#134_2017_0316_TS_FINAL

INSPECTION REPORT ROUTING SHEET
To be attached to all inspection reports in-house only.
Laboratory Cert. #:
134
Laboratory Name:
Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
Inspection Type:
Commercial Maintenance
Inspector Name(s):
Tonja Springer and Todd Crawford
Inspection Date:
March 16, 2017
Date Forwarded for Initial
Review:
May 9, 2017
Initial Review by:
Jason Smith
Date Initial Review
Completed:
May 11, 2017
Cover Letter to use:
❑ Insp. Initial
❑Insp. No Finding
❑Corrected
® Insp. Reg
❑Insp. CP
❑Insp. Reg. Delay
Unit Supervisor/Chemist III:
Todd Crawford
Date Received:
May 15, 2017
Date Forwarded to Admin.:
June 2, 2017
Date Mailed:
June 5, 2017
Special Mailing Instructions:

WaterResources
ENV I R,ONi N6HW AL QUAL.?T Y
June 5, 2017
134
Ms. Connie Flowers
Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
1094 Addor Road
Aberdeen, NC 28315
ROY COOPER
,,,,,,
MICHEAL S. REGAN
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Subject: North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification (NC WW/GW LC)
Maintenance Inspection
Dear Ms. Flowers:
Enclosed is a report for the inspection performed on March 16, 2017 by Tonja Springer. I apologize for
the delay in getting this report to you. Where Finding(s) are cited in this report, a response is required.
Within thirty days of receipt, please supply this office with a written item for item description of how these
Finding(s) were corrected. Please describe the steps taken to prevent recurrence and include an
implementation date for each corrective action. If the Finding(s) cited in the enclosed report are not
corrected, enforcement actions may be recommended. For Certification maintenance, your laboratory
must continue to carry out the requirements set forth in 15A NCAC 2H .0800.
A copy of the laboratory's Certified Parameter List at the time of the audit is attached. This list will reflect
any changes made during the audit. Copies of the checklists completed during the inspection may be
requested from this office. Thank you for your cooperation during the inspection. If you wish to obtain an
electronic copy of this report by email or if you have questions or need additional information, please
contact me at [phone] ext. 251.
Sincerely,
Todd Crawford
Technical Assistance & Compliance Specialist
NC WW/GW Laboratory Certification Branch
Attachment
cc: Dana Satterwhite, Tonja Springer, Master File# 134
Water Sciences Section
NC WastewaterlGroundwater Laboratory Certification Branch
1623 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
Location: 4405 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: http:I/deg.nc.gov/about/d iv is ion slwater-resources/water-resources-data/water-sciences-home-page/laboratorycertif!cation -branch

On -Site Inspection Report
LABORATORY NAME:
NPDES PERMIT #:
ADDRESS:
CERTIFICATE #:
DATE OF INSPECTION:
TYPE OF INSPECTION:
AUDITOR(S):
LOCAL PERSON(S) CONTACTED:
I. INTRODUCTION:
Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
NCO037508
1094 Addor Road
Aberdeen, NC 28315
134
March 16, 2017
Commercial Maintenance
Tonja Springer and Todd Crawford
Janna Scherer Nall and Connie Flowers
This laboratory was inspected by representatives of the North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater
Laboratory Certification (NC WW/GW LC) program to verify its compliance with the requirements of
15A NCAC 2H .0800 for the analysis of environmental samples.
GENERAL COMMENTS:
The auditors found this lab to have excellent organization. This was evident from viewing records
and observing the layout and actions which help streamline the day to day activities of the lab. The
staff were receptive to recommendations and worked quickly to institute all necessary changes.
The laboratory's corrective action responses, that were received prior to writing the inspection
report, were thorough and included proper documentation and strategies to prevent recurrence of
those Findings. The laboratory is commended on this effort.
The laboratory type was changed in our database from Commercial to Municipal at the laboratory's
request effective April 27, 2017.
All required Proficiency Testing (PT) samples for the 2017 PT calendar year have not yet been
analyzed. The laboratory is reminded that results must be received by this office directly from the
vendor by September 30, 2017.
The laboratory submitted their Quality Assurance (QA) and/or Standard Operating Procedures
(SOP) document(s) in advance of the inspection. These documents were reviewed and editorial
and substantive revision requirements and recommendations were made by this program
outside of this formal report process. Although subsequent revisions were not requested to be
submitted, they must be completed by March 16, 2018.
The laboratory is reminded that any time changes are made to laboratory procedures, the
laboratory must update the QA/SOP document(s) and inform relevant staff. Any changes made
in response to the pre -audit review or to Findings, Recommendations or Comments listed in this
report must be incorporated to insure the method is being performed as stated, references to
methods are accurate, and the QA and/or SOP document(s) is in agreement with each
approved practice, test, analysis, measurement, monitoring procedure or regulatory requirement
being used in the laboratory. In some instances, the laboratory may need to create an SOP to
document how new functions or policies will be implemented.

