SW6200102_Revision Letter_08JUN2020_20200608

Mason&Hanger
ADay&Zimmermann Company
June 8, 2020
Jim Farkas
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Program
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
1612 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1612
Re: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Permit No. SW6200102
Human Performance Training Center (PN 79443)
Cumberland County
Mr. Farkas
Enclosed please find a revision to the storwamter control plans and report previously submitted to your office.
These revisions are in response to your request for additional information. In addition to the revisions made on
the plans and in the report, below is some additional clarifications. These are in the order listed on your request
letter.
1) The information concerning the wetland delineations can be found on CG101. Additional information can be
found in the report.
2) The information on the Supplemental EZ form is correct. The calculation sheet has been revised to reflect the
open area as discussed on the conference call on June 4, 2020.
3) a) An original signed in pen copy of the cover page will be sent along with the hard copies.
b) The BUA has been delineated on CG750 and CG751. This is an old roadway within the complex.
Attached please find an aerial image confirming this. All existing BUA will be removed.
In accordance with the Permit Application, only the existing BUA that will remain after development is
reported on the application. We followed the instructions on the application which state to not report any
existing BUA that is to be removed and which will be replaced by new BUA. All existing BUA is being
removed. As discussed on the conference call, we are matching the information on the application with the
information on the EZ form. The percent BUA matches between the two as discussed in the call (the EZ
sheet rounded automatically). The total new BUA is listed. The existing BUA to be removed is taken into
account in the calculations.
The breakdown of the BUA is noted on CG751 for clarity.
The bioretention sheet has been clarified for the existing BUA and areas
Mason & Hanger 300 West Vine Street Suite 1300 Lexington, KY 40507 t 859.252.9980 f 859.253.0781 masonandhanger.com

4) As discussed on the conference call, a more recent SHWT investigation has been performed. The results of
this investigation have been used for calculations. A minimum of 5.5' separation exists between the bottom of
the cell and the SHWT.
Although we have made the corrections in the plans, I have also attached separately information for each
comment for your help. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding these changes, or need any
additional clarifications or information. We appreciate your help with this project.
Very truly yours,
MASON & HANGER
Digitally signed by F. Michael Mayer, PE
DN: C=US,
F. Michael Mayer, PE E=[e-mail],
CN="F. Michael Mayer, PE"
Date: 2020.06.08 22:31:10-04'00'
F. Michael Mayer, PE
[e-mail]
O 859.280.35571 M 859.202.1838

