals
Aluminum(AI),Arsenic(As),Cadmmm(Cd),Chromium(Cr),Copper(Qu),Iron(Fe),Lead(Pb),Mercury(Hg),Nickel(Nr),and Zinc(Zn) All
analvses will be for total metals Metals monitoring was suspended per DWQ's April 2010 memorandum at the agreement of DWQ and the
LCFRP
LCFRP MOA Page 8 of 17

Table A-1 Continued - LCFRP Sampling Stations, Parameters and Sampling Frequency y
7��,."C}- '� � 7,.v. �y"k-pM'J/sc'r�!P:°. 'r°i7 a':i' �•; i u's'''� �.�a- 6 vt�•'�""4�Sy®'+�4 iJt,'YiT• ��r-w.a�
rN.;.'-
.- . � 9.ti ` ®. a �, Rqd � ,tuAe�,L'ong�tudea F 8 Dig�t�w,StViel � �� a gab. , �`Grilore -,= eIDro a catiomDescri bon g„$tatl0n Comments®•_ ;ad ,s d'd.8ddd Count, IRe wn1°•'indecs IIUCidSI eClasst,'lMtasurements't,Nutrientsr ._Metals_
.T
(I
FTSS 59 h Ilia:,td ntercocc�,°leohg
NE Cape Fear River SR 1700 nr Dns Guilford Mills and
69191500 SAR Sarecta CogentnxWWTPs 349801 -778622 Duplin WIRO I8-74-1 03030007 CSw M M EOM M M
89430000 ROC Rockfish Creek at US 117 nr Ups Wallace WWTP2 34.7168 -779795 Duplin WIRO 18-74-29 03030007 C Sw M M M M
Wallace
B9460000 LRC Little Rockfish Creek at NC l I nr Ups Wallace W WTP 1, 347224 -779814 Duplin WIRO 18-74 03030007 C Sw M M EOM M M M
Wallace benthic stn 29-6
B9490000 ANC Angola Creek at NC 53 nr Maple benthic stn 346562 -777351 Pender WIRO 18-74- 03030007 C Sw M M M M
Hill 33-3
B9500000 BCRR Burgaw Canal(Creek)at SR 1345 Ups Burgaw W WTP 345633 -779348 Pender WIRO 18-74-39 03030007 C Sw M M M M M M
Wright St at Burgaw
B9520000 BCI 17 Burgaw Creek at US 117 at Burgaw DWQ ambient stn,dns 345637 -779220 Pender WIRO 18-74-39 03030007 C Sw M M EOM M M M M
Burgaw W WTP
B9580000 NCF 117 NE Cape Fear River at US 117 at DWQ ambient stn.dns 34 3637 77 8965 New WIRO 18-74 03030007 B Sw M M EOM M M
Castle Hayne Elementis Chromium wwt Hanover (47 5)
B9670000 NCF6 NE Cape Fear River Nr Below GNF and Arteva 343171 -779538 New WIRO 18-74 03030007 C Sw M+2SM M M M
Wn°htsboro WWTPs Hanover (525)
B9720000 SC-CH Smith Creek at US 117 and NC 133 Dns Smith Ck W W'rP,urban 342586 -779391 New WIRO 18-74-663 03030007 C Sw M M
at Wilmington runoff Hanover
B9790000 BRR Brunswick River dns NC 17 at park Park access from SR 133. 342214 -779787 Brunswick WIRO I8-77 03030005 SC M M M M
nr Belvdle dns Belville w WTP
89795000 M54 Cape Fear Riverat Channel Marker Dos Wilmington Southside 34 1393 -779460 New WIRO 18-(71) 03030005 SC M+2SM M EOM M M
54 WWTP Hanover
B9800000 M61 Cape Fear River at Channel Marker Dns Wilmington Northside 341938779573 New WIRD l8-(71) 03030005 SC M+2SM M M M M M
61 at Wilmington N'WTP.DWQ ambient stn Hanover
B9850100 M35 Cape Fear River 35 Channel Marker Ups Carolina Beach WWTP 340335 -779370 Brunswick WIRO 18-(71) 03030005 SC M+2SM M EOM M M
B9910000 M23 Cape Fear River 23 Channel Marker Dns Carolina Beach W WTP 339456 -779696 Brunswick WIRO (87- 03030005 li A M+2SM M EOM M M
QW
B9921000 M18 Cape Fear River at Channel Marker NT Mouth of Cape Fear 339130 -780170 Brunswick WIRO 18-88 03030005 Sc M+2SM M EOM M M M M
18 River 3 5