Page 2
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
The laboratory is also reminded that SOPS are intended to describe procedures exactly as they
are to be performed. Use of the word "should" is not appropriate when describing requirements
(e.g., Quality Control (QC) frequency, acceptance criteria, etc.). Evaluate all SOPs for the proper
use of the word "should".
Laboratory Fortified Matrix (LFM) and Laboratory Fortified Matrix Duplicate (LFMD) are also
known as Matrix Spike (MS) and Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD) and may be used
interchangeably in this report.
Requirements that reference 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (A), stating "All analytical data pertinent
to each certified analysis must be filed in an orderly manner so as to be readily available for
inspection upon request", are intended to be a requirement to document information pertinent to
reconstructing final results and demonstrating method compliance. Use of this requirement is not
intended to imply that existing records are not adequately maintained unless the Finding speaks
directly to that.
Contracted analyses are performed by Research & Analytical Laboratories (Certification # 34).
Current Approved Procedure documents for the analysis of the facility's currently certified Field
Parameters were provided at the time of the inspection.
III. FINDINGS, REQUIREMENTS, COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Documentation
Comment: Error corrections were not always properly performed on the TSS benchsheet. There
were a few instances of write-overs. NC WW/GW LC Policy states: All documentation errors must
be corrected by drawing a single line through the error so that the original entry remains legible.
Entries shall not be obliterated by erasures or markings. Wite-Out®, correction tape or similar
products designed to obliterate documentation are not to be used. Write the correction adjacent to
the error. The correction must be initialed by the responsible individual and the date of change
documented. All data and log entries must be written in indelible ink. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., a statement that the correct procedure for error correction was discussed
with staff and notice posted for the laboratory with an implementation date of March 20, 2017) was
received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding
Quality Control
Comment: Duplicate analyses are not required for Field parameters (i.e., pH, Temperature,
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Settleable Residue, Total Residual Chlorine and Conductivity).
Bacteria- Coliform Fecal — Standard Methods, 9222D-1997 (MF) (Aqueous)
Comment: Incubator temperature was only being checked one time per day. Standard
Methods, 9020 B-2005. (4) (n) states: When incubator is in use, monitor and record calibration -
corrected temperature twice daily. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a log to
record temperature in the morning and in the afternoon with an implementation date of April 3,
2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this
Finding.
Comment: The start time that the sample is filtered was not recorded on the benchsheet to show
that no more than 30 minutes passed before filters were placed into the incubator. North Carolina
Administrative Code, 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (A) states: All analytical data pertinent to each
certified analysis must be filed in an orderly manner to be readily available for inspection upon