E
M
M
CG110
R ®w
So —PESO)
T:OR \ El \ \
E„Ts) lk \
T° H \
EAGLE TALON DRIVE
CORE " —
jOAe`SE's OINv E)MPH
-- z--- ' — —
I I I I I DN zss / I ELE RE I c s
/ I oL1%
/ ON CEP, / I I BAr�HO
mEVA I I
g
IIIII I I I I
IIIII I I I �
I ICONTRACTORI
STAGING ARE
I I \ I I I
1.1
IIII�I�I \ I
ELNZE EATD\\
H°� m \ za,� �I I
•\ I
AS Al I II I I I II I \ \ \ \
I h _
\\,/m II II II III I III LE�TDNzss \ �E\z�z \ � T��a`--I
PA3 RE HOLE �Z \
III E ELEV
2fi
I I I I I I
( I I I \—ODEDAREA I\ _ —21P_ Ell
DS (IIIII \ z
I
GENERAL NOTES
1. REFER TO G-202 AND C-001 FOR WORKZONE AND
GENERAL CIVIL NOTES.
2. DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE GRADED TO MATCH
EXISTING SLOPES AND GRASSED. REFER TO CG701
AND CG801 SERIES FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND
PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS.
3. ALL RCP DRAINAGE PIPES TO BE CLASS III UNLESS NOTED.
PERFORATED PIPES TO HAVE MINIMUM 1.9 SQUARE
INCHES OPEN AREA PER LINEAL FOOT OF PIPE.
(CONTECH A-2000 OR EQUIVALENT). ALL PIPES 12" OR
LESS IN DIAMETER TO BE PVC. CONTRACTOR
MAY USE STEEL REINFORCED HDPE PIPE (SRHDPE) IN
-----�
LIEU OF RCP PIPE FOR ANY DRAINAGE STRUCTURE.
---28�----------
ENV.:Sow\ \ ®.-�S'
R=:sos
l \
�z
�0
4. NO UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (UST) ARE
-----
/
J �°oa s \—
® E
J_E/
\ �� \
---- ANTICIPATED TO BE FOUND DURING CONSTRUCTION.
HOWEVER, IMMEDIATELY CONTACT THE CONTRACTING
OFFICER IF A UST IS ENCOUNTERED DURING
CONSTRUCTION AND TO CONSULT WITH FORT BRAGG
DPW ON REMOVAL PROCEDURE.
/ /o==zSZS
/
J
/ w°^°°ESST°" /
' 5. REFER TO SHEET CG601 FOR STORM DRAINAGE
1Rvz— (IROMASBwLTS)
/
/ z
EACLETaLON°Ri E SCHEDULE
l-II I I I I I I I I III POINT OF CONTACT:
°ar a s NH III \ I I I III III MONICA STEPHENSON
I DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC WORKS
�l / I IIIII I 2175 REILY ROAD STOP A
E, I lIl ;I [e-mail]
\--:SS\ HUMAN PERFORMANCE. i �// I I ARNOLOT [phone]
�— TRAINING CENTER
\ (HPTC)
\ — \ FF EL 26175
\\ Ij j m Iljlljll \
PL
� I \
\ II I III
DE ° \'ze3\ I I p I"
°
r
//�I UI11
zs, J
,e yl
-;-----� �`� °E• -- \; ° /Jy E oo°� 1� °°i LEGEND
en 10 TENTIO AREA #2 oa R. ° ° \ —
fr---a•----�� cow es °S Rb - CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
N RR S R;a
\Ljrl IIIII I —RD— ROOF DRAIN.
s I °
Sos RER E STORM DRAINAGE PIPING.
\ \ \ A ON :SSD \ �. \ S,o �/ I III I I \ — SD— REFER TO SHEETS CG501 THRU CG503.
\\ \\ gym° Il�llll I I '�
s0� I I (IIIIIII / \\ J HWA ® REFER TO DETAIL TYPICAL HEADWALL.
1L SHEET CG507.
CBTYICAL CATCH BASIN.
-1 Q REFER TO SHEETS CG504 THRU CG506.
\ — \
\ \ .1- ----- aNVERTE)- - < �,• ,o uT. - - --
p
—•• —s o "�" " z OR=zSS.Ts 6. ALL FRAMES, GRATES AND COVERS FOR ANY
CG 111 - DRAINAGE STRUCTURES IN PAVEMENT SHALL BE
RATED FOR HS-20 LOADING.
�."
s0 — SDILTS) zS, zE — — — — — _ ` — — _
sz ���
;S _ — = 7. ALLSBIO-RENTENTION AREAS SHLL HAVE SOD INSTALLED
-----_� — / — --
� cos,__ a — //�S ON IDE SLOPES AND FINISHED GRADE.
I /co BIO RETENTI IN pi z r— -- — -- — — < ---- -- --- — -- --- —�@z-
------- o it l
H / � CO /
s �.. S. ---- -- ---
----e-- -----
Gz
-- --- - -- - ---- -- --- -
-_-
---- s=-- ---- -- -
I
__; -- --- - N- --- -� a- ro F�1 ED --- -a IL1 _ 7 to
_ _ _ _ _ _I:I _
L 1 ,.
y _ - v - -- r- - ED 11 WETLANDS
:SD
o
-- --- -- =
Ioo J� --- -- - --- -- - -- --- - -- -- m N / �, 1 as \ NO WETLANDS EXIST ON SITE OR WITHIN 100'
S OF THE EDGE OF THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS
fef I o os os os e°S s I \ REFER TO USFWS NWI MAP, RECORD OF
°O -co
° I I �/ / \ I \\ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION AND
ti" i o i , i l I 1 IIIII WETLAND MAP OF PATRIOT POINT AREA FROM
Im mI �w I / III I PIN 69287 SOF INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT, ALL
91 I i II i 1 I CONTAINED WITHIN STORMWATER REPORT.
777777)
I
�"Po ,9'as ,E) \ _ .�_ �.. I / �N I I I I r IELEVA,;DN=2E27s
I TYPICAL CURB INLET.
ARHIN°LLT CI-1 ❑i
REFER TO SHEETS CG504 THRU CG506.
°RE HOE s� s
ELE"A2,;,
TI�=zss \\\\ ° /j\•.—•( —\�/wOO \ \/\ \ \ � \ \\ J// '\ \ \ \�\ \ \\\\ \ \ \\ \\\\\ \\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \1\\\\ \s \ �\\\\\\I \ \\\\\ \\ /I ' I IlIlIIi JIIIII�//I // a/g9 =JP/m J �IIII IlIlII jlI II �II wR
IIII °\\
\
GI-1QO TRYEPFIECRALTOGRATED
IL INLET.
z REFER TO DETAIL 2, SHEEETT
CCGG5500
89.
Ili.. %,,
T TYPICAL STORM MANHOLE.
SDMH-1
ELIS
comm k oR"
S. °_
ELIR„„z\� \ 0'
woA„EA 40' 20' 0 40' 80' 12.
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=40,_0, N
\ \ w
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATE DATA
cAR'•'
\ A I I I HORIZONTAL DATUM: r°qN O
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD83. Q' ��2'
: VERTICAL DATUM:
I I
=2Q
. OF /// UNITS OF MEASURE: U.S. SURVEY FEET.
COORDINATES SHOWN ,NG,NORTHNGANDELEVATON.wOooEDAREA ro"g''P�•y.
?
.:
I I
I . I
US Army Corps
of Engineers'
a
x
o:
z
?w Z
U
00 a
of
z U 0
a 0
U'- Q Q
a2�i w
m° a
p cE CD
I Z
x
0
Q
N
SHEET ID
CG101
to

