NC0088471_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2016

North Carolina Division of Environmental Health
rl�,l Terry L. Pierce, Director
Public Water Supply Section
Division of
Efiv&onmehU Hea16 Jessica G. Miles, Section Chief
September 28, 2007
Mr. Tom Roberts
Aqua North Carolina, Incorporated
202 MacKenan Court
Cary, North Carolina 27511 .
16,7u t-AA".tt , ow Q
S a e o North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
William G. Ross, Secretary
Re: Plan Approval Requirements
Bishop's Ridge Subdivision
PWSID# 02-34-197, Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Roberts:
On August 15, 2007, Ms. Rose Pruitt of the N.C. Division of Water Quality and I visited the above
referenced community water system. The purpose of this visit was to verify the removal of the
greensand filtration equipment in Well House #1.
Inorganic chemical samples were collected from Well #1 and the entry point to the distribution
system (E01) to be analyzed for iron, manganese, and pH. The results of the samples were in
compliance with the State Drinking Water Parameters (copies enclosed).
Our records indicate that plans and specifications for the water system serving Bishop's Ridge
Subdivision were approved under Division of Environmental Health serial number 93-02545,
datedAugust-26, 4992, (copy -enclosed):-- These -plans' -called- for -the--continuous application- of -
chlorine at both of the wells along with the addition of Aqua-Mag sequestering agent at Well #1.
Currently, the treatment equipment at Well 91 consists of the continuous application of chlorine.
The treatment equipment at Well #2 consists of the continuous application of chlorine and caustic
soda to the drinking water.
Therefore, this office is requiring that as -built plans and specifications for the treatment
equipment in both of the well houses be submitted by October 31, 2007. Please note that this rule
infraction was brought to Mr. Gary Moseley's attention in my letter of June 16, 2006 (copy
enclosed). An administrative penalty request will be forwarded to the Protection and
Enforcement Branch on November 1, 2007 if the revised plans and specifications are not
submitted to the Winston-Salem Regional Office. Another option would be to operate the water
system per the approved plans.
Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107 One
Telephone [phone] ♦ Fax [phone] NOrthCarohna
http://ncdrinkingwater.state.ne.us/ naturally
An Equal Opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Tom Roberts
September 28, 2007
Page Two
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, or if I can be of further assistance,
please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Tamara S. Taylor
Environmental Engineer
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SECTION
\TST
Enclosures
cc: Jessica G. Miles, Chief, Public Water Supply Section
Bob Midgette, Protection and Enforcement Branch.
N.C. Utilities Commission, Public Staff Water Division
Forsyth County Health Department
®s� P��nitt9�d.0 _I�gvflS�®n; ®f" ate° Quality
Gary Moseley, Aqua North Carolina, Inc.

Gary R. Moseley
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
of ENR
4163 Sinclair Street
�dAR 0 7 2007
Denver, NC 28037
�nstcn•Salem
R.eglonal Office
Dear Mr. Moseley:
February 22, 2007
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
r:1a i
}i' I FEB 2 6 26%
1 pFRrzLE1GW REGIONAL OFFIGF
Subject: Receipt of permit application
NPDES Permit NCO088471
Bishops Ridge — Well #1
Forsyth County
The Division received your permit application on February 20, 2007, along with your fee payment of
$715.00 check #2332. A member of the NPDES Unit will review your application. They will contact your
Authorized Representative if further information is needed about this project.
While we do not expect severe delays in handling your request, be aware that your application is one
of many that are being currently reviewed. If you have any additional questions concerning the subject
application, please call [phone], extension 363.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Brya
NPDES Unit
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit
1�I�te itrrtal�Offce-/ai�ar��QnaliSeetio
\JJ S
NoAhCarolina
lvatura!!rff
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer —50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(This form is best filled out on computer, rather than hard copy)
Date: 08/15/2007 County: Forsyth
To: NPDES Discharge Permitting Unit Permitee: Aqua North Carolina
Attn. NPDES Reviewer: Agyeman Adu-Poku Application/ Permit No.: NCO088471
Staff Report Prepared By: Rose Pruitt
Project Name: Bishop's Ridge Well 91
SDC Priority Project? (Y/N) N If Yes, SQC No.
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. This application is (check ail that apply): New ❑ Renewal
❑ Modification
2. Was a site visit conducted u1 order to prepare this report? M Yes or ❑ No.
a. Date of site visit: 08/15/2007
b. Person contacted and telephone number: Paul Nelson
c. Site visit conducted by: Rose Pruitt
d. Inspection Report Attached: ❑ Yes or M No.
3. Keeping BIMS Accurate: Is the following BIMS information (a. through e. below) correct?
M Yes or M No. If No, please either indicate that it is, correct on the current application or the
existing permit or provide the details. If none can be supplied, please explain:
Discharze Point (Fill this section only if BIMS or Application Info is incorrect or missing)
(If there is more than one discharge pipe, put the others on the last page of this form.)
a. Location OK on Application 0,
OK on Existing Permit 0, or provide Location:
b. Driving Directions OK on Application 0,
OK on Existing Permit 0, or provide Driving Directions (please be accurate):
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number OK on Application ❑,
OK on Existing Permit 0, or provide USGS Quadrangle Map name and number:
d. Latitude/Longitude OK on Application ❑, (check at http://www.topozone.com These are often
inaccurate) OK on Existing Permit 0, or provide Latitude: Longitude:
e. Receiving Stream OK on Application 0,
OK on Existing Permit 0, or provide Receiving Stream or affected waters:
a. Stream Classification:
b. River Basin and Sub basin No.:
c. Describe receiving stream features and downstream uses:
For NEW FACILITIES Proceed to Section C Evaluation and Recommendations
(For renewals or modifications continue to section B)

NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
B. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES AND WASTE(S) (renewals and modifications only)
1. Describe the existing treatment facility:
2. Are there appropriately certified ORCs for the facilities? ❑ Yes or ❑ No.
Operator in Charge: Certificate # (Available in BIMS or Certification Website)
Back- Operator in Charge: Certificate #
3. Does the facility have operational or compliance problems? Please comment:
Summarize your BIMS review of monitoring data (Notice(s) of violation within the last permit cycle;
Current enforcement action(s)):
Are they currently under SOC, ❑ Currently under JOC, ❑ Currently under moratorium ❑? Have
all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit, SOC, JOC, etc. been complied with? ❑ Yes
or ❑ No. If no, please explain:
4. Residuals Treatment: PSRP ❑ (Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens, Class B) or
PFRP ❑ (Process to Further Reduce Pathogens, Class A)?_
Are they liquid or dewatered to a cake?
Land Applied? Yes ❑ No ❑ If so, list Non -Discharge Permit No.
Contractor Used:
Landfilled? Yes ❑ No❑ If yes, where?
Other?
Adequate Digester Capacity? Yes ❑ No ❑ Sludge Storage Capacity? Yes ❑ No ❑
Please comment on current operational practices:
5. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this
permit? ❑ Yes or ❑ No. If yes, please explain:
C. EVAL UATIONAND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: has the facility evaluated the non -discharge options available? Give
regional perspective for each option evaluated:
Spray Irrigation:
Connect to Regional Sewer System: Not available
Subsurface:
Other Disposal Options:
2. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the application: Request to withdraw permit
application submitted. Green sand filters which were the source of the discharge have been removed
from this facility. Ok to withdraw application.
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03 2
I

NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3. List any items that you would like NPDES Unit to obtain through an additional information
request. Make sure that you provide a reason for each item:
Recommended Additional Information Reason
4. List specific Permit requirements that you recommend to be removed from the permit when
issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each condition:
Recommended Removal Reason
PW—ithdraw application Green sand filters removed from facty
5. List specific special requirements or compliance schedules that you recommend to be included in
the permit when issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each special condition:
Recommended Addition Reason
6. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office;
❑ Hold, pending review and approval of required additional information by NPDES permitting
office; ❑ Issue; ® Deny. If deny, please state reasons: Source of discharge, green sand filter
backwash, has been removed from this facility.
Reminder: attach inspection report if Yes was chec*d for 2 d.
7. Signature of report preparer:
Signature of WQS regional st
Date: ,() 7
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03
3

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
E P ^H Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 I NI 2 15I 31 NCO088471 Ill 121 07/08/15 117 181 CI 191 sI 20III
Remarks
21111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111116
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA --------------------------- Reserved ----------------------
67I 169 70I I 711 I 721 NJ 73I 174 751 I I I I I I 180
1—I—I
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:00 AM 07/08/15
Bishops Ridge - Well #1
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Creedmoor Dr NCSR 4411
Rural Hall NC 27045
11:00 AM 07/08/15
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Name, Address of Responsible Officiallfitle/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Gary Moseley,4163 Sinclair St Denver NC 28037//704-489-9404/704489940
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Other
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Rose Pruitt WSRO WQ//336-771-5000/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page # 1

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3I NCO088471 I11 12I 07/08/15 1
17 18ICI
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Visited site with Tammy Taylor with Public Water Supply. Met operator Paul Nelson with Aquasource at the
site. Inspection revealed that 4 green sand filters had been removed from the premises and the effluent
pipe was capped off at the facility building (inside). Reminded operator that if the filters were reinstalled that
a NPDES permit would be needed.
Page # 2

