NC0029131_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20050510

NPDES DOCIMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0029131
Kittrell Job Corps WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Signature Authority
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
May 10, 2005
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore airy
content on the WialilleX44e side

1-0111V-1
I AY 1 0 2005 .J
EN
L 7 - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
GINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
ALTERNATIVES
KITTRELL, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared For:
U.S DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
1096 U.S. Highway 1
Kittrell, North Carolina 27544
PBDewberry
2101 Wilson Boulevard/Suite 200
Arlington, Virginia 22201
ESA Environmental Specialists, Inc.
1403 Greenbrier Parkway/Suite 575
Chesapeake, Virginia 23320
By:
QDRIEN b GERE
951 Aviation Parkway
Morrisville, North Carolina 27560
FILE NO. 11896.36584
May 2, 2005
CA ° dr
•':,FOSS !.'• 9 `:
1 446511
•z`
y✓`�� NE' QS\".

Mil
ion
MI
Ing,
MEI
ion
rag
fn
Mal
Mil
MR
rall
MI
girl
fun
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
2.0 EXISTING FACILITIES 2
3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT 3
4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 3
4.1 Alternative 1— No Action 3
4.2 Alternative 2A — Continued Surface Water Discharge — Modify Existing Clarifier, low flow 3
4.3 Alternative 2B — Continued Surface Water Discharge — Modify Existing Clarifier, normal flow 4
4.4 Alternative 2C — Continued Surface Water Discharge — New Clarifier, normal flow 5
4.5 Alternative 3 — Subsurface Drip Irrigation 5
4.6 Alternative 4 — Surface Drip Irrigation 7
4.7 Alternative 5 — Force Main to Henderson 7
5.0 CONCLUSIONS 8
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1— Project Location Area
Exhibit 2 — Alternative 2A, 2B & 2C Proposed Modifications Schematic
Exhibit 3 — Flood Plain Map
Exhibit 4 — Drip Irrigation Schematic
Exhibit 5 — Vance County Soil Survey — Soils Map
Exhibit 6 — Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow — Vance County, North
Carolina — Soil Type, Vance (VaB) & Wedowee (WeD)
Exhibit 7 — Force Main Route
APPENDICIES
Appendix A
NCDENR, N.C. Division of Water Quality/NPDES Unit. Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA)
Guidance Document.
Appendix B
NPDES Permit No. NC0029131

Appendix C
Conceptual Cost Estimates
Appendix D
Life Cycle Costs •
Appendix E
Austin, Texas Water Utility. Drip Irrigation Systems
rat
rig

Sul
1m1
�► 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) is prepared on behalf of the U. S. Department of Labor
fir (DOL), Kittrell, North Carolina to evaluate the economic feasibility of various wastewater treatment
alternatives for the Kittrell Job Corps Center.
The Job Corps Center is an existing college -like campus that offers education and training opportunities
to approximately 300 students for long-term, specialized careers. In addition to the students on campus,
the Job Corps Center has approximately 100 staff members between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
The student and staff population have remained constant over the years and are not expected to increase
1.4 in the future; therefore, the sewer flow should remain constant. Wastewater generated by the facility is
domestic in nature, and it is currently treated at an on -site package, extended aeration, activated sludge
wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) rated at 25,000 gallons per day (gpd).
The WWTP has had a history of non-compliance since 1998 even though upgrades to the plant were
implemented in 2000. In an effort to remedy the treatment deficiencies currently plaguing the WWTP, the
F.9 Job Corps Center, through its consultants, prepared an engineering design in the Fall of 2004 to upgrade
the existing plant. The design included modifying the existing clarifier by installing Stamford baffles and
reconfiguring the waste and return sludge piping and pumping, installing a new dual media gravity filter
and an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system, modifying equalization basin pumping and several other
minor improvements to increase treatment efficiency. The design documents were submitted to DWQ for
review; however, the request for additional information by DWQ led the Job Corps Center to withdraw
the documents from further consideration until that information could be provided.
rig
Although the Job Corps Center is not requesting a new or expanded wastewater discharge, DWQ
requested that an EAA be prepared. In an effort to comply with DWQ's request, representatives of the
`al' Job Corps Center and it consultants met with the following DWQ personnel in the Raleigh Regional
Office on March 10, 2005 to discuss the requirements for the EAA:
F.9 Mr. Ken Schuster
Mr. Dan Blaisdell
Mr. Cecil Madden
0.1 Mr. Shannon Langley
During the meeting it was agreed to by the Job Corps representatives and DWQ that the EAA would be
prepared and it includes an evaluation of the following alternatives:
Alternative No. 1: No action
Alternative No. 2A: Continued Surface Water Discharge Modify the existing clarifier by installing
Stamford baffles and reconfiguring the waste and return sludge piping and
pumping, install a new dual gravity filter and an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection
' system, modify equalization basin pumping and other minor improvements to
increase treatment efficiency, including proposed electrical modifications.
Construction would be performed under low flow (school break) conditions;

Pir1
MI
Mi,
Pal
Alternative No. 2B:
Alternative No. 2C:
Continued Surface Water Discharge Same as Alternative 2A except that
construction would be performed under normal flow (school in session)
conditions;
Continued Surface Water Discharge Same as Alternative 2A except that a new
clarifier will be installed rather than modifying the existing clarifier and
construction would be performed under normal flow (school in session)
conditions;
Alternative No. 3: Subsurface Drip Irrigation
Alternative No. 4: Surface Drip Irrigation
owl
Alternative No. 5: Force Main to Henderson, N.C.
W I It is recognized that Alternative Nos. 2A, 2B, and 2C are all modifications of the Continued Surface
OW
MI
foal
rial
Pin
WI
MI
run
Pal
PM
rail
mil
Water Discharge Alternative.
This evaluation was prepared using, Appendix A, Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance
Document authored by the DWQ/NPDES Unit.
2.0 EXISTING FACILITIES
The Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP discharges to Long Creek, a tributary of the Tar River. The project
location area and the project site are included as Exhibit 1. The discharge is permitted at 25,000 gallons
per day average daily flow under NPDES Permit No. NC0029131, Appendix B. No increase in flow is
requested for this project.
Due to a history of non-compliance dating back to 1998, a Special Order of Consent between the Division
of Water Quality (DWQ) and the Job Corps Center was executed requiring upgrades to the existing
WWTP by March 2000. After the upgrades were implemented, a new NPDES permit was issued in
March 2000.
Although the upgrades were installed, the plant continues to have occasional violations of the permit,
particularly with 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The
current permit expired on September 30, 2004. At this time the renewal is pending and the discharge
continues to be allowed under the existing permit.
The existing facilities include the following process units:
• Headworks including a bar screen and flow splitting structure
• Flow equalization basin
• Packaged Treatment unit consisting of:
➢ Aeration tank
➢ Circular clarifier
➢ Chlorination chamber
➢ De -chlorination chamber
➢ Post aeration chamber
• Aerated sludge digestion tank integral to flow equalization basin
• Residuals are land applied at a permitted facility
2

fwl
• Effluent flow measurement structure including a v-notch weir, ultrasonic sensor, and a flow
recorder
• 4-foot diameter manhole on the outfall line constructed to include cascade aeration steps
Potable water is available at the existing facility.
3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT
As noted under Section 2, the Job Corps Center WWTP continues to have occasional violations of the
pending NPDES permit, particularly with 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and Total
Suspended Solids (TSS). This project is necessary for renewal of the existing NPDES permit based on
the implementation of the selected alternative.
4.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
An alternatives analysis has been conducted to demonstrate the most environmentally sound and
reasonably cost-effective alternative for disposal of wastewater generated by the Kittrell Job Corps
Center. The alternatives evaluated include No Action and four options for treating and/or disposing the
existing domestic sewage flow. Alternative 2 is subdivided into three options.
Below is a description of each alternative with a conceptual -level estimate of associated costs for each
option. In order to make an "apples -to -apples" comparison of each alternative, the 20-year life cycle costs
were estimated using the guidelines set forth by Appendix A. For the EAA an inflation rate of 2.8%, a
bond rate of 4.8% and a power cost of $0.05/kWh were assumed. A cost summary is included following
each alternative description. Conceptual Cost Estimates are included in Appendix C. Life Cycle Costs
are included in Appendix D.
4.1 Alternative 1: No action
The No Action alternative is not a feasible option, as it is the Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP's mission
to support the facilities of the Job Corps Center. No Action would mean that the WWTP would continue
to be in violation of its NPDES permit eventually resulting in the suspension of permission from the State
of North Carolina to discharge treated effluent. Without the ability to treat and legally dispose of its
wastewater, the Kittrell Job Corps Center would have to cease operations.
4.2 Alternative 2A: Continued Surface Water Discharge Modify the existing clarifier by installing
Stamford baffles and reconfiguring the waste and return sludge piping and
pumping, install a new dual gravity filter and an ultraviolet (UV) disinfection
system, modify equalization basin pumping and other minor improvements to
increase treatment efficiency, including proposed electrical modifications.
Construction would be performed under low flow (school break) conditions;
In order to continue the surface water discharge to Long Creek it will be necessary to address the issues of
non-compliance particularly with 5-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and Total Suspended
Solids (TSS). The following modifications to the existing facilities are proposed to bring the WWTP into
compliance:
• installation of a new tertiary filter with post aeration
• installation of a new ultra -violet disinfection system
3
WI

• modifications to the existing clarifier including installation of a new v-notch weir, scum baffle and
density current baffle
• conversion of the existing chlorination/dechlorination/post aeration basin into a RAS pump station
with the level controlled by a telescoping valve
• modifications to the flow equalization pump station piping
• installation of a circular chart recorder
In addition to the modifications described above, the scum return line will be extended to discharge
directly into the sludge digestion tank.
Design Basis
The following describes the design basis for units to be added to the existing Kittrell Job Corps Center
WWTP as part of the process modifications package:
• Tertiary Filter — Dual Filters
2 gpm/sq.ft. of filter surface area based on average daily flow
5 gpm/sq. ft. of filter surface area based on peak flow
Average backwash flow rate of 15 gpm/sq. ft. of filter area
• Post Aeration — 20 scfm @ 5 psi
• UV Protection —
Peak Flow:
Total Suspended Solids:
UV Transmittance @ 253.7 nm:
Annual Effluent Temperature Range:
Effluent Standards to be achieved:
75,000 gpd
30 mg/1
65%
33 to 85 degrees F
200/100 ml fecal coliform,
based on geometric mean of
daily samples
• RAS/WAS Pumps — 21 gpm @ 12.5 ft. TDH, capable of range between 11 gpm and 32 gpm
The proposed modifications will be performed under low flow conditions during either the 2-week
Christmas holiday break or the summer break in July. The low flows will allow for storage in the existing
tanks without the necessity of incurring pump and haul costs during the construction period. See Exhibit
2 for schematic of proposed modifications and Exhibit 3 for floodplain information.
Costs
Capital Costs
First year Operating Costs
20 year Life Cycle Costs
$ 321,765
$ 73,000
$2,282,708
Alternative 2B: Continued Surface Water Discharge Same as Alternative 2A except that
construction would be performed under normal flow (school in session)
conditions;
Alternative 2B will be identical to Alternative 2A except that the modifications will be performed under
normal flow conditions. This will require that a pump and haul permit be obtained from DWQ and the

Iat
project will incur the costs of hauling an average daily flow of 25,000 gpd off site to the Henderson
WWTP during the construction period.
Costs
,_, Capital Costs $ 364,101
First Year Operating Costs $ 73,000
20 year Life Cycle Costs $2,325,044
4.4 Alternative 2C: Continued Surface Water Discharge Same as Alternative 2A except that a new
clarifier will be installed rather than modifying the existing clarifier and
construction would be performed under normal flow (school in session)
conditions;
Alternative 2C will be identical to Alternative 2B except that rather than modifying the existing clarifier
as described above, it will be replaced with a new clarifier. Although modifications to the existing
miq clarifier will help to resolve some of the problems with clarifier, the operational results cannot be
guaranteed. One of the primary problems with the existing clarifier is its side water depth (SWD). The
SWD is limited to 8.82' and would actually be reduced even more by implementing the proposed
,m modifications which include the installation of a coned shaped bottom. The WCPF Manual of Practice
No. 36 & ASCE Manual on Engineering Practice No. 36 recommends that the SWD be a minimum of ten
feet with a suggested SWD of eleven feet. Installation of a new clarifier will better position the Job Corps
to address existing and/or future compliance requirements by providing a more efficient operation. Also,
a new installation will allow for the existing clarifier to remain in service during construction while
installation of the new clarifier is completed along with the other proposed modifications under normal
operating conditions. The new clarifier will be placed in service upon completion of all other
modifications. The existing clarifier will remain in operation as additional flow equalization capacity.
Costs
Capital Costs $ 342,115
First Year Operating Costs $ 73,000
20 year Life Cycle Costs $2,303,058
,.or, 4.5 Alternative 3: Subsurface Drip Irrigation
Sub -surface drip irrigation is a method of treatment where wastewater is disposed from flow emitters
regularly spaced along a flexible polyethylene drip line. The drip line is buried about 6 —10 inches below
the ground and effluent is distributed slowly and uniformly over a large surface area. See Exhibit 4 for
schematic layout of drip irrigation system.
In North Carolina, regulation of the design and approval of sub -surface drip irrigation systems is the
responsibility of the On -site Wastewater Section (OSWS) of the NCDENR — Division of Environmental
Health when the average daily flow exceeds 3,000 gpd as is the case with the Kittrell facility
ral
Based on a review of the property boundary and the existing Job Corps Center Site, approximately 11
acres (after subtracting for buffers and setbacks) on the north side of the property is available for use as a
potential subsurface drip irrigation area as noted in a document entitled Engineering Alternatives Analysis
5
lam

— Wastewater Treatment Plant Modifications, prepared by Municipal Engineering Services Company,
P.A., dated February 2004. Should additional property be required, it would have to purchased by the Job
Corps Center.
According to NCGS mapping of the area, the slopes on the site are approximately 8-10 percent and the
soils are specified as Vance (VaB) and Wedowee (WeD) type soils by the Vance County Soil Survey,
Exhibit 5. According to the Vance County Soil Survey, the seasonal high water table is 6-feet or greater
and the depth to bedrock is at 4-feet or greater. The steep slopes and potential for rock outcropping may
also have a negative effect on the installation of the system. Refer to Exhibit 6 for a summary of the
properties of the soil types as related to potential as an irrigation site. Exhibit 6 also indicates that
permeability is restricted in VaB soils and the WeD soils are too steep for surface application. Exhibit 6
also states "The (soil) limitations generally cannot be overcome without major soil reclamation, special
design, or expensive installation procedures. Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected."
This study is based on the assumption that suitable soils are available on the Job Corps Center property;
therefore, land costs have not been included in the cost analysis. For purposes of this conceptual study,
reference is made to the N.C. On -Site Wastewater Guidance Manual, Chapter 7, Alternative, Innovative,
and Experimental On -Site Wastewater Systems for the determination of a Long -Term Acceptance Rate
(LTAR) for use in the analysis of this site for a sub -surface drip irrigation system. OSWS has issued an
ra, approval of a "Perc-Rite" Subsurface Wastewater Drip Irrigation System. This will be the model used for
analysis of this system.
r9 According to the OSWS reference, the LTAR for the Type III Soil Group, which corresponds to the
description of the Vance soils as referenced above is 0.25 to 0.10 gpd/ft2. For purposes of this conceptual
study, an average value of about 0.15 gpd/ft2 will be selected as the LTAR.
Conceptual Design
Field Design
Qav = 25,000 gpd = 28 ac.ftiyr
LTAR = 0.15 gpd/sq.ft.
AW = (Q.,,/LTAR) where, A, = Land area requirement (sq. ft.)
Qav = Average Daily Flow
1.9 LTAR = Long Term Application Rate (gpd/sq. ft.)
AW = 25,000 gpd/0.15 gpd/sq. ft.
AW = 166,667 sq. ft. = 3.8 ac.
Standard Drip Line Spacing = 2 feet
Linear Feet of Dripline in area =167,667 sq. ft./2 = 83,350 linear feet
Emitter Spacing = 2 feet
Number of Emitters = 83,350 linear feet/2 feet = 41,675
Dripfield Pressure = 20 psi
Head Required at Dripfield = 20 psi x 2.31 = 46.2 feet