M
/
_OE w
\ of \ \
To IN,
EAGLE TALON DRIVE /16g
ASPHALT
CONC
—_- _ ---
2�- — -
/ u-e 5 e6 (FROM ASBUILTE) /
I � / 1. —x66-
=x a.R /
aooEss To.„vE i / �— Ece TALON ORivE
25_
B.1 OF H RANT
f
- ss— — — — — —z� — Towzs11ou / \ ■ �� — —
_ _ / / aecEssro „v si _ — — - — — — — HO_Ese`:o N ERTsis) \ ■ — —_
--- --L9Z���� ■ "/-- I 83� `-----xe­_�/62— -- --xi
1 .12
/
BREHOLE
EEV ...
mEAaON-266, PREDEVELOPMENT �/ ?III /�I�NJ-
I I DRAINAGE AREA 1
EXISTING BUA( IE E a',ION �.66
TO BE REMOVED
I I I I : I \ III' I'I ■I ///// s- 66 � �
I � I I I' I \ III I � :I ■I „I I I II \ i V3, \�
r I ICONTRACTORI /9.— I I ■ (IIII
I III p II1111
(STAGING AREA( _
I111111\ I I I----------------------------------------------------------B­01 BORE
/ IIII 'III HOLE\\ I I �I� I IIII 111 I
EXISTING BUA
I I r I \,�\ I I■ TO BE REMOVED I
PAR.„OPOT PT _x`„ca3P„A
IIII � I I • \ � II � � 7 �I III � I v
■ v
IIII I m ME�a.1'.` "25R`2v v v � v � I I I I _ �Pa6 v
IIII I° „°�a 6EATo= '� a 60R„OBE
E�Ea�
P EDEVLOPMENT vv IIII S 1 /I 1 v
DRAINAGE -AREA 2
I 1 \ / lI ■\ 1 Ti
WooOEcaREa � _ -x6�
II I II I I I'WOODED
IIIIII �
\ o36ORE„OLE \ \ \
\ \ \ E�EVATIo„-x666
\ \ \ \ �\m '^ : I / \ \\ \ IIII •I I�' 111�1111 I I ��\
I I 1 )
k
\ I
.l \ .......... \ 6,T636 6 \
\ ........ :x.. ....... _ IIII E 90�.. I P \
CB ...... �» . ... .... ■ T } T I
v „=x ,6,E, \ I 11 IE Eva OR-x6x,6 1
1 1 1 �„vO"T=2a,,,T�,R, ;.>� � �..�.. ..�.. I /-��� ICI\I
_2 F PaRk „O OT T
_x �\ 11
v / \2s I
✓•ePEVATIm=x66.6 \\\\ '� \\ \\ \ II � // //•I/ / \�' IIIIII ,ICI_ ;�
/I•�\O�. \\ \\ \\ \ \ I'/ //I \ �illlll •I II I
_< \ ATION153.3DE EA /• \ 1 \ II l �" \
GENERAL NOTES
1. REFER TO SHEET C-001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. US Army Corps
of Engineers'
2. DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE GRADED TO MATCH EXISTING
SLOPES AND GRASSED. SEE THE EROSION CONTROL
PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING REQUIREMENTS.
PRE DEVELOPED
AREA 1
DRAINAGE AREA: 1.52 ACRES
WEIGHTED CN: 65
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
Q1: 0.93
Q2: 1.64
Q5: 3.00
Q10: 4.00
Q25: 5.72
Q50: 7.03
Q100: 8.56
AREA 2
DRAINAGE AREA: 2.49 ACRES
WEIGHTED CN: 65
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
Q1: 1.52
Q2: 2.69
Q5: 4.90
Q 10: 6.54
Q25: 9.35
Q50: 11.50
Q100: 13.99
W }
Z W c�
U 0
&Z °W
UZ. C
Zva w
a
¢��i W
�a w O
aNaox 3x6 \\ \ \ \ �\ I f I = o
ur000EoAREa
O I \\ \\\\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ I I
--------\ \ RE
\ a a
\ \ 40' 20' 0 40' 80' 120' _
0
-0 GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=40'" N
\ GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATE DATA
HORIZONTAL DATUM:
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD83. o•'�N OARo"••., SHEET ID
3P:"cSsi"Ci -,
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88. ° o;eoa °''•
tin SEAL
UNITS OF MEASURE: U.S. SURVEY FEET. _ os i'�i'�7Co
COORDINATES SHOWN IN FORMAT OF lllVJ / J
EASTING, NORTHING AND ELEVATION.
CERTIFIED FINAL FAST -TRACK (ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION)