Field Measurements include Temperature.Dissohed Oxygen pH,and Conductivity M=Monthly.M+2SM=Monthly with twice monthly summer sampling
Summer includes the months of May,June.July,August,and September Twice monthly samples are to be collected at least ten days apart except when
extenuating conditions anse
Nutrient Sampling includes Ammonia as N(NEG),Nitmte/Nitnte as N(N021NO3).Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen(TKN),and l-otal Phosphorus as P(TP)
'Metals Sampling EOM=Every Other Month sample collection(February,April June,August.October,and December)for the following metals Aluminum(Al),Arsenic
(As),Cadmium(Cd),Chromium(Cr),Copper(Cu).Iron(Fe),Lead(Pb),Mercury(lig),Nickel(Ni),and Zinc(Zn) All analyses will be for total metals Metals monitoring was
suspended per DWQ's April 2010 memorandum at the agreement of DWQ and the LCFRP
LCFRP MOA Page 9 of 17

APPENDIX B- SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Sample Collection Procedures
Sample collection shall be performed by trained personnel with NC DWQ certified laboratories in
accordance with the DWQ NPDES Discharge Monitoring Coalition Program Field Monitoring
Guidance Document (May 2008) and subsequent documents. Alternate collection procedures may be
considered if reported to and approved by the DWQ Coalition Coordinator(s) prior to use. Any
approved alternate sampling procedures will be documented in writing by the LCFRP.
Laboratory Analysis
All laboratory analyses shall be performed at a DWQ certified laboratory using approved methods as
prescribed by 40 CFR, part 136 or other methods certified by the DWQ Laboratory Certification Branch
(hl!p:Hportal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/lab/cert), or the Director of DWQ. Section 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations part 136 (40CFR136) can be accessed on the web at the following address:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/lab/cert/nonfield/ruies.
Reporting levels will be at least as stringent as the target reporting levels used by the DWQ Laboratory.
For guidance purposes, Table B-1 lists target reporting levels for each parameter based on the reporting
levels of the DWQ Laboratory. The lowest possible analytical limits for all the parameters should be
pursued.
Table B-1 DWQ Laboratory Reporting Limits
tr:'aaz�"�.a.Y
abParamete"rs" w"+ ;Tar etRe orin ,Level ; �� , vx_�aComments � +�s,; _ _
Temperature Resolution to 0.1 degree Celsius
Dissolved Oxygen Report results to the nearest 0.1 mg/l.
Meters should be calibrated to measure a pH range
pH of at least 4.01 to 9.18. Report results to the nearest
0.1 pH units.
Specific Report results to the nearest whole µS/cm at 25 °C.
Conductivity
LCFRP MOA Page 10 of 17

Table B-1 Continued -DWQ Laborator�yy Reporting Limits and Methods
" "��` ate•. -� +®S.'s'% a°I'l�y''.a e•t /° .f�it,—'— _ °VosA°�x rr•a `g•+ y< w e. `ff3 '
.�x • ne.°..;.:.q[ e:•L:i '�� �%i'aer,°'d.r� �� B✓.p.``ry /J �•
•�8-.�°.� R RJB �,.n y'r `� a. �•qL <. Z• �, ,• .• K ^ v FV d'+bCo
. 7 ya_ •'�,� ea••r�'a/ 9d
=Parameters *• Targe't•RieportingyZ:eye[°�, e ,$,�,.� °b.