Page 3
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
request. This is considered pertinent information. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e.
an updated benchsheet that included filtration start time with an implementation date of April 3,
2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this
Finding.
Comment: Duplicates were not analyzed at the required frequency. North Carolina Administrative
Code, 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (C) states: Analyze five percent of all samples in duplicate to
document precision. Laboratories analyzing less than 20 samples per month must analyze at
least one duplicate each month samples are analyzed. Notification of acceptable corrective
action (i.e., a statement that two duplicates will be analyzed each month with an implementation
date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is
necessary for this Finding.
Comment: Final results were not calculated correctly when no filters contained colony counts in
the 20-60 range. Results were not calculated correctly on the following data reviewed: December
6, 2016 sample #1206030 reported 9 cfu/100mL instead of 8 cfu/100mL, December 7, 2016
sample #120744 reported 7 cfu/100mL instead of 6 cfu/100mL and December 9, 2016 sample
#1209063 reported 4 cfu/100mL instead of 5 cfu/100mL. There were 3 dilutions (100 mL, 50 mL
and 20 mL) analyzed for those samples. None of the samples contained counts in the 20-60 range.
Only the counts of the 100 ml samples were being reported. The miscalculated results were only
off by 1 cfu/100mL and did not exceed the facility's compliance limit. The NC WW/GW LC Fecal
Coliform Reporting Policy document states: If all counts are below the lower limit (20) of the
ideal counting range: (a) Select the count most nearly acceptable and compute the count
using the general formula. Report the count as an Estimated Count per 100 ml: or (b) Total the
counts on all filters and report as number per 100 ml. For example, if 50, 25, and 10 ml portions
were examined and counts were 15, 6, and 0 coliform colonies respectively, calculate results as
follows and report the count as 25 colonies per 100 ml. Notification of acceptable corrective action
(i.e., a statement that the final results are now being calculated using the 2 (b) rule when no
colonies are in the 20-60 range with an implementation date of March 20, 2017) was received by
email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: The NIST thermometer used to verify the fecal water bath thermometer is only
graduated to 0.2°C. Standard Methods, 9020 B 4 (a) — 2005 states: Use glass or metal
thermometer graduated in increments to monitor required analytical temperature range for
incubators and refrigerators. For example, use thermometer graduated to 0.1 °C for incubators
operated above 40°C. Annually, calibrate and record accuracy of all temperature -monitoring
devices by comparison with a NIST certified thermometer, or equivalent. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., a statement that a new NIST traceable thermometer in increments of 0.1 °C
was purchased on March 23, 2017 and documentation of the calibration on April 10, 2017) was
received by email on March 24, 2017 and June 1, 2017. No further response is necessary for
this Finding.
A. Finding: Consumable materials used for the Fecal Coliform MF method are not tested.
Requirement: Before a new lot of consumable materials are used for the Fecal Coliform
MF method, those materials must be tested and compared to those currently in use to
ensure they are reliable. Consumable materials included in this requirement are:
membrane filters and/or pads (often packaged together) and media. It is recommended
that only one consumable be tested at a time. At a minimum, make single analyses
on five positive samples that will yield 20-60 colonies for both the current lot and the new
lot. There are two options for determining acceptance of results:
Option 1: Follow the acceptance criteria described in Standard Methods 9020 B 5. f 2) a)
and b). Option 2: Compare the average colony count of each five -sample set and
evaluate against your routine sample duplicate acceptance criterion. Ref: NC WW/GW

Page 4
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
LC Policy. Please obtain (i.e., purchase or borrow) a new lot of media and perform
the consumable testing on your current media and submit the results of this study
with your response to this report.
Comment: A copy of the Fecal Coliform Reporting Policy document was provided at the
time of the inspection.
B. Finding: Culture positive plates are not analyzed with each batch of prepared media.
Requirement: A culture positive must be analyzed with each batch of prepared media
and once per week for purchased ready -to -use media. A sample volume that yields a
countable plate must be analyzed so that individual colonies may be verified to have
proper morphology (i.e. color, shape, size, surface appearance). Ref: NC WW/GW LC
Policy.
C. Finding: The laboratory is not monitoring the quality of the reagent water used in fecal
coliform analysis.
Requirement: At a minimum, reagent water used to prepare buffered dilution/rinse
water or media must be analyzed at least every twelve months for the following
parameters: Specific Conductance, Total Organic Carbon, Cadmium, Chromium,
Copper, Nickel, Lead, and Zinc.
Maximum Acceptable Limits are:
Total Organic Carbon < 1.0 mg/L
Specific Conductance < 2 pmhos/cm
Heavy Metals, single element < 0.05 mg/L
Heavy Metals, Total of cited elements < 0.10 mg/L
If the facility is using vendor purchased dilution/rinse water, this testing is not required as
long as the Certificate of Analysis from the manufacturer meets these requirements and
is kept on file. Ref: NC WW/GW LC Policy.
D. Finding: Sample bottle sterility is not verified.
Requirement: Minimally test for sterility one sample bottle per batch sterilized in the
laboratory, or at a set percentage such as 1 to 4%. This is performed by adding sterile
dilution/rinse water to the bottle after sterilization and then subsequently analyzing it as a
sample. Document results. If sample bottles or bags are purchased pre -sterilized,
verification of sterilization is not required if the laboratory maintains copies of the
Certificate of Analysis from the vendor. Ref: NC WW/GW LC Policy.
E. Finding: Plate comparison counts are not being conducted.
Requirement: For routine performance evaluation, repeat counts on one or more
positive samples at least monthly, record results, and compare the counts with those of
other analysts testing the same samples. Replicate counts for the same analyst should
agree within 5% (within analyst repeatability of counting) and those between analysts
should agree within 10% (between analysts reproducibility of counting). If they do not
agree, initiate investigation and any necessary corrective action. Ref: Standard Methods,
9020 B-2005. (9) (a).