f�1
Flow Rate per Emitter = 1.3 gallons per hour
Flow rate for area = 41,675 x 1.3 gallons per hour = 32,000 gallons per hour, say 550 gpm
Pipe diameters for manifolds and submains — 550 gpm requires an 8-inch diameter pipe w/ V=3.5 ft/s &
Head Loss of 0.97 ft/100 ft. (C = 100)
Minimum Pump Capacity = 550 gpm
The existing aeration basin along with the new clarifier as described in Alternative 2C will be used in
order to achieve primary treatment prior to the irrigation field. The existing equalization (EQ) basin
1.+ (approximately 19,000 gallons) will be converted to a dosing/holding basin.The existing EQ basin pump
station will converted to pump effluent to the sub surface drip irrigation field.
ram, Capital Costs for subsurface drip irrigation systems are not readily available in the literature for systems
on a scale as the one proposed in this study; however, according to the City of Austin, Texas (Appendix
E), a residential system with an average daily flow of 300 gpd would cost about $15,000 to install, not
including pretreatment. Subsurface drip irrigation fields covering an acre or more cost in the range of
$25,000 per acre including tubing, emitters, fittings and controls according to industry representatives.
For the purposes of the analysis, the cost to operate the existing wastewater system to provide primary
treatment for the Subsurface Drip Irrigation System is reduced by the elimination of the requirement for
ri9 dual media filter and UV System. Although the costs to operate the WWTP will be reduced by the
elimination of the gravity filter and UV system, the O&M costs to operate the combined system will
increase due to the additional maintenance requirements. Since problems with land application systems
'"'' such as clogged lines and valves are sometimes "out of sight, out of mind" it is more difficult to
determine if the system is operating properly. To help insure the proper operation, a SCADA system will
be installed to include alarms for tanks levels, pump failures, piping system pressure and other key
systems. Additional maintenance measures will also be implemented to insure the proper operation of the
system and will include but not be limited to the following:
• Daily inspection of pumps and tanks
• Weekly inspection of irrigation fields, emitters, flush valves, air relief valves and filters
• Monthly flushing of lines to prevent clogging
�•, • Periodic line repairs
run
Costs
Capital Costs $ 464,425
First Year Operating Costs $ 103,915
20 year Life Cycle Costs $3,251,823
ramt
4.6 Alternative 4: Surface Drip Irrigation
The obvious difference between surface drip irrigation and subsurface drip irrigation is that the tubing in a
surface drip system is anchored to the top of the ground rather than being buried. Therefore, the
installation costs are slightly lower. Estimated installation costs are $23,000 per acre compared to
$25,000 per acre for subsurface. However, with the piping installed on top of the ground there is a
potential for freezing with a surface system. The potential for freezing adds to the O&M of the system

rm1
r+�
riar
thereby increasing costs due to piping and emitter replacement. Another concern with the surface
irrigation system is that operability of the Job Corp Center may be put into jeopardy if the irrigation
system is not available during a prolonged period of freezing.
Costs
Capital Costs $ 456,065
First Year Operating Costs $ 106,515
20 year Life Cycle Costs $3,311,927
4.7 Alternative 5: Force Main to Henderson, N.C.
min The nearest Public Owned Treatment Works (POTW) is the wastewater treatment plant operated by the
City of Henderson, N.C. The City of Henderson is willing to accept wastewater from the Job Corps
Center.
It is anticipated that a 4-inch force main and two pump stations will be required to transfer the wastewater
to the Town of Henderson WWTP (Exhibit 7). The force main will be approximately 27,500 feet long.
rur For purposes of this study, it is assumed the force main will be located in existing highway rights -of -way.
The existing equalization basin pump station would be converted to handle the pumping and head
requirements to discharge to a second pump station at a location to be determined between the Job Corps
rim Center and the discharge point at the Town of Henderson. In addition to annual O&M costs, the Job
Corps Center will also incur sewer discharge fees of $7.10/100 cubic feet.
Costs
Capital Costs $ 781,585
First Year Operating Costs $ 108,814
F.' 20 year Life Cycle Costs $3,684,055
p.9 5.0 CONCLUSIONS
Table 5-1 summarizes all of the alternatives discussed herein.
rim
8
not

Table 5-1: Alternatives and Associated Costs
Alternative
Capital Costs First Year O&M 20-year Life Cycle
1. No Action n/a n/a n/a
2. Continued Discharge
A. Low Flow Mod $321,765 $73,000 $2,282,708
B. Normal Flow Mod $364,101 $73,000 $2,325,044
C. New Clarifier $342,115 $73,000 $2,303,058
2. Subsurface Drip $464,425 $103,915 $3,251,823
3. Surface Drip $456,065 $106,515 $3,311,927
4. Force Main $781,585 $108,814 $3,684,055
As can be seen in Table 5-1, the Continued Discharge Alternative continues to be the most economically
feasible alternative. Among those three alternatives, installation of the Low Flow Modification
Alternative, 2A is the least expensive; however, in order to implement this option work will have to occur
during a 2-week shutdown period either during the Christmas break or the July break. Although slightly
more expensive, it is recommended that Alternative 2C be constructed to include the installation of a new
clarifier rather than modifying the existing clarifier.

PM
PM
References:
ran 1. Andy Smith, Granville Farms, Inc. Telephone Conversation. April 15, 2005.
FIR
Pig
fail
2. Austin, Texas Water Utility. Drip Irrigation Systems.
3. ESA Environmental Specialist, Inc. Cost Proposal to Upgrade Wastewater Treatment Plant, Kittrell
Job Corps Center, Kittrell, North Carolina. August 12, 2004.
4. Geoflow. Design, Installation and Maintenance Guidelines — Subsurface Drip for Onsite
Wastewater Reuse and Dispersal. October 2003.
5. Municipal Engineering Services Company, P.A. Engineering Alternatives Analysis — Wastewater
Treatment Plant Modifications, Kittrell Job Corps Center, Kittrell, Vance County, North Carolina.
February, 2004.
6. NCDENR, N.C. Division of Water Quality/NPDES Unit. Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA)
Guidance Document.
7. NCDENR. Instructions for Form: SIA 09-02 (Surface Irrigation Systems).
ran 8. NCDENR, N.C. Division of Environmental Health/On-Site Wastewater Section. On -Site
Wastewater Management Guidance Manual. March 1996.
9. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey of Vance County, North Carolina.
PNI
WI
foci
ragl
ImP
10
PM

EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATION AREA

2,000
0
U.S DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
2,000
PROJECT LOCATION AREA
I M 0
1 "=2,000'
EXHIBIT 1
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 1400
MORRISVILLE, NC 27560
PH. [phone]
DUREN6OEM
ENGINEERS INC.
11896.36584-001
APRIL, 2005

Pal
EXHIBIT 2
ALTERNATIVES 2A, 2B, & 2C
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS SCHEMATIC
furl

60 PIPING
LOOP TO
INDUCE
ADDITIONAL
HEAD
AIR
RELEASE
VALVE
SLUDGE
DIGESTER
F.E.
PUMP
STATION
MANHOLE
INFLUENT
r
FLOW
EQUALIZATION
BASIN
AERATION
BASIN
EFFLUENT
6" 0 FILTER
EFFLUENT
EFFLUENT
GRAVITY
FILTER AND
POST —AERATION
MIXED LIQUOR
MANHOLE TO
EFFLUENT
OUTFALL
FLOW
METERING
STRUCTURE
6" o U/V
EFFLUENT
MANHOLE
ULTRA —VIOLET
DISINFECTION
SYSTEM
6" 0 CLARIFIER
EFFLUENT
CLARIFIER
PROPOSED PROCESS FLOW SCHEMATIC
NOT TO SCALE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
EXHIBIT 2
ALTERNATIVE 2A, 26 & 2C
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS
SCHEMATIC
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 1400
MORRISVILLE. NC 27560
PH. [phone]
aiRENGOERE
ENGINEERS INC.
11896.36584-002
APRIL, 2005

EXHIBIT 3
FLOOD PLAIN MA►P

NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
VANCE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
(UNINCORPORATED AREAS)
PANEL 100 OF 100
COMMUNITY -PANEL NUMBER:
370366 0100 B
EFFECTIVE DATE:
JULY 16, 1991
2,000
0
TOWN OF KITTRELL
AREA NOT INCLUDED
This Is an official copy of a portion of the above e referenced flood map. It
was extracted using F-MIT On -Line. This map does not reflect changes
or amondmonts which may haw been made subsoquont to the date on the
title dock. For tho latest product Information about National Flood Insuranco
��. Program rood maps check the FEMA Rood Map Store at www.msc.fema.gor
2,000
1 "=2,000'
CLIENT NAME
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT LOCATION
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
EXHIBIT 3
FLOOD PLAIN MAP
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 1400
MORRISVILLE, NC 27560
PH. [phone]
° ENGOE IE
ENGINEERS INC.
11896.36584-003
APRIL, 2005

EXHIBIT 4
DRIP IRRIGATION SCHEMATIC

" supply tin
pump tank
Plush return to
predrraDncnt tank
Not to scale
NOT TO SCALE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
EXHIBIT 4
DRIP IRRIGATION SCHEMATIC
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 140Q
MORRISVILLE, NC 27560
PH. [phone]
CEINIENHOBIE
ENGINEERS INC.
1 1896.36584--004
APRIL, 2005

EXHIBIT 5
VANCE COUNTY SOIL SURVEY
SOILS MAP

JOB CORPS
CENTER
PROPERTY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
1,000 0 1 ,000
1 "=1,000'
EXHIBIT 5
VANCE COUNTY
SOIL SURVEY
SOILS MAP
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 1400
MORRISVILLE, NC 27560
PH. [phone]
MEE DBRIENSOERE
ENGINEERS INC.
11896.36584-005
APRIL, 2005

EXHIBIT 6
AGRICULTURAL DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER BY IRRIGATION AND OVERLAND
FLOW — VANCE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Vance (VaB) Soils
Wedowee (WeD) Soils

RRI
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow
mri Vance County, North Carolina
PRI
tit
rat
r�r
rrq
F=l
[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
Pct.
of
map
unit
Disposal of wastewater by
irrigation
Overland flow of wastewater
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
Rating class and
limiting features
Value
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/23/2004 Page 1 of 2

I1
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow
Soil properties are important considerations in areas where soils are used as sites for the treatment and disposal of
organic waste and wastewater. Selection of soils with properties that favor waste management can help to prevent
environmental damage.
This table shows the degree and kind of soil limitations affecting the treatment of wastewater, including municipal
and food -processing wastewater and effluent from lagoons or storage ponds. Municipal wastewater is the waste
stream from a municipality. It contains domestic waste and may contain industrial waste. It may have received
primary or secondary treatment. It is rarely untreated sewage. Food -processing wastewater results from the
preparation of fruits, vegetables, milk, cheese, and meats for public consumption. In places it is high in content of
sodium and chloride. In the context of these tables, the effluent in lagoons and storage ponds is from facilities used
to treat or store food -processing wastewater or domestic or animal waste. Domestic and food -processing
wastewater is very dilute, and the effluent from the facilities that treat or store it commonly is very low in content of
carbonaceous and nitrogenous material; the content of nitrogen commonly ranges from 10 to 30 milligrams per
liter. The wastewater from animal waste treatment lagoons or storage ponds, however, has much higher
concentrations of these materials, mainly because the manure has not been diluted as much as the domestic
waste. The content of nitrogen in this wastewater generally ranges from 50 to 2,000 milligrams per liter. When
wastewater is applied, checks should be made to ensure that nitrogen, heavy metals, and salts are not added in
excessive amounts.
The ratings in the table are for waste management systems that not only dispose of and treat wastewater but also
are beneficial to crops. 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 agricultural waste management. 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 tables 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).
Disposal of wastewater by irrigation not only disposes of municipal wastewater and wastewater from
food -processing plants, lagoons, and storage ponds but also can improve crop production by increasing the
amount of water available to crops. The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect the design,
construction, management, and performance of the irrigation system. The properties that affect design and
management include the sodium adsorption ratio, depth to a water table, ponding, available water capacity, Ksat,
slope, and flooding. The properties that affect construction include stones, cobbles, depth to bedrock or a
cemented pan, depth to a water table, and ponding. The properties that affect performance include depth to
bedrock or a cemented pan, bulk density, the sodium adsorption ratio, salinity, reaction, and the cation -exchange
capacity, which is used to estimate the capacity of a soil to adsorb heavy metals. Permanently frozen soils are not
suitable for disposal of wastewater by irrigation.
Overland flow of wastewater is a process in which wastewater is applied to the upper reaches of sloped land and
allowed to flow across vegetated surfaces, sometimes called terraces, to runoff -collection ditches. The length of the
run generally is 150 to 300 feet. The application rate ranges from 2.5 to 16.0 inches per week. It commonly
exceeds the rate needed for irrigation of cropland. The wastewater leaves solids and nutrients on the vegetated
surfaces as it flows downslope in a thin film. Most of the water reaches the collection ditch, some is lost through
evapotranspiration, and a small amount may percolate to the ground water.
The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect absorption, plant growth, microbial activity, and
the design and construction of the system. Reaction and the cation -exchange capacity affect absorption. Reaction,
salinity, and the sodium adsorption ratio affect plant growth and microbial activity. Slope, saturated hydraulic
conductivity (Ksat), depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, stones, and
cobbles affect design and construction. Permanently frozen soils are unsuitable for waste treatment.
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/23/2004 Page 2 of 2

Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow
twin Vance County, North Carolina
ran
Rig
[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
Pct.
of
map
unit
Disposal of wastewater by
irrigation
Overland flow of wastewater
Rating Bass and
limiting features
Value
Rating Bass and
limiting features
Value
WeD:
ery limited
0o steep forsurface
appflcation
oo acid r
'oo steep for_;
sprinkler,ap'plicabon
8`
'ery limited
Seepage,
Too. acid
Toosteep for surface
'application ;
USDANatural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/23/2004 Page 1 of 2

PEI
rwri
for
Mgt
rut
1,
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow
Soil properties are important considerations in areas where soils are used as sites for the treatment and disposal of
organic waste and wastewater. Selection of soils with properties that favor waste management can help to prevent
environmental damage.
This table shows the degree and kind of soil limitations affecting the treatment of wastewater, including municipal
and food -processing wastewater and effluent from lagoons or storage ponds. Municipal wastewater is the waste
stream from a municipality. It contains domestic waste and may contain industrial waste. It may have received
primary or secondary treatment. It is rarely untreated sewage. Food -processing wastewater results from the
preparation of fruits, vegetables, milk, cheese. and meats for public consumption. In places it is high in content of
sodium and chloride. In the context of these tables, the effluent in lagoons and storage ponds is from facilities used
to treat or store food -processing wastewater or domestic or animal waste. Domestic and food -processing
wastewater is very dilute, and the effluent from the facilities that treat or store it commonly is very low in content of
carbonaceous and nitrogenous material; the content of nitrogen commonly ranges from 10 to 30 milligrams per
liter. The wastewater from animal waste treatment lagoons or storage ponds, however, has much higher
concentrations of these materials, mainly because the manure has not been diluted as much as the domestic
waste. The content of nitrogen in this wastewater generally ranges from 50 to 2,000 milligrams per liter. When
wastewater is applied, checks should be made to ensure that nitrogen, heavy metals, and salts are not added in
excessive amounts.
The ratings in the table are for waste management systems that not only dispose of and treat wastewater but also
are beneficial to crops. 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 agricultural waste management. 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 tables 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).
Disposal of wastewater by irrigation not only disposes of municipal wastewater and wastewater from
food -processing plants, lagoons, and storage ponds but also can improve crop production by increasing the
amount of water available to crops. The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect the design,
construction, management, and performance of the irrigation system. The properties that affect design and
management include the sodium adsorption ratio, depth to a water table, ponding, available water capacity, Ksat,
slope, and flooding. The properties that affect construction include stones, cobbles, depth to bedrock or a
swi cemented pan, depth to a water table, and ponding. The properties that affect performance include depth to
bedrock or a cemented pan, bulk density, the sodium adsorption ratio, salinity, reaction, and the cation -exchange
capacity, which is used to estimate the capacity of a soil to adsorb heavy metals. Permanently frozen soils are not
suitable for disposal of wastewater by irrigation.
Overland flow of wastewater is a process in which wastewater is applied to the upper reaches of sloped land and
allowed to flow across vegetated surfaces, sometimes called terraces, to runoff -collection ditches. The length of the
run generally is 150 to 300 feet. The application rate ranges from 2.5 to 16.0 inches per week. It commonly
exceeds the rate needed for irrigation of cropland. The wastewater leaves solids and nutrients on the vegetated
surfaces as It flows downslope in a thin film. Most of the water reaches the collection ditch, some is lost through
evapotranspiration, and a small amount may percolate to the ground water.
The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect absorption, plant growth, microbial activity, and
the design and construction of the system. Reaction and the cation -exchange capacity affect absorption. Reaction,
salinity, and the sodium adsorption ratio affect plant growth and microbial activity. Slope, saturated hydraulic
conductivity (Ksat), depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, stones, and
cobbles affect design and construction. Permanently frozen soils are unsuitable for waste treatment.
tom
USDA Natural Resources This report shows only the major soils in each map unit. Others may exist.
Tabular Data Version: 3
Conservation Service Tabular Data Version Date: 12/23/2004 Page 2 of 2