C ►aei. _ ?' rA/���� � �Sfore:.�F,' � o��`�a �". A� ,�Ae9 . a. �d1�.t� j� 'ti;'+}��: a
Turbidity 1.0 NTU
TSS 6.2 mg/L
Entercocci
At least 3 dilutions should be used to achieve
Fecal Coliform 1 colony/100 mL optimum colony counts per membrane filter of 20-
60 colonies.
Report Chlorophyll a values free from pheophytin
Chlorophyll a 1 µg/L and other chlorophyll pigments. (Not listed in 40
CFR 136) Analysis by HPLC is not approved by
DWQ.
Ammonia 0.02 mg/L Address distillation requirement. See 40CFRI36
(NH3 as N) Table 11 footnote.
Nitrate+Nitrite as 0.02 mg/L
N
Total Kjeldahl 0.20 mg/L
Nitrogen as N
Total Phosphorus 0.02 mg/L
as P
Al 50 L
As 2 /L A reporting level of 5 /L is acceptable
Cu 2
Cd 1 /L
Cr 10 L
Fe 50 L
Pb 10 /L
Hg 0.2 L
Ni 10 L
Zn 10 L
SM=Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 18`h, 190i,and 20th ed.
EPA=EPA Method see 40 CFR 136(http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html)
APHA=American Public Health Association
LCFRP MOA Page i t of 17

Data Qualification Codes
When reporting data, the DWQ's data qualifier codes must be used to provide additional information
regarding data quality and interpretation. The current set(codes are subject to change)of qualifier codes
to be used is provided in Table B-2. Review the data qualifier codes at least once a year and utilize the
most current set being utilized by the DWQ laboratory. Use the following website to check for changes
in the qualifier codes: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/lab/qualityassurance.
Table B-2 Data Qualification Codes For Use With Coalition Data (current as of April 20,2011)
`A 8: a'Fr°m°,+ a*esS'i°�4d Vie.-A° �- y�r' ' d"� `� L'"�'9•�'afl°P°lb. d,'� g.. `� ° �'$. � 4.ea'T Ba C• '88 � •
�� „�,�
b�.Pa °...g .,' d y v <.•^ at. tee, oaf a e°e A �^':9°°. a • :'d,
i:!^ c R °.y,�jbve�Y ° '�)�,w �� F°'r< 1° ae a�j 4�a}°ei�,P":� YQ®*ra a ♦ <'
'-Remark„B° „mt -}� 's��� ��� �° @' ile Definiti n �. ��.�sP �$,'e �»s' ��
� .,e�� ar°eP '•-� s,^�;�i`"O e'ak0 °3�� �,;a,.;B.e�'S r;�.e!n- ° .�.c•� �o°
�'��C,Ode'��% d��i � d ��� '7''a�Rd', ��d�'Y_ jW je• 0 $b`v�+'"'i7'.,�•.H4e. �° 8 9
Value reported is the mean(average)of two or more determinations. This code is to be used if the results
of two or more discrete and separate samples are averaged. These samples shall have been processed and
A analyzed independently(e.g. field duplicates, different dilutions of the same sample). This code is not
required for BOD or coliform reporting since averaging multiple dilutions for these parameters is
fundamental to those methods.
Results based upon colony counts outside the acceptable range and should be used with caution. This code
applies to microbiological tests and specifically to membrane filter(MF)colony counts. It is to be used if
B 'less than 100%sample was analyzed and the colony count is generated from a plate in which the number
of colonies exceeds the ideal ranges indicated by the method. These ideal ranges are defined in the method
as:
Fecal coliform or Enterococcus bacteria: 20-60 colonies Total coliform bacteria: 20-80 colonies
B 1.Countable membranes with less than 20 colonies. Reported value is estimated or is a total of the
counts on all filters reported per 100 ml.
B2.Counts from all filters were zero. The value reported is based on the number of colonies per 100
m]that would have been reported if there had been one colony on the filter representing the largest
filtration volume(reported as a less than "<"value).