Page 5
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
BOD — Standard Methods, 5210 B-2001 (Aqueous)
Comment: Samples were not properly adjusted for pH. An industry sample analyzed on
December 7, 2016 for Thermal Metal was diluted more than 0.5% during pH adjustment.
Standard Methods, 5210 B-2001. (4) (b) (1) states: Check pH; if it is not between 6.0 and 8.0,
adjust sample temperature to 20 ± 3 °C, then adjust pH to 7.0 to 7.2 using a solution of sulfuric
acid or sodium hydroxide of such strength that the quantity of reagent does not dilute the
sample by more than 0.5%. The pH of dilution water should not be affected by the lowest
sample dilution. Always seed samples that have been pH adjusted. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., a statement that 10N H2SO4 & 10N NaOH will be used to adjust pH and
confirmation that sample isn't diluted more than 0.5% with an implementation date of April 3,
2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this
Finding.
Comment: Influent samples analyzed more than six hours after collection were not seeded.
Standard Methods 5210 B-2001. (4) (d) states: Some samples (for example, some untreated
industrial wastes, disinfected wastes, high -temperature wastes, wastes having pH values less
than 6 or greater than 8, or wastes stored more than 6 h after collection) do not contain a
sufficient microbial population. Seed such samples by adding a population of suitable
microorganisms. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that all samples
are now being seeded if greater than 6 hours from collection time with an implementation date
of March 20, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is
necessary for this Finding.
Comment: Seed controls with less than 2.0 mg/L Dissolved Oxygen (DO) depletion were used
for seed correction calculation. The seed correction factor was incorrectly calculated on March
12, 2016. The error did not affect the final result. Standard Methods, 5210 B-2001. (6) (d)
states: For the ratio method, divide the DO depletion by the volume of seed in milliliters for
each seed control bottle having a 2.0 mq/L depletion and greater than 1.0 mg/L minimum
residual DO and average the results. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a
statement that seed corrections are now being calculated correctly, using the seed controls
having a 2.0 mg/L depletion and greater than 1.0 mg/L minimum residual DO with an
implementation date of March 20, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further
response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: The laboratory was not stirring the seed during transfer to BOD bottles.
POLYSEEDO manufacturer's instructions state: Continue to gently stir the POLYSEEDO
solution while adding to seed controls, GGA standard and all samples. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., a statement that seed will be stirred while transferring to bottles with an
implementation date of March 20, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further
response is necessary for this Finding.
F. Finding: The documentation does not demonstrate that initial DO readings are measured
within 30 minutes of sample dilution. This is considered pertinent information.
Requirement: After preparing dilution, measure initial DO within 30 min. Ref: Standard
Methods, 5210 B-2001. (5) (g).
Requirement: All analytical data pertinent to each certified analysis must be filed in an
orderly manner so as to be readily available for inspection upon request. Ref: 15A NCAC
2H .0805 (a) (7) (A).
Comment: Currently, only"time in the incubator" is documented. In order to show that 30
minutes or less have passed from preparing the dilution to measuring the initial DO, a

