NC0041246_Permit Modification_20020823

Michael F. Easley
Govemor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
August 23, 2002
Thomas C. Seagle III, Maintenance Director
Lincoln County Schools
P.O. Box 400
Lincolnton, North Carolina 28093-0400
Subject: Permit Modification to Extend Ammonia Compliance
Deadline, Relocate Outfall to Indian Creek and Revise
Discharge Limits Appropriate to the New Outfall
NPDES Permit NC0041246
West Lincoln High School
172 Shoal Road
Lincoln County
Dear Mr. Seagle:
The Division of Water Quality (the Division) has reviewed your request to modify your existing
permit for the subject site, including an Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) provided by
your consultant, W.K Dickson and Company, Inc. (May 17, 2001). Your application presents data
' in support of expanding flow (from 0.010 MGD to 0.014 MGD) and relocating Outfall 001 to the
main stem of Indian Creek.
North Carolina applauds your decision to discontinue discharging under "zero -flow" stream
conditions and hereby approves your request to modify the permit. Attached, please find final
permit change -pages reflecting revised limits and monitoring requirements. Based on your
intentions to move the outfall, the Division has extended the deadline for compliance to stricter
ammonia limits to July 1, 2003 to provide time for project scheduling and Division Authorization
to Construct (ATC) new facilities.
Concerning EAA Discharge Alternatives. The EAA compares alternatives and concludes that
surface discharge, represented by Options 1, 2 and 3, are the most environmentally and
economically viable. The Division concurs with Options 1 and 2, however Option 3 proposes to
add to surface discharge from the adjacent West Lincoln Middle School (WLMS). Considering
that the existing conventional septic system is operating adequately for WLMS, the Division
would prefer that this additional flow not be discharged to surface waters of the state. Therefore,
Option 3 should no longer be considered.
This action constitutes a major permit modification. Therefore, the Division adhered to federal
requirements for Public Notice (May 6, 2002), including a minimum 30-day public comment
period, by publishing a notice in newspapers having circulation in the general Lincoln County
area. The Division received no public comments on the draft permit.
ATA
NCDENR
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 919-733-7015
Customer Service
1-800-623-7748

Lincoln County Schools
West Lincoln High School WWTP
Permit Modification to Relocate Outfall 001
NPDES Permit NC041246
Page 2
Concerning Authorization to Construct. Please be advised that prior to expanding, you must
submit a request to the Division's NPDES Unit for Authorization to Construct (ATC) new
facilities, including all pertinent plans and specification (see NPDES web site, Instructions for
Submitting ATC), a minimum 90 days prior to beginning construction. Should the Division need
to request additional information, this review period will be extended.
Omission of the Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) Limit. Based on Division policy for all
expanding discharges, a TRC limit of 28 µg/L has been added to the expanded flow of 0.014
MGD. The Division apologizes for omitting this limit in the permit modification draft. Should de -
chlorination facilities be required to meet the TRC limit, please include these with your ATC
request. Note that adherence to a TRC limit and monitoring is required only if chlorine continues
as the option to disinfect.
If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable, 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, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless
such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
Please notice that this permit is not transferable except after notifying the Division of Water
Quality. The Division of Water Quality may require modification or revocation and re -issuance of
this permit. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits required by
the Division of Water Quality, the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act,
or other federal or local governments.
If you have questions, or if we can be of further service, please contact Joe Corporon at
[e-mail] or [phone], extension 597.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosure: NPDES Permit NC0041246
cc: Central Files
Mooresville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit Files
Point Source Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
W. K. Dickson and Company, Inc. , Attn: Thomas Bach, PE
616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, NC 28205

NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
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
(NPDES)
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,
Lincoln County Schools
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
West Lincoln High School
172 Shoal Road (NCSR 1002)
West of Lincolnton, NC
Lincoln County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary of Indian Creek and Indian
Creek within the Catawba 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 October 1, 2002
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2005.
Signed this day August 23, 2002
original Signed By
pavid A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, PE, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Lincoln County Schools
is hereby authorized:
1. to operate a 0.010 MGD domestic wastewater treatment facility consisting of
• one (1) 1, 500-gallon septic tank with dosing compartment (single bell)
• flow -diversion box with three distribution lines
• a surface sand filter
• chlorine tablet disinfection
located at, West Lincoln High School, 172 Shoal Road (NCSR 1002), west of Lincolnton,
Lincoln County; and
2. to discharge from said wastewater treatment works through Outfall 001 to a specified
location on an unnamed tributary of Indian Creek (see attached map), a stream
classified as C waters within the Catawba River Basin; and,
3. upon receiving Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality, to relocate
Outfall 001 to the main stem of Indian Creek, and
4. upon receiving Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality, to install
new domestic wastewater treatment works sufficient to expand flow to 0.014 MGD, and
5. to discharge from said wastewater treatment works through Outfall 001 at a specified
location on Indian Creek (see attached map), a stream classified as C waters within the
Catawba River Basin.