B3.Countable membranes with more than 60 or 80 colonies. The value reported is calculated using the
count from the smallest volume filtered and reported as a greater than ">" value.
B4.Filters have counts of both>60 or 80 and<20. Reported value is estimated or is a total of the
counts on all filters reported per 100 ml.
B5.Too many colonies were present;too numerous to count(TNTC). TNTC is generally defined as
>150 colonies. The numeric value represents the maximum number of counts typically accepted
on a filter membrane(60 for fecal or enterococcus and 80 for total),multiplied by 100 and then
divided by the smallest filtration volume analyzed. This number is reported as a greater than value.
B6. Estimated Value. Blank contamination evident.
B7. Many non-coliform or non-enterococcus colonies or interfering non-coliform or non-enterococcus
growth present. In this competitive situation,the reported value may under-represent actual
density.
Note: A "B" value shall be accompanied by justification for its use denoted by the numbers listed above
(e.g.,B1,B2,etc.).
Note: A"J2" should be used for spiking failures.
This code applies to most probable number(MPN)microbiological tests.
BB
1. No wells or tubes gave a positive reaction. Value based upon the appropriate MPN Index and
LCFRP MOA Page 12 of 17

r
,
�

- '•je,y-+�� °a s P: 4•'°`,ae:.°-° -^� - e.u° o.�_• s.°rB" x- °/^fR.a T¢.� •ti"-fes .°�fC7°m.•"7:�^r�e9:�a•.-^'^7°'AJC ml.: ti�®,:�p'.
1'•°Data'4� csi •� o q \ 8 e • f .'r :°i r°'.:- i�'t`.` Ve r° B 5°.
+ `®y' e�. 4 St®•� ! °0 S°�� / °°�r °P.' 4ee:. e� 8• 8i°. �°• ! °�.mss.h'm '8\�-ds'i ♦' / a •Bilo
iig8 Maid °�f r.�d` =e.f°f'•,ti �a 4'6K e4Y. r°e F.° •�Od^..« ,'eo..a .`° :L. h.°t :\ e r4 x)a �.V .4
\Sx. w:`Z- "S• • ffr .'•f,od a°. ® f8 ��" :. ai P _ •. •� Yr JM -'.�...r °.fi '"
Remarke � �y E L
1 >..�,'ti °ri°`gP .80 a-°•. y"3 i�r• ••i E3'`st r®t yy a o'�'� ve
�' g�yypp'+B '�•°\i • Se: ,sg � '1k a ".ie h { • vo. 0 a,°+• 7 erA
���4 �a'.'� A Yo° �wY at S+°° v,.1iaJ".a •'fit-a�ia�d��� Y.` •� ^"6"$°'} �oArAa®e�
//''�r i,F "'444PPP L e a6 y.tgr no d ,g ^e° ° ao"S.°m
•�.!l'COde,"1�.A'Y;�aP:\e °9id�:•�^.. �,•i°O. * ,°'f�°ll y'°,M. ;t,eta', ° •9tib'e.°�r'"°!".:�.aa �a�7a e° ;°�°. °° ^�:'� s-'!,Tf `�!F'Z•'�x f_S•'°°.e.^ eBJareai^�t
parameters.
Note:A"J"value shall not be used if another code applies(ex.N,V,M).
M Sample and duplicate results are "out of control." The sample is non-homogenous(e.g. VOA soil). The
reported value is the lower value of duplicate analyses of a sample.
N Presumptive evidence of presence of material;estimated value. This code is to be used if:
NI. The component has been tentatively identified based on mass spectral library search;
N2. There is an indication that the analyte is present,but quality control requirements for confirmation
were not met(i.e.,presence of analyte was not confirmed by alternate procedures).
N3. This code shall be used if the level is too low to permit accurate quantification,but the estimated
concentration is less than the laboratory practical quantitation limit and greater than the laboratory
method detection limit. This code is not routinely used for most analyses.