EXHIBIT 7
FORCE MAIN ROUTE

40 f
2ND INTERMEDIATE PUMP
STATION PROPOSED —
LOCATION NOT SHOWN
PROPOSED
FORCE MAIN
ROUTE
PUMP
STATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
KITTRELL JOB CORPS CENTER
KITTRELL, NC
5,000 0 5 000
1 "=5,000'
EXHIBIT 7
FORCE MAIN ROUTE
PROPOSED
DISCHARGE
POINT
',. CS Landing
951 AVIATION PKWY.
SUITE 1400
MORRISVILLE, NC 27560
PH. [phone]
OCEPE
E5s INC.
11896.36584-007
APRIL, 2005

APPENDIX A
NCDENR/NPEDES UNIT ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS GUIDANCE
DOCUMENT
r9

lag
ram
fort
fwl
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance Document
North Carolina Division of Water Quality/ NPDES Unit
NOTE: The N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) will not accept an NPDES application for a new or
expanding wastewater treatment plant discharge unless all the required application requirements are
submitted. A complete NPDES application will include the following items:
NPDES Application Form (in triplicate)
Application Fee
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (in triplicate)
Local Government Review Form (non -municipals only)
Failure to submit all of the required information will result in return of the incomplete package. If you have
any questions about these requirements, contact the NPDES Unit staff at 919-733-5083. Application forms,
applicable fees, and guidance documents are available on the NPDES website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES. Completed applications should be mailed to:
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.
Background
The NPDES permit program was enacted in 1972 as part of the Clean Water Act. The original goal of the program
was to eliminate all point source discharges to surface waters by 1985. Although this goal was not achieved, the
NPDES program continues to strive toward it. In that light, an Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) is
required with any NPDES application for a new or expanding wastewater treatment plant discharge, in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In order for an NPDES application to be approved, the EAA must
provide complete justification for a direct discharge to surface water alternative, and demonstrate that direct discharge
is the most environmentally sound alternative selected from all reasonably cost-effective options [per 15A NCAC
2H.0105(c)(2)].
F"' The purpose of this EAA Guidance Document is to provide guidance to the regulated community for the evaluation of
wastewater disposal alternatives. The impetus behind this comprehensive guidance was based on the following. 1) a
majority of new NPDES applications were being returned as incomplete due to inadequate EAA submissions; and 2) a
few recent court cases resulted in unfavorable rulings for the NPDES discharger due in part to inadequate EAAs.
DWQ most frequently returns EAAs as incomplete due to inadequate flow justification, inadequate alternatives
evaluations, and/or lack of documentation/references used to design and cost alternatives.
Please note that this guidance document is designed primarily for domestic wastewater discharges. For other proposed
discharges such as water treatment plant discharges from ion exchange and reverse osmosis units, some alternative
disposal options may not be technologically feasible. Within this guidance document, we have attempted to point out
where such technological limitations may exist. You are urged to review NPDES permitting guidance documents on
the NPDES website, which discuss some of the limited disposal options for some discharges.
Please note that if a proposed municipal expansion is subject to SEPA Environmental Assessment
(EA)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) requirements, the EAA requirements should be incorporated into the
SEPA document. In addition, the NPDES Unit cannot accept an application for a new/expanding NPDES discharge
until departmental review of the SEPA document is complete and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has
been submitted to the State Clearinghouse for circulation.
The following step-by-step outline should be used for the preparation of all EAA submissions. If an EAA submission
lacks any of these basic elements, the NPDES application will be returned as incomplete.
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
rani Page 1 of 8

r1
STEP 1. Determine if the proposed discharge will be allowed
Before beginning any engineering evaluation of alternatives, you must first determine if the proposed wastewater
✓ discharge will be allowed. Otherwise, time and money may be spent needlessly for an EAA preparation that will
ultimately be rejected on the basis of existing water quality restrictions. There are several potential restrictions to a
wastewater discharge to surface waters, including.
• Zero flow stream restrictions [15A NCAC 2B.0206(d)(2)] apply to oxygen -consuming waste in zero -flow
streams. In order to determine streamflow at the proposed discharge location, contact the U.S.
Geological Survey at 919-571-4000.
• Receiving stream classification restrictions [e.g., ORW, WS, SA, NSW, and HQ class waters have various
discharge restrictions or require stricter treatment standards]. Stream classifications are available on the
DWQ website and from the DWQ Standards & Classifications Unit at 919-733-5083, while wastewater
discharge restrictions for various stream classifications are presented in state regulations [ 15A NCAC
2B.0200].
• Basinwide Water Quality Plans. These basin -specific plans list NPDES permitting strategies that may
limit wastewater discharges to particular streams within the basin due to lack of stream assimilative
capacity, etc. Basin plans are available on the DWQ website, or you may contact the DWQ Basinwide
Planning Unit at 919-733-5083.
• Impaired waters and TMDLs. Certain waterbodies listed as impaired on the 303(d) list and/or subject to
impending TMDLs may have wastewater discharge restrictions. The list of 303(d) impaired waters is
located on the DWQ website, or you may contact the DWQ Modeling/TMDL Unit at 919-733-5083.
• Presence of Endangered Species. If endangered species are present in the proposed discharge location,
there may be wastewater discharge restrictions. Endangered species information may be included in the
Basinwide Water Quality Plan, or you may contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (919-856-4520),
N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (919-733-3633), or the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (919-733-
m 7701).
189
PEI
Municipal applicants.
As a public service, the NPDES Unit will evaluate whether a proposed municipal discharge is considered allowable.
The municipality needs to initiate this review by submitting a letter request for Speculative Effluent Limits to the
NPDES Unit. If the proposed discharge appears to be allowable, the NPDES Unit will prepare speculative effluent
limits for a maximum of 2 flows and 2 discharge locations using water quality models. The municipality can then use
the speculative limits to prepare preliminary engineering design and cost estimates for the direct discharge alternative
within the EAA. In limited instances where complex water quality models are necessary to develop speculative limits
and determine potential water quality impacts, some municipalities have undertaken the modeling effort (with DWQ
review) in order to expedite this portion of the NPDES permit review process.
Non -municipal applicants.
Due to staff constraints, the NPDES Unit cannot prepare speculative limits for non -municipal applicants. Thus, it is
your responsibility to make your own determination as to whether the proposed discharge might be allowed by the
Division, by evaluating the water quality factors listed above. It is highly recommended that you discuss the proposed
poi discharge with the applicable DWQ Regional Office and/or NPDES Unit staff, who may be able to provide input on
the likelihood of a new/expanding discharge. As a first step, you must obtain streamflow estimates for the proposed
discharge location to ensure that the receiving stream is not subject to zero flow restrictions. Low flow data
,., (specifically, the summer 7Q10 and 30Q2 flow statistics) can be obtained for a nominal fee from the U.S. Geological
Survey in Raleigh at 919-571-4000. The low flow data must be submitted with the EAA, and will be used by the permit
writer to develop permit limits. You must also verify that the proposed action (i.e., construction of a wastewater
treatment plant and its appurtenances) is consistent with local zoning and/or subdivision ordinances. You will need to
request the local governments) to complete a Local Government Review Form (Attachment A), and include the
signed and notarized form with your NPDES application package.
1
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
rwi Page 2 of 8

Ful
All applicants.
If you conclude that the proposed discharge will pass the "allowable discharge" criteria, then begin the EAA
preparation by summarizing the following general information about the proposed project:
■ Provide a description of the proposed project. If the project will be constructed in phases, provide a
schedule for constructing each additional phase, and provide the projected flow per phase (see STEP 2).
rim
■ Applicant name, mailing address, phone number, contact person
■ Facility name, address, county, phone number, contact person
■ EAA preparer's name, mailing address, phone number, contact person
fml STEP 2. Provide reasonable projections for population and flow
Residential Population Projections.
rim
Facilities requesting an NPDES discharge permit for new or expanding domestic wastewater discharges must
document the population to be served within the service area over a 20-year planning period. The NC State
Demographics unit provides population data for each county and municipality and can be accessed on the Internet at
�+ http://www.demog.state.nc.us. If 20-year population projections for specific areas are not available, a linear
extrapolation of population trends from the past decade should be used. Any deviation from a linear projection
method must be dearly justified If population projections include future annexations, indude a proposed annexation
,.4.1 schedule as well as any annexation requirements that must be met.
Municipal Flow Projections.
Justification of flow as well as a demonstration of need shall be provided. Mere speculation is not sufficient. Flow
projections should represent average anticipated flows, since permit flow limits are based on monthly averages.
Peaking factors used to design various components of the wastewater collection system (e.g., collector sewers,
interceptor sewers, pumping stations) should not be used in the justification of the average anticipated flow. For
municipal wastewater dischargers, flow must be justified using the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF)
criteria available on the Internet at http://www.nccgl.net/fap/cwsr£/201gui.html. Exceptions to these flow criteria
may be approved on a case -by -case basis provided adequate justification is supplied.
■ Current Flow- Provide current flows including residential, commercial, industrial, and non -excessive
infiltration/inflow (I/I) based on actual flow data or water billing records. Current residential flow and
1.1 current commercial flow may be based on water billing records minus a 10% consumptive loss. Current
industrial flow may be based on dual metering to determine consumptive losses. Current non -excessive
I/I should also be determined in accordance with CWSRF criteria. If I/I is demonstrated to be above
CWSRF criteria, that infrastructure contributing to excessive I&I must either be repaired or replaced
prior to any request for flow expansion.
• Future Residential Flow- Provide 20-year residential flows based on projected residential growth.
Multiply the projected growth in residential population by 70 gallons per day per capita.
• Future Commercial Flow- Provide 20-year commercial flows based on projected residential growth.
Multiply the projected growth in residential population by 15 gallons per day per capita.
• Future Industrial Flow- Provide flow for future documented industrial flow. A nominal allowance for
pin future unplanned industrial expansions may be considered by the Division, provided the basis is clearly
justified and current land -use plans and local zoning allow for such industrial growth.
• Future Non -excessive I/I- A nominal allowance for non -excessive I/I for new sewer lines may be
considered by the Division, provided the basis is dearly justified.
Non -Municipal Flow Projections.
Flow may be justified in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0219(1) for various activities (e.g., new subdivisions, new
schools, various commercial activities). For other proposed discharges (e.g., groundwater remediation, water
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
Page3of8

F, treatment plant filter backwash, industial facilities), the flow projections will be based on engineering design
considerations and/or production projections rather than population projections.
Owl
full
STEP 3. Evaluate technologically feasible alternatives
Since a goal of the Clean Water Act is to minimize or eliminate point source discharges to surface waters, any
proposal for a new or expanding wastewater discharge must include evaluation of wastewater disposal alternatives in
addition to direct discharge. Particularly for dischargers of domestic wastewater, this evaluation should investigate the
feasibility of the following wastewater disposal altematives:
• Connection to an existing wastewater treatment plant (public or private)
• Land application alternatives, such as individual/community onsite subsurface systems, drip irrigation,
spray irrigation, infiltration galleries (for groundwater remediation discharges)
• Wastewater reuse
• . Surface water discharge through the NPDES program
• Combinations of the above
r+•, In order for the applicant to eliminate a wastewater disposal alternative, you must either show that the alternative is
technologically infeasible, or that it would be cost prohibitive to implement relative to a direct discharge alternative.
Please note that for some alternatives, it might be easier to prove an alternative is not viable based on high cost rather
than technological feasibility. For example, for a large municipal expansion that would require several hundred acres
for a land application alternative, it might be easier to simply assume that the required acreage could be purchased and
calculate the present value costs (including current market land costs) for this option, rather than evaluating whether
land application is technologically infeasible due to lack of available land and/or poor soil conditions. For those
alternatives identified as technologically feasible, you must develop and compare costs, based on a preliminary level
design effort (see STEP 4).
The Division recognizes that wastewater disposal alternatives may be limited for some non -domestic wastewater
scenarios, and a full alternatives evaluation may not be warranted. If there is some question as to whether an alternative
may be eliminated, contact the NPDES Unit staff. Some scenarios that might not require a full alternatives evaluation
ra9 include:
• Water Treatment Plant Discharges. Discharges from water treatment plants (WTPs) that utilize a
membrane technology (e.g., reverse osmosis, nanofiltration) or ion exchange system tend to generate
Iwo
highly concentrated wastestreams. These wastestreams are not amenable to land application and do not
have to be evaluated for this alternative. However, since these wastestreams can also have a toxic impact
on a receiving freshwater system, proposed new discharges from these WTPs to freshwaters will not be
Po' considered for an NPDES permit unless you can demonstrate that the environmental impacts would be
minimal based on dilution modeling. You should investigate whether the wastewater can be piped to a
stream with sufficient dilution, or whether a local WWTP might accommodate this discharge. Please
note that discharges from WTPs that utilize greensand filtration or conventional technology produce a
wastestream that is not saline, therefore no disposal alternatives can be automatically ruled out as
infeasible for these other WTPs. Refer to the NPDES website for permitting strategies for reverse
onn osmosis, ion exchange, greensand filtration, and conventional WTPs.
• Groundwater Remediation System Discharges. You will need to evaluate whether WWTP connection,
land application, and infiltration galleries are viable disposal alternatives. While land application might be
a feasible alternative in rural areas, it would not be a feasible alternative in downtown Charlotte, where
there is no land available for wastewater application. In this instance, you may simply state that land
application is infeasible based on land constraints within the city. You will also need to evaluate
connection to an existing WWTP (in accordance with Alternative A), since there are some municipalities
REII
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
FIR Page4of8

r�r
that have accepted this wastestream in the past. If the municipality will not accept the wastestream, the
connection alternative is also considered technologically infeasible.
Aside from these exceptions, you should proceed with the alternatives evaluation in accordance with the following
requirements. If you have any questions about these requirements, contact the NPDES Unit staff.
Alternative A. Connection to an Existing Wastewater Treatment System.
You must evaluate the feasibility of connecting to an existing wastewater treatment system served by a municipality or
other entity holding a valid NPDES or Non -Discharge Permit. All connection options should include an evaluation
of a gravity line and/or force main with pump station(s).
1. Existing Sewerage System:
(a) Identify whether there are existing sewer lines within a five -mile radius, or consider a greater radius if
cost effective for the project size.
(b) Provide a preliminary indication of flow acceptance from existing municipal or private WWTPs
under consideration for connection. If a municipal or private WWTP cannot accept the wastewater,
include a letter documenting such and consider this alternative technologically infeasible.
(c) If an existing sewerage system will accept the wastewater, evaluate the piping/pumps/resources
necessary to connect to the existing wastewater treatment plant. Attach a topographic map or a site
drawing showing the physical route of this alternative. Conduct a Present Value Cost Analysis per
STEP 4.
2. Planned Sewerage System: Determine if a regional sewerage system within a five mile radius is projected
to be available within the next five years to receive waste from the project site. If applicable, determine
availability date and flow acceptance projection from appropriate authority.
Alternative B. Land Application.
Land application disposal alternatives indude individual/community onsite subsurface systems, drip irrigation, and
spray irrigation.
1. Provide an estimate of the best case hydraulic loading rate based on County Soil Surveys or from a soil
evaluation performed by a soil scientist. Include calculations showing the hydraulic loading rate
and the total area of land needed for the land disposal system, including buffers.
2. Assess the availability of land. If insufficient land is available onsite, assume that the necessary land can
be purchased and estimate the land purchase cost based on local real estate prices. Alternatively, provide
documentation to demonstrate that insufficient land is available for sale in the project area (include
letters from adjacent property owners indicating no interest in selling property).
3. Provide a description of the wastewater treatment system and the non -discharge application system.
ran Include a site plan showing the proposed layout, the application area, any existing structures, proposed
structures, and other uses within the site.
4. Explain the proposed reuse plan if redaimed water will be used by a third party.
5. Conduct a Present Value Cost Analysis per STEP 4. For the redaimed water system include the
potential revenue generated by selling the water.
6. Provide all calculations, documentation and maps as necessary to support assumptions and conclusions.
7. Note: The design of land application systems must meet the treatment and design requirements specified
ran
in 15A NCAC 2H.0219 or 15A NCAC 18A.1900.
8. Note: Proposed discharges from groundwater remediation systems must evaluate the potential for an
infiltration gallery treatment alternative.
p.1
Alternative C. Wastewater Reuse.
You must evaluate reusing all or a portion of the wastewater generated. Some municipalities are currently reusing
rml wastewater within the confines of their WW TP property for irrigation, toilet flushing, backwashing, etc., while other
municipalities have established progressive reuse programs for residential irrigation. Reuse applications might include
golf course irrigation, crop irrigation (e.g., hardwood or pine plantation, grasses), athletic field irrigation, landscape
sinuses, and commercial/industrial uses. Some of these reuse applications will be evaluated under Alternative B, Land
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
Page 5 of 8