., p4kWHHs,�4kM-a x1'a:.fs"'�IeYo+'�
o
�
f
t
r
y f
it
rl

Re: FR)': Bishop's Ridge
Subject: Re: FW: Bishop's Ridge
From: Tammy Taylor <[e-mail]>_
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:32:46 -0400
To: "Spencer, Cheri L." <[e-mail]>
CC: Rose Pruitt <[e-mail]>
Cheri,
I just spoke to Rose Pruitt. Right now, we both have August 15, 2007 or August 17, 2007 open. We
would prefer the appointment to beat 10:00 am. Just let me lalow which day you would like to meet.
Thanks!
Tammy
Tammy Taylor
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
NC Div of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply Section
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107 \
Voice: [phone] l�
FAX: [phone]
r
4-
On 8/3/2007 8:55 AM, Spencer, Cheri L. wrote:
Good Morning Tammy, 400
Here is the email I promised. Hope you enjoy your days off.
Cheri
Cheri L Spencer
Field Supervisor
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
325-105 Habersham Rd.
Nigh Point, NC 2726o
Phone - 336.889.6318
Fax - 336.889- 7691
[e-mail]
isoICI �(1191L�4 U� �_
From: Campbell, Reid A.
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:00 AM
To: Spencer,. Cheri L.
Cc: Melton, Michael A.; Sasser, Edward 0.; Harwood, Michael S.; ([e-mail])
Subject: Bishop's Ridge
Cheri,
1 of 2 8/8/2007 7:59 AM

Re: FW�Bishop'sRidge
s`
We need to expedite the filter vessel removal from Bishop's Ridge. In discussions with NC DWQ this
morning they would like to inspect the well house in just over two weeks to confirm that the vessels
have been removed and that there is no need for the NPDES permit. Can you coordinate a joint
inspection between the regional DWQ (Ms. Rose Pruitt) and PWSS during the week of August 6th?
Eddie,
Can you send a letter to the NC PWSS P&S Group asking to modify our approved plans for this
water system?
Thank you
Reid Campbell, P.E.
Regional Manager, Compliance
Aqua North Carolina
202 MacKenan Court
Cary, NC 27511
Phone: [phone] x 39
email: racampbellCaquaamerica.com
Tammy Taylor <Tammy.Taylor(cDNCmail.net>
WSRO
NC DENR j
2 of 2 8/8/2007 7:59 AM

Print Preview http://maps2.co.forsyth.nc.us/geodata/printPreview.aspx?PrintOptDa...
Forsyth Comity, NC
Block Lot
Property Address
Additional Lots
PIN
Tax Jurisdiction
Anx
Taxable Owner Name I
Taxable Owner Name2
'Taxable Owner Address
Taxable Owner City St Zip
Taxable Deed Bk-Pg
Taxable Deed Date
Taxable Deed Stamps
New Owner Name I
New Owner Name2
New Owner Address
New Owner City St Zip
New Deed Bk-Pa
4952DO59
New Deed Date
Creedmoor Dr
New Deed Stamps
Map Number
624902
6920-75-5532
W/P
Forsyth County Suburban (Rural Hall) FID
Land Value
$5,400
N
Dwelling Value
HEATER UTILITIES INC
Commercial Value
Industrial Value
4163 Sinclair St
Misc Imp Value
Denver, NC 28037-0000
Total Value
$5,400
2073-1121
Acreage
0.92
6/18/1999
Sq Ft Living Area es
$6
Gross Sq Ft (Com)
Year Built (Res)
Year Built (Com)
Census Tract
28.07
Zoning
RS30
Sale Price
1 of 2/12/2007 2:06 PM

Bishop's Ridge
Subject: Bisht 9y's Ridge
From: "Camp ell, Reid A." <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:00:11 -0400
To: "Spencer, Cheri L." <[e-mail]>
CC: "Melton, Michael A." <[e-mail]>, "Sasser, Edward O."
<[e-mail]>, "Harwood, Michael S." <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>
Cheri,
We need to expedite the filter vessel removal from Bishop's Ridge. In discussions with NC DWQ this
morning they would like to inspect the well house in just over two weeks to confirm that the vessels have
been removed and that there is no need for the NPDES permit. Can you coordinate a joint inspection
between the regional DWQ (Ms. Rose Pruitt) and PWSS during the week of August 6th?
Eddie,
Can you send a letter to the NC PWSS P&S Group asking to modify our approved plans for this water
system?
Thank you
Reid Campbell, P.E.
Regional Manager, Compliance
Aqua North Carolina
202 MacKenan Court
Cary, NC 27511
Phone: [phone] x 39
email: [e-mail]
1 of 1 7/23/2007 11:03 AM

Re: return #2252
Subject: Re: return #2252
From: Agyeman Adu-Poku <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:55:18 -0400
To: [e-mail]
Well they said they don't need the green sand filtration any more so they will not
be backwashing any more. I guess DWQ will have to
make an announced inspection.
Rose Pruitt wrote:
any particular reason? These folks have about 25 unpermitted facilities they
need permits for. I'm concerned that they are not being straight forward and
understand that there have been recent firings and resignations of top level
management at this company because of poor performance.
Rose Pruitt
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
On 6/21/2007 1:25 PM, Agyeman Adu-Poku wrote:
It's for NC0088471. The permittee requested the application be withdrawn.
Thanks
Agyeman
Rose Pruitt wrote:
I got a copy of the permit app return for #2252 but I'm not clear on which
app this was for. I have two sites for this company that I am about to
prepare staff reports for, NCO088471 and NC0088501, is it for either one of
these?
Rose Pruitt
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Agyeman Adu-Poku <aayeman.adupolcu(c�,ncmail.net>
Environmental Engineer
Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality-NPDES Unit
1 of 1 6/21/2007 2:07 PM

/?074
Mr. Gary Moseley
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver, NC 28037
Dear Mr. Moseley:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
June 13, 2007
RECEIVED
Deot. of ENR
JUN 19 2007
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Subject: NPDES Permit pp ica 10
Return # 2252
Forsyth County
In accordance with the Division policy, we must hereby return the attached NPDES permit application
received on February 20, 2007. After a preliminary review by the NPDES staff, the Division received
an application withdrawal request dated June 11, 2007, from Aqua North Carolina.
If you wish to reapply for an NPDES permit, please complete the NC Form C-WTP and include
appropriate fees before resubmitting the application form. Submit the completed application form to the
attention of Agyeman Adu-Poku. If you resubmit the application form within sixty days of this letter,
the application fee you submitted previously will be credited to you.
Should you have any questions about the NPDES permitting process, contact Agyeman Adu-Poku at
[phone], ext. 508 or the address listed below.
Sincerely,
Susan A. Wilson
Supervisor, NPDES Western Program
cc: NPDES File
Wil �.t� Salem 12teg=i�ona�l'®f� :fi; e�/�-urrface ifil�ater�Protection�S;,ection;
Central Files
o e NhCarolina
AmUM4
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
hitemet: www.ncwateEguality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

�oF W A rFq p �_ Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
'C Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 29, 2007
RECEIVED
N.C. Pc-- a; ENR
Mr. Gary Mosely
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. MAY 3 n 7W
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver NC 28037 Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Subject: Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA)
Permit NCO088471
Bishop Ridge — Well # 1
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Mosely:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA) for
the Bishop Ridge Subdivision. The Division concurs with the conclusions and recommendations of the
EAA. The EAA you submitted is sufficient to meet the Alternative Analysis requirements for a new
discharge.
The Division will now move forward to drafting of the new NPDES permit. The draft permit will
be published in a local newspaper in your area. The entire permitting process may take between 60 and
120 days. If the draft permit causes significant protest from local citizens, governmental organizations,
and/or environmental groups, a public hearing may be scheduled and issuance of the final permit may be
further delayed. In some cases the Division may modify or deny the request for a new permit based on
public hearing results.
I am, M IM1� t M� � k
and recommendations regarding this disc arge. you nave
process, feel free -to contact me at phone number [phone] extension 508.
Sincerely,
Agyeman Adu-Poku
Environmental Engineer
NPDES Western Program
cc: NPDES Unit
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc./ I Thurman Horne, P.E.
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, NC 28124-8567
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone]
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
N"o�°0nCarolina
dvat MAY
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Norm t_arouna'
vision of Environmental /dealt=
1��►
- Terry L. Pierce, Director -
Public Water Supply Section
Division of
Environmental Health
Jessica G. Miles, Section Chief
Mr. William G. Langley, P.E.
4712 Properity Church Road
Charlotte, North Carolina 28269
Dear Mr. Langley:
State of North Carolina
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
William G. Ross, Secretary
RECEIVED
hi.c. Dapt. of ENR
IlEV�1R .j 209
tl!insEon•Salom
Regional office
Re: As -Built Water. System Improvements
Bishop Ridge Subdivision
Forsyth County
We have reviewed the plans and specifications for the referenced and offer the following comments:
1. Plans shall include a project vicinity map.
2. Plans shall include wells layout site plans and Wells # 1 backwash discharge point and receiving
stream or creek. Project cannot be approved until NPDES permit have been obtained.
3. Filter backflow flow rate is generally twice or greater of service flow rate with approximately 15 to
20 minutes for proper backwashing. Will the existing system have adequate backwash water supply?
Feel free to contact us at [phone] if we may be of service.
Toni (3/ Gh'E, P.E.
Technical Services Branch
Public Water Supply Section
TCC: db
cc: Lee G. Spencer, Regional Engineer
Forsyth County Health Department
Gary Moseley
1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1634
Telephone [phone] ♦ Fax [phone] ♦ Lab Form Fax [phone]
http://ncdrinkingwater.state.nc.us/
NorthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
February 22, 2007
Gary R. Moseley
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver, NC 28037
Subject: Receipt of permit application
NPDES Permit NCO088471
Bishops Ridge — Well #1
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Moseley:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
The Division received your permit application on February 20, 2007, along with your fee payment of
$715.00 check #2332. A member of the NPDES Unit will review your application. They will contact your
Authorized Representative if further information is needed about this project.
While we do not expect severe delays in handling your request, be aware that your application is one
of many that are being currently reviewed. If you have any additional questions concerning the subject
application, please call [phone], extension 363.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Brya
NPDES Unit
cc: Central File _„ ,
R :�S1
Raleigh Regional Office/Water Quality Section
oy`
NCarolina
Xaturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled1100% Post Consumer Paper ',

Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Ms. Susan Wilson
Supervisor, Western NPDES Program
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699 - 1617
Subject: NPDES Permit Application
Existing Well Backwash Discharge
Aqua, North Carolina, Inc.
Bishops Ridge Subdivision
Forsyth County
Dear Ms. Wilson:
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124-8567
704-788-4455
Fax: [phone]
February 14, 2007
Attached are four (4) copies of an application for permit signed by Aqua North Carolina, Inc.,
four (4) copies of the Engineering Alternatives Evaluation (EAA) and a check for $ 715
(application fee.) This application is for a permit for the continued discharge of backwash from
existing green sand filters installed on a potable well which serves the Bishops Ridge
Subdivision, located outside the Rural Hall, N.C. town limits. The EAA contains a map which
indicates the existing location.
This is an existing groundwater well that filters water through a series of green sand filters before
the water is distributed to the Bishops Ridge community. The filters are "backwashed" with
water approximately once every three days and approximately 1,680 gallons of water is then
discharged into the nearby stream.
This has been in service for a number of years and we are not aware of any environmental
concerns over this discharge.
We appreciate your consideration of our application for permit. If you have any questions or if
there is anything we need to discuss, please call me (704-788-4455.)
FF,3 9,
C: Tamara S. Taylor (NC Public Water Supply Section)
Gary Mosely
Mike Melton

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
Mail the complete application to:
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit Number INCOO ,ffz/Z
If you are completing this form in computer use the TAB key or the up — down arrows to moue from one
field to the next. To check the boxes, click your mouse on top of the box. Otherwise, please print or type.
1. Contact Information:
Owner Name
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Facility Name
Bishops Ridge - Well # 1
Mailing Address
4163 Sinclair Street
City
Denver
State / Zip Code
NC/28037
Telephone Number
[phone]
Fax Number
[phone]
e-mail/Address
[e-mail]
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Check here if same as
above ❑
Street Address or State Road Creedmoor Drive (NCSR 4411)
City
Rural Hall
State / Zip Code
NC/27045
County
Forsyth
3. Operator Information:
Name of the firm, consultant or other entity that operates the facility. (Note that this is not referring to the
Operator in Responsible Charge or ORC)
Name Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Mailing Address 4163 Sinclair Street
City Denver
State / Zip Code NC/28037 a ,r
Telephone Number [phone] FED ) 0 2007 �( 4
Fax Number [phone] J I
4. Ownership Status:
Federal ❑ State ❑ Private ® Public ❑
Page 1 of 3 C-WTP 03/05

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
5. Type of treatment plant:
❑ Conventional (Includes coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, usually followed by
filtration and disinfection)
❑ Ion Exchange (Sodium Cycle Cationic ion exchange)
® Green Sand Filter (No sodium recharge)
❑ Membrane Technology (RO, nanofiltration)
Check here if the treatment process also uses a water softener ❑
6. Description of source water(s) (i.e. groundwater, surface water)
Groundwater well
7. Describe the treatment process(es) for the raw water:
Green sand filtration using potassium permanganate. Chlorine added for disinfection.
8.. Describe the wastewater and the treatment process(es) for wastewater generated by the
facility:
Wastewater discharge is the backwash of the green sand filters. Discharge rate is
approximately 1,680 gallons, once every three days.
9. Number of separate discharge points: 1
Outfall Identification number(s) 001
10. Frequency of discharge:
If intermittent:
Days per week discharge occurs: 2
11. Plant design potable flowrate 0.0418
Backwash or reject flow 0.0017
Continuous ❑ Intermittent
MGD
MGD
Duration: approx. 20 min.
12. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall, including
latitude and longitude):
an unnamed tributary to Rough Fork (Roanoke River Basin)
Page 2 of 3 C-WTP 03/05

02/09/07 14:33 HORIZON ENGINEERING & CONSULTING 4 7044899409 NO.772 P05
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
13. Please list all water treatment additives, including cleaning chemicals, that have the
potential to be discharged.
potassium permanganate
chlorine
14. Is this facility located on Indian country? (check one)
Yea. ❑ NO Z
16. Additional Information:
Provide a schematic of flow through the facility, include flaw volumes at all points in
the treatment process, and point of addition of chemicals.
>� Salida Handling Plant
16. NEW Applicants
Information needed in addition to items 1-I5; _
New applicants must contact the NCDENR Customer Service Center.
Was the Customer Service Center contacted? ® Yes ❑ No
a Analyses of source water collected
D Engineering Alternative Analysis
Discharges from Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis plants shall be evaluated using a
water quality model.
17. Applicant Certification
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the
beat of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 (b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any false
statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document files or
required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission
implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or
monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained under Article 21 or regulotions of the
Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine not to exceed $25,000, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section
1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both,
fora similar offense.)
{ ftr"of3 C-WTP03/05

02/16/07 10:08 HORIZON ENGINEERING &,CONSULTING --� 7044899409 NO.774 P03
Attachment AL. Local Grovernr;nent Review Form
Gener IL,St;�rucr Q•�s,rw North Carolina Gffleral Siatvre 141 13-I ;c`Of'allow, input fron•. local govcrnmen rs in cht:rsuance
of NPhLS Pr;lnlli for non-rnullicipfd domr.Suc wa:ucur;feer rrea(Cf�ciir, EQilltieL Sprtcifjc-4v, the Envlroitmentid Managementinm Coassion -;E-'vfC) may not act on an apphc: d,41 fr,c a stew Hein-muf1ictrial d0l:ua-1;1iC 14*15tewatcr disich-itrF;e facility untU it 11a.4
received a writ%ri aratcmenf frorn each city arld n
colwiry anvernmcnr hanp, juaidtlartion over any pan of the lands on which the
Proposed fAcihry and its appwreriances are ro be located. 71711c wnuen „(,1tLmen( a•h,ll docvrr,riw Whether the: r_ify or County 11-ts a
zOriir;g or subdivision Ordinance in cffccr and f!1f Y1fCf1 an rndinance aS in effect) VJ11Cdler The proposed facility is consisTent wit11 The
ordinance The EMC shnU nor applove, a p&rmiT tipplir-ation for ayt• fnciliTy' \vhrch Tr city or counry l,ad drecrn-uned re be
inconsisrent with zoning or arcltino,tcxi tillesr rite apprr..,v«l of such applmarion. is dererrninrd ro have sutcuvide
significance Ind is in the bcst interear of dic Erzi-P.
iStriiCLlonR ro_the jljzlicaXq: PTIor tc, .Lrl)miT ing an ftn-plicition fr,r a NPDL•S Pcrinly for a proposed fnc`iliry, nc� appliearlt
Shall rrriuest div both the t-mub ' ciry and counr; government coilipkic rhis form. Tile ;1ppLcanr mist
■ Submit x cvlyy of the j+ctnvt .rpplicnt';cti iwil !I,., wf trrctt rwdur..t fox 11tix tort t ro be complcrcd} cc the clerk n( nce city and
the counte by cerrilit.d r-nail, recurs receipt rc9ue�ttcl
■ If uchr,t (us bosh) local Fovcrnmcnr(',; kZll;s; 10 11:ri1 111c camplctcd form, fie. r.:vtdcncod by the poornsirk o,i cart =Tified
_T riiall catd(s;, -within 15 da}'s after recci\irg a/lJ :',g„ing Eor tkic ccrofwd mail, the applicant may subnur ncc applicatir,n to
the \PDES 1;nit.
■ As evidcrice ro the Commission that rh2 locul �avcinmellr.,s:; failed to msonrid wirhan 15 days, the apphtant shall submit a
copy of ncc cecrified snail cud -along \\if91 a notnllGrd 4:1'Wr Starinq; t1)ar rlia::ucal govertlrneslt'(a) failed to respand within The
15-day period,
2 ctioa; to xhc L_orai Governme_n,I: The ntmifhy ory and; i;: COUnN l;uvel:nrnen( whicl•1 a11a} hRvc or har, jurisdicdon over
tiny parr of dw 1-arid on Which die proposedi fzr_ilir, es) it-3 .ylpurreaian: cs ttrr- i-o be .located ig required to complerc and return rids
foini ro the applicantltirhrn'15 dot's of ;C,,eipt. ; pie fprm mus( be .r�traci asld r.araT-;--j.
Nime of local governmcnr _ FO L t3 Y1:11
Does the city/cp'timry have ju,i+dM ion O.Cl: a„y r.1;It( of rare );iItd 011 tt-!tsclt the prul-joscd fxciliry and iti uppurtcna=6 are to be '
located% Yes (wj do [ ] if no, please "ipr1 this forr:t, have it norar ,.cd, :a_d reruin it to rhr'• ap' plicant.
.Does die cirr/county. have in ct.ftcc a Zoning or s!1f dlvtaion ordinance? ley I
If there is a zoning of subdivision w iriance iri ciTcrc is the elan for Lit prorJGspd fjciiaf - ConsisU:ntvAth the ordiadtice? I,'c9 f �
No [V�
D.trc 2'/ 15 / 07
Sib�slarurc .,,
;Gary Manager/Countvger} 7,. t
State of
North C3r.4j�na_
County nt°
_For syrh —.�
On this--_
5
dap of _-Fabr% ary
_._
?00 . _7 , persui•i:rl(t- appeared before me, Tltc Said
name J. Dudley Watts ,Trr0 The known area knoa-i1 to me to be the person described in
and who executod rite foregoiflg doctrme:llr and hc. (or nc�`. 1Vlri)uw1c-1ged diw lie (or site} c`ttcured the slime and being di,dv sworn
by rase, made oath rhat flits Mmenr rri die foreg--,i:re r,pcumem, air, tnic'. �
Myl:omiTiissiou expires' d6 _ ;S,lEniuure of 1'kltary feu IMI ,� l � .t4L.A
No asy 1 ublic (Official Seal)
'mar®rA
KIMavtER
i TM GO M
a °kQ
bo�
ftt Mts+
CJoau.mem', Veretarr June 23, 2005
pckpe 8 of S,