N4. This code shall be used if the level is too low to permit accurate quantification,but the estimated
concentration is less than the laboratory practical quantitation limit and greater than the instrument
noise level. This code is used when an MDL has not been established for the analyte in question.
N5. The component has been tentatively identified based on a retention time standard.
P Elevated practical quantitation limit(PQL)* due to matrix interference and/or sample dilution.
Q Holding time exceeded. These codes shall be used if the value is derived from a sample that was received,
prepared and/or analyzed after the approved holding time restrictions for sample preparation and analysis.
The value does not meet NPDES requirements.
Q1. Holding time exceeded prior to receipt by lab
Q2. Holding time exceeded following receipt by lab
S Not enough sample provided to prepare and/or analyze a method-required matrix spike(MS)and/or
duplicate(MSD).
U Indicates that the analyte was analyzed for but not detected above the reported practical quantitation limit
(PQL)*. The number value reported with the "U" qualifier is equal to the laboratory's PQL*.
V Indicates the analyte was detected in both the sample and the associated method blank.
Note: The value in the blank shall not be subtracted from the associated samples.
X Sample not analyzed for this constituent. This code is to be used if-
XL
f-XL Sample not screened for this compound.
X2. Sampled,but analysis lost or not performed-field error
X3. Sampled,but analysis lost or not performed-lab error
Y Elevated PQL* due to insufficient sample size
Z The presence or absence of the analyte cannot be verified. The sample analysis/results are not reported due
to:
ZI. Inability to analyze the sample.
Z2. Questions concerning data reliability.
*PQL The Practical Quantitation Limit(PQL) is defined as the lowest level achievable among laboratories within specified
limits during routine laboratory operation. The Practical Quantitation Limit(PQL) is "about three to five times the method
detection limit(MDL)and represents a practical and routinely achievable detection level with a relatively good certainty that
any reported value is reliable." (APHA, AWWA, WEE 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 18`x'ed.)
APPENDIX C- DATA FORMAT AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Data Format for Monthly submittals
Table C-1 provides the required data submittal spreadsheet format. Do not use commas, tabs, pipes or
LCFRP MOA Page 14 of 17

other common file delimiters anywhere in the table. The first row should contain the column headings
only. Column headings must include appropriate information on measurement units (mg/l, µg/1,
cfu/l 00ml, etc.). The second row must contain the method code. It is very important that the format of
the headings and the number and order of columns is consistent among all monthly submissions. The
DWQ station number must be provided (e.g. B6140000). An additional column containing the location
description is acceptable as long as it is consistently included. Include a comment column for
describing pertinent information related to the sampling event or specific samples. Ensure that there are
no missing values for station, date, time, and depth. Place all remark codes in a separate column as
demonstrated in Table C-1. If there is no result for a particular parameter leave the cell blank. Screen
all data for inappropriate or improbable values, such as a pH of 21.2.
Annual Report
The LCFRP is required to submit an annual report by April 30`x' for each year the Agreement is in effect.
The annual report will summarize all data collected in the past calendar year and contain the following
elements:
• Monitoring Station List to include station number, station description, county, accurate coordinates
(in decimal degrees to 4 decimal places using NAD83), stream classification, and 8 digit
hydrologic unit code (HUC).
• List of all certified laboratories that conducted work for the coalition in the past year and
laboratory methods used for all parameters. Summarize any laboratory certification issues for
individual parameters.
• Submit a CD that includes all monitoring data for the past year with a statistical summary for each
station. These data should be combined into a single table containing the year's reviewed and
finalized data, which may be placed on the DWQ web site. The annual statistical summary must
describe for each parameter at each location:
o Number of observations (N)
o Number of observations less than the laboratory reporting level (N<RL)
o Identify the water quality standard,action level, or other reference level (Ref)
o Identify the number of observations that do not meet the reference level (N>Ref) or
(N<Ref)
o Maximum observed value and Minimum observed value
o Annual arithmetic mean (use a geometric mean for fecal coliform data)
• Include a list of active LCFRP members with authorized representative updates, contact names,
email addresses and phone numbers. Identify the facility name and permit number. Provide a list
of members that are no longer active in the LCFRP.