r
s
M
M
SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE (SHWT)
LOCATION GROUND ELEVATION OF BORING DEPTH TO SHWT SHWT ELEVATION
SHWT-01 251.75 80" 245.08
SHWT-02 257.37 102" 248.87
SHWT DETERMINATIONS WERE MADE BY ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP ON MAY 27, 2020
REFER TO STORMWATER REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
aa----------- :o- = s7
\ ir,°oa�oE To wvERrs,
,a cac / n`"® EAGLE TALON DRIVE 5 �e csc /� / - •s /oP- / /J ,uoaccEssroc1—TSs) / EgcLE rnaory DRVE
scaa¢n-^sam�r__ .. ''iaeas �rvv zsoBzaE CEROM nsawirs, ��rR" zs' /
/" i
IN
OLT 0,
\ OrvO E Ev ry z . —
w — _
PIL 1. IS
ssoNv s, — — — — s — _ eaD
�.
Al -IT
-- ---
\ ——
_ ■ _ _ _ _ _ zaa / � ar= _
---- «� -610 RETENTION AREA#7 5 _ __ ___ __ ___ _ __ ___ __ __ ___ ai % I�� �' - - ■ //r
rv-°e°°z77a z
E,aa�aaaa � "a�REaD _ _
o /
/ PR/ 1 I / ELI—TONzaa. • I I ■ SHWT_01----------- - -- --- -- -- --- - --- -- -- --- -F i I - \ ■ a�// \
, E " N -
/s.aa; //// F
261
- -- --- -- -- - -- --- -- -- --- I -- - - ■ /�///
waw Ep "- --s -- - --- OMR> -- ------ -- --- -Z'
:,I I II I II II IN.
\�—
I CONTRACTOR I■
(STAGING ARE 41 : I =; I I m it 2,570 SF EXISTING BUA
-VITO BE REMOVED
III�III \\ II'I $I ;�✓/ II J III 21;1
I \ I I \ 3;¢' POST DEVELOPMENT 1 I
rvMry 1 �I �I I I
I� I I �• I DRAINAGE AREA 7i1 l
JI
/ II II II II HUMAN PERFORMAN I a I 'A rvo oT T
TRAIN(HPTCCENTER I I I ;IIIII" I I I
�\ AS Al FF EL 263.75
1 :'III 2,,2212 SF EXISTING BUA
I II II Po r S I I I _ \\� I I \ I a, \ LI. i1I
/: � °s I ,IIII � I I \\ ..."....y .......................................... i t a---t- R I T BE REMOVED
® I I R� I I I I I I \ : \ _ _��_ _I F / _ _ I I• .. i • :I aa7°o N\
OT I
POST DEVELOPMENT
I I a,I DRAINAGE AREA IIIII Ij
G 9jl
za-2.
I 1 R" � wOODEDAREA _zap , . c z
I
- 00 ■1��IIII
/
—s�---6.----6�10/R�TENT60N AREAiy zaa a ,a RD D
■ a
i III �° s------ ■ s rv,
�Pl
z ElI1111ry I "
sD IS
I INI�� 11 11 \\\ \ \\\ \' • \\\ \\za,
I IIIII I\\
kzso
a II : II cR �.l \ \\ _ \\ \\ I III 111114S' aa77aaaaa \\
n,,as _
T-n° I I 1 ou: a,`a`ia, \\ �, \ IIII IIIr IEEVOry A - z7a
\.>� \ 1� 1-11OaOT T
r, aY /II w 2 _� 4 �\ \\ 1/ \\ II a1
°aalll \�,\ \\ \\\ \ \ II // / /I I / \ (IIIII • II r
I / J II I11 I I III
B. �lo.sr —
\ /.• —\\ _�.`-- \\\ \\\\ \\`_ \\ \ J(TDEoIEA— �i IIIII ;I II I
—� �
GENERAL NOTES
1. REFER TO SHEET C-001 FOR GENERAL NOTES. US Army Corps
of Engineers'
2. DISTURBED AREA SHALL BE GRADED TO MATCH EXISTING
SLOPES AND GRASSED. SEE THE EROSION CONTROL
PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING REQUIREMENTS.
DEVELOPED
AREA 1
DRAINAGE AREA: 2.58 ACRES
BUILT UPON AREA
BUILDINGS: 30,894 SF
STREETS: 6,162 SF
PARKING: 8,500 SF
SIDEWALKS: 2,042
EXISTING BUA TO REMAIN: 0 SF
WEIGHTED CN: 91
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
Q1: 7.36
Q2: 9.37
Q5: 12.63
Q10: 14.78
Q25: 18.19
Q50: 20.66
Q100: 23.43
AREA 2
DRAINAGE AREA: 1.40 ACRES
BUILT UPON AREA
BUIDLINGS: 15,120 SF
STREETS: 19,668 SF
PARKING: 6,850 SF
SIDEWALK: 4,440 SF
EXISTING BUA TO REMAIN: 0 SF
WEIGHTED CN: 95
PEAK FLOW (CFS)
Q 1: 4.54
Q2: 5.62
Q5: 7.35
Q 10: 8.49
Q25: 10.31
Q50: 11.63
Q100: 13.11
NMToTToM
BOX—Md�
�I\ 7a�„zao
zs
a.za
\
w000Eo AREA r �: 40' 20' 0 40' 80' 120'
I \
\z OCD \ \
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1"=40'-0" N
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATE DATA
HORIZONTAL DATUM:
0
a
x
z
zW O
U JO
00 of
cl
owz ILL
z U a d
&a� o
>
.0 W
It
Ua U)
uZ o
a
x
0
0
N
NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD83. epPoFEssio+Ly?
VERTICAL DATUM:NAVD88.
SHEET ID
-
z
UNITS OF MEASURE: U.S. SURVEY FEET. sEAL
- D+
CG751
sR
DOuaR
ur000EoaREa
COORDINATES SHOWN IN FORMAT OF '-: v
y`
EASTING, NORTHING AND ELEVATION.•'
CERTIFIED FINAL FAST -TRACK (ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION)