Pol
„■, Application. The design of reclaimed water systems must meet the treatment and design requirements specified in
15A NCAC 2H.0219.
Alternative D. Direct Discharge to Surface Waters.
1. No new or expanding (additional) discharge of oxygen -consuming waste will be allowed to surface waters
of North Carolina if both the summer 7Q10 and 30Q2 streamflows are estimated to be zero, in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206(d). Private applicants must contact the Federal USGS in Raleigh at
ran 919-571-4000 and obtain (generally for a nominal fee), the receiving streamflow data (s7Q10, 30Q2,
annual average streamflow) at the proposed discharge location. This information must be included in the
EAA, and will be used to develop permit limits.
2. All direct discharge systems of oxygen -consuming wastes should be evaluated both with tertiary filtration
[GODS= 5 mg/1, NH3-N= 1 mg/1] and without, and assuming a weekly sampling regime.
3. Provide a description of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities, induding a schematic diagram of
r,■, the major components and a site plan of the treatment facility with outfall line(s).
4. Provide documentation of the availability of required land and/or easement agreements.
5. Conduct a Present Value Cost Analysis per STEP 4.
6. Note: All direct discharge treatment systems must comply with Reliability Requirements specified in 15A
NCAC 2H.0124 as well as Minimum Design Requirements specified in 15A NCAC 2H.0219.
Alternative E. Combination of Alternatives.
You should evaluate the possibility of a combination of wastewater alternatives that would minimize or eliminate a
direct discharge alternative. For example, consider whether the facility can operate a land application system during
the dry season when streamflows are at their lowest and provide less dilution, and operate an NPDES discharge
system during the wet season when soils may not be as amenable to land application and the receiving stream
provides its greatest dilution.
r=►
STEP 4. Evaluate economic feasibility of alternatives
fail
To provide valid cost comparisons among all technologically feasible wastewater alternatives identified in STEP 3, a 20-
year Present Value of Costs Analysis (PVCA) must be performed. A preliminary design level effort is considered
rs, appropriate for comparing feasible options and their associated costs. For the PVCA cost comparison, all future
expenditures are converted to a present value cost at the beginning of the 20-year planning period. A discount rate is
used in the analysis and represents the time value of money (the ability of money to earn interest). Present value is also
referred to as "present discounted value" or "present worth".
The PVCA should include all monetary costs associated with construction, startup and annual operation and
maintenance of a facility. All unit cost information must be provided, and costs must be referenced. Costs can be
';' referenced in paragraph format by summarizing the sources utilized (e.g., vendor quotes, realtor land quotes, past
bids, Means Construction Index, etc). Vender quotes received for treatment units or other components, as well as
realtor land quotes, shall be included as well. For each treatment alternative identified as technologically feasible,
r■+ costs should include, but not be limited to, the following.
Capital Costs
■ Land acquisition costs
■ Equipment costs
• Labor costs
• Installation costs
■ Design costs
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
Page 6 of 8

fort Recurring Costs
• Operation and maintenance costs (with replacement costs)
■ Laboratory costs assuming a weekly monitoring regime for discharge systems and a monthly regime for
non -discharge systems
• Operator and support staff costs
• Residual disposal costs
• Connection fees and subsequent user fees
owl
■ Permit and compliance fees
■ Utility costs (power, water, etc.)
Lost Opportunity Costs
1
PVCA Calculation Method.
The following standard formula for computing the present value must be used in all cost estimates made under this
evaluation:
C
PV=C +t t
° t_i (1 + r)t
Where:
PV = Present value of costs.
Co = Costs incurred in the present year.
Ct = Costs incurred in time t.
t = Time period after the present year ( The present year is t = 0)
n = Ending year of the life of the facility.
r = Current EPA discount rate. EPA adjusts this rate annually on October 1, and it can be accessed from
the Internet at http:/www.nccgl.net/fap/cwsrf/201gui.html.
If recurring costs are the same in years 1 through 20, then Ct=C and the formula reduces to:
PV C + C[
° r(1 +
As an example, assuming capital costs (Co) of $2 million, annual recurring costs (C) of $40,000, and a discount rate (r)
t"+ of 5.625%, the 20-year (n=20) present value of costs would equal:
PV= capital costs + recurring costs X [(1+0.05625)20 — 1] / [0.05625(1+0.05625)20]
run PV= $2,000,000 + $40,000 X [1.98/0.168]
PV= $2,000,000 + $471,428
PV= $2,471,428
PVCA Summary Table.
The EAA must include a Summary Cost Table, which summarizes present worth costs developed for all technologically
feasible wastewater alternatives. The summary should include a breakdown of capital costs and recurring costs. In
some situations, the Division may require the applicant to refine cost estimates for some alternatives, or possibly collect
actual soil data to better characterize the land application alternative. Ultimately, the final determination on cost
effectiveness is made by the Division with consideration of monetary costs as well as potential environmental impacts.
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
rm.; Page 7 of 8

Mel
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 unless 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:
Fsm • 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 the 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 the
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
sal form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Pol
Name of local government
(City/County)
Does the city/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be
rm9 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 [ ]
ran
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Date Signature
(City Manager/County Manager)
State of , County of
On this day of , , personally appeared before me, the said
name 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 he (or she) executed the same and being duly swom
by me, made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true.
My Commission expires .(Signature of Notary Public)
Notary Public (Official Seal)
EAA Guidance Document Version: October 14, 2004
Page 8 of 8

APPENDIX B
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC0029131

rEs
moon
PRMI
MEM
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
January 25, 2000
Mr. Tim Wilkerson
Kittrell Job Corps Center
P.O. Box 278
Kittrell, North Carolina 27544
ATA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0029131
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
Vance County
Dear Mr. Wilkerson:
The Division received your application for a wastewater discharge permit on July 28,
1999. Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application. Accordingly. we
are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to
the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated
December 6, 1983. and as subsequently amended.
The following additional changes to the final permit were not present in the draft
permit previously sent to you:
Monitoring for nutrients has been changed from 2/Month to Monthly, pursuant
to the Tar -Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) Implementation Strategy.
> Per your request to the Raleigh Regional Office, the location of effluent sampling
has been relocated to the last manhole before the discharge point.
The Division received your request to change flow monitoring on January 13. 2000.
This permit limits monthly average flow. By limiting the monthly average flow. the facility
may experience some fluctuation in daily flows without violating the permit limit for the
month. For example, your facility's monthly average flow ranged from 0.0146 MGD to
0.0208 MGD during the period January -November 1999. None of those flows violated the
monthly average permit limit of 0.025 MGD. The "instantaneous monitoring" designation
is simply a reflection of the flow monitoring equipment installed at your facility and the
type of flow "sample" it collects, not the period of compliance.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this
permit are unacceptable to you. you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written
request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the
form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer Visir us ON THE INTERNET @ http:iih2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES

ran
Permit NC0029131
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
,., Kittrell Job Corps Center
ran
Fon
Faq
Fon
con
mot
Fon
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
U.S. Highway 1
Kittrell
Vance County
to receiving waters designated as Long Creek in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective March 1, 2000.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on September 30, 2004.
Signed this day January 25, 2000.
I
. j .Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

f�1
Permit NC0029131
fol
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
The Kittrell Job Corps Center is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.025 MGD wastewater treatment facility with
the following components:
• Two manual bar screens
• Splitter. box
• Aerated equalization tank
• Fixed film activated sludge treatment
• Clarifier
• Chlorine contact tank with tablet chlorinator
• Dechlorination tank with tablet dechlorination
• Chemical feed for alkalinity adjustment
• Cascade aeration
• Effluent flow meter
• Aerated sludge digester
This facility is located at the Kittrell Job Corps Center on U.S. Highway 1 in
Vance County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Long Creek, classified C-NSW waters in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin.

..414.144
WIN
MEI
.• . ,,
• el
,,, ••,, i
.7...1/7/V.
% Y ' •‘
) :
1
.i .;.. • ' :.
, • . ,--- ,
, " \ , -
N' • 1
N(
N, '1
.,
'.
i!
,
i,tt
n•
,, ,..
. .,.
' ,,,,,,
,
/(,..7.......-
: .f.. • ' •
385
„• I'...'•'' ...; -
,
• .
. ,, il,
( _.
....._„....- • , ____, .
•:);')
f f, .
'''. - - -.-.., • ;'
Y\ • I.. -
; -
• ---' '' . \ , 1/4-
- . . , 1 .1/
- , I 1,.. ' e .
1 / •; /
/ ( I A
• -.._/•;`•—I----.•/-/e./-,-----1-.1--:7-/
\\...._../ , ..,
,} 7--;,------.46 ..
, .
',\..L.._/.(,. j'____)) C }
\_...„../2"' • '
''../
/1r
•
k \ \ •
,
\ N., ,
\ .
! ; (
' . I
_
--
, ...- -,--____- - . , (
' ' / ,-., -.7.... 1 .
. --..! / / ,•//.\
• • ...
, -',...''.:./.......,_
( , ... i •-• ---
....„.\./ 11,
1 Mr 1 .•
.1..
I ----........
I'...... "";,...." , ........-..... ;
• 1 1 .- •
• ? ' ' - " -
,.... r _ 7'....,
.
... , \ 0 rj.
.......! ..,_
. \k\''''''' )). - ,'"' \-:i':".---r----.:1....?) .•
',
(‘'..;..
il
, i'
* " •-•• .
I ' —7 11" .
‘..-/".7------" . .-7.77-1
.• L.,.....5p0,--.7,- ----- ,,....,-
.
/ 1 j .\
„if ....._ /...,/ \...
I ' -_..., • .I
, . ,-,-,./ •..._}
..:::, , _ ( i , i . , ,
/-'*-' ,„.f :I '. -
--' --,c--,•__,..,____, .,.., s( : :',--:_
Is
. . *
- i
-
-
1
li: " • ' 7
. - .--,•'• .
:-
..,..
--,. -
..,.._...."-</t ---------L"--;>/'
:.•
•. I,' k\ <Z),F..------/..--------
----•-s---,-. 11•1 • .'
i•-•---7--s,--.
- -•
::.•-_..,,h
• •
.
, ' • ,4,_
•
...., - • ....._ ---....._.
-..d,-----:1-r- - „,..,. --,..,---
•••„-----, ,. ,--...------
-. '`,,,',! f (:. ,---
---......; • -,--,.-.
_
. ...„. , ....
.---
- .
.:•------,- ,-- -
, ,• -
--- -- .P.f.-1<is,'•
,, _ 4-
, _ 4 .
i.
c,---,,., ---:::.7
-,,. --'•\ ',
,
. \`,,,• (
• . /
--- --- -
, _i
l'--_--..1'-----M,''ssz•
, ',.' J) i
e-:-..,----r-,,, i
,:••••- ,,..--,...,-,.....--_ 0:
• ..--- ---- -=::-.- -.),
- •••• .,.....- ' N•
' --,) 7---'; .
.-,_/,/, ..? r- _, •
1, •:-,
, !/ (..•
m• ....,
!„ :,.
,-
I.&
\- .'
v, ,',`.-.:, `,
• ) '
(cm i• ; .'-‘-'...
, : t -::
/ , .
• , ...----
':. V- - ... ,
--:
-....-' Z.:.; - . ••
- -...L.---• :
,--,
- ': /;':- 1 - -
-',
. :-....., .: ' -, A1/4
(...________A.; I k...,. - ,• i _.',,--_-_--;.-
\ .
,:::-_,. _ . - -.‹•
-1.›.. ' a i ,
•
.
,--7.._____ J-:„.•:._..„.......,
! t 4 ----J___ J--„L----
\
• • .. •
--
, , , . .... ‘i \ .. 1
...., ,...„....s. .
•._ .
_../.,, 777/....:
....- -.:(11.1.,n1.7..74:4olt.:1_,..C...rOlitege.
-.._...._ :0
•:•:,„„-•. ....„._ ,. 00
-k=:;...--_-.„.•
.
-II ,•• , •-----N
- .::‘„:"../11
,z........
,
--.• -'
-... -.,---........,., 41E•i
- ,
,
1•
.A.
-..,-- ez•
'• c..
- •.— - , '‘ \ •
-
.
---___c-_-1----'7,---:----...J„._ ,
• ,
. /-7.'....C...-...•'(.) L,—,•..
..:---/--:•.;>-1 r
i --- • . ..--
\ -
.-‘---:- '• •' . 1
•,I
..,...-.„..„......,-..k/,-:.%-s-.:-.._:• :,-'_-- /.At \"--- .,
..
-
: ;
D -
-.
•'\,,,..-. ---_,
• .//
.>)) ••••,„ . _
. • //Pi
1.ss.‘,\ '.---4, _..,-..--_- .z././
•/r---.,.-.•-.:-,:. ,,
f
. I
'''.':
; ?
••••"H. , i
F)'•' • -
7
• . -- . .
•
c • ,i
•
‘,../ .. ..... •
• • ii •-• •
II ,,_„ , ,-
I. •--___,
'-i''
- • .„.,-,,,,.,...4._ ( ,*.
e.- -...-
...
;
16i.,
IJ
‘ .._. ...;
: . '.1—r--'-' '''
-'
.:-.1'... • .(,
(i1 7....17-::___. ::::-/-L-li.....„-
` 1‘.. • .....74.:.-- ---.._l1.:•... -." '/
7-"
''''•••
• •
• •••
...
/
-------L--„sf .'••-‘', / ,--
; -.. L.-<--, ^ ' • \ --'-:-,<C'
9-- • ..
. .%----. . - : • ,
Ili I\r'\.------'T-(...____._.,: )
_.....-,.•,/..'.•-•• -\•
•, , j '; . .- .='- - -- 7...-. . .,if/1- - 7`:,7...7.'."•'.-.-'''..'—',s .„•
:4 I -/-
--'-,
; i
‘ ----,
O.•
...44-.1.::\,...,...
'•
.:::.-_- '-',-•-•""-• \ \ •
. '..*:;...-. • C.
• L_,..
--.., —. -----.)..:-•
r.:7:. _- -.-:- •'-.,i'-;-lz-2,s-_:,:'••::.::--.7..N:/.,.....::..-s.:.-\-.‘-C.,-;.:-.7::.--'- .7/'I,,•-\,.'•:.•...•.. -.1.7..„0. '24I' :(1 .1'...:'..".;,
'1,14. 7._
•
—
--; .1. 6, ..
:5-
:-'--'7--":-7-.-1---:I,-../-•./..-..,
( • . .-;-••• '
s
Ra.
.
c
-
:-
i-
:":•"l'"
-
.:, A .._7.•
•'.
'
_2-
•_7—,
-;
--,-`
.,.-.•,-_•..".1 .
, 1
•:..
--
---•:-•
• y
••
---- II, _ ,.
..
/(
,......... ,p • :
. • . - 1:' '.. 4
.-,,,.._ . •
---....:./- \s..----.•• /.. - •/
• ••
,.,•-•-•, ?..f--,-"...._ •
.1,:,--s,•.--", ,,
:. •••,. -,..,,,.---:-..:
' .._,d • ,...----\_„..-_,
' .-7.------. ''...tr"-• .._.• -
...-•__.
-• ••••-•.--=--• .
....._ \-. 1 •LL---_-.- )
-` .•
• ---._
.., . --/
,.--, : ..,. , ....: •• )
IL, --_-.., 1 ('N::-) L.......
kz........--• -.
. — .
• ,------'
.....',:s ? -
'4-
...c„,„
, .‘. ,...,
.• :,-
• -
-t
.-6r-...,„) }1.!',
s•-• •,..1---ie,....•;c
:-..- )41-
•
,- ....„.?....„,,,
'I Liz. irr.., ,-„,
-' " k
•
i
, '. ,,,. .:,-: .
, ; 7 ..,
/
`i (
i ':-
-. •
i .
--
:,- !.- 44
•
• "-,
,f--*•--, ', --- /•----.------
‘1:, \
..:-_
•-: f
.....,,H.
,,::...,-;:--/,:e.:.___:."\..
‘)s: •
• ,_ ".•••:'......,:- i
eS: ,. - ,;;•.--=--,...____,,.!
.
( 1 : -
• ., 7' :::'
.
ii
,,)
t
s N•
..,i.-----:--
7 . . ' :
'',N, `- . I
I• ".',
.: :'.-1.
- 1.----._
- ../.%-•-
-....1
..........._L_ ,
''''.
- '' ' - - - - - 2 -': ) \ r )1 ,-
. • '7. • •
::•-., „.... i -,.
i irF. —,—..... Th,,,--.-_-,
,
-..,
f I..-•
\V,,
IS
.„..„.. ,
',1\
r AN- •.` ‘., ..,.../
Vg•
_..
\ J---- 1. S •
! • . ,
•
.‘-- •- • ! liiiiti‘.
• .
i - •
• ... : - iii
'
71,'....-.
• :
: .'%.
T.atitude:36°13'37"
angitude:78°26'59"
'Quad # C25NW
Receiving Stream: Long
Creek
Stream Class: C NSW
Subbasin: 030301
NC00291 31
Kittrell job Corp
Center
Facility
Location
SCALE 1:24000