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
Mail the complete application to:
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit Number INCOO gy7/
If you are completing this form in computer use the TAB key or the up - down arrows to moue from one
field to the next. To check the boxes, click your mouse on top of the box. Otherwise, please print or type.
1. Contact Information:
Owner Name
Facility Name
Mailing Address
City
State / Zip Code
Telephone Number
s
Fax Number
e-mail Address
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Bishops Ridge - Well # 1
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver
NC/28037
[phone]
[phone]
[e-mail]
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Check here if same as above ❑
Street Address or State Road Creedmoor Drive (NCSR 4411)
City
State / Zip Code
County
Rural Hall
NC/27045
Forsyth
3. Operator Information:
Name of the firm, consultant or other entity that operates the facility. (Note that this is not referring to the
Operator in Responsible Charge or ORC)
Name Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Mailing Address 4163 Sinclair Street
City Denver 6F
State / Zip Code NC/28037 _
Telephone Number [phone] FED 2 0 100 /
i
Fax Number [phone]
4. Ownership Status:
Federal ❑ State ❑ Private ® Public ❑
Page I of 3 C-WTP 03/05

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
5. Type of treatment plant:
❑ Conventional (Includes coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, usually followed by
filtration and disinfection)
❑ Ion Exchange (Sodium Cycle Cationic ion exchange)
® Green Sand Filter (No sodium recharge)
❑ Membrane Technology (RO, nanofiltration)
Check here if the treatment process also uses a water softener ❑
6. Description of source water(s) (i.e. groundwater, surface water)
Groundwater well
7. Describe the treatment process(es) for the raw water:
Green sand filtration using potassium permanganate. Chlorine added for disinfection.
8.. 'Describe the wastewater and the treatment process(es) for wastewater generated by the
facility:
Wastewater discharge is the backwash of the green sand filters. Discharge rate is
approximately 1,680 gallons, once every three days.
9. Number of separate discharge points: 1
Outfall Identification number(s) 001
10. Frequency of discharge: Continuous ❑ Intermittent
If intermittent:
Days per week discharge occurs: 2 Duration: approx. 20 min.
11. Plant design potable flowrate 0.0418 MGD
Backwash or reject flow 0.0017 MGD
12. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall, including
latitude and longitude):
an unnamed tributary to Rough Fork (Roanoke River Basin)
Page 2 of 3 C-WTP 03/05

02/09/07 14:33 HORIZON ENGINEERING & CONSULTING -> 7044899409 NO.772 IP05
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM C - WTP
For discharges associated with water treatment plants
13. Please list all water treatment additives, including cleaning chemicals, that have the
potential to be discharged.
Potassium permanganate
chlorine
24. Is this facility located on Indian country? (check one)
Yes Q No Z
15. Additional Information;
> Provide a schematic of flow through the facility, include flow volumes at all points in
the treatment process, and point of addition of chemicals.
Solids Handling Plan
16. NEW Applicants
Information needed in addition to items I-I5,
> New applicants must contest the NCDENR Customer Service Center.
Was the Customer Service Center contacted? ® Yes ❑ No
> Analyses of source water collected
> Engineering Alternative Analysis
as Discharges from Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis plants shall be evaluated using a
water quality model.
17. Applicant Certification
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the
best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 (b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any false
statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document riles or
required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission
implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or
monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained under Article 21 or regul4tions of the
Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine not to exceed S25,000, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section
1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $25,000 or imprisonment not more than S years, or both,
for a similar offense.)
fte 3 of 3 C-WTP 03/05

02/16/07 10:08 HORIZON ENGINEERING & CONSULTING -> 7044899409 NO.774 IP03
Attachmenr A. Local Government Review Form
Gene' tL tut' Qv 7CaV NorTIl Cut(bnit Gffleral SIanlre 141•-21'�.l i*c'(ti) allows rnpm frorr. local govcrnrnents in tht:::suance
DE NPhT;S l>r:,:c,r Cor nail-rnutlicirlll domestic w.uut vurer trcalolctir. fracihtiOL Sp,:c;hc}tly, The Environmental Management
Co:nm,ssion () :vlC) May not act on an appjjrar;n4j fr,r a nc!1' 71:Jn--nu2L`clrjal d,+t'1es67! •zrastewatcr diachuE•e facility tuttil it hap
icceivl:d a writrwi statcman, Crom cacti ciiv and c4iavity grxerllmCni havinc, jur;*Ail,;trnn over any part of the lands on which the
proposed Nclhry and irs appurtemaaccs are ro be located. "Flic u�riTtec :,r,iteale at �ilall dpcurnene wllctlict thr: airy or county hai a
zeivug or subdivision ordinance in effecr end (if suUh an ntditllnce is in cffcct) the proposed faclvy is consistent with the
ordinance The MvfC shal} nor applove , po-rnlir application for a:jc• foc:lity wl:rch a City or counq- has deternuncd to be
inconaisrent wirh zoning or mbdi'%iscioil orrlxn:+nc:ci 11111asr the appznv41 of such upplicar:ion. is dereaninrd ro have sratcv ide
significance and is in the bast iilterear of the
InstructionR to -Chic Aji cast: P:1or ro slcl.,irlicTin� an ar:i4ition f,„ a NPD)r$ Pcrirlr fot a proposed Facility, the appheant
shall rcriuost riisr both the nearbl• cinr al)d coun': 901•errltntnt coilyl&rc rLs -Corr-.. Tie opplacanr must
■ Sub:tut it copy of the rermir applicettlon (w11 a \VlirrCll raquc't io; 1111p tone ro be completed) ro the clerk of chc Ctry and
the cou::hr I)y cestititA -nail, retum receipt rc9ae�.trcl
■ If eithat (,ut both) lm.gl povzriltticnr(s. kail;;i; 10 •,»;lit 111C completed Lorin, it>, evtClunccd by ilia posrmsirk on tine certified
_T mail card(s;, within l it dot's after iecci,u:g and t-igiung for viic ccrufwd roe ui, the applieam rnav subn r ncc application to
dlc \PDES Unit.
■ As evidence to the Commission that di? local 1v0vc>nmenr.;s? failed to respond L6rhin 15 days, the applicant shall submit a
copy of thr cccrified mail rnrd ;along «irh a 11001t1wrd icri;;r stawl,;; 6)ar dji -, local govertlrrient(a) failed to respand within the
15-dal• period,
irasttncrion3to ,,c. 7Yara1 Govcrntnent: 'Chc marl!- C11V in•d; a: cntLnN l;aver-riment which may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of tic 1ur:d on Which t11c prepost"d f-Icuir. o) it9 tti I,e located is required to complete and return this
ioini to the applicant v-irhin'15 da,•s of :c'ccipt. ,ale Corm ma:: be .r,�n-tcd anti
N-Ameoflocal govemmcnr Fotext:li CC)uT�t�^
Does the city/c unry have jurisdLcrion o,-cr ariy r.r1ct Of rlLe ),},td on tall:el, the prQpovcd filcilily and itY appurtcninces are to be
located% Ycs (� \o [ ] if no, please slpil this 1.`0=i, haze it sera', led, au:d rerun n it to tha: applicant.
Doc,5 the Lrykounty alive to -freer a zoning OT 5'A1diV1S10r3 prdlnince? Yeti I S j i �'[i [ ]
if there is a zoningoi subdivision aiAiriance iri cffcct is the elan for the ptOprKd facr14t3- consisuentwith the ordinance? Ycs [ [
\ o [ V,
DrtrC 2'/ 15 / 07 5iarure ,. _
;(',ITy ibinnager/Counrv�ger— ) 'op, 1 ,
Srate of North Caro] inn County of TForsyr.h _ _�
on this—.,— 15 da}' of...^ j_bruary_ '1007 , peraoriiilly appeared before me, chc Said
name J Dudley Watts ;! ram^ _ TO file krwtljli as-:.1 l noac-%% to me to be the person described in
and who executrd the forugoitlg docutncnr and hx (or slw• ec:h:w,v1c,1ged'Brit 11,: (o: sale) t.m!eLlred the sjille and being dull' sworn
by me, made oath chat the s rt.ftl'nr Ira the fore 411t-! r•1pc111tler1r air, tole'. 1
1VIy Connnissiou expires l' _ d6 %_ (Signature
�. .
No ar? Public (Official Seal)
WrCM Brit
KIM LER
wnxw u�r. capN GOOMM
eadro4, Z=
Grjidwic z, Dc� rtm.enl Va n iri a• ,tun': 2.3, 7005
page 8of6,

Existing Wastewater Discharge Alternatives Evaluation
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Bishops Ridge Subdivision
Rural Hall, N.C.
REcFlvEa
Forsyth County N.C. Dtl..*. of ENR
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Applicant Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver, N.C. 28037
Ph: 704-489-9404
Contact: Gary Mosely
Facility Bishops Ridge Wells # 1
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Creedmoor Drive (NCSR 4411)
Rural Hall, N.C. 27045
Ph: 704-489-9404
Contact: Gary Mosely
Prepared by: J. Thurman Horne, P.E.
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124
Ph: 704-788-4455
Date: February 10, 2007

-Ok
Existing Wastewater Discharge Alternatives Evaluation
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Bishops Ridge Subdivision
Rural Hall, N.C.
Forsyth County
Applicant Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
4163 Sinclair Street
Denver, N.C. 28037
A
Ph: 704-489-9404
Q�`
yE
Contact: Gary Mosely
'
YJ"�prd L j✓^ygp9OG'U j��ev�
Facility Bishops Ridge Wells ## 1 nuu^rar�e��e�V_
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Creedmoor Drive (NCSR 4411)
Rural Hall, N.C. 27045
Ph: 704-489-9404
Contact: Gary Mosely
Prepared by: J. Thurman Horne, P.E.
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124
Ph:704-788-4455
Date: February 10, 2007
FED 2 0 2CO/