HPTC
Existing
L PL
wL R
C_
r

CLEANOUT, MINIMUM
ONE PER UNDERDRAIN
= NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
REFER TO SPECIFICATIONS
NCDOT #57 CRUSHED ROCK
PROVIDE 3" CRUSHED
ROCK ABOVE AND ON
EACH SIDE OF PIPE
0E
-ME
mm
4" DIA ORIFICE
PEAK ATTENUATION VOLUME
DESIGN VOLUME N
6" SCHEDULE 40 OR �
SDR 35 SMOOTH WALL
PVC PIPE WITH
PERFORATIONS
TIE UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
PIPES INTO RISER. REFER
TO PLAN SHEETS FOR
LAYOUT
NOTE:
REFER TO TABLE BELOW
FOR ELEVATIONS
PONDBERM
TOP ELEV
o
SET THE TOP OF THE
o — \ IWS ZONE A MINIMUM
OF 18 INCHES BELOW
THE PLANTING SURFACE
o RCP CLASS 3
-RISER WITH LOCKING
h "O" RING JOINT
RISER STRUCTURE
\ \ \� \ ^\ ^\ \ REFER TO DETAIL 2,
SHEET CG508
* IWS=INTERNAL WATER STORAGE
*BIORETENTION "ENGINEERED SOIL" LAYER SHALL BE MINIMUM 30" DEEP. THE SOIL MIX SHOULD BE UNIFORM AND FREE
OF STONES, STUMPS, ROOTS OR OTHER SIMILAR MATERIAL GREATER THAN 2 INCHES. IT SHOULD BE A HOMOGENOUS
SOIL MIX OF 75 TO 85 PERCENT BY VOLUME MEDIUM TO BARK FINESDA SOIL TEXTURAL
CLASSIFICS). HIGHER ((10 PERCENT) FINES CONTEN8 TO 10 PERCENT FINES (SILT T SHOULD AND
S TO 10 RESERVED
SERV D FORARSE WASHED SAND �AREAS WHERE ORGANIC TTNRIS THE TARGET
SUCH AS NE
NOTE: CUT SOIL FROM THE PROJECT SITE OR SOIL FROM THE BORROW PIT MAY NOT BE USED FOR THE ENGINEERED
SOIL FOR THE BIORENTENTION BASINS
THE MEDIA SHOULD BE TESTED TO DETERMINE AN ACTUAL DRAINAGE RATE AFTER PLACEMENT. THE PERMEABILITY
SHOULD FALL BETWEEN 1 AND 6 INCHES PER HOUR, WITH 1-2 INCHES PER HOUR BEING PREFERRED. AS A RULE OF
THUMB, USING THE ABOVE -SPECIFIED MEDIA, THE INFILTRATION RATES SHOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 2 IN/HR AND 1
IN/HR FOR 8% AND 10% FINES, RESPECTIVELY, DEPENDING ON THE TARGET POLLUTANT. AN ESTIMATED DRAINAGE
RATE FOR PERCENT FINES BETWEEN 8 AND 10 CAN BE APPROXIMATED DURING DESIGN BY LINEAR INTERPOLATION. IF
REFER TO PLANS FOR FINISH GRADES.
LOW IMPACT BMP
BIO RETENTION BASIN
DETAIL
TYP NOT TO SCALE
TOP ELEV
US Army Corps
BASIN 1: 258.50
DOMED TRASH RACK
of Engineers'
2: 260.50
NO.6 REBAR W/ MAX. 12"
HORIZONTAL OPENING, MOUNTED
WEIR ELEV
WITH HINGES AND HOLD DOWN
BASIN 1: 257.50
CLASP WITHIN THE INSIDE LIP OF
BASIN 2: 259.50
PRE -CAST BOX. LID SHOULD OPEN
o
AWAY FROM DAM.
WEIR DIMENSION
6" HIGH X 36" LONG
u)
Tx 3' MIN CONCRETE RISER
LOCATED ON 3 SIDES
INSIDE DIMENSION
OF RISERo
w/6" THICK SOLID WALLS
MIN WEIGHT - 23,587 LBS.
0
3' MIN
STEPS
EACH WAY
WATERPROOF
o
MASTIC (TYP.)
RISER
RCP CLASS 3
WITH LOCKING
"O" RING JOINT
o
a
ANTI -FLOTATION
INV. ELEV
U
y
o
BASE 8' x 6' x 1'
(SEE CG601)
CONTINUOUS RUBBER WATERSTOPS SHALL BE
PROVDED AT ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS IN RISER
AND SECTIONS SHALL BE STRAPPED TOGETHER
W/STAINLESS STEEL HARDWARE.
RISER
STRUCTURE
moo
. s
a
n
DETAIL
w�o�ZUU
~W�
Um}d
NOT TO SCALE
FINISH GRADE
LLI NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE CAST IN PLACE
of TO BE WRAPPED AROUND CONCRETE
CONNECTION ENCASEMENT
PERFORATED
PIPE
� RCP PIPE
F�- 1
n1
1
1
/p
l
r
al
CLASS I BEDDING
TO SUPPOE COLLAR PROVIDE SPACER TO
MATCHINVERTS
AS NECESSARY
PERFORATED PIPE TO CONCRETE PIPE CONNECTION
n DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
Bioretention
Surface
Ponding Depth
Funding
NCDEQ
Surface
Depth of
Head
Emergency
Provided Emergency
Exit
t00yr
Infiltration
Underdrains
Number of
Size of
Number of
Height
Depth of
Peak
Planting
Bottom of
Bottom
SHWT
Depth to
Area
Area
Provided (in)
Volume
Volume
Area
Soil above
(ft)
Overflow
Spillway
Channel
Storm
Rate
and IWS
Underdrains
Underdrains
Clean Out
of Riser
Planting Media
Attenuation
Elevation
Planting
Elevation
Elevation
SHWT
(sf)
(cf)
Required (cf)
Required (sf)
IWS (in)
Flow (cfs)
Length (FT)
Length (FT)
(cfs)
Ksat
Required
(in)
Pipes
'A' (IN)
'B' (IN)
Depth (IN)
Media Soil
of Cell
(FT)
Bioretention Cell 1
8,400
9
6,300
4,282
5,710
18
0.50
21.63
18'
20.00
21.11
0.005
YES
10
6
10
12
30
24
256.00
253.25
252.50
245.08
7.42
Bioretention Cell 2
4,500
9
3,375
2,888
3,851
18
0.50
11.03
9'
20.00
9.93
0.005
YES
6
6
6
12
30
24
258.00
255.25
254.50
248.87
5.63
U
H
W co
r �
?W
U
of 7 W 0
z
0K¢- a Z
xlKg ZQ
of
of m
ZUd ❑Z
zm 20
ppz
HK W
�W ir
tz O
� m
x
0
,''�tNC?Ro"'•. SHEET ID
SEAL`y
03 CG508
J
CERTIFIED FINAL FAST -TRACK (ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION)