Page 6
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
second time is required. This is often achieved by documenting the time the dilutions are
prepared.
Nitrogen, Ammonia —Standard Methods, 4500 NH3 D-1997 (Aqueous)
Comment: The laboratory was not analyzing an LFM/LFMD. Standard Methods, 4020 B-2009,
Rev. 2011, Table 4020: 1 and (2) (g) state: When appropriate for the analyte (Table 4020: 1),
include at least one LFM/LFMD daily or with each batch of 20 or fewer samples. Notification of
acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that an LFM/LFMD has been added to the
benchsheet, and an updated benchsheet which includes space for the LFM/LFMD with an
implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further
response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: The laboratory was not analyzing a calibration blank after every tenth sample and at
the end of each sample group. NC WW/GW LC Policy states: The calibration blank and
calibration verification standard (mid -range) must be analyzed initially (i.e., prior to sample
analysis), after every tenth sample and at the end of each sample group to check for carry over
and calibration drift. If either fall outside established quality control acceptance criteria,
corrective action must be taken (e.g., repeating sample determinations since the last acceptable
calibration verification, repeating the initial calibration, etc.). Notification of acceptable corrective
action (i.e., an updated benchsheet which includes a space for the calibration blank after every
10 samples and at the end of the sample group, with an implementation date of April 3, 2017)
was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: The laboratory was not analyzing a Method Blank. Standard Method, 4020 B-2009.
(2) (d) states: Include at least one MB daily or with each batch of 20 or fewer samples, whichever
is more frequent. Any constituent(s) recovered must generally be less than or equal to one-half the
reporting level (unless the method specifies otherwise). This may include re -analyzing the sample
batch. North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Policy states: The
concentration of Method Blanks (MB) and Continuing Calibration Blanks (CCB) must not exceed
50% of the reporting limit standard concentration. Notification of acceptable corrective action
(i.e., an updated benchsheet which includes a space for the Method Blank with an
implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further
response is necessary for this Finding
Comment: The laboratory was not documenting that the sample pH was adjusted to >11 S.0
during the analysis. This is considered pertinent information. North Carolina Administrative Code,
15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (A) states: All analytical data pertinent to each certified analysis must
be filed in an orderly manner so as to be readily available for inspection upon request. Notification
of acceptable corrective action (i.e., an updated benchsheet which includes space to document the
pH > 11 S.U, with an implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24,
2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: Samples were not being checked for Total Residual Chlorine and neutralized if
necessary. This only applies if analyzing influent or industrial pre-treatment samples, since the
WWTP utilizes Ultra Violet disinfection. Standard Methods, 4500 NH3 A-1997. (2) states: Residual
Chlorine reacts with ammonia; remove by sample pretreatment. If a sample is likely to contain
residual chlorine, immediately upon collection, treat with dechlorinating agent as in 4500-NH3.
B.3d. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that Total Residual Chlorine
strips, with a detection limit of 0.5 mg/L, are being used to check for Total Residual Chlorine with
an implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further
response is necessary for this Finding.