• Provide a list of changes in members' names, ownerships, and discharge locations.
• Summarize all quality assurance and quality control issues and any field audits conducted.
• Summarize any significant issues, special studies, or projects.
• Describe any required data collection that was missed and provide an explanation.
• Review the monitoring program and suggest potential MOA modifications.
• Provide the Coalition's Website Address.
LCFRP MOA Page 15 of 17

Table C-1 File Format For Coalition Data Reporting
F-4�t" EJD
;A. "a--v
46
T
R,
g"
ZL'"4�.
-'X
z
NO.
IrL,
z
4w; E.,
6�
'k
• 0
lu U YU-- '-;zY FZ �4 -
00- n Z-
Date Time Depth 10 300 400 94 31613 530 82079 70953 610 625630 665 1665
Station j(m/d/yyyy)(hh:mm)j (m) 10 rmk 300�rmk j 400 rmk 94 rmk 1 31613 rmk 530 rmk 82079 rmk 709531 rmk 610 1 rmk 625 rmk 1630 rmk rmk
A1234567 8/19/2002 15:30 0.1 25.2 7.8 6.9 1331 110 45 22 23 Q1 0.1 0.2 0.3
69876543 8/20/2002 11:50 0.1 2721 7.1 72 125 30 4 5.61 5 0.14 0.6 0.31
B98765431 8/20/2002 11:501 1 28� 6.51 7 122 1 1 1
B9876543 8/20/2002 11:50� 2 25 6.7� 6.9 1191
B9876543 8/20/2002 11:50 3 17 5.5 6.7 120 1
C13579241 8/21/2002 16:10 0.1 22.1 3.1 6.2 233 15 BI 55 11
CO246813 9/1/2002 9:301 01 19.71 8.31 71 1 991 6000 B5 410 36 026 04 0.571
CO246813 10/1/2002 11:30 0.1 12 8.9 7.3 115 1200 B3 95 Al X3 016 J21 0.2 0.09
The reporting format table continues with metals and comment columns on the next page.
LCFRP MOA Page 16 of 17

Table C-1 Continued. File Format For Coalition Data Submittals
-y.r°^' �;' •e mC' s `,n'_ -"_'av a h
a ^ r.a�w [•^Y �:�w ro.r.P�" ��' �' �,..�ea ,`y 7:,•�- ..l -8' :^a<�, ;Y. "•s°s` "@�.'�,�A,°,•e° y°y ... -
rgg ..x,`'r. �]�,,a•�Y. �,9}�.' ,air. +rie � `.� 5: b•}.1, i�• `b�i�1• .+mss• ��x �,1 am°.e,�°•�w.ra ee�Fs'F.&�$;n
d•t'�'�y, •d 9f �4. { n. .—v; _ ; s" +. ° a�'.; ecpp. °.'°E�S�;&'• 'S
a~y.r•Y t.• �` °
dD •aJ" b0 2 : :,�' ,mit �7.;b °� '^� ' "K ;� ��;.�!„^,�. ed ie 1 c8. ,LR° .� `rPo. °`�,p~e�
�E�.;�•.L.,�^���-L 'ti'''�',,:'1 �j• Y•�w.C• Pl'Y.�.�°�]' �;��"•° ���., L' �1 ':1+9. �'k° ,*•. In.K. ��., e�'J 4s bD�4 £r s• =} s ;�'.n .. 5�r.
tf v fl • rq r�_c A ir' •�"S?.•, C`•'e rl ,a/p' :•_. e'
.m I to P L a° a,;w pp}• �+s+ cl °e
,v a,,;�,. -�}"��•= a.:.,:�•s.l. : �.' mL, ' ?c•+';.au i-11. •:..�`�. f^e. rb]i.' •� c�•$i , •re rte ,r... .. Id' .E'd • r .