Outfall 001
(flows west and
south)
on High S
Lincoln County Schools
West Lincoln High School
State Grid/Ouad: F 34 NE / Cherryville, NC
Latitude: 35° 28' 42" N
Longitude: 81° 23' 48" W Permitted Flow: 0.010 MOD
Receiving Stream: Indian Creek Drainage Basin: Catawba River Basin
Stream Class: C Sub -Basin: 03-08-35
J
/y'r s
l ---
Facility
Location
not to scale
X
North
NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
Lincoln County

NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until relocation of the outfall to Indian Creek, but
lasting no later than the expiration date of this permit, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated domestic
wastewater through Outfal1001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified
below:
PARAMETERS
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample
Location 4
Flow
0.010 MGD
Weekly
Instantaneous
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20° C
_
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform 2
200 / 1001111
400 / 100 ml
2/Month
Grab
E
NH3as N (April 1-October 31)
2.0 mg/L3
2/Month
Grab
E
NH3as N (November 1— March 31)
4.0 mg/L3
2/Month
Grab
E
Temperature
Weekly
Grab
E
pH 4
Weekly
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen 5
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine 6
2/Week
Grab
E
Temperature
Weekly
Grab
U, D
Dissolved Oxygen
Weekly
Grab
U, D
Fecal Coliform
Weekly
Grab
U, D
Footnotes:
1. E = effluent; I = influent; U = upstream (50 feet above); D = downstream (300 feet below)
2. Calculate Fecal Coliform using the geometric mean (see procedure Part II. Section A ,Paragraph 9b)
3. NH3 (ammonia) Limits: Permittee shall comply with limits beginning July 1, 2003.
4. pH shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0 standard units.
5. Dissolved oxygen daily average effluent concentration shall not fall below 5.0 mg/L.
6. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) shall be monitored only if chlorine is used to disinfect.
Units:
BOD = biochemical oxygen demand
MGD = million gallons per day
m1= milliliters
mg/L = milligrams per liter
µg/L = micrograms per liter
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.

NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning upon relocation of the outfall to Indian Creek and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge treated domestic wastewater through Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETERS
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample
Location1
Flow
0.010 MGD
Weekly
Instantaneous
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20° C
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform2
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
2/Month
Grab
E
NH3 as N
Monthly
Grab
E
Temperature
Weekly
Grab
E
pH3
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
2/Week
Grab
E
Footnotes:
1. E = effluent; I = influent
2. Calculate Fecal Coliform using the geometric mean (see procedure Part IL Section A ,Paragraph 9b)
3. pH shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0 standard units.
4. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC): Permittee shall comply with TRC monitoring only if chlorine is used to
disinfect.
Units:
BOD = biochemical oxygen demand
MGD = million gallons per day;
mg/L = milligrams per liter.
µg/L = micrograms per liter.
ml = milliliters
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts

NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
A. (3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning upon relocation of the outfall to Indian Creek and start-up of treatment facilities with average design
flow greater than 0.010 MGD, and lasting until the expiration date of this permit, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge treated domestic wastewater through Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by
the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
PARAMETERS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample
Locatlont
Flow
0.014 MGD
Weekly
Instantaneous
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20° C
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
2/Month
Grab
E
NH3 as N
Monthly
Grab
E
Temperature
Weekly
Grab
E
pH3
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine's
28 µg/L
2/Week
Grab
E
Footnotes:
5. E = effluent; I = influent
6. Calculate.Fecal Coliform using the geometric mean (see procedure Part II. Section A ,Paragraph 9b)
7. pH shall not fall below 6.0 nor exceed 9.0 standard units.
8. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC): Permittee shall comply with TRC permit limit and monitoring only if
chlorine is used to disinfect.
Units:
BOD = biochemical oxygen demand
MGD = million gallons per day;
mg/L = milligrams per liter.
µg/L = micrograms per liter.
nil = milliliters
Effluent shall contain no floating solids or foam visible in other than trace amounts.