2
Table of Contents
Page
Section 1: General...............................................................................3
1.01 Introduction: ................................................................... 3
1.02 Scope: ........................................................................... 3
Section 2: Background Information........................................................3
2.01 Project Area: ................................................................... 3
2.02 Site Characteristics: .......................................................... 4
2.03 Receiving Stream Characteristics........................................4
Section 3: Existing Utilities ................................................ 4
....................
3.01 Public Facilities: ............................................................... 4
3.02 Private Facilities:...........................................................4
Section 4: Alternatives For Service.........................................................5
4.01: On site surface and/or subsurface disposal .........................5
4.02: Wastewater Reuse: ........................................................ 6
4.03: Surface Water Discharge................................................6
4.04: Combination of Alternatives.............................................6
Section 5: Summary and Conclusions: ................................................... 7
Section 6: Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities: .............................. 7
Appendix
A
Cost Analysis of Alternatives
Appendix
B
USGS Location Map and Aerial Photo
Appendix
C
Possible Route for Connection to POTW
Appendix
D
Possible Locations for Subsurface Land Disposal
Appendix
E
Possible Locations for Surface Land Disposal
Appendix
F
SCS Soil Maps and Soil Descriptions
Appendix
G
Summary of Analysis of Well Water Constituents
Appendix
H
Existing Process Flow Schematic
Appendix
I
Residuals Management Plan
Appendix
J
Local Government Review
Appendix
K
Chemical Analysis of Raw Water Supply

Section 1: General
1.01 Introduction:
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. (Aqua NC) currently owns and operates an existing well
water system serving Bishops Ridge Subdivision (Bishops Ridge), located
southeast of Rural Hall, N.C. in Forsyth County. Well,#1 of the water system uses
an assembly of green sand filters in the treatment of groundwater prior to
distribution to the Bishops Ridge community. These filters are backwashed, using
potable water, approximately once every three days. This backwash is a relatively
small volume of approximately 1,680 gallons. The discharge exits the well house
via a 1" PVC pipe and is released into an intermittent stream that is an unnamed
tributary to Rough Fork in the Roanoke River basin.
The well has a good overall history of compliance with water supply regulations,
but is required to obtain an NPDES permit for the continued operation of the
existing backwash discharge.
The Bishops Ridge water system currently has 66 customers. Well # 1 is approved
for 29 gpm. No expansion of this well is planned and the current two well system
is sufficient to serve the subdivision. Whereas this well is limited by its current yield
capacity and since this capacity is being utilized, there is no potential for any
population increase to affect the existing rate of water use or backwash discharge
flow.
The review of this source and the consideration of alternatives is being made with
inclusion of consideration of the guidance contained in "Permitting Strategy For
GreenVnd Filtration Water Treatment Plants - January 2004")
1.02 Scope:
The scope of this project is limited to the investigation and evaluation of
alternatives for treating and/or disposing of the existing green sand filter backwash
from Well # 1 at Bishops Ridge Subdivision. This includes consideration of the
feasibility of continuing the existing discharge and options for eliminating the
existing discharge.
Section 2: Background Information
2.01 Project Area:
The existing service area is limited to the Bishops Ridge Subdivision. All homes
are single family residences. There are no commercial or industrial customers. All
wastewater is typical backwash from green sand filters.
The existing discharge coordinates are: Longitude:-80.2628689 W
Latitude: 36.2310664 N

4
2.02 Site Characteristics:
The subdivision is located in a rural portion of Forsyth county, outside any
municipal limits and remote from public water and/or sewer. The nearest existing
sewer is approximately 1.6 miles away.
The general area has soil characteristics which are limited to the possibility of on
site treatment and disposal.
Terrain is generally rolling but has been graded level at the existing well site.
2.03 Receiving Stream Characteristics:
The receiving stream is intermittent in nature and is an unnamed tributary to
Rough Fork which is Class C waters. The receiving stream is obviously a zero
flow stream (7Q10 and 30Q2 = 0) but since the wastewater discharge is not
oxygen consuming, discharge into the zero flow stream should be allowable under
state procedures.
This receiving stream has no known outstanding features or characteristics that
should preclude the continuation of the existing discharge. There are no known
endangered or threatened species and these are not threatened or impaired
waters.
Section 3: Existing Utilities
3.01 Public Facilities:
The nearest existing public sewer is located approximately 1.6 miles northwest of
the existing well at the junction of Academy Street and Simmons Road. The
distance that would be required for sewer force mains to be installed would be
approximately 8,000 ft. This would be the route that appears to be the most
practical from an engineering perspective to take advantage of following existing
highway right of way and have minimal impact to adjacent property owners. This
sewer is operated by the Town of Rural Hall.
The Town Manager of Rural Hall was consulted on February 9, 2007 and he has
advised that this is the nearest location of available sewers and that the Town has
no plans within the next five years or beyond to extend service any closer to the
Bishops Ridge vicinity.
3.02 Private Facilities:
There are no known existing private sewer utilities within any reasonable proximity
of Bishops Ridge that would be available for consideration as a possible
alternative.

1A
Section 4: Alternatives For Service
4.01: On site surface and/or subsurface disposal:
Subsurface Disposal:
Appendix E contains portions of soil survey reports that provide insight as to the
suitability of the soils for subsurface disposal. As described in the report, these
soils are mainly Hiwassee soils with characteristics that are somewhat limited to
very limiting with respect to the potential for subsurface disposal. Subsurface
disposal requires buffers and land for the drainfields as well as equal areas of
suitable soil, be available and maintained as a repair/replacement areas that are
simply not available for individual on site disposal.
The only practical possibility for subsurface disposal would be to construct a
subsurface disposal system on lands acquired beyond the 100 foot buffer required
to protect the well. This would necessitate that additional lands be acquired that
are not now owned by Aqua NC. Some attempts have been made to explore this
possibility but have been unsuccessful. An area of approximately 1/4 acre that
adjoins,the current welt lot was investigated but the property owners were not
interested in selling.
Given the limitations described in the attached soil survey, it is doubtful that this is
a viable option. A full and extensive soils investigation of potential sites would be
necessary to confirm if useable areas are available. In keeping with the state
guidance for alternatives evaluation, the cost effectiveness of this alternative is
further evaluated to determine if a detailed soils analysis is appropriate. The costs
associated with this option are estimated in Appendix A.
fjThis option would require that the existing discharge be conveyed to an acquired
,site having sufficient area for subsurface disposal and a suitable reserve area of
;equal size, and that these areas include adequate buffers from property lines,
'homes, wells, etc.
Surface Irrigation:
Disposal by irrigation requires storage capacity for periods of inclement weather
when application is not allowable. Therefore consideration of this as a possible
alternative must also include the provision of storage of the backwash waters
during periods of inclement weather.
As noted earlier, the soils surveys for this area has determined this to have limited
to severely limited potential for on site subsurface disposal. Consideration of this
alternative is based on an assumed allowable application rate of 0.20 inches per
week which is based on a typical range of 0.15 to 0.25 inches per week for this
geographic area and the soil conditions generally described in the soils survey.

Storage requirements for this area are typically in the range of 45 to 90 days. For
purposes of this assessment, a storage requirement of 60 days will be assumed.
Whereas all of the area currently owned by Aqua NC is within the required 100
foot buffer zone, the only possible alternative for on site disposal, either by
subsurface or surface application, would require the acquisition of off site
properties for disposal.
Considering the relatively benign nature of the current discharge it is not expected
that any additional treatment would be required for surface application. Although
the additional cost of conveyance and the additional costs for on site disposal
should readily be recognized as a significant cost increase as compared to the
alternative of continued discharge, an estimate of the costs for this alternative is
included in Appendix A for comparison.
The evaluation is based on a very conservative assumption that the nearest
available lands that could be reasonably used would actually be available. A
comparison of the costs were made first, using the best (lowest cost) reasonable
assumptions. It would obviously be necessary to perform a more detailed site
investigation and ascertain if the property owner would consider allowing these
lands to be acquired for this purpose.
4.02: Wastewater Reuse
Options for reuse of wastewater for this area are essentially nil. Reuse is usually
associated with non -potable uses such as irrigation. This becomes potentially
more viable if there is a need or outlet for reuse such as irrigation of a golf course.
The volume of this discharge is very low and would have little attraction as a
source for recycle purposes. This area does not have a golf course, nor are there
any other viable options for reuse associated with the subdivision or in the
surrounding area.
4.03: Surface Water Discharge
This is the current method of wastewater disposal. There is no anticipated need to
add any new facilities for additional treatment.
An estimate of the costs for the continuation of this alternative is included in
Appendix A for comparison.
4.04: Combination of Alternatives
Alternatives to discharge that may be technologically feasible, such as connection
to the nearest public sewer, subsurface disposal and/or surface irrigation, could

not be employed in conjunction with the current method of disposal (surface water
discharge) and yield any reduction in capital expenditures. The evaluation of
alternatives shows that these alternatives are clearly not viable due to the
overwhelming magnitude of associated cost.
Combining one of these alternatives while continuing the periodic discharge, yields
no reduction in the cost for non -discharge alternatives and merely increases the
overall costs. There would be no reduction in capital costs for any of these
alternatives and the operating costs for combining surface discharge with either of
the other alternatives would be greater than for any single alternative that might be
selected.
In short, whereas the conclusion that continued surface discharge is the only
viable option due to the overwhelming differential in capital and operating costs,
any addition of an additional alternative would merely make the cost differential
worse.
Section 5: Summary and Conclusions:
As can be seen from a comparison of the net present value of the various
alternatives, there is a wide difference between the cost estimate of the option of
continuing discharge and options to eliminate the discharge.
Compared to the cost of the next most cost effective and reliable alternative
(subsurface disposal) the estimated Net Present Value is approximately 1,621 %
greater. This represents a difference of $3,205 NPV per customer.
In light of the financial impracticality, it is not necessary to further pursue whether
connection is politically acceptable to the POTW, or whether land based disposal
options are workable.
By far, the most practical and cost effective alternative is the continued discharge
of the relatively benign filter backwash waters.
Section 6: Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facilities:
Based on the findings of this evaluation, it has been concluded that the most
economical and practical alternative is to continue discharge to surface waters.