fat
Permit NC0020131
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration. the Permittee is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Perrnittee as
n specified below:
Fml
owl
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location'
Flow
0.025 MGD
Weekly
Instantaneous
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
(April 1 - October 31)
17.0 mg/L
25.5 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
• BOD, 5-day (20°C)
(November 1- March 31)
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
• Weekly
Grab
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1 - October 31)
2.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1- March 31)
4.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved 0xygen2
Weekly
Grab
Effluent,
Upstream & Downstream
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 m!
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28 pg/L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (2C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (QC)
Weekly
Grab
Upstream & Downstream
Total Nitrogen
(NO2+NO3+TKN)
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
pH3
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. Effluent = at the last manhole before discharge to Long Creek.. Upstream = at least 100 feet upstream from
ran the outfall. Downstream = at the NCSR 1 104 bridge.
2. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be
monitored twice per month at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Pa,
A. (2.) Nutrient Reduction Requirement
The 1 <tr-Pamlico Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) implementation Strategy requires a total reduction
in nutrients (total phosphorus and total nitrogen) within the Tar -Pamlico River basin.
If requirements other than those listed in this permit are adopted as part of a future revision to the
NSW strategy. the Division reserves the right to reopen this permit and include those requirements.
If requirements other than those listed in this permit are adopted to prevent localized adverse
impacts to water quality. the Division reserves the right to reopen this permit and include those
requirements.

11
fol
PART I
Section B. Schedule of Compliance
1. The permittee shall comply with Final Effluent Limitations specified for discharges in accordance
with the following schedule:
e., Permittee shall comply with Final Effluent Limitations by the effective date of the permit unless
specified below.
1.1
Earl
2. Permittee shall at all times provide the operation and maintenance necessary to operate the
existing facilities at optimum efficiency.
3. No later than 14 calendar days following a date identified in the above schedule of compliance,
the perm ittee shall submit either a report of progress or, in the case of specific actions being
required by identified dates, a written notice of compliance or noncompliance. In the latter case,
the notice shall include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the
probability of meeting the next schedule requirements.

1=1
Tarl
Pon
ran
ran
PEI
Part II
Page 1 of 14
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
SECTION A. DEFINITIONS
1. Permit Issuing Au thori ty
The Director of the Division of Water Quality.
2. DEM or "the Division"
Means the Division of Water Quality, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
3. EMQ
Used herein means the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
4. Act or "the Act"
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 USC
1251, et. seq.
5. Mass/Day Measurements
a. The "monthly average discharge" is defined as the total mass of all daily discharges sampled
and/or measured during a calendar month on which daily discharges are sampled and
measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such
month. It is therefore, an arithmetic mean found by adding the weights of the pollutant found
each day of the month and then dividing this sum by the number of days the tests were
reported. The limitation is identified as "Monthly Average" in Part I of the permit.
b. The "weekly average discharge" is defined as the total mass of all daily discharges sampled
and/or measured during the calendar week (Sunday - Saturday) on which daily discharges are
sampled and measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured
during such week. It is, therefore, an arithmetic mean found by adding the weights of
pollutants found each day of the week and then dividing this sum by the number of days the
tests were reported. This limitation is identified as "Weekly Average" in Part I of the permit.
c. The "maximum daily discharge" is the total mass (weight) of a pollutant discharged during a
calendar day. If only one sample is taken during any calendar day the weight of pollutant
calculated from it is the "maximum daily discharge." This limitation is identified as "Daily
Maximum," in Part I of the permit.
d. The "average annual discharge" is defined as the total mass of all daily discharges sampled
and/or measured during the calendar year on which daily discharges are sampled and
measured, divided by the number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such
year. It is, therefore, an arithmetic mean found by adding the weights of pollutants found each
day of the year and then dividing this sum by the number of days the tests were reported. This
rmi limitation is defined as "Annual Average" in Part I of the permit.

T
T
r
T
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
Part II
Page 2 of 14
6. Concentration Measurement •
a. The "average monthly concentration," other than for fecal coliform bacteria, is the sum of . the
concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a calendar month on
which daily discharges are sampled and measured, divided by the number of daily discharges
sampled and/or measured during such month (arithmetic mean of the daily concentration
values). The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a composite sample or in
the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean (weighted by flow value) of all the samples
collected during that calendar day. The average monthly count for fecal coliform bacteria is
the geometric mean of the counts for samples collected during a calendar month. This
limitation is identified as "Monthly Average" under "Other Limits" in Part I of the permit.
b. The "average weekly concentration;" other than for fecal coliform bacteria, is the sum of the
concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a calendar week
(Sunday/Saturday) on which daily discharges are sampled and measured divided by the
number of daily discharges sampled and/or measured during such week (arithmetic mean of the
daily concentration values). The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a
composite sample or in the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean (weighted by flow
value) of all the samples collected during that calendar day. The average weekly count for
fecal coliform bacteria is the geometric mean of the counts for samples collected during a
calendar week. This limitation is identified as "Weekly Average" under "Other Limits" in
Part I of the permit.
c. The "maximum daily concentration" is the concentration of a pollutant discharge during a
calendar day. If only one sample is taken during any calendar day the concentration of
pollutant calculated from it is the "Maximum Daily Concentration". it is identified as "Daily
Maximum" under "Other Limits" in Part I of the permit.
d. The "average annual concentration," other than for fecal coliform bacteria, is the sum of the •
concentrations of all daily discharges sampled and/or measured during a calendar year on
which daily discharges are sampled and measured divided by the number of daily discharges
sampled and/or measured during such year (arithmetic mean of the daily concentration
values). The daily concentration value is equal to the concentration of a composite sample or in
the case of grab samples is the arithmetic mean (weighted by flow value) of all the samples
collected during that calendar day . The average yearly count for fecal coliform bacteria is the
geometric mean of the counts for samples collected during a calendar year. This limitation is
identified as "Annual Average" under "Other Limits" in Part I of the permit.
e. The "daily average concentration" (for dissolved oxygen) is the minimum allowable amount of
dissolved oxygen required to be available in the effluent prior to discharge averaged over •a
calendar day. If only one dissolved oxygen sample is taken over a calendar day, the sample is
considered to be the "daily average concentration" for the dixhar,2. It is identified as "daily
average" in the text of Part I.
f . The "quarterly average concentration" is the average of all samples taken over a calendar
quarter. It is identified as "Quarterly Average Limitation" in the text of Part I of the permit.
g. A calendar quarter is.defined as one of the following distinct periods: January through March,
April through June, July through September, and October through December.

P!I
Part i i
Page 3 of 14
7. Other Measurements
a . Flow, (MGD): The flow lamp it expressed in this permit is the 24 hours average flow, averaged
veag d
monthly. It is determined as the arithmetic mean of the total daily flows recordedduring
e
calendar month.
w measurement" is a measure of flow taken at the time of sampling, when
b. An instantaneo • � flo
both the sample and flow will be representative of the total discharge.
c. A continuousours of the faci. Flow flow measurement" is a measure of discharge flow from the alit ity which occurs
all be
continually without interruption throughout the operating swhen there may be no flow or for
monitored continually except for the infrequent times
infrequent maintenance activities on the flow device.
8. Types of Samples
a . Composite Sample: A composite sample shall consist of:
series of
of grab samples collected at equal time intervals over a 24 hour of individual sample
charge
(1) a
and combined proportional to the rate of flow measured at the t�
collection, or
ofgrab samples of equal volume collected over a 24 hour period passingwith
he the time
•
(2) a series P
ing
intervals between samples determined by a preset mst all be determined by use of a flow
point. Flow measurement between sample intervals
recorder and totalizer, and the present gallon interval between sample collecct on fixed at
no greater than 1/24 of the expected total daily flow at the treatment al to the rate of flow.
system, or
(3) a single, continuous sample collected over a 24 hour periodproportion
no
In accordance
with (1) above, the time interval between influent grab samples shall be
no
greater than once per hour, and the time interval between effluent gT�ngb samples detention time of
greater than once per hour except at wastewater
er samples may be collected at time intervals
greater than 24 hours. In such cases, effluentgrab
evenlyspaced over the 24 hour period which are equal in number of hours tothe deteerit o eenfluent
n time
of the system in number of days. However, in no case may interval
the time
mg, grab samples be greater than six (6) hours nor the number of samples less than four (4) during a
24 hour sampling period.
b. Grab Sample. P
• Grab samples are individual samples collected over aperiod l of
time
munot
exceeding 15 minutes; the grab sample can be taken manually. r P
be
representative of the discharge or the receiving waters.
9. Calculati n f Mean
a Arithmetic Mean: The ar
ithmetic mean of any set of values is the summation of the individual
values divided by the number of individual values.
Thegeometric mean of any set of values is the Nth root of the product of the
�. Geometric Mean: geometric mean is
individual values where N is equal to the number of individual ithmseof the The ndividual values.
equivalent to the antilog of the arithmeticmean
of logarithms
(0) shall be considered to be one
For purposes of calculating the geometric mean,
(1).
g
c. Weighted by Flow
Value: Weighted by flow value means the summation of each concentration
times its respective flow divided by the summation of the respective flows.
Fun

url
Part II
Page 4 of 14
10. Calendar Day
A calendar day is defined as the period from midnight of one day until midnight of the next day.
However, for purposes of this permit, any consecutive 24-hour period that reasonably represents
ran the calendar day may be used for sampling.
11. Hazardous Substance
A hazardous substance means any substance designated under 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section
311 of the aean Water Act.
12. Toxic Pollutant
A toxic pollutant is any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act.
SECTION B. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Duty to Comply
The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance
constitutes a violation of the Clean Water Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit
termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or denial of a permit renewal application.
a. The permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under section
307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants and with standards for sewage sludge use or
disposal established under section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act within the time provided in
the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions or standards for sewage sludge
use or disposal, even if the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement.
b. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition is subject to a
civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day for each violation. Any person who negligently
violates any permit condition is subject to criminal penalties of $2,500 to $25,000 per day of
violation, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both. Any person who knowingly
violates permit conditions is subject to criminal penalties of $5,000 to $50,000 per day of
violation, or imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both. Also, any person who violates a
permit condition may be assessed an administrative penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation
with the maximum amount not to exceed $125,000. [Ref: Section 309 of the Federal Act 33
U.S.C.1319 and 40 CFR 122.41 (a)]
c. Under state law, a civil penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per violation
may be assessed against any person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms,
conditions, or requirements of a permit. (Ref: North Carolina General Statutes § 143-215.6A]
d. Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for violating
section 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, 318, or 405 of the Act, or any permit condition or limitation
implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section 402 of the Act.
Administrative penalties for Class 1 violations are not to exceed $10,000 per violation, with
the maximum amount of any Class I penalty assessed not to exceed $25,000. Penalties for Class
II violations are not to exceed $10,000 per day for each day during which the violation
continues, with the maximum amount of any Class 11 penalty not to exceed $125,000.

fER
FBI
Part II
Page 5 of 14
2. Duty to Mitigate
The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or
disposal in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting
human health or the environment.
3. Civil and Criminal liability
Except as provided in permit conditions on "Bypassing" (Part I1, C-4) and "Power Failures" (Part II,
C-7), nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee from any responsibilities,
liabilities, or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3, 143-215.6 or Section 309 of
the Federal Act, 33 USC 1319. Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential damages,
such as fish kills, even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily
suspended.
4. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve
'm' the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may
be subject to under NCGS 143-215.75 et seq. or Section 311 of the Federal Act, 33 USG 1321.
Furthermore, the permittee is responsible for consequential damages, such as fish kills, even
cw though the responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily suspended.
5. Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property,
or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of
personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.
6. Onshore or Offshore Construction
This permit does not authorize or approve the construction of any onshore or offshore physical
structures or facilities or the undertaking of any work in any navigable waters.
7. Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the application
of any provision of this permit to any circumstances, is held invalid, the application of such
provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby.
•
8. Duty to Provide Information
The permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority, within a reasonable time, any
information which the Permit Issuing Authority may request to determine whether cause exists for
modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit or to determine compliance with this
permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority upon request, copies of
records required to be kept by this permit.
9. Duty to Reapply
If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of
this permit, the permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit.
PRI

rml
10. Expiration of Permit
Part 11
Page 6 of 14
The permittee is not authorized to discharge after the expiration date. In order to receive
automatic authorization to discharge beyond the expiration date, the permittee shall submit such
information, forms, and fees as are required by the agency authorized to issue permits no later than
180 days prior to the expiration date. Any permittee that has not requested renewal at least 180
days prior to expiration, or any permittee that does not have a permit after the expiration and has
r•n not requested renewal at least 180 days prior to expiration, will subject the permittee to enforcement
procedures as provided in NCGS 143-215.6 and 33 USC 1251 et. seq.
Peel
11. Signatory Requirements
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed
and certified.
a . All permit applications shall be signed as follows:
(1) For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purpose of this Section, a
responsible corporate officer means: (a) a president, secretary, treasurer or vice president
of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who
performs similar policy or decision making functions for the corporation, or (b) the manager
of one or more manufacturing production or operating facilities employing more than 250
persons or having gross annual sales or expenditures exceeding 25 million (in second quarter
1980 dollars), if authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager
in accordance with corporate procedures.
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,
respectively; or
(3) For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by either a principal executive
officer or ranking elected official.
b. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Permit Issuing
Authority shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of
that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
(2) The authorization specified either an individual or a position having responsibility for the
overall operation of the regulated facility or activity, such as the position of plant
manager, operator of a well or well field, superintendent, a position of equivalent
responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental
matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named
individual or any individual occupying a named position.); and
(3) The written authorization is submitted to the Permit Issuing At—hority.
c. Certification. Any person signing a document under paragraphs a. or b. of this section shall
make 'the following certification:
"I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under
my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the
person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering
the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false
information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
f