NPDES PERMIT
DRAFT / FINAL
CHECK LIST PEcAtra-
�p�,c��
FILE CONTENTS: Facility UA . (,j �CdL-l� Ar.s
Permit No. I "e--5-� 1(01 e` w y t b. b (4-
Left side:
❑ New Tracking Slip.
❑ Old Tracking Slip.
Right side:
❑ Streamline Package Sheet
❑ Draft Permit Cover Letter.
❑ Draft Permit
❑ Facility Map
❑ Fact Sheet.
❑ Permit Writer's Notes
❑ Staff Report from Region
❑ Old Permit
O Permit Application.
O Acknowledgement Letter
❑ Permittee Responses
0
NPDES Permit Writer:
ajor changes to permit)
fluent sheets, special conditions)
(E-Map: Include f ility; Outfal s; U and D sample locations)
(document permit writer's issueand re -issue logic)
(if not in Facts Sheet -- chronology, strategy, DMR Review, RPA, etc.)
(as appropriate -- not needed if streamlined)
(Text, Effluent Sheets and Special Conditions)
(New Permit or Renewal; any additional permittee correspondence)
(for Renewal Application, from NPDES Unit)
(to acknowledgement letter, if any)
Waste Load Allocation (reference date; recalculated for Curren action?)
(to region, only if strea f fined)
(add new policy text`: mmarize
(order: cover, suppl; ent, map,
4Ev\.-c- N 6 a (SPc,W-P-4-/ 4-1/tuts P M- n--
Note: Italics indicate special
conditions not always required or app icable.
D--Submitted to hi M PeV" t for Peer Review: Date
c9--17 e? Admin cutoff
II" -Peer Review completed by NW. i ALE Date '`�.
62-
Aa
Date 361PO"`V
Er-- Permit Mailed / E-Mailed to 5044144-2 1300 c (Regional Staff) by
O Regional Office Review completed by Date
❑ Additional Review by initiated by Date
❑ Additional Review completed by on: Date
E r Submitted to C6R-C S 7 ' E <2A for Public Notice on 00.- : Notice Date- r(Se
IJ Public Notice System Update ,40 0"2
Er AL to Dave Goodrich for signature on 0-aIN
BIMS Update
0 4-2 , Letter Dated
•
0A--wz<aa C ote co-c`N Cl"cvtit
❑ Additional Review \) %DO F c).:0M V-LTa (PIRTEZ - 5-2--
Additional Review

�►WK
111 DICKSON
Engineers • Pia ntiers • Surveyors
Landscape Architects
May 23, 2002
Mr. Joe Corporon, P.G.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-16I7
RE: Lincoln County Schools
West Lincoln High School WWTP Expansion
NPDES Permit Modification (Permit No. NC0041246)
WKD #10695.10.CL
Dear Mr. Corporon:
_Q d
1AkY 2 2 't?
4
L
�.Y
As highlighted in your letter dated May 8, 2002 pertaining to review comments of the NPDES
Permit Modification for the West Lincoln High School WWTF Expansion project, we request that
the effective date of monitoring ammonia limits at the existing facility be May 1, 2003 instead of
January 1, 2003. The reason for our request is due to the April 1, 2002 submittal of plans,
specifications, and the Authorization to Construct (ATC) for the new referenced facility. As you
know, your Department in the approval of the project's Engineering Alternatives Analysis
recommended the design of the new facility's surface water discharge system.
We appreciate your continued assistance on this project. If you have any questions and/or
comments pertaining to this information, please advise.
Sincerely,
W. K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
aibsi
Thomas A. Bach, PE
cc: Mr. Thomas C. Seagle, III - Lincoln County Schools
616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
704.334.5348
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com
Other Offices:
Asheville, NC
Atlanta, GA
Boca Raton, FL
L: /lines/10695/corporan052302
Columbia, SC
Hickory, NC
Raleigh, NC
Wilmington, NC