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP "Setting the Standard for Servicetgs
Geotechnical - Construction Materials - Environmental - Facilities INC Registered Engineering Firm F•1078
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-406
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3239
May 29, 2020
Mr. Wes Clark, P.E.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Building 2-2414 Woodruff Street
Fort Bragg, North Carolina 28307
Reference: Report of Seasonal High Water Table Estimation
SOF HPTC
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.11754
Dear Mr. Clark:
ECS Southeast, LLP (ECS) recently conducted an estimation of the Seasonal High
Water Table (SHWT) within the existing and proposed stormwater control measure
(SCM) areas at the SOF HPTC Site off of Eagle Talon Drive on Fort Bragg, Cumberland
County, North Carolina. This letter, with attachments, is the report of our estimation.
Field Testing
On May 27t", 2020, ECS conducted an exploration of the subsurface soil and SHWT
conditions, in accordance with the NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual section A-2, at two
requested locations shown on the attached Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). The
purpose of this exploration was to estimate the SHWT of the in situ soils for the design
of for the existing and proposed SCM areas. ECS met with Mr. Wes Clark on site in
order to locate the borings. ECS explored the subsurface soil and groundwater
conditions by advancing one hand auger boring into the existing ground surface at the
requested boring locations. ECS visually classified the subsurface soils and obtained
representative samples of each soil type encountered. ECS recorded the SHWT
elevation observed at the time of each hand auger boring. The attached SHWT sheet
provides a summary of the subsurface conditions encountered at each hand auger
boring location.
The SHWT elevation was estimated at each boring location below the existing grade
elevation. B-1 was advanced within the sidewall of the existing SCM. Below is a
summary of each boring location.
Location
SHWT
B-1 (Cell 1)
80 inches
B-2 (Cell-2)
102 inches
ECS Capitol Services, PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC • EC5 Mid -Atlantic. LLC - ECS Midwest, LLC - ECS Southeast, LLP • ECS Texas, LLP
www.ecslimited.com

Report of SHWT Estimation
SOF HPTC
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.11754
May 291", 2020
The SHWT may vary within the proposed site due to changes in subsurface conditions
and elevation. Based on the regional geology and the SHWT elevation observed at B-
1, the SHWT elevation observed at B-2 potentially could be perched. ECS
recommends that a licensed surveyor proved the elevations of the boring locations.
Closure
ECS's analysis of the site has been based on our understanding of the site, the project
information provided to us, and the data obtained during our exploration. If the project
information provided to us is changed, please contact us so that our recommendations can
be reviewed and appropriate revisions provided, if necessary. The discovery of any site or
subsurface conditions during construction which deviate from the data outlined in this
exploration should be reported to us for our review, analysis and revision of our
recommendations, if necessary. The assessment of site environmental conditions for the
presence of pollutants in the soil and groundwater of the site is beyond the scope of this
geotechnical exploration.
ECS appreciates the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project. If you have
any questions concerning this report or this project, please contact us at [phone].
Respectfully,
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
K. Brooks Wall
Project Manager
bwall ecslimited.com
910-686-9114
Attachments: Boring Location Plan
SHWT sheet
GBA Document
W. Brandon Fulton, PSC, PWS, LSS
Environmental Department Manager
bfulton ecslimited.com
704-525-5152

N
® APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS
CJ
W ��✓ E
SCALE SHOWN ABOVE
s
SOF HPTC Site _- Figure 1— Boring Location Plan
Fort Bragg, Cumberland County,
North Carolina �
Provided by: U.S. Army Corps of
�
ECS Project # 49.11754 � Engineers
May 27th, 2020
KBW 11T.

Seasonal High Water Table Estimation
SOF HPTC Site
Fort Bragg, Cumberland Co., North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.11754
May 27t", 2020
Location Depth USCS Soil Description
B-1 0-80" Sc Tan/orange/gray clayey SAND
Seasonal High Water Table was estimated to be at 80 inches below the
existing grade elevation.
Location Depth USCS Soil Description
B-2 0-1001, Sc Red clayey SAND
100"-112" SC Red/gray clayey SAND
Seasonal High Water Table was estimated to be at 102 inches below the
existing grade elevation.

0
Geotechnical-Engineering Report
The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA)
has prepared this advisory to help you — assumedly
a client representative — interpret and apply this
geotechnical-engineering report as effectively
as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from
a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems
that, for decades, have been a principal cause of
construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and
disputes. If you have questions or want more
information about any of the issues discussed below,
contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer.
Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business
Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a
wide array of risk -confrontation techniques that can
be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a
construction project.
Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific
needs of their clients. A geotechnical-engineering study conducted
for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil -
works constructor or even a different civil engineer. Because each
geotechnical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-
engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Those who
rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client
can be seriously misled. No one except authorized client representatives
should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
- not even you - should apply this report for any purpose or project except
the one originally contemplated.
Read this Report in Full
Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-
engineering report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an
executive summary. Do not read selected elements only. Read this report
in full.
You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer
about Change
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors
when designing the study behind this report and developing the
confirmation -dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few
typical factors include:
• the client's goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and
risk -management preferences;
• the general nature of the structure involved, its size,
configuration, and performance criteria;
• the structure's location and orientation on the site; and
• other planned or existing site improvements, such as
retaining walls, access roads, parking lots, and
underground utilities.
Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include
those that affect:
• the site's size or shape;
• the function of the proposed structure, as when it's
changed from a parking garage to an office building, or
from a light -industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;
• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or
weight of the proposed structure;
• the composition of the design team; or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their
impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
would have considered.
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
• for a different client;
• for a different project;
• for a different site (that may or may not include all or a
portion of the original site); or
• before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or
environmental remediation, or natural events like floods,
droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations.
Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified
codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. If your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an `apply -by" date on the report,
ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain
about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical
engineer before applying it. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis - if any is required at all - could prevent major problems.
Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are
Professional Opinions
Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a site's
subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The
data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to
form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual
sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly - from
those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your
geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to
project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
whenever needed.