..f• L"•1 ,O. P �.• �1wL' 'x' o'. L,tf C,'• r rer 'v I.• Pot er,a . f'
:�$Pr �U •eoV S: V r 7. .•*y _I;; `fes° I'a' �..i„ S eke,, °� elr r$ I.6• ivr. 'a•.�°y �� asp° b4e'�. r' _ 4 fl ' � :did; efl Oer• ".'J'..
s°a' U p :L• ' . -V"
" q x". :Si a 3-:`# a'r• u, :a• u,'n
°E .»-U "P^a ar °a ai. d, '.CiA a s<, `' `p':de y�o•e o
ti°• "zree ;._ :a,o,, N °p rN, BSE. "° 7;>• °�•� ew, .d•" w °« y > ^ Gomm"enfs L «; `
Qaac�r C �..,Can;��=�"S i�v`fl .d, �• '"u °�H,•p: 'v „Ca °C<. '°"6�C<�P ds °C°a. �'a rC °'�`-a•L: ,e•"4 7, ��°^os;j -. ,Y, •��° „"`�
,£.�a® a �.9s .0 °p.d' ,iar'gt^ 'C .eyyta iJ,i C sC?. C o`'O�s �w,Ce a c7 °• •C°� ar S 7=;as- u 5.s a5•• - _i5°�°C."°4 ;d,�
E,
It
='Ya, u_. c0 ra° }<C •. ,O°w `Lr. ad'.r 4., U,°tee Qy .. •hu
9er.•pM,p F°e•L -ALL •t O, . `z^ i=1',,, .N 'E'
�iU0`7 y `;r�°e *°b0.. Ca" y r.• "L L A
•j.• ', •�,° �.C ,f.QU• aU�..'rbzb` -`a°` ��. '�•N •�y' ' - •aC0 P °C,Y �.d`� �� "s U °•. d. ".,a ^°`�''ed 'a: -.e�,ter.+'°. `8, Wct:
��$$,,eV •,� J.U,"d m1.}V4, r.+ ! �J.. :.t °1 .s •.dr, Ems' ,p.•`�r ;b4°2^i os . P - �,'d"ve .�," :�, °.a. ^�,•
±. u''•#5 - ,�-�' r° S .i. �• +,o., ".�. .f.c-4 "�".L' .T... P_ / 'l Ps a. C ••re:-• •f Vii. +...r.
- 'd '�.• �'•'..+• wy�'.�� �:�. .e•'�,,•.. (• �� '•v - •4.' ".T.� �SS.S$4 +t '��r�i4�-�•i4•�'` ,�': -`.�:- . �-f - .ve -+�,-
= «9027-�.r�° 1'0 4� 1051`' -1092 1']05°^ "'1045'�� ' `1055^'°i ':� •d002� �t`.'% -71900'
. g.':. . qry R m •° ° _ ¢g� .. t, .. .•. - ,qx.
g,C, w..gtre.. Y"• .�' °
102T' iTnk 103.4_.rmk�'1N4 rmk,dl'067a.iink- •l05°1,:rnik 1092•krriik` 1105;°rink =1'045 rmk,� :1055° 'rmko °'1002= ;rnik 74900 imk�° rnik9-
130 11 3 27 44 610 t0 0.21 12 12
120 10 U 2 U 25 U 2 U1 5101 101 U 10 U1 0 2 - U 10 U l0 U
Secchi depth 1.2 meters
333 101 U 21 U 25 U 2 U 624 10 U 10 U 0.2 U 101 U 10 U Nutrient Sample Spilled
120 10 U 2 U 25 U 2 U 510 10 U 10 U 0.2 U 10 U 10 U 2.5"of rain on 8/31/2002
120 10 U 2 U 25 U 2 U 510 101 U1 10 U1 0.21 U 10 U 10 U
LCFRP MOA Page 17 of 17