Appendix A
Cost Analysis of. Alternatives
Note: Cost estimates based on, National Construction Estimator, Means Building Construction
Cost Data, consultation with contractors and the engineers experience.

10
1. Surface Water Discharge at 1,680 GPD Flow Rate:
Whereas this is the existing method of disposal and considering that no additional
treatment is expected as a consequence of any forthcoming permit, there are no
estimated additional capital costs.
The only anticipated increase in operation and maintenance costs are those associated
with the collection, analysis and reporting of effluent discharge samples as required by an
LAPSES permit.
Capital Cost:
Total Capital Cost =
Operation & Maintenance Cost
(Present Value, 20 year life, 5.875% interest):
Annual Cost
Operation & Maintenance
($ 100/mo. X 12 mo/yr)
Total Annual Cost = $ 1,200
PV Annual Cost = $ 13,905
Total Net Present Value = $ 13,905
$ 0.00
$ 1,200

11
2. Connection to POTW Sewer System at junction of Academy Street and
Simmons Road:
Install new lift station to collect discharge and convey by force main along existing high
way right of way to junction with existing municipal sewer.
Distance = approx. 8,000 LF
Lowest elev. = approx. 800.0
Highest elev. = approx. 990.0
Lift station Avg. flow = 1,680 gpd gpm
Peak flow = 2.5 x 1.2 gpm = 3 gpm
Pump Design
Use 1" Sch. 40 PVC, approx. 8,000LF
FH @ 3 gpm = 0.68 ft/100 ft = 54.4 ft.
SH = 190 ft (approx.)
Use TDH = 250 ft.
Use dual effluent pumps (rated at 250 ft. TDH at 3 gpm) OSI P201512or approved equal
Capital Cost:
Item:
Y 1"-force main sewer
Air release
Pump Station
Manholes
Tap Fee
Road Crossings
Creek Crossings
Metering Station
Tie to exist. MH
Erosion control
Surveying
Electrical
Legal
Engineering
Quantity:
Unit Cost:
Cost:
8,000 LF
$ 8
$
64,000
4 Ea.
$ 2,500
$
10,000
1 Ea
$ 45,000
$
45,000
1 Ea
$ 1,800
$
1,800
1 Ea.
$ 3,000
$
3,000
2 Ea
$ 5,000
$
10,000
3 Ea
$ 5,000
$
15,000
1 Ea.
$ 30,000
$
30,000
1 Ea
$ 1,000
$
3,000
LS
$ 15,000
$
15,000
3 days
$ 1,500
$
4,500
LS
$ 5,000
$
5,000
LS
$ 5,000
$
5,000
Sub -total $ 211,300
15 % 31,695
Total Capital Cost = $ 242,995

12
Operation & Maintenance Cost:
Local government sewer fee
Annual sewer charges =
$ 2.208/100 CIF
$ 2.208/100 CF x 1,680 gpd/7.48 gal x 122 day/yr
_ $ 605
Annual electrical charges = $ 125/month X 12 mo/yr = $ 1,500
Annual sample analysis charges = $ 100/mo. X 12 mo/yr = $ 1,200
Annual repair and maintenance = $ 100/mo. X 12 mo/yr = $ 1,200
Total annual costs = $ 4,505
(Present Value, 20 year life, 5.875% interest)
Present Value Annual Cost = $ 52,200
Total Net Present Value = $ 295,195

13
3. Land Based Disposal:
3A. Subsurface Disposal:
Based on the soil survey information and the engineers field observations, the soils in this
area appear to be limited to severely limited as a medium for subsurface disposal. In the
event that it was found to be apparently a cost effective alternative, an in depth site
specific soil investigation would need to be done to confirm that the soils could in fact be
used. However, for the purpose of comparing the potential alternatives within the scope
of this evaluation, it will be assumed that a typical low design loading rate would be
workable. Therefore, it will be assumed that a loading rate of 0.10 gpd/sq. ft. is
acceptable.
Therefore, based on the design flow, the area required for subsurface disposal is:
1,680 gpd / 0.10 gpd/sq. ft.= 16,800 SF
Whereas it is required to maintain an equal size area as a reserve for future repair, the
required area is 33,600 SF. Assuming a roughly rectangular field (340 ft x 100 ft.for the
initial drain field plus repair and In order to maintain the required 50 foot buffer to property
lines), the minimum estimated land required is 88,000 SF or 2.0 acres.
Capital Cost:
Item:
Quantity: Unit Cost:
Cost:
4" sewer drain in 3' trenches
5,600 LF
$ 12
$
67,200
Site Clearing
2.0 acre
$ 6,500
$
13,000
Land
2.0 acres
$ 20,000
$
40,000
1" FM
250 LF
$ 8
$
2,000
Pump Station
1 Ea
$ 15,000
$
15,000
Surveying
3 days
$ 1,500
$
4,500
Soils Investigation
1 day
$ 1,500
$
1,500
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment LS
$ 2,000
$
2,000
Erosion control
LS
$ 5,000
$
5,000
Electrical
LS
$ 3,000
$
3,000
Legal
LS
$ 2,500
$
2,500
Engineering
Sub -total
15%
$ 155,700
23,355
Total Capital Cost = $179,055

14
Operation & Maintenance Cost (Present Value, 20 year life, 5.875 % interest):
Annual Cost
O & M of drain field,
Pump station and force main = $ 2,500/yr $ 2,500
Annual electrical charges = $ 125/month X 12 mo/yr = $ 1,500
Total Annual Cost = $ 4,000
PV Annual Cost = $ 46,349
Total Net Present Value = $ 225,404

UR
313. Surface Irrigation:
Surface irrigation preliminary design is based on an assumed allowable application rate
of 0.20 gpd/sq. ft. and a required storage basin for 60 days design flow. Based on the
design flow of 1,680 gpd, this results in an estimated disposal area of 8,400 SF. Allowing
a recommended 50% repair area, the required total area is 12,600 SF. Assuming a
roughly rectangular field (415 ft x 415 ft.for the initial spray field plus repair and in order to
maintain the required 150 foot buffer to property lines), the minimum estimated land
required is 172,225 SF or approximately 4 acres.
Capital Cost:
Item:
Quantity:
Unit Cost:
Cost:
100,800 gal. storage basin
(1)
$
19,500
Surface irrigation system
8,400 SF
$
0.35
$
2,940
Monitoring wells
4 ea
$
4,000
$
16,000
Land
4 acres
$
20,000
$
80,000
Fencing
2,000 LF
$
6.00
$
12,000
2" FM
300 LF
$
8.50
$
2,550
Manholes
1 Ea
$
1,600
$
1,600
Pump Station
1 Ea
$
35,000
$
35,000
Surveying
3 days
$
1,500
$
4,500
Soils Investigation
3 days
$
1,500
$
4,500
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment LS
$
3,000
$
3,000
Erosion control
LS
$
8,000
$
8,000
Electrical
LS
$
5,000
$
5,000
Legal
LS
$
5,000
$
5,000
Sub -total
$
199,590
Engineering
15 %
29,940
Total Capital Cost = $
229,530
(1) Storage:
Excavation 625 cu. Yds. @ $ 6.00/yd = $ 3,725
Compaction and Lining 4,500 SF @ $ 3.50/SF = $ 15,750
Sub -total = $ 19,500

16
Operation & Maintenance Cost
(Present Value, 20 year life, 8% interest):
Annual Cost
O & M of spray field,
Pump station and force main = $ 3,500/yr $ 3,500
Annual electrical charges = $ 250/month X 12 mo/yr = $ 3,000
Annual sample analysis charges = $ 100/mo. X 12 mo/yr = $ 1,200
Total Annual Cost = $ 7,700
PV Annual Cost = $ 89,222
Total Net Present Value = $ 318,752

18
Appendix B
USGS Location Map and Aerial Photo

w
Longitude:-80.2628689 W
Latitude: 36.2310664 N
Bishops Ridge Subdivison - Well # 1
Existing Discharge Location
USGS Map - Rural Hall, N.C. Quadrangle
2
F
S
N
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Scale: 1 "= 200Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007
0'

Map for GIS User
Location of My Location
1:4J37
Rural Hall
7.5-minute Quadrangle
Index snap
NC SPCS E: 496070.3, N:275961.9 meters (NAD83)
Long:-80.2628689 W, Lat: 36.2310664 N (NAD83)
Bishops Ridge Subdivison - Well # 1
Existing Discharge Location
Aerial Photo - Rural Hall, N.C. Scale: 1 '= 340'
I
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007

=yi��
�°" ��{'

19
Appendix C
Possible Route for Connection to P®TW

i--l�"��
"O" I
. 1, ' — _ �o •1 � .'�.."- � C
-' '{.+ `I :,il �']'Dy,B'i �..`•':�6h0. '=$9Z •���• Cam%
OCR
qt
.10
'140
.'j'i
?1)y
J{r=u��s,,, �qi• ,Ill'�,,,•(�,• �.,i.+�„fJt
I � � V, •l rr ' sue' ^,'; 1 1 .f"',r f , ' �',•�ii
If
0/�
^I _-SOD
Pam- f'.g920 W _
,M ty . .t., d M 00 !L .r ,� • .- f` Off':•- fCi
•per., Y.. ."t-m 'FsrVf ' io'-v, e
Bishops Ridge Subdivision - Well # 1 Horizon En-gineering & Consulting, Inc.
Possible Connection to Public Sewer Location 2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007
Topographical Map - Rural Hall, N.C. Scale: 1"=1,000'