Part ii
Page 7 of 14
12. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The filing of a request
by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a
notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit condition.
13. Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the permit issuing authority from r_apening and
r."`' modifying the permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit as allowed by
the laws, rules, and regulations contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 122 and
123; Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H .0100; and North
1114 Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 et. al.
14. Previous Permits
All previous National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits issued to this facility,
whether for operation or discharge, are hereby revoked by issuance of this permit. (The exclusive
authority to operate this facility arises under this permit. The authority to operate the facility
ram► under previously issued permits bearing this number is no longer effective. 1 The conditions,
requirements, terms, and provisions • of this permit authorizing discharge under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System govern discharges from this facility.
MCI
SECTION C. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF POLLUTION CONTROLS
1. Certified Operator
Pursuant to Chapter 90A-44 of North Carolina General Statutes, and upon classification of the
facility by the Certification Commission, the permittee shall employ a certified wastewater
rim treatment plant operator in responsible charge (ORC) of the wastewater treatment facilities. Such
operator must hold a certification of the grade equivalent to or greater than the classification
assigned to the wastewater treatment facilities by the Certification Commission. The permittee
must also employ a certified back-up operator of the appropriate type and any grade to comply
with the conditions of Title 15A, Chapter 8A .0202. The ORC of the facility must visit each Class 1
facility at least weekly and each Class II, III, and IV facility at least daily, excluding weekends
and holidays, and must properly manage and document daily operation and maintenance of the
facility and must comply with all other conditions of Title 15A, Chapter 8A .0202. Once the
facility is classified, the permittee shall submit a letter to the Certification Commission which
designates the operator in responsible charge within thirty days after the wastewater treatment
facilities are 50% complete.
�+n
2. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of
treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to
achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also
includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision
requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a
permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the
permit.

fiPPI
rar
Part II
Page 8 of 14
3. Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defen
defense fora permittee in an enforcement action that it would the eobeen
e nine ofssary
this
It shall not be a
to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with
permit.
4. B;^oassin oe�f Treatment Facilitie
a . Definitions
(1) "Bypass" mea
ns the known diversion of waste streams from any portion oeatmin t
facili including the collection system, which is not a designed or established or
ty
mode for the facility.pdamage to the
(2) "Severe property damage" means substantial physical damage inoperable,orsubstantial and permanent
treatment facilities which causes them to become mope
loss of natural res
ources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence o of
in
a
bass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss causedby
delays
YP
production.
b. Bypass not exceeding limitations.
allow anybypass to occur which -does not cause effluentoperation.
lie limitations
to o be
The permittee may Yp
exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance tod d assureof thisf section.
bypasses are not subject to the provisions of Paragraphs c.
c. Notice
f the permittee knows in advance of the need for a by ass, itn shall
e
,�, (1) Anticipated bypass. I g
submit prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass,
evaluation of the anticipated quality andha affect
ct of the bypass.
a of an unanticipated bypass as
� (2) Unanticipated bypass. The '� h s p�rmit a (shall
4 hour notice). required in Part ,
d. Prohibition of Bypass
and the Permit Issuing Authority may take enforcement action against
(1) Bypass is prohibited
a permittee for bypass, unless:
(A) Bypass was un
avoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury or severe property
damage;
ent
(B) There were
no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use ot auxiliary
1 ptreatm of
facilities, retention of untreated wastes or maintenance during vi meet should
downtime. This condition is not satisfied adequauedbackup o prevent a bypass
equipment
have been installed in the exercise°reasonable downtime or preventive maintenance;
which occurred during normal periods
(C) and
The permittee submitted notices as required under Paragraph c. of this section.
Y
(2) The Permit Issuing
Authorit may approve an anticipated bypass, after cons dhenthr its
adverse affects, if the Permit Issuing Authority determines that it will
conditions listed above in Paragraph d. (1) of this section.

F�1
Part II
Page 9 of 14
5. Upsets
a. Definition.
"Upset " means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary
noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the
reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent
caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment
facilities, lack of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
b. Effect of an upset.
An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such
technology based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph c. of this
condition are met. No determination made during administrative review of claims that
noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final
ran administrative action subject to judicial review.
c. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset.
A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate,
through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that:
'"' (1) An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The permittee facility was at the time being properly operated; and
(3) The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in Part II, E. 6. (b) (B) of this permit.
fin (4) The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II, B. 2. of this
permit.
d. Burden of proof.
In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has
the burden of proof.
6. Removed Substances
Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of
wastewaters shall be utilized/disposed of in accordance with NCGS 143-215.1 and in a manner such
as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering waters of the State or navigable
waters of the United States. The permittee shall comply with all existing federal regulations
governing the disposal of sewage sludge. Upon promulgation of 40 CFR Part 503, any permit issued
by the Permit Issuing Authority for the utilization/disposal of sludge may be reopened and
modified, or revoked and reissued, to incorporate applicable requirements at 40 CFR Part 503. The
permittee shall comply with applicable 40 CFR Part 503 Standards for the Use and Disposal of
Sewage Sludge (when promulgated) within the time provided in the regulation, even if the permit
is not modified to incorporate the requirement. The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing
Authority of any significant change in its sludge use or disposal practices.
7. Power Failures
The permittee is responsible for maintaining adequate safeguards as required by DEM Regulation,
Title 15A, North Carolina Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H, .0124 Reliability, to prevent the
discharge of untreated or inadequately treated wastes during electrical power failures either by
means of alternate power sources, standby generators or retention of inadequately treated effluent.
Pal

fowl
Part II
Page 10 of 14
SECTION D. MONITORING AND RECORDS
rim 1. Representative Sampling
Samples collected and measurements taken, as required herein, shall be characteristic of the
Foil volume and nature of the permitted discharge. Samples collected at a frequency less than daily
shall be taken on a 'iay and time that is characteristic of the discharge over the entire period
which the sample represents. All samples shall be taken at the monitoring points specified in this
permit and, unless otherwise specified, before the effluent joins or is diluted by any other
rogl
wastestream, body of water, or substance. Monitoring points shall not be changed without
notification to and the approval of the Permit Issuing Authority.
ram► 2. Reporting
Awl
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each month and
reported on a monthly Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) Form (DEM No. MR 1, 1.1, 2, 3) or
alternative forms approved by the Director, DEM, postmarked no later than the 30th day
following the completed reporting period.
The first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the issuance of the permit or in the case
of a new facility, on the last day of the month following the commencement of discharge.
Duplicate signed copies of these, and all other reports required herein, shall be submitted to the
following address:
Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
3. Flow Measurements
Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with accepted scientific practices
shall be selected and used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of
monitored discharges. The devices shall be installed, calibrated and maintained to ensure that the
accuracy of the measurements are consistent with the accepted capability of that type of device.
Devices selected shall be capable of measuring flows with a maximum deviation of less than + 10%
from the true discharge rates throughout the range of expected discharge volumes. Once -through
condenser cooling water flow which is monitored by pump logs, or pump hour meters as specified in
Part I of this permit and based on the manufacturer's pump curves shall not be subject to this
requirement.
4. Test Procedures
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations published
pursuant to NCGS 143-215.63 et. seq, the Water and Air Quality Reporting Acts, and to regulations
published pursuant to Section 304(g), 33 USC 1314, of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
Amended, and Regulation 40 CFR 136; or in the case of sludge use or disposal, approved under 40
CFR 136, unless otherwise specified in 40 CFR 503, unless other test procedures have been specified
in this permit.
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this permit, all test procedures must produce
minimum detection and reporting levels that are below the permit discharge requirements and all
data generated must be reported down to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the
procedure. If no approved methods are determined capable of achieving minimum detection and

Pon
Pan l l
Page 11 of 14
reporting levels below permit discharge requirements, then the most sensitive (method with the
lowest possible detection and reporting level) approved method must be used.
5. Penalties for Tampering
The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders
inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit shall,
upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for
not more than two years per violation, or by both. If a conviction of a person is for a violation
committed after a first conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment is a fine of not
more than $20,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or both.
6. Records Retention
Except for records of monitoring information required by this permit related to the permittee's
sewage sludge use and disposal activities, which shall be retained for a period of at least five
years (or longer as required by 40 CFR 503), the permittee shall retain records of all monitoring
information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart
recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this permit,
for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application.
This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time.
7. Recording Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit, the permittee
shall record the following information:
a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements;
b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c. The date(s) analyses were performed;
d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses;
e. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
f. The results of such analyses.
8. Inspection and Entry
The permittee shall allow the Director, or an authorized representative (including an authorized
contractor acting as a representative of the Director), upon the presentation of credentials and other
documents as may be required by law, to;
a. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or
conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
b. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions
of this permit;
c. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control
equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit; and
d. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit compliance or as
otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act, any substances or parameters at any location.

Part II
Page 12 of 14
SECTION E. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Change in Discharge
All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.
The discharge of any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or at a level in excess
of that authorized shall constitute a violation of the permit.
2. Planned Changes
The permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned physical
alterations or additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when:
a. The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one of the criteria for determining
whether a facility is a new source in 40 CFR Part 122.29 (b); or
b. The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the quantity of
pollutants discharged. This notification applies to pollutants which are subject neither to
effluentlimitations in the permit, nor to notification requirements under 40 CFR Part 122.42 (a)
(1).
c. The alteration or addition results in a significant change in the permittee's sludge use or
disposal practices, and such alternation, addition or change may justify the application of
permit conditions that are different from or absent in the existing permit, including notification
of additional use or disposal sites not reported during the permit application process or not
reported pursuant to an approved land application plan.
3. Anticipated Noncompliance
The permittee shall give advance notice to the Director of any planned changes in the permitted
facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements.
4. Transfers
This permit is not transferable to any person except after notice to the Director. The Director may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permittee and incorporate such other
.requirements as may be necessary under the Clean Water Act.
5. Monitoring Reports
Monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere in this permit.
a. Monitoring results must be reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) (See Part li. D. 2
of this permit) or forms provided by the Director for reporting results of monitoring of sludge use
or disposal practices.
b. If the permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by the permit, using test
procedures specified in Part II, D. 4. of this permit or in the case of sludge use or disposal,
approved under 40 CFR 503, or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring shall be
included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR.
c. Calculations for all limitations which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an
arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified by the Director in the permit.

Part II
Page 13 of 14
6. Twenty-four Hour Reporting
a. The permittee shall report to the central office or the appropriate regional office any
noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall be
provided orally within 24 hours from the time the permittee became aware of the
circumstances. A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a
description of the noncompliance, and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact
dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is
expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence
of the noncompliance.
b. The following shall be included as information which must be reported within 24 hours under
this paragraph:
(1) Any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit.
(2) Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit.
(3) Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants listed by the
Director in the permit to be reported within 24 hours.
c. The Director may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis for reports under paragraph
b. above of this condition if the oral report has been received within 24 hours.
7. Other Noncompliance
The permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under Part II. E. 5 and 6. of
this permit at the time monitoring reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the information
listed in Part II. E. 6. of this permit.
8. Other Information
Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit
application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the
Director, it shall promptly submit such facts or information.
9. Noncompliance Notification
The permittee shall report by telephone to either the central office or the appropriate regional
office of the Division as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working
day following the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence'of any of the following:
a. Any occurrence at the water pollution control facility which results in the discharge of
significant amounts of wastes which are abnormal in quantity or characteristic, such as the
dumping of the contents of a sludge digester; the known passage of a slug of hazardous substance
through the facility; or any other unusual circumstances.
b. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that render the facility incapable of
adequate wastewater treatment such as mechanical or electrical failures of pumps, aerators,
compressors, etc.
c. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass
directly to receiving waters without treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such
station or facility.

J.U. JJ LJL'i�LJOJU
MI I I rwLL JIJD lrlJKrJ rmum UL
rairt
PRI
A. construction
PART III
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
No construction of wastewater treatment facilities or additions to add to the plant's treatment
capacity or to change the type of process utilized at the treatment plant shall be begun until Final
Plans and Specifications have been submitted to the Division of Water Quality and written approval
and Authorization to Construct has been issued.
B. Greundwater Moni rg i ng
The permittee shall, upon written notice from the Director of the Division of Water Quality, conduct
groundwater monitoring as may be required to determine the compliance of this NPDES permitted
facility with the current groundwater standards.
C.nges in Discharges of Toxic Substances
The permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority as soon as it knows or has reason to believe:
a_That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge, on a routine or
frequent basis, of any toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will
exceed the highest of the following "notification levels';
(1) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/1);
(2)Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/I) for acrolein and acrylonitrile; five hundred
micrograms per liter (500 ug/1) for 2.4-dinitrophenol and for 2-nnethyl-4.6rdinitrophenol; and
one milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
(3) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit
application.
b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in any discharge, on a non -routine
or infrequent basis, of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will
exceed the highest of the following "notification levels";
(I) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/l);
(2) One milligram per liter (1 mg/1) for antimony;
'" ' (3) Ten (10) times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit
application.
ID. Requitement to Continual! Evalu t Wa t i ha e
The permittee shall continually evaluate all wastewater disposal alternatives and pursue the most
environmentally sound alternative of the reasonably cost effective alternatives, If the facility is in
1=1 substantial non-compliance with the terms and conditions of the NPDES permit or governing rules,
regulations or laws, the permittee shall submit a report in such form and detail as required by the
Division evaluating these alternatives and a plan of action within sixty (60) days of notification by the
Division.
pin

PART IV
ANNUAL ADMINISTERNG AND COMPLIANCE MONITORING FEE
REQUIREMENTS
A. The permittee must pay the annual administering and compliance monitoring fee
�., within 30 (thirty) days after being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee in
a timely manner in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0105(b)(4) may cause this
Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.

APPENDIX C
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATES

E'I
Pal
p► Alternative 2a (Repair Ex. Clarifier/Reduced Flow during Break)
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
`'"' Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
MI
fal
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
ITEM
UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Chart Recorder Is 1 $ 3,450 $ 3,450
ran Repair Clarifier Is 1 $ 69,000 $ 69,000
Renovate Flow Equalization Is 1 $ 8,100 $ 8,100
System
Effluent Filtration Is 1 $ 105,000 $ 105,000
UV System Is 1 $ 14,500 $ 14,500
Misc. Yard Piping Is 1 $ 13,600 $ 13,600
ow Electrical Upgrades Is 1 $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Subtotal $ 258,650
''"' Contingency @ 10% $ 25,865
Engineering $ 37,250
Total $ 321,765
riwi
Estimated Annual Operating Costs
1.9
First Year Operating Costs $ 8.00 /1000 gal
25,000 god x 365 days x $8 = $73,000/yr
1000 gallons
rm
ma
fan

rem Alternative 2b (Repair Ex. Clarifier/Normal Flow)
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
PPI
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
�., ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Chart Recorder Is 1 $ 3,450 $ 3,450
Fs, Repair Clarifier Is 1 $ 69,000 $ 69,000
Renovate Flow Equalization Is 1 $ 8,100 $ 8,100
System
r•► Effluent Filtration Is 1 $ 105,000 $ 105,000
UV System Is 1 $ 14,500 $ 14,500
Misc. Yard Piping Is 1 $ 13,600 $ 13,600
r"" Electrical Upgrades Is 1 $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Pumping Equipment for Pump Is 1 $ 3,000 $ 3,000
& Haul
r"9 Temporary Holding Tank day 14 $ 1,000 $ 14,000
Hauling to City of Henderson
PO.i.W gal 350,000 $ 0.05 $ 17,500
Disposal Fee to City of 100 cf 468 $ 8.52 $ 3,987
Henderson
Subtotal $ 297,137
Contingency c 10% $ 29,714
Engineering $ 37,250
Total $ 364,101
Note:
Hauling & Disposal costs based on 14 days x 25,000 gpd = 350,000 gal = 46,800 cf
run
r1 Estimated Annual Operating Costs
First Year Operating Costs $8.00 /1000 gal
Prl
25.000 a d x 365 days x $8 = $73,000/yr
1000 gallons

mn Altegnative 2c (Normal Flow/New Clarifier)
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
''" Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
f all
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
ITEM
UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Chart Recorder Is 1 $ 3,450 $ 3,450
rr, Install New Clarifier Is 1 $ 80,000 $ 80,000
Clarifier Foundation Is 1 $ 7,500 $ 7,500
System Is 1 $ 8,100 $ 8,100
fir Effluent Filtration Is 1 $ 105,000 $ 105,000
UV System Is 1 $ 14,500 $ 14,500
Misc. Yard Piping Is 1 $ 13,600 $ 13,600
"" Electrical Upgrades Is 1 $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Subtotal $ 277,150
riel
Contingency @ 10% $ 27,715
Engineering $ 37,250
rm Total $ 342,115
Tim Estimated Annual Operating Costs
First Year Operating Costs $8.00 /1000 gal
rw
25.000 god x 365 days x $8 = $73,000/yr
1000 gallons