This Report's Recommendations Are
Confirmation -Dependent
The recommendations included in this report - including any options
or alternatives - are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are
not final, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction. If through observation your
geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist
actually do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming
no other changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation -
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform
construction observation.
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted
Other design professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical-
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk
by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the
design team, to:
• confer with other design -team members,
• help develop specifications,
• review pertinent elements of other design professionals'
plans and specifications, and
• be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering
guidance is needed.
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction
observation.
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift
unanticipated -subsurface -conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent
the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the
complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note
conspicuously that you've included the material for informational
purposes only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note
that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely
on the interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in
the report, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific
times, locations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements,
including options selected from the report, only from the design
drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may
perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough
time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position
to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring
them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction
conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do
not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured
unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays,
cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical
engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled "limitations;' many of these provisions indicate
where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help
others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these
provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should
respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an
environmental study - e.g., a "phase -one" or "phase -two" environmental
site assessment - differ significantly from those used to perform
a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-
engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of
encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management
guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report
prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six
months old.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
Infiltration and Mold
While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer's
services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled
migration of moisture - including water vapor - from the soil through
building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can
cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly,
proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations
will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront
the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold
specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building -
envelope or mold specialists.
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
SEA ASSOCIATION
Telephone: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail] wwwgeoprofessional.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly
prohibited, except with GBAs specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any
kind. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent

Mayer, F Michael
From: Clark, Weslyn E (Wes) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, June 1, 2020 3:16 PM
To: TJ Yonts; Hall, Christopher CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc: Chris Cook; Mason McKnight IV; Frank Barron; John Jordan; Mayer, F Michael
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [Non-DoD Source] Boring Elevations
I appreciate it! I am forwarding the verification report for the SWHT later today.
Wes Clark
(c) 910-633-5171
-------- Original message --------
From: TJ Yonts <[e-mail]>
Date: 6/l/20 2:40 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "Clark, Weslyn E (Wes) CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)" <[e-mail]>, "Hall,
Christopher CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: Chris Cook <[e-mail]>, Mason McKnight IV <[e-mail]>, Frank Barron
<[e-mail]>, John Jordan <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Boring Elevations
Wes,
The boring elevations are as follows:
Bio-Retent #1: 251.75
Bio-Retent #2: 257.37
TJ Yonts
ACC Const. Co., Inc.
Project Superintendent
Human Performance Training Center
Cell: 7o6.386.2901

Discrete SCS Curve Number Method (NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual 3.3.2)
Location: Bioretention Area 1 Date: 5/9/2020
Soil Group
Predevelopment BUA
1 1.
©
1 1-
1 1�
Predevelopment Open Area
Area
1.46
acres
Area
63,641
sf
CN*
65
S
5.38
is
1.08
in
P
1
in
Q
0.00
in
V
0
cf
Area 1.52 acres
Total 169 cf
Developed BUA
Area
1.55
acres
Area
67,546
sf
CN*
98
S
0.20
is
0.04
in
P
1
in
Q
0.79
in
V
4,452
cf
Developed Open Area
1 �1®
III®
Area 2.58 acres
Total 4,452 cf
Storage Required 4,282 cf
Pond Area 8,400 sf
Riser 9 in
Surface Area Required 5,710 sf
Storage Provided 6,300 cf
Note: Runnoff depth for CN <= 70 set to 0.00 for 1.0" rainfall event based upon
TR55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-1
* Composite CN calculated using Army LID Planning and Cost Tool
Developed by USACE Baltimore District and USACE ERDC

Discrete SCS Curve Number Method (NCDEQ Stormwater BMP Manual 3.3.2)
Location: Bioretention Area 2 Date: 5/9/2020
Soil Group
Predevelopment BUA
Area
0.05
acres
Area
2,212
sf
CN*
98
S
0.20
is
0.04
in
P
1
in
Q
0.79
in
V
146
cf
Predevelopment Open Area
Area
2.44
acres
Area
106,252
sf
CN*
65
S
5.38
is
1.08
in
P
1
in
Q
0.00
in
V
0
cf
Area 2.49 acres
Total 146 cf
Developed BUA
Area
1.06
acres
Area
46,035
sf
CN*
98
S
0.20
is
0.04
in
P
1
in
Q
0.79
in
V
3,034
cf
Developed Open Area
Area 1.40 acres
Total 3,034 cf
Storage Required 2,888 cf
Pond Area 4,500 sf
Riser 9 in
Surface Area Requir 3,851 sf
Storage Provided 3,375 cf
Note: Runnoff depth for CN <= 70 set to 0.00 for 1.0" rainfall event based upon
TR55 Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds Table 2-1
* Composite CN calculated using Army LID Planning and Cost Tool
Developed by USACE Baltimore District and USACE ERDC

SUPPLEMENT-EZ COVER PAGE
FORMS LOADED
1 !Project Nam
2 Proiec Ae
rea (
Area
h or Low Density?
use an off -site SCM?
HPTC
4.76
0
0
High
No
COMPLIANCE WITH 02H .1003(4)
7 Width of vegetated setbacks provided (feet) 10
8
Will the vegetated setback remain vegetated?
Yes
9
Is BUA other that as listed in .1003 4 (c-d) out of the setback?
Yes
10
Is streambank stabilization proposed on this project?
No
TYPE OF SCMs:
Cell
Filter
Dry Pond
StormFi@er
25 'Bayfilter
26 Filterra
El
FORMS LOADED
gNMEARNMCATION
27
Name and Title: F. Michael Mayer, PE Civil Engineer
28
Organization:
Mason & Hanger
29
Street address:
300 W Vine St Suite 1300
30
City, State, Zip:
Lean ton, KY 40507
31
Phone number(s):
859-280-3557
32
Email:
__.
mike. ma e
y [e-mail]
Certification Statement
I certify, under penalty of law that this Supplement-EZ form and all supporting information were prepared under my direction or
supervision; that the information provided in the form is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete; and that
the engineering plans, specifcetions, operation and maintenance agreements and other supporting information are consistent with the
information provided here.
``;`Urrrrllll �'
-�'N CAIRp' .
=�Q
SEAL -
- 039 8
A
fit lrnIN�I Low
Signatu t
of Designer
�I �I zo2o
Dat��

DRAINAGE AREAS
1
Is this a high density project?
Yes
2
If so, number of drainage areas/SCMs
2
3
Is all/part of this project subject to previous rule
versions?
No
FORMS LOADED
DRAINAGE AREA INFORMATION
Entire Site
1
2
4
Type of SCM
Bioretention
Bioretention
Bioretention
5
Total BUA in project (sq ft)
113581 sf
67546 sf
46035 sf
6
New BUA on subdivided lots (subject to
permitting) (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
7
New BUA outside of subdivided lots (subject to
permitting) (sf)
113581 sf
67546 sf
46035 sf
8
Offsite - total area (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
9
Offsite BUA (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
10
Breakdown of new BUA outside subdivided lots:
sf
sf
sf
Parking (sq ft)
15350 sf
8500 sf
6850 sf
Sidewalk (sq ft)
6442 sf
2042 sf
4400 sf
Roof (sq ft)
46014 sf
30894 sf
15120 sf
Roadway (sq ft)
25827 sf
6162 sf
19665 sf
Future (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
Other, please specify in the comment box
below (sq ft)
19948 sf
19948 sf
sf
11
New infiltrating permeable pavement on
subdivided lots (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
12
New infiltrating permeable pavement outside of
subdivided lots (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
13
Exisitng BUA that will remain (not subject to
permitting) (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
14
Existing BUA that is already permitted (sq ft)
sf
sf
sf
15
Existing BUA that will be removed (sq ft)
4782 sf
2570 sf
2212 sf
16
Percent BUA
66%
60%
76%
17
Design storm (inches)
1 in
1 in
1 in
18
Design volume of SCM (cu ft)
7170 cf
4282 cf
2888 cf
19
Calculation method for design volume
SCS
SCS
SCS
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
20
Please use this space to provide any additional information about the
drainage area(s):
Drainage Area 1 includes area of outdoor astroturf area. Underdrains from
turf area lead to Bioretention Area 1.

BIORETENTION CELL
1
1 Drainage area number
1
qcf
2
Design volume of SCM (cu ft)
4282 cf
288
GENERAL MDC FROM 02H .1050
3
Is the SCM sized to treat the SW from all surfaces at build -out?
Yes
Yes
4
Is the SCM located away from contaminated soils?
Yes
Yes
5
What are the side slopes of the SCM (H:V)?
3:1
3:1
6
Does the SCM have retaining walls, gabion walls or other engineered side
slopes?
No
No
7
Are the inlets, outlets, and receiving stream protected from erosion (10-
year storm)?
Yes
Yes
8
Is there an overflow or bypass for inflow volume in excess of the design
Ivolume.
Yes
Yes
9
What is the method for dewatering the SCM for maintenance?
Drawdown Orifice
Drawdown
Orifice
10
If applicable, will the SCM be cleaned out after construction?
Yes
Yes
11
Does the maintenance access comply with General MDC (8)?
Yes
Yes
12
Does the drainage easement comply with General MDC (9)?
Yes
Yes
13
If the SCM is on a single family lot, does (will?) the plat comply with
JGeneral MDC (10)?
Yes
Yes
14
Is there an O&M Agreement that complies with General MDC (11)?
Yes
Yes
15
Is there an O&M Plan that complies with General MDC (12)?
Yes
Yes
16
Does the SCM follow the device specific MDC?
Yes
Yes
17
Was the SCM designedy an NC licensedprofessional?
Yes
Yes
BIORETENTION
CELL MDC FROM 02H .1052
18
SHWT elevation (fmsl)
245.08
248.87
19
Bottom of the bioretention cell (fmsl)
252.50
254.50
20
Ponding depth of the design storm (inches)
9 in
9 in
21
Surface area of the bioretention cell (square feet)
8400 sf
4500 sf
22
Design volume of the bioretention cell (cubic feet)
6225 cf
3788 cf
23
Is the bioretention cell used for peak attenuation?
Yes
Yes
24
Depth of peak attenuation over planting surface (in)
24 in
24 in
25
Height of peak attenuation outlet above the planting surface (in)
18 in
18 in
26
Infiltration rate of the in situ soil (inch/hour)
1 in/hr
1 in/hr
27
Diameter of the underdrain pipes (if applicable)
6 in
6 in
28
Does the design include Internal Water Storage (IWS)?
Yes
Yes
29
if so, elevation of the top of the IWS (fmsl)
254.5
256.5
30
Elevation of the planting surface (fmsl)
256
258
31
What type of vegetation will be planted? (grass, trees/shrubs, other)?
Grass
Grass
32
Media depth (inches)
30 in
30 in
33
Percentage of medium to coarse washed sand by volume
85%
85%
34
Percentage of fines (silt and clay) by volume
10%
10%
35
Percentage of organic matter by volume
5%
5%
36
IType of organic material
Engineered Fill
Engineere
d Fill
37
Phosphorus Index (P-Index) of media (unitless)
10
10
38
Will compaction be avoided during construction?
Yes
Yes
39
Will cell be maintained to a one inch/hour standard?
Yes
Yes
40
Depth of mulch, if applicable (inches)
n/a
n/a
41
Type of mulch, if applicable
n/a
n/a
42
How many clean out pipes are being installed?
10
6
43
Type of pretreatment that will be used:
Vegetative
Filter/Rip Rap
Vegetativ
e
Filter/Rip
Rap
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Please use this space to provide any additional information about the
44 bioretention cell(s):
The engineered fill will infiltrate at approximately 2in/hr (maintained at a min 1 in/hr),
which will eliminate the surfae ponded volume within 24 hours, to the storage within
the IWS for ultimate infiltration. Peak attenuation volumes provided in order to
comply with EISA 438. Project based entirely within Fort Bragg (US Gov't property).