20
Appendix D
Possible Location for Subsurface Land Disposal

23.73AC,,-
2
4P.
to 2
603,41
3.61CA IR
ge
cite -
.126,44 -65
102'.0,
204
8.54AC
Z'
72A&'
2-81AC
27 H
10,OAC
I op
0
Possible Subsurface Disposal Area
Bishops Ridge,Subdivison - Well # I Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Possible Subsurface Disposal Location 2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007
Rural Hall, N.C. Scale: 1 "=290'

oil
Appendix E
Possible Locations for Surface Land Disposal

Bishops Ridge Subdivison - Well # 1
Possible Surface Disposal Location
Rural Hall, N.C. Scale: 1" = 508'
W
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007

as
Appendix F
SCS Soil Maps and Soil Descriptions

z
Bishops Ridge Subdivison - Well # 1 Horizon Engineering & Consultin_q, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
SCS Soils Map - Rural Hall, N.C. Scale: 1 "=420' Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007

''"'"la
,�
1��
;1
Q:. ".
:._a

Sewage Disposal
Forsyth County, North Carolina
[The information in this table indicates the dominant soil condition but does not eliminate the need for onsite
investigation. The numbers in the value columns range from 0.01 to 1.00. The larger the value, the greater the
potential limitation. The table shows only the top five limitations for any given soil. The soil may have additional
limitations]
Map symbol
and soil name
Ch:
Chewacla
Wehadkee, undrained
Co:
Congaree
Wehadkee, undrained
EnB:
Enon
Picture, undrained
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
of
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
85
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1.00
Flooding
1.00.
Depth to saturated
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
zone
zone
Seepage, bottom
1.00
Seepage
0.50
layer
Slow water
0.50
movement
5
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
zone
zone
Slow water
0.50
Seepage
0.50
movement
80
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated
1:00
Depth to saturated
1.06
zone
zone
Slow water
0:50
Seepage
0.50
movement
5
Very limited
Very limited
Flooding
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
zone
zone
Seepage, bottom
1.00
Seepage
1.00
layer
Slow water
0.50
movement
90
Very limited
Somewhat limited
Slow water
1.00
Seepage
0.32
movement
Slope
0.32
2
Very limited
Very limited
Slow water
1.00
Depth to saturated
1.00
movement
zone
Depth to saturated
1.00
Depth to soft bedrock
0.42
zone
Seepage
0.18
Depth to bedrock
0.78
USDA Natural Resources Tabular Data Version: 8
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 01/19/2007
4
Page 1 of 4

Sewage Disposal
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Pct.
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Map symbol
of
and soil name
map
unit
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
Value
limiting features
limiting features
EnC:
Enon
85
Very limited
Very limited
Slow water
1.00
Slope
1.00
movement
Seepage
0.32
Slope
0.01
HIB:
Hiwassee
85
Somewhat limited
Somewhat limited
Slow water
0.50
Seepage
0.50
movement
Slope
0.32
HIC:
Hiwassee
85
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Slow water
0.50
Slope
1.00
movement
Seepage
0.50
Slope
0.01
HIE:
Hiwassee
80
Very limited
Very limited
Slope
1.00
Slope
1.00
Slow water
0.50
Seepage
0.50
movement
HmB2:
Hiwassee, moderately eroded
90
Somewhat limited
Somewhat limited
Slow water
0.50
Seepage
0.50
movement
Slope
0.32
HmC2:
Hiwassee, moderately eroded
90
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Slow water
0.50
Slope
1.00
movement
Seepage
0.50
Slope
0.01
PaC:
Pacolet
80
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Slow water
0.50
Slope
1.00
movement
Seepage
0.50
Slope
0.01
PaD:
Pacolet
85
Very limited
Very limited
Slope
1.00
Slope
1.00
Slow water
0.50
Seepage
0.50
movement
USDANatural Resources
Conservation Service
Tabular Data Version: 8
Tabular Data Version
Date: 01/19/2007 Page 2
of 4

Sewage Disposal
Forsyth County, North Carolina
Map symbol
and soil name
Pct.
of
map
unit
Septic tank absorption fields
Sewage lagoons
Rating class and
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
limiting features
PaF:
Pacolet 75
Very limited
Very limited
Slope 1.00
Slope
Slow water 0.50
Seepage
movement
PcC2:
Pacolet, moderately eroded
PcF2:
Pacolet, moderately eroded
WIF:
Wilkes
85 Somewhat limited
Slow water
movement
Slope
85 Very limited
Slope
Slow water
movement
85 Very limited
Depth to bedrock
Slope
Seepage, bottom
layer
Value
1.00
0.50
Very limited
0.50 Slope 1.00
Seepage 0.50
0.01
Very limited
1.00 Slope 1.00
0.50 Seepage 0.50
Very limited
1.00 Depth to soft bedrock 1.00
1.00 Slope 1.00
1.00 Seepage 0.18
USDA Natural Resources
Tabular Data Version: 8
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 01/19/2007 Page 3 of 4

Sewage Disposal
This table shows the degree and kind of soil limitations that affect septic tank absorption fields and sewage
lagoons. The ratings are both verbal and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are
limited by all of the soil features that affect these uses. "Not limited" indicates that the soil has features that are very
favorable for the specified use. Good performance and very low maintenance can be expected. "Somewhat limited"
indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for the specified use. The limitations can be
overcome or minimized by special planning, design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance
can be expected. "Very limited" indicates that the soil has one or more features that are unfavorable for the
specified use. The limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special design, or
expensive installation procedures. Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected.
Numerical ratings in the table indicate the severity of individual limitations. The ratings are shown as decimal
fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the
greatest negative impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation (0.00).
"Septic tank absorption fields" are areas in which effluent from a septic tank is distributed into the soil through
subsurface tiles or perforated pipe. Only that part of the soil between depths of 24 and 72 inches or between a
depth of 24 inches and a restrictive layer is evaluated. The ratings are based on the soil properties that affect
absorption of the effluent, construction and maintenance of the system, and public health. Saturated hydraulic
conductivity (Ksat), depth to a water table, ponding, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, and flooding affect
absorption of the effluent. Stones and boulders, ice, and bedrock or a cemented pan interfere with installation.
Subsidence interferes with installation and maintenance. Excessive slope may cause lateral seepage and surfacing
of the effluent in downslope areas.
Some soils are underlain by loose sand and gravel or fractured bedrock at a depth of less than 4 feet below the
distribution lines. In these soils the absorption field may not adequately filter the effluent, particularly when the
system is new. As a result, the ground water may become contaminated.
"Sewage lagoons" are shallow ponds constructed to hold sewage while aerobic bacteria decompose the solid
and liquid wastes. Lagoons should have a nearly level floor surrounded by cut slopes or embankments of
compacted soil. Nearly impervious soil material for the lagoon floor and sides is required to minimize seepage and
contamination of ground water. Considered in the ratings are slope, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), depth
to a water table, ponding, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, flooding, large stones, and content of organic
matter.
Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) is a critical property affecting the suitability for sewage lagoons. Most
porous soils eventually become sealed when they are used as sites for sewage lagoons. Until sealing occurs,
however, the hazard of pollution is severe. Soils that have a Ksat rate of more than 14 micrometers per second are
too porous for the proper functioning of sewage lagoons. In these soils, seepage of the effluent can result in
contamination of the ground water. Ground -water contamination is also a hazard if fractured bedrock is within a
depth of 40 inches, if the water table is high enough to raise the level of sewage in the lagoon, or if floodwater
overtops the lagoon.
A high content of organic matter is detrimental to proper functioning of the lagoon because it inhibits aerobic
activity. Slope, bedrock, and cemented pans can cause construction problems, and large stones can hinder .
compaction of the lagoon floor. If the lagoon is to be uniformly deep throughout, the slope must be gentle enough
and the soil material must be thick enough over bedrock or a cemented pan to make land smoothing practical.
Information in this table is intended for land use planning, for evaluating land use alternatives, and for planning
site investigations prior to design and construction. The information, however, has limitations. For example, '
estimates and other data generally apply only to that part of the soil between the surface and a depth of 5 to 7 feet.
Because of the map scale, small areas of different soils may be included within the mapped areas of a specific soil.
The information is not site specific and does not eliminate the need for onsite investigation of the soils or for
testing and analysis by personnel experienced in the design and construction of engineering works.
Government ordinances and regulations that restrict certain land uses or impose specific design criteria were
not considered in preparing the information in this table. Local ordinances and regulations should be considered in
planning, in site selection, and in design.
USDA Natural Resources Tabular Data Version: 8
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 01/19/2007 Page 4 of 4

23
Appendix G
Summary of Analysis of Well Water Constituents

24
Appendix H
Existing Process Flow Schematic

Four Potassium
Permanganate
Feed Tanks
(One each to
each green sand
filter)
To Bishops Ridge Community Water System
Chlorine Addition
to filtered water
Four Green Sand Filters
(In parallel)
Well Water
Backwash
Discharge to
unnamed
tributary to
Rough Fork
Bishops Ridge Subdivision— Well # 1 Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Existing well System - Process Flow Diagram 2510 Walker Road
Rural Hall, NC Scale: NTS I
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124 February 10, 2007

25
Appendix I
Residuals Management Plan

26
Residuals Management Plan
Prepared by: J. Thurman Horne, P.E.
Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Residuals Mannement Plan:
The proposed continued surface water discharge will have no impact on existing residuals management.
There are no wastewater treatment facilities.
The nature of the operation (backwashing of green sand filters) is such that only minor amounts of solids
(less than 30 mg/1) are released with the discharge.
There is no generation of any grits, sludges or residuals for removal or disposal.
This project does not increase or alter the amounts of sludge produced or impact the current methods of
disposition.