Alternative 3 (Subsurface Drip Irrigation)
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Fin
Mobilization Is 1 $ 12,000 $ 12,000.00
p•, Chart Recorder ea 1 $ 3,450 $ 3,450.00
Install New Clarifier Is 1 $ 80,000 $ 80,000.00
Clarifier Foundation ea 1 $ 7,500 $ 7,500.00
fir Clearing Subsurface Irrigation ac 3.8 $ 3,000 $ 11,400.00
Fields
1/2" dia. Polyethylene Dripline,
Emitters, Fittings, Controls and ac. 3.80 $ 25,000 $ 95,000.00
rir' related Accessories
Conversion of EQ Pump Station Is 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000.00
with 2-550 gpm pumps
SCADA System Is 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000.00
8-inch PVC Pipe ft 1,100 $ 20 $ 22,000.00
Miscellaneous Yard Piping Is 1 $ 4,000 $ 4,000.00
EQ Basin Modificatons Is 1 $ 5,000 $ 5,000.00
Erosion Control Is 1 $ 2,500 $ 2,500.00
Lift Station Site Is 1 $ 2,500 $ 2,500.00
far
Seeding ac 3.80 $ 3,000 $ 11,400.00
r+� Subtotal $ 326,750.00
Contingency © 10% $ 32,675.00
Soils analysis $ 15,000.00
Surveying, Engineering &
$ 65,000.00
Permitting
Construction Observation $ 25,000.00
poi
Total $ 464,425.00
Estimated Annual Operating Costs
First Year Operating Costs
(VVVVTP) $ 7* /1000 gal
1
1000 gallons
* Operating costsper 1000 gallons reduced because of no filter and no UV System
25,000 clod x 365 days x $7 = $ 63,875 per year
faM

Faxl
PM
Irrigation Fields Maintenance
Daily Inspections (per week)
,i, pumps & tanks 2 hr x 5 days © $40/hr $ 400
Weekly Inspection of Fields,
Emitters, valves, filters, (includes
monthly flushing and line
repair)etc 8 hr x 1 day © $40/hr $ 320
Materials $ 50
$ 770 per week
mn
Subtotal $ 40,040 per year
p, Total $ 103,915 per year
Rol
fall
MI
Furl
roll
relq

ran
Alternative 4 (Surface Drip Irrigation)
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
run Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Mobilization Is 1 $ 12,000 $ 12,000.00
Chart Recorder ea 1 $ 3,450 $ 3,450.00
Install New Clarifier Is 1 $ 80,000 $ 80,000.00
Clarifier Foundation ea 1 $ 7,500 $ 7,500.00
Clearing Subsurface Irrigation ac 3.8 $ 3,000 $ 11,400.00
Fields
1/2" dia. Polyethylene Dripline,
Insulation, Emitters, Fittings, ac. 3.8 $ 23,000 $ 87,400.00
Controls and related Accessories
Conversion of EQ Pump Station Is 1 $ 50,000 $ 50,000.00
with 2-550 gpm pumps
SCADA System Is 1 $ 20,000 $ 20,000.00
8-inch PVC Pipe ft 1,100 $ 20 $ 22,000.00
Miscellaneous Yard Piping Is 1 $ 4,000 $ 4,000.00
EQ Basin Modificatons Is 1 $ 5,000 $ 5,000.00
Erosion Control Is 1 $ 2,500 $ 2,500.00
Lift Station Site Is 1 $ 2,500 $ 2,500.00
Seeding ac 3.8 $ 3,000 $ 11,400.00
Subtotal
Contingency aG� 10%
Soils analysis
Surveying, Engineering &
Permitting
Construction Observation
Total
Estimated Annual Operating Costs
First Year Operating Costs
(VVWTP) $ 7* /1000 gal
$ 319,150.00
$ 31,915.00
$ 15,000.00
$ 65,000.00
$ 25,000.00
$ 456,065.00
p-,
25.000 qpd x 365 days x $7 = $ 63,875 per year
1000 gallons
fan * Operating costs per 1000 gallons reduced because of no filter & no UV System

1ram
1I
Irrigation Fields Maintenance
Daily Inspections (per week)
pumps & tanks 2 hr x 5 days $40/hr $ 400
Weekly Inspection of Fields,
Emitters, valves, filters, (includes
monthly flushing and line
repair)etc 8 hr x 1 day © $40/hr $ 320
Materials $ 100
$ 820 per week
Total 42,640 per year
Subtotal $ 106,515 per year

Ion
fml
Alternative 5 (Force Main to Henderson)
Kittrell Job Corps Center WWTP
Kittrell, North Carolina
22-Mar-05
Estimated Capital & Construction Costs
ITEM
Mobilization
4-inch dia. PVC Force Main
4-inch dia. DIP Force Main
& jack wl 4-inch dip carrier pipe
Air Relief Valve in Manhole
No. 67 Stone
Roadway Pavement Repair
Erosion Control
Seeding & Mulching
Retrofit Exist. EQ Pump Sta.
85 gpm Lift Station
Lift Station Site
Subtotal
Contingency @ 10%
Surveying, Engineering &
Permitting
Construction Observation
Total
Estimated Annual Operating Costs
Annual Labor for Routine Maintenance
Electricity for Pumps
Miscellaneous Parts
*City of Henderson Disposa Fees
Total
UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE
Is 1 $ 12,000 $ 12,000.00
If 27,000 $ 12 $ 324,000.00
If 500 $ 18 $ 9,000.00
If 300 $ 150 $ 45,000.00
ea 9 $ 3,250 $ 29,250.00
to 150 $ 32 $ 4,800.00
sy 1,110 $ 30 $ 33,300.00
Is 1 $ 15,000 $ 15,000.00
ac 10 $ 1,500 $ 15, 000.00
Is 1 $ 42,500 $ 42,500.00
Is 1 $ 90,000 $ 90,000.00
Is 1 $ 2,500 $ 2,500.00
*((25000 gpd x 365 days)/7.48
gallcf)/100) x $7.10 per 100 cf = $ 86,614
$ 622,350.00
$ 62,235.00
$ 62,000.00
$ 35,000.00
$ 781,585.00
$ 10,000
$ 9,900
$ 1,500
$ 86,614
$ 108,014

APPENDIX D
n
LIFE CYCLE COSTS
�j
n

ICI
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
OBRIEN G GERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
I'�1ii Cat
!RO: ECT:NAME::::
I0 ..Ar+. .
••:NUMB.
ESCRIPTI
•
iLYSIS:PEf FORMED':
.........................
............................
............................
..........................
............................
Kittrell Job Corps Center - Wastewater Feasibility Study
OBG Project 36584
U.S. Department of Labor - Kittrell Job Corps Center
Alt2A.•............... ............
•
(Repa
ir Ex. Clarifier/Reduced Flow During Break
.................................................................... .... Note:
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Energy and other consumption costs are included in Annual
Maintenance Costs
wdixon
25-Mar-05
•
•
•
•
Page 1

Pin
12,1
Pnl
Pal
rmV
pin
Fmg
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
QBRIEN 6 [SERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
` '1�t.F R.............................................. 1 :::::::.:::::::::::::::.........:::::::::••••:::-:::•
•• • " .R NI •V• •:••••••••••••••:':•-:••:'''::::: Alt. 2A ... .
:•COtT10'iN::i
:... OIIAI.C:LIFE
::1I F.L••ATION�# ATE
..................................
.................................
..................................
.................................
..................................
.................................
.................................
..................................
...................................
....................................
.....................................
....................................
.....................................
....................................
.....................................
..................................
....................................
:"GA ITAL II VESTME
•FITAL
�:. A• I�CF.B• OND :"': :. ......:.
.....:. U NTEREET:RATE:'
=: LOAN-mptiD BERM
:A . l4....4..........i.P...... P:.i 'IHG.-.0. * ..
:NATURA G
= PFOP�AIE:::
_..�1 -:
2005
20
2.8%
$321,765
4.8%
0.0%
20
A1Q• .
:..
N.
.044
::NV N=p CURRIiVG:REPAIRIREPL;ACEMENT:GO
:::.....::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.1::::::::::::::::::{::::::::::::::::-.::::•:...i..•:.::::.::.::::::::::::.:::::::.:!:.:1:r.::•::6:.•::.::.:..:::...................
......::::•:::::.::::.:::::::::::!::::k.:::::::::::11:•:::•1:::::::::::::•::.::":::::::::::•••••:::.::::::::::::::::::::::.:••:.:::.•::1:::::.::••••:•:
$73,000
.i+ICF:�
•
•
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$25,000
Motors
12
$5,000
fog
Page 2

PIM
furl
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
QBRIEN G GERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
'EAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $
TOTAL COST
1
$307,092
$0
$73,000
$0
$380,092
2
$772
$0
$75,044
$0
$75,816
3
$772
$0
$77,145
$0
$77,917
4
$772
$0
$79,305
$0
$80,077
5
$772
$0
$81,526
$0
$82,298
6
$772
$0
$83,809
$0
$84,581
7
$772
$0
$86,155
$0
$86,927
8
$772
$0
$88,568
$0
$89,340
9
$772
$0
$91,047
$0
$91,820
10
$772
$0
$93,597
$32,054
$126,423
11
$772
$0
$96,217
$0
$96,990
12
$772
$0
$98,912
$6,775
$106,459
13
$772
$0
$101,681
$0
$102,453
14
$772
$0
$104,528
$0
$105,300
15
$772
$0
$107,455
$0
$108,227
16
$772
$0
$110,464
$0
$111,236
17
$772
$0
$113,557
$0
$114,329
18
$772
$0
$116,736
$0
$117,508
19
$772
$0
$120,005
$0
$120,777
20
$772
$0
$123,365
$0
$124,137
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
• $0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$321,764
$0
$1,922,116
$38,828
r
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 2A
$2,282,7081
Page 3

fon
Pori
Pol
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
QBRIEN 6 GERG
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
OJECTNAME*•'-'-'-' Kittrell Job Corps Center - Wastewater Feasibility Study_
:PROJE " ` ED OBG Pro ect 36584
ENCIf U.S. Department of Labor - Kittrell Job Corps Center
•:iV�::-: .•R .
Ntf1111� .. : • Alt. 2B
'Repair Ex. ClarifierlNormal Flow
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Energy and other consumption costs are included in Annual
Maintenance Costs
Note:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
=ANALY�IS•FOR{111�D�:B''�����'���"����'���'�"=��'=��'�'�"�'�'�'��'�����������'�'�'����:�:�:����'�'�������'�"�'�"��:�:�:':•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-:•:•:•:•:•
:�?ER
IAfiE : wdixon
•AF
25-Mar-05
MCI
Page 1

PEI
fon
fI
furl
fool
ran
PEI
1l
TI
Flirt
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
Of OBRIEN 6 GERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
•!iNITV !•.• -. • •:::::::::::::::::•:••••• • • • • • • • • • Alt 2B ...•
*-.:1;-.::
TI#i:fetIbN: Y�Ai...................• 2005
:ECONOMIC: FE: ::::::: •20 Years•:• •:::::' •:
11• FLkT�ON fA'FE:• 2.8% 'fo:••• ::=::::::•:::::::::::: .
f.
• :Fug
:C-
:.IVIANYEN• A
................................
•
:Nt N=p IJRRING:REPAIRJREPLACEMENT.CC
...............• .• ...• .• .......................................
•
...........................................................
..........................................................
...........................................................
•
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$25,000
Motors
12
$5,000
•
•
ran
Page 2

r)
I1
Pal
flol
rom
I1
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
BEN 6 CERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
YEAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $
TOTAL COST
1
$347,498
$0
$73,000
$0
$420,498
_
2
$874
$0
$75,044
$0
$75,918
3
$874
$0
$77,145
$0
$78,019
4
$874
$0
$79,305
$0
$80,179
5
$874
$0
$81,526
$0
$82,400
6
$874
$0
$83,809
$0
$84,682
7
$874
$0
$86,155
$0
$87,029
8
$874
$0
$88,568
$0
$89,441
9
$874
$0
$91,047
$0
$91,921
10
$874
$0
$93,597
$32,054
$126,524
11
$874
$0
$96,217
$0
$97,091
12
$874
$0
$98,912
$6,775
$106,560
13
$874
$0
$101,681
$0
$102,555
14
$874
$0
$104,528
$0
$105,402
15
$874
$0
$107,455
$0
$108,329
16
$874
$0
$110,464
$0
$111,337
17
$874
$0
$113,557
$0
$114,430
18
$874
$0
$116,736
$0
$117,610
19
$874
$0
$120,005
$0
$120,879
20
$874
$0
$123,365
$0
$124,239
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$364,100
$0
$1,922,116
$38,828
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 2B
$2,325,044
PEI
Page 3

fan
Pal
Caul
1161
Pal
MEI
1.
Pr,
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
oBwENsGE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
R040.V.NAIfiIE::'• ••-
:PRO•JECT ID OBG Project 36584 ..... .
:cO•E
:::-..:::::::.::::::::-..:-.13.....a....91.9..N....::-Ata.ERNAT
:•3Q-:N:l3I�I�E�
•••• • • • -.. ••••••••••::::::::#1;:*:-.:.:•.::::.:::%-:%•:%-::::::::::::
DE cRIpljQN::.:::::.:::.::
....•.•......................................
.......................................
..........................................
...........................................
:::..•:...:: ...•: ::: :::::: ::: ...•••• .:::.:: .:::::: :-; ::::: :•:. ::::: ::. :•••• :: :: :•• ...... ....: .. : :. •:* •: ....." : .1.• : : -:. •••• :". : :: : : : ....... : •:: . ••• ::. ::: : :
.......-.:::::*:::;:::::•:::-.......:-......::::•••••••••••::-...........-........--:-.•::•:::-...x...:•:.:-...:-.:.....:-....::•::-.•
Kittrell Job Corps Center - Wastewater Feasibility Study
ormal Flow/New Clarifier
Continued Surface Water Discharge
Note: Energy and other Consumption Costs are included in Annual
Maintenance Costs
•
Page 1

f�!
rag
ron
foul
rol
1101
Pal
Pain
rail
Carl
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS laBRIENGGERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
V :Alt. 2C ................... .
200 1� 5
20 Years : ' ' ' ''•'•'•'•'•'•••'•"••.•.-.-.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•-•.•.
•
•
2.8
o p.'.
::II��.LATrON:BATE:=''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' /o
GArI• :i'• A• i:::I V• S','Y.1 :
"-••• "' " 342115
:�A.iris :::
• 04
LOANJBO• ND : /o % .
o q'.
:a�tPR63T:2i4: 0 0% ./
.�•L'QAIV:lB�l�D; R
'�N'
0-•AL-;.-...aiiistA-11.0:00.01:0•Aii.140.60.j.ottolii.....::::.:::.::-..::-.....:.•::.:,:::-..:.•:•::.............•:::-..:.-........:::.:.:.:::.::-......-::::•••:-..:::.::-..:::.:::.:::.:..:.•::::::::.:.:..............:::::::::::::•:::::::::•::::::::::::::::::.::::........-...:::•::::.-......-:::::::::........
::NATURAL:OAS: • $::.:':':.:':.:.:'::: i4:F::::.:::::::
PANE :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::' :':' :' :• GAcI:::':'• •'..... .
c ► ::'::::::::::• •: ••••:•• ::::: .. :::::::::: ::: aids
i111ANNiIsICS: ::: $73,000
i1[3N=FEERRINC3 REPAIRJR ':SOS
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$25,000
Motors
12
$5,000
Page 2

tin
Pr
Pin
ral
fall
fan
Pa
PM
ri
f girl
faal
fan
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
ai oBRIEN8GER&
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
YEAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $
TOTAL COST
1
$326,515
$0
$73,000
$0
$399,515
2
$821
$0
$75,044
$0
$75,865
3
$821
$0
$77,145
$0
$77,966
4
$821
$0
$79,305
$0
$80,126
5
$821
$0
$81,526
$0
$82,347
6
$821
$0
$83,809
$0
$84,630
7
$821
$0
$86,155
$0
$86,976
8
$821
$0
$88,568
$0
$89,389
9
$821
$0
$91,047
$0
$91,868
10
$821
$0
$93,597
$32,054
$126,471
11
$821
$0
$96,217
$0
$97,039
12
$821
$0
$98,912
$6,775
$106,507
13
$821
$0
$101,681
$0
$102,502
14
$821
$0
$104,528
$0
$105,349
15
$821
$0
$107,455
$0
$108,276
16
$821
$0
$110,464
$0
$111,285
17
$821
$0
$113,557
$0
$114,378
18
$821
$0
$116,736
$0
$117,557
19
$821
$0
$120,005
$0
$120,826
20
$821
$0
$123,365
$0
$124,186
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$342,114
$0
$1,922,116
$38,828
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 2C
$2,303,0681
WI
Page 3