Page 7
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
Comment: Values less than the established reporting limit were being reported on the
electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR). The laboratory's reporting limit is 1 mg/L based
upon the lowest calibration standard. North Carolina Administrative Code, 15A NCAC 2H .0805
(a) (7) (1) states: For analytical procedures requiring analysis of a series of standards, the
concentrations of those standards must bracket the concentration of the samples analyzed. One
of the standards must have a concentration equal to the laboratory's lower reporting
concentration for the parameter involved. Notification of acceptable corrective action (i.e., a
statement that the laboratory will begin reporting effluent concentrations below 1 mg/L as <1 mg/L
on February eDMR) was received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is
necessary for this Finding.
Residue, Suspended —Standard Methods, 2540 D-1997 (Aqueous)
Comment: Filters were not weighed to constant weight prior to sample analysis, nor was a dry
filter blank analyzed with each set of samples. NC WW/GW LC Policy states: If pre -prepared
filters are not used, the method requires that filters must be weighed to a constant weight after
washing. Repeat cycle of drying, cooling, desiccating, and weighing until a constant weight is
obtained or until weight change is less than 4% of the previous weighing or 0.5 mg, whichever is
less. In lieu of this process, it is acceptable to analyze a single daily dry filter blank to fulfill the
method requirement of drying all filters to a constant weight prior to analysis. Notification of
acceptable corrective action (i.e., a statement that a dry filter blank is being analyzed each analysis
day with an implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24, 2017.
No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Conductivity —Standard Methods, 2510 B-1997 (Aqueous)
Comment: The incorrect true value was documented for the check standard on the
benchsheet. The true value documented was 100 Nmhos/cm instead of 99.8 Nmhos/cm. The
NC WW/GW LC Approved Procedure for the Analysis of Specific Conductance (Conductivity)
states: The following must be documented in indelible ink whenever sample analysis is
performed: True value of the calibration verification check standard. Notification of acceptable
corrective action (i.e., updated benchsheet which included the correct check standard value of 99.8
Nmhos/cm with an implementation date of April 3, 2017) was received by email on March 24,
2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Comment: The laboratory benchsheet was lacking pertinent data: meter calibration time and
time of sample analysis. The NC WW/GW LC Approved Procedure for the Analysis of Specific
Conductance (Conductivity) states: The following must be documented in indelible ink whenever
sample analysis is performed: Meter calibration time and time of sample analysis. The North
Carolina Administrative Code, 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (g) (1) states: Certified Data must consist of
date collected, time collected, sample site, sample collector, and sample analysis time. Notification
of acceptable corrective action (i.e., an updated benchsheet which included the meter
calibration time and time of sample analysis with an implementation date of April 3, 2017) was
received by email on March 24, 2017. No further response is necessary for this Finding.
Dissolved Oxygen — Standard Methods, 4500 O G-2001 (Aqueous)
Comment: The barometric pressure at the time of meter calibration is not documented. The NC
WW/GW LC Approved Procedure for the Analysis of DO states: Calibration documentation must
include the following, where applicable to the instrument used and the type of calibration
performed: elevation, temperature, barometric pressure (in mmHg), salinity, slope, or
%efficiency. Acceptable corrective action (i.e., the benchsheet was updated to include barometric
pressure) was performed by the laboratory and approved by the auditor during the inspection. No
further response is necessary for this Finding.

Page 8
#134 Moore Co. Water Pollution Control Plant
IV. PAPER TRAIL INVESTIGATION:
The paper trail consisted of comparing original records (e.g., laboratory benchsheets, logbooks,
etc.) and contract lab reports to electronic Discharge Monitoring Reports (eDMRs) submitted to
the North Carolina Division of Water Resources. The following data were reviewed for Moore Co.
Water Pollution Control Plant (NPDES permit # NC0037508): Field parameter data for June
2016; BOD, Fecal Coliform and Ammonia data for July 2016; TSS data for January 2017. No
transcription errors were detected. The facility appears to be doing a good job of accurately
transcribing data.
V. CONCLUSIONS:
Correcting the above -cited Finding(s) will help this laboratory to produce quality data and meet
Certification requirements. The inspector would like to thank the staff for its assistance during
the inspection and data review process. Please respond to all Findings and include
supporting documentation and implementation dates for each corrective action.
Report prepared by: Tonja Springer Date: May 9, 2017
Report reviewed by: Jason Smith Date: May 11, 2017

E
U)
E
k
k
a
/
t:
J
2 \
7 ) >
� 5 \
/
Q E e
? ..
{
) @ = {
\ X
G u u e
)
\
/ �
/ w
¥ ■
§
} k
\ §
\ u
00
} (
2 $
3 )
a \ 0
] §
\ z
) } / f
] ) ) ) w § J $
7 § f
/ / / \ ( i \ / 2 - 11 §
�E I /000% °z± /
)_ m m»\ 6 ) E 2 u 8
) f ( (� ) 6 2° = m e CD
k v a G 2 3 0 0 } =/ 3//
z§ 0 o\ o\ o k o 0 6 0) G
2 0 ± § j § / $ 00
$ R { E m
M k u § L o z
] 7 a)� co ° i ° / ° 0 ° z ®t co ƒ ® ( °
7