26
Appendix J
Local Government Review

27
A copy of the permit application and the local government review form has been faxed and
mailed by certified mail to the County Manager. A copy of the response will be forwarded
immediately upon receipt.

Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
2510 Walker Road
Mt Pleasant, N.C. 28124
Ph.: 704-788-4455
Fax: [phone]
To: Mr. Dudley Watts
County Manager
From: J. Thurman Home, P.E.
Date: February 10, 2007
Fax
Fax No.: [phone]
No. of pages: 7
(including cover)
Subject: Local Government Review
Bishops Ridge Subdivision - Well Water Backwash Discharge
Message:
Mr. Watts,
Please review the attached letter and documents
Please call me if you have any questions or need any additional information (704-788-4455.)
Thanks!
Vff
A L
Ln
E=l Postage
—0
Certified Fee
ru Postmark
C3 Return Receipt Fee I-lere
M (Endorsement Required)
C3 [Restricted Delivery iFee
C3 (Endors..ent R.qu d)
-0 CO ;?AlT7
r- Total Postage & Fees L$
ru
Sent To
—0
ulfQe
113 ,
or PO Box No.
—2, ..................
City, State, ZIP+4

Horizon Engineering & Consulting, Inc.
Mr. Dudley Watts
County Manager
Forsyth County
201 N. Chestnut St.
Winston-Salem, NC 27101
Subject: Request for Local Government Review
NPDES Permit Application
Existing Well Backwash Discharge
Bishops Ridge Subdivision
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Watts:
2510 Walker Road
Mt. Pleasant, N.C. 28124-8567
704-788-4455
Fax:[phone]
February 9, 2007
Attached is a copy of an application for permit signed by Aqua North Carolina, Inc. This
application is for a permit for the continued discharge of backwash from filters installed on an
existing potable well which serves the Bishops Ridge Subdivision, located outside the Rural
Hall, N.C. town limits. I have also attached a map to indicate the existing location.
As part of the application process, the state requires that we notify the local government and ask
that they complete the attached form which indicates whether the local government has a zoning
or subdivision ordinance and whether the continued discharge is consistent with that ordinance.
This is an existing groundwater well that filters water through a series of filters before the water
is distributed to the Bishops Ridge community. The filters are "backwashed" with water
approximately once every three days and approximately 1,680 gallons of water is then discharged
into the nearby stream.
This has been in service for a number of years and we are not aware of any concerns over this
discharge, other than that the state has advised that we must apply for a permit.
As the state has instructed, we are trying to file this application as soon as possible. Therefore,
we would certainly appreciate anything you can do to expedite review of this attachment and
return of the signed form. If you could sign and fax a copy of this back to me (fax: 704-788-
4455) on Monday or Tuesday, it would be very helpful and we would certainly appreciate it. I
would still like to receive a copy by mail as well if possible.
We apologize for the necessity to ask for this assistance but I hope that you can appreciate our
dilemma.
If you have any questions or if there is anything we need to discuss, please call me (704-788-
4455.)
Sincerely,
Burman orne, P. E.

Attachment A. Local Government Review Form
General Statute Overview, North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c)(6) allows input from local governments in the issuance
of NPDES Permits for non -municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) may not act on an application for a new non -municipal domestic wastewater discharge facility until it has
received a written statement from each city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the
proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be located. The written statement shall document whether the city or county has a
zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect and (if such an ordinance is in effect) whether the proposed facility is consistent with the
ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has determined to be
inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ordinances tuzless the approval of such application is determined to have statewide
significance and is in the best interest of the State.
Instructions to the Applicant: Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for a proposed facility, the applicant
shall request that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The applicant must:
• Submit a copy of the permit application (with a written request for this form to be completed) to the clerk of the city and
the county by certified mail, return receipt requested.
■ If either (or both) local government(s) fail(s) to mail the completed form, as evidenced by the postmark on the certified
mail card(s), within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant may submit the application to
the NPDES Unit.
• As evidence to the Commission that tie local governments) failed to respond within 15 days, the applicant shall submit a
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local government(s) failed to respond within tie
15-day period.
Instructions to the Local Government: The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of the land on which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local
(City/County)
Does die city/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be
located? Yes [ ] No [ ] If no, please sign this form, have it notarized, and return it to the applicant.
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes [ ] No [ ]
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is tie plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Date
State of County of
Signature
(City Manager/County Manager)
On this day of , personally appeared before me, the said
" " to me known and known to me to be the person'described in
and who executed the foregoing document and he (or she) acknowledged that lie (or she) executed the same and being duly sworn
by me, made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true.
My Commission expires .(Signature of Notary
Notary Public (Official Seal)
EAA Guidance Document Version: June 23, 2005
Page 8 of 8

28
Appendix K
Chemical Analysis of Raw Water Supply

1 20 C, 7 1 (j 14 FA 7 0 4 4 'C'S 3 4 0 S [A 002/00,
IS 07 08:342a
O-ru ' Vjjj7jingtovNC 29401
A Divisioll (910) 763-979?�IFax: [phone]
N-EVV W-ELL 'fNORGANIC CjrFjqlCAL ANALYSIS
(ATER SYSTEM ID 4: C2-34-197
.amc of Water Systems.- Bishops Ridgc
_=.Pie -fype,., 0 Source for Plan Re'view
,O,Cltion %Vberc Cal]Erzted: We bead 01
,oc-afion Code; WEI
:011eCted)3y;,8',jy'Swung , 'put".-Tiflo
Aag R�jts to (water systern reprzseowllve):
qaryAmentr011T
Renter Ufilides, Inc-
VO ROT 859
DeiaveV, JJC 28037
*31721
D &t_0 Dffi!�� �Uli 1
(Sgcay A-V Ov PM)
2_
(, 1) 489-9404
[phone]
_ .j�� � �5F%ff 0 )USAWLEN—V.J Otvt.'f -9NSATISFACTORY
ALLOWAaLF-
LIMrr*
tiunlou
COIF r-C NT AM I-N ANT L
N
1.0 Utu IA
001 0.10 L-j
DNO Tuxtidity
170 mv/fL IIl
-- !
mg/L•Baxii= O.Go MgA',
M
mgA, j
Cadrni=!!�
Ol 4M
L. I Cal Ljurn 101 1.0 rfigil
1016•
5 . a
0.100 mgv"
Copper
170
lN2 .......
C`Lum d0040
m4.0d0 --mg---/-L-.-
--
—
Fluoride 0.100 ME— .. . ..... o300-gL 0-075 mgam
mg/L
-70
m
00-j=mFg/L
Du..w002 lm*&LL
ogazrw I- --
04 rWL
1035 Mercury100.
Con=tr_A1% not N!
tons for &n(l COj , )PU;,,,� aad,
1 of 3

11
02/13!2007 10:14 FAX. [phone]C19 t joo3,�003
r • •-
1a 07 09:Uck UT-Itf Wilmington, NC 28401
1J i? t%Tl+tis �JC►i Jtra?�t
(910) 7�73.9793IFrrx. [phone]
NALYSTS
(ccousia i�1
rtr,iz^. BZj, a:Gar� �:��iaa ny�xic Lv, m1., p:irxS fac pIms r+.w4kMr rsa:'..at.
'CATER SYSTEM IJD 0: 02-34-197;�-----�-
L,acation C:odc WEI
�I A1i liA3 2:57 FM(sPdH AM or PW.
� (t�'C1L`rY'Y7
a-..anncx+s..s�"' •,.wa•-:,.a,.:air.�u�=�e.r w, _ _•
,A-RATOJRY ED 9: 37721
— OWASLF.
�134��ZF�iJ rS2•.t QLlANTiPI�D
r t L �O a;.rca� r vtir rti:i�a•`+'S B3-L,
coNrAk2�9LTL L1A��
CON7AMrINAN-T I cOL'1'•
CODE
Mae] 170 MOD MRL � - __ �_.._--..-..• � _m.
1036 I Nock_ _ _, _ _.._ C -
.a
1ofl �._
--.... Nitrate 163 1.OG rti"'T, i m 00 ni&q
109 0.10 ni?17 ?,
1041 Nitrite . ;.._ ..•- _ ._ _...................... m 0.050 raga,
1045 I Seicmum
170 0.010 rn� r, :^
1.'' �.._ .__U:os.-_-_....... - mom' 0.100 reagfl,
Silver -
-- m
...._
NIA
.....__.....r--........._....._.. _ 13, �.0 m� _ .. NIA `
Z055 Sulfa[e if mg/L
Acidity 157 1.0 kr � j_`j
1b68 rngll.
170 i.dt}i inglf,
10`74 Antinony �, 1 0.004 mgA,
107mg/L 4 Bety1'riaria L70 0,00� mp-- O.UO2 m
1095 li�allium 170 J,001 ri gj-
.
0.854 mg/L 5.0 mg/'--.
1
1095 Zinc 12 19 5 0 m�iL 15 units
1905 Color
usit� •
� 179 mg/L NIA _
15 ToW Fwdaws _... • 1 .... _ - 7.36 units
41 t •0 i'�
1-35
19 ..... i 1� to ]dlrl
1427 1 0 raigfL ... _. —
m
� ._r. 500 O+agg/L
1930 t "fatal Dissolved leg ao,o Solids tngjL
u�p. _..--
A Note: GonctntM iolls for Lead and CoKCr Ar&- €aCrlo-- lc� 11104 MCi S.
Y,.`¢AS E
Lobvr tort' LQV #: 311-7911
13-.00 FM
��yy�� ��yy�7�pf}tmdlr AAl ar +SO•
COTS; > 1Z27X3G8 221OW D27 3 an 'aka �s� a.s _'lt p�Ta9 1�it it , 49.P lugtiGhe was 0.25p ri
2 of
01. 002 - • . . . - �� •. u1f�aFr