Pori
furl
POI
Pan
fail
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS in as aams
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
•
.................. ...•.•......................•.•.•.•.•.•.•
........'Stud ............... .
P12QJECT:NAME Kittrell Job Corps Center Wastewater Feasibility �r y �
OJ C. OBG Project 36584
.EN : U.S. Department of Labor Kittrell Job Corps Center
Oik
Alt 3
Subsurface Drip Irrigation
Eliminate Surface Water Discharge
Energy and other consumption costs are included in Annual
Maintenance Costs
Note:
wdixon
25-Mar-05
•
•
•
Page 1

F�1
Mal
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
CON•STR•I•
TIOfYEA1:
ONOMIC:l�f:��'='�'�'�'�'�'�'�'���'�'�'�'�••' 20 Years�:��������:�:=:�:�:�:�:�:':'=�:=:�:�:==�:�:':':':�:�:•:-
:•INFLATION: •
•
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
019
PRI
2005
$464,425
4.8%
0.0%
20
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$40,000
Page 2

r1
w
TI
Fowl
ran
In
r
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
•a= ORMENSGERS
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
FEAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $
TOTAL COST
1
$443,247 ,
$40,040
$63,875
$0
$547,162
2
$1,115
$41,161
$65,664
$0
$107,939
3
$1,115
$42,314
$67,502
$0
$110,930
4
$1,115
$43,498
$69,392
$0
$114,005
5
$1,115
$44,716
$71,335
$0
$117,166
6
$1,115
$45,968
$73,332
$0
$120,415
7
$1,115
$47,256
$75,386
$0
$123,756
8
$1,115
$48,579
$77,497
$0
$127,190
9
$1,115
$49,939
$79,667
$0
$130,720
10
$1,115
$51,337
$81,897
$51,286
$185,635
11
$1,115
$52,775
$84,190
$0
$138,080
12
$1,115
$54,252
$86,548
$0
$141,915
13
$1,115
$55,771
$88,971
$0
$145,857
14
$1,115
$57,333
$91,462
$0
$149,910
15
$1,115
$58,938
$94,023
$0
$154,076
16
$1,115
$60,589
$96,656
$0
$158,359
17
$1,115
$62,285
$99,362
$0
$162,762
18
$1,115
$64,029
$102,144
$0
$167,288
19
$1,115
$65,822
$105,004
$0
$171,941
20
$1,115
$67,665
$107,944
$0
$176,724
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
, $0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$464,424
$1,054,267
$1,681,851
$51,286
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 3
$3,251,8291
Page 3

1�1
Furl
I1
PPI
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
OBRIEN 6 GERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
...............................................................................................................................
N•.
•:PRO:•EC • I: H•AN•IE:= Kittrell Job Corps Center - Wastewater Feasibility Study
• PR•OJE•CT:ID OBG Project 36584
• �AGENCIf U.S. Department of Labor - Kittrell Job Corps Center
......... .......................... � Alt. 4 ..............................
'•'••- :=':: (Surface Drip Irrigation ......................... :••
N:::: : Eliminate Surface Water Discharge Note:
:::: Energy and other consumption costs are included in Annual
Maintenance Costs
.......................................
•
..........................................
..........................................
...........................................
...........................................
•
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
cN1 L• ysiS:PR••••ORM•ED.• • ... .. •••.
wdixon
25-Mar-05
Pori
Page 1

LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
CSOlitatiaragin
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
..............................
............................
..............................
iT EST R ... :: :
ANNUA OPE iATING •
C iS3 :AND:GQNSUN PTIOI
::PROPANE••:'" :::::::::.::
:-PUBE:••i1L••:
:=IRRiO.ATtQ :r(EtD••f Bill :=
!A1t.41
$42,640
•
$63,875
$
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$40,000
Page 2

f�1
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
„M,,.. 951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
OBRIENV3ER6
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
YEAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $
TOTAL COST
1
$435,268
$42,640
$63,875
$0
$541,783
2
$1,095
$43,834
$65,664
$0
$110,592
3
$1,095
$45,061
$67,502
$0
$113,658
4
$1,095
$46,323
$69,392
$0
$116,810
5
$1,095
$47,620
$71,335
$0
$120,050
6
$1,095
$48,953
$73,332
$0
$123,380
7
$1,095
$50,324
$75,386
$0
$126,804
8
$1,095
$51,733
$77,497
$0
$130,324
9
$1,095
$53,182
$79,667
$0
$133,943
10
$1,095
$54,671
$81,897
$51,286
$188,948
11
$1,095
$56,202
$84,190
$0
$141,486
12
$1,095
$57,775
$86,548
$0
$145,417
13
$1,095
$59,393
$88,971
$0
$149,458
14
$1,095
$61,056
$91,462
$0
$153,613
15
$1,095
$62,765
$94,023
$0
$157,883
16
$1,095
$64,523
$96,656
$0
$162,273
17
$1,095
$66,330
$99,362
$0
$166,786
18
$1,095
$68,187
$102,144
$0
$171,426
19
$1,095
$70,096
$105,004
$0
$176,195
20
$1,095
$72,059
$107,944
$0
$181,098
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$456,064
$1,122,726
$1,681,851
$51,286
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 4
$3,311,927
Page 3

PRI
Pal
fan
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
IG OBRIENBGERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
:p. p4ECT NAME::::::::: Kittrell Job Corps Center Wastewater_Feasibility 1
_Y.
�?RO:E`fD•:''='''''' OBG Project 36584 .. ..-
A• G... U.S. Department of Labor - Kittrell Job Corps Center
:.3. t.
••••••••••••••••••••••••1::.:-.....••••••.................1:11......•••••:..... •••• • ••••••••••••:-:•:•••::.:::.:.:...
Force Main to Henderson
flECRIPiQM• ' ' ' '=' ' Discontinued Surface Water Discharge
•
•
NALY .Eft ED S1S:P CORM 8'�C:::;:':':• .••
wdixon
25-Mar-05
Page 1

Pal
twn
Ain
Ian
fan
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
O'BRIEN&&ERE
951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
V : AIt...S• .... .
•
2005
2
2.
•
GA#' A:I..5..tjil1.
$781,585
Af.BOf�LD::' 4.8%
LEA{/.BOAD:: RM::::::'::::• ••'••'•: 20
i l A ::# P i i4 l #G c S' ` ►�1 G N••• :• • - •
:::MISCEL_LANE US:Pi4•_
$E#NER:f31SCNAkiCE:E •'
$9,900
$1,500
$86,614
:: •::( IE::::' ::.:.:•'•:-:-:•::::::=::::':':' $::'::•:-:=:':.:•::* :::' '•
' :::::::;:
NT N';
$1
0,000 000
....: •
.".............. . .........................................................................x.x.x.;.•:-:•:•:•:-:-:•:::•:•:•:-:•:•:-:•:•:•:-:•:••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••...........•.:
::f�IIV=fCt..2RING:fEt?AIRIREPLACE:IlAEN 0" • • :' ::::.:::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::
'
DESCRIPTION
YEAR
COST
Pumps
10
$35,000
Motors
12
$10,000
$:
:$:
:$:
Page 2

fINI
Fan
PRI
MR
fail
Mil
MR
imrl
MR
MI
MI
MI
Fig
LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
1951 Aviation Parkway/Suite 1400
17B`16GERE
Morrisville, N.C. 27560
YEAR
CAPITAL $
OTHER $
MAINTENANCE $
REPAIR/REPLACE $1 TOTAL COST
1
$745,945
$98,014
$10,000
$0
$853,959
2
$1,876
$100,758
$10,280
$0
$112,914
3
$1,876
$103,580
$10,568
$0
$116,023
4
$1,876
$106,480
$10,864
$0
$119,219
5
$1,876
$109,461
$11,168
$0
$122,505
6
$1,876
$112,526
$11,481
$0
$125,883
7
$1,876
$115,677
$11,802
$0
$129,355
8
$1,876
$118,916
$12,133
$0
$132,924
9
$1,876
$122,246
$12,472
$0
$136,594
10
$1,876
$125,668
$12,821
$44,875
$185,241
11
$1,876
$129,187
$13,180
$0
$144,243
12
$1,876
$132,804
$13,550
$13,550
$161,779
13
$1,876
$136,523
$13,929
$0
$152,328
14
$1,876
$140,346
$14,319
$0
$156,540
15
$1,876
$144,275
$14,720
$0
$160,871
16
$1,876
$148,315
$15,132
$0
$165,323
17
$1,876
$152,468
$15,556
$0
$169,899
18
$1,876
$156,737
$15,991
$0
$174,604
19
$1,876
$161,125
$16,439
$0
$179,440
20
$1,876
$165,637
$16,899
$0
$184,412
21
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
22
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
23
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
24
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
25
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
26
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
27
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
28
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
29
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
30
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
31
32
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
33
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
34
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
35
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
TOT.
$781,584
$2,580,743
$263,304
$58,425
$3,684,0551
TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST FOR ALTERNATIVE NO. Alt. 5
MR
Page 3

APPENDIX E
AUSTIN, TEXAS WATER UTILITY — DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
fal
Pin

city of Austin - Unsite Disposal Systems Fact Sheets Page 1 of 4
t1
f-I
fa.,
AUSTIN
Find! I :;D;;t;: ; , 'Select a service jISelect a map
I ': %.�i. ,�•�1� I I .: t) I _ I .c,ntt° l•:
Drip irrigation Systems
AwrItical
I. Description
Drip (or trickle) subsurface soil disposal is a shallow slow rate pressure -dosed system used for land
application of pretreated wastewater. Subsurface drip disposal systems have three basic design
principles which are different from conventional subsurface disposal systems. They are (1) uniform
distribution of effluent, (2) dosing and resting cycles and (3) very shallow placement of trenches. This
type of system uses small diameter piping with underground drip emitters, and must be preceded by
�°► pretreatment which conforms to the manufacturer's specifications for the particular emitter used.
Effluent must be adequately filtered before distribution through the underground emitter system.
Aol
rarl
wr
Subsurface drip irrigation systems have the capability of equally distributing effluent at a relatively low
application rate over the entire absorption field to prevent saturation of the soil. Wastewater is applied
at a controlled rate in the plant root zone, which tends to minimize percolation of the effluent. Hydraulic
loading rates for drip irrigation systems may vary between 0.01 and 0.4 gallons per day per square
foot. Shallow placement of the drip emitter lines is intended to allow for enhanced evapotranspiration of
effluent as compared with conventional subsurface disposal systems. Small vibratory plows or trenchers
may be used to install drip emitter lines.
II. Common Modifications
Filtration of effluent preceding the drip emitter lines may be provided using one of several different
types of filtration media or devices. Proprietary filtration devices are commercially available, including
disc filters, screens, and sand filters. Telemetry equipment may be used to monitor the performance of
the system and alert the resident or staff responsible for managing the system of operational problems.
Automatic backfiushing of filters is provided in some system designs.
III. Technology Status
Drip irrigation systems have been used in the past primarily for agricultural applications in arid climates,
though there has been increasing use of this type of system for subsurface wastewater disposal. Some
field monitoring of sites has been performed for this type of alternative residential onsite disposal
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/wri/dis5.htm 4/17/05

city ot Austin - unsite Disposal Systems t act Sheets Page 2 ot 4
system. it is estimated from local permitting records that there are currently approximately 50
subsurface drip irrigation systems installed at residences and commercial establishments in the Austin
area.
N. Applications
ran
Subsurface drip irrigation systems are often used for sites with adverse conditions such as: soils which
are unsuitable for conventional absorption systems; insufficient depth to a restrictive horizon or ground
fim
water; and steep slopes. Since initial capital costs tend to be relatively high as compared with other
disposal options, and regular maintenance of these systems is necessary to ensure their proper
functioning, they may be most cost-effective where more than one home is served by the same drip
irrigation system.
V. Limitations
Drip irrigation systems require a reliable source of power. The system must be designed by a registered
professional engineer. If site environmental conditions are such that septic tank pretreatment alone
may not provide adequate removal of certain potential pollutants, an additional pretreatment process
(es) may be necessary prior to final subsurface disposal. Routine maintenance is necessary to ensure
the proper functioning of these systems. Initial capital costs tend to be relatively high for single home
1.1 applications as compared other subsurface disposal systems. Many system components supplied from
local commercial sources are proprietary.
VI. Typical Equipment/Number of Manufacturers
There are several State and local suppliers of drip irrigation equipment. Some of those suppliers provide
technical assistance with the design and installation of the systems.
VII. Performance
The performance of subsurface disposal systems is a function of site conditions and evaluation, and the
design, construction and maintenance procedures used for the system. Pollutants are removed from the
wastewater effluent by physical, chemical and biological processes in the soil zone around the bed or
trench. For adequate pollutant removal to occur, site conditions must be such that these processes can
occur to the extent needed for a given loading rate. Nitrogen uptake may be greater for drip irrigation
systems as compared with some other subsurface disposal systems since the wastewater is applied at a
controlled and fairly slow rate in the plant root zone. Pretreatment units, including adequate filtration,
1.9 and pumping system components and controls must be adequately maintained for subsurface drip
irrigation systems to continue functioning properly.
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/wri/dis5.htm 4/17/05

Pal
airy or tiusun - unsite visposat bystems r act bneets rage s or 4
MEI
VIII. Overall Reliability
This technology has been shown to be reliable as long as the system is adequately maintained and a
reliable source of power is available.
IX. Operation and Maintenance Requirements
If a septic tank is used to pretreat the wastewater prior to its distribution in the subsurface absorption
bed or trench, the tank should be pumped periodically to remove sludge/solids (see fact s! ':et: for
Septic Tanks) . Other types of pretreatment units and processes will require maintenance of some type.
For the drip irrigation system, filters must be routinely backflushed or otherwise cleared of trapped
particles. Pumps require either periodic maintenance or repair, or replacement. Electrical and
mechanical components of the pump control and alarm system may also need occasional repair or
replacement.
X. Potential Environmental Impacts
Improperly sited, designed, constructed or maintained subsurface disposal systems may contaminate
ground or surface water.
XL Energy Consumption
1
It is estimated that a pump operating in a residential subsurface drip irrigation system providing
approximately 40 psi of pressure head (92.2') and about 30 gpm, with an overall efficiency of about
pw+ 30%, operating approximately 10 minutes per day, will use approximately 1.16 KW of power. For a flow
of about 300 gpd, this would be about 0.193 KWH of energy per day.
Pal
forl
XII. Costs
Estimated drip irrigation system costs, installed, including controls and
alarm, (not including pretreatment unit(s)),
$15,000
Energy costs (using 0.193 KWH/day energy use),
$0.47/month
O&M, with a maintenance contract of $540/year (est. 18 hrs. @ $15/hour
* 2.0, including taxes, overhead, and profit),
$45/month
Equipment repair/replacement costs, estimated at $50/year,
i
$4.17/month
POI
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/wri/dis5.htm
4/17/05

City of Austin - Unsite liisposat Systems Fact meets rage LI or it
129
i
20-year NPW (not including design & permitting costs),
XIII. Aesthetic Considerations
$20,934.68
Subsurface pressure dosing absorption trenches are typically not visible on the site. Drip irrigation
systems may be placed around trees and landscaped areas.
XIV. State and Local Acceptance
These systems are well -accepted in Texas where site conditions are suitable for their use.
XV. References
1. "Regulation Governing Individual Onsite Wastewater Disposal Systems", Mississippi State Department
of Health, Draft regulations, 1995.
2. Small Flows newsletter, Volume 8, No. 2, Spring 1994, National Small Flows Clearinghouse, West
Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.
3. "Performance Evaluation of Drip Disposal System for Residential Treatment", Rubin, A.R., Greene, S.,
Sinclair, T., ]antrania, A. Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Individual and Small
Community Sewage Systems, December, 1994.
4. Waste Water Systems, Inc., Design Guidelines and Manual, 1992.
Information provided by
Community Environmental Services Inc.
Back to Fact. Sheet "I able of (..Intents
r ...
(_f>ilii! ' I Pr, .il .V f'.i[:!E.'1•i' .nt
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/wri/dis5.htm 4/17/05