LINCOLN TIMES -NEWS
F.O. Box 40
Lincolnton, North Carolina 28093-0040
Telephone [phone]
cue'
I, Beverly S. Baker. A/R of the Lincoln Times -News, do hereby acknowledge that
the attached advertisement was published in the Lincoln Times -News on the
following dates: May 6, 2002.
This is the 17th day of May, 2002.
COPY
My Commission Expires: 5 9 ODD
i
PUBLIC NOTICE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION/NPDES UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A
NPDES WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the basis of thorough staff rcvicw and application of
NC General Statute 143.21 Public law 92-500 and other
lawful standards and regulations, the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission proposes to
issue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the person(s)
listed below effective 45 days from the publish date of this
notice.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit will be
accepted until 30 days after the publish date of this notice.
All comments received prior to that date arc considered in
thc final determinations regarding thc proposed permit.
The Director of thc NC Division of Water Quality may
decide to hold a public meeting for the proposed permit
should the Division receive a significant degree of public
interest.
' Copies of the draft permit and other supporting
information on file uscd to determine conditions prcscnt
in thc draft permit arc available upon request and payment
of the costs of reproduction. Mail comments and/or
requests for information to the NC Division of Water
Quality at the above address or call Ms. Christie Jackson
at [phone], extension 538. Please include the
NPDES permit numbcr (attached) in any communication.
Interested persons may also visit the Division of Water
Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-
1148 between thc hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to •
rcvicw information on filc.
NPDES Pcrmit Numbcr NC0041246, Lincoln County
Schools / Wcst Lincoln High School, P 0 Box 400,
Lincolnton, NC 28093 has applied fora modification for a
facility located in Lincoln County discharging treated
wastewater into an unnamed tributary of Indian Creek
and to Indian Crcck (phased permit) in the Catawba River
Basin. Currently chlorine and ammonia nitrogen (starting
January 1, 2003 unless discharge is moved) arc water
quality limited. This discharge may affect future
allocations in this portion of the receiving stream.
Ir- r.e.,.., win"

,n Carolina
Jklenburg County}
ss
The Knight Publishing Co., Inc.
Charlotte, NC
Affidavit of Publication
THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER
NCDENR/DWQ/BUDGET OFFICE
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1617
REFERENCE: 30019881
4474096 Intent to Issue
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said
County and State, duly authorized to administer
oaths affirmations, etc., personally appeared,
being duly sworn or affirmed according to law,
doth depose and say that he/she is a
representative of the Knight Publishing Company a
corporation organized and doing business under the
laws of the State of Delaware, and publishing a
newspaper known as The Charlotte Observer in the
city of Charlotte, County of Mecklenburg and State
of North Carolina and that as such he/she is
familiar with the books, records, files and
business of said Corporation and by reference to
the files of said publication
the attached advertisement was inserted. The
following is correctly copied from the books and
files of the aforesaid Corporation and
Publication.
PUBLISHED ON: 05/04
AD SPACE:
FILED ON:
80 LINE
05/07/02
NAME:
In Testimony Whereof I have hereunto
day and year aforesaid.
Notary
TITLE:
DATE:
MILK: NOTICE •
STATE OF NORTH CAROUNA
ENVIRONMENTAL mimo M> NT COMMISsopipoEts tllwf •
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27890-1817
NOTIRCAT10N OF INTENT TO ISM A NPOES WASTEWATER MART
On the basks of thorough staff review and appiicabon a NC General Sreh9e
14321. Puhic Law 92-500 and.other lawful standards end reguiaticns, the
North Ceroine Emaronmentai Mariaoement Commission to
System�
wpen*to 'sweffective
the per* date a this notice.
Written comments ents spreading the prtsoeed pent* WI be O we 30 •
days after the publish date a Ws rate. Al comments pior to
that date are considered in the final deteminatiors�the ptpoeed
perm*: The Dfreobr a the NC Dlvl.*!• ch of Water may decide to hall
a a w meeting tar the proposed R"r**ir ahouJd the recelve a etg,
ni�cert degree a puh8c interest
Copies. a the draft petu 1 and other information on fie used to
determine conditions present In tic draft are available upon request
ad payment of the costs of reprixiii.xisn. Mai comments and/or requests
to irnbmnetbn to the NC Division or Water Orakty at the above address or
cal Ms. Christie Jackson al (919) 7z3 5083, extension 538. Please include
the NPOES permit number (attad zed) III a7 eam onicatbn. taereeled
perms S may ekso Welt the Dirb:*r a Wafer Ouafly at 512 N. Seisbuv
u"tree1. Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 bo'?reen the hour o113.0) run.
p.m. to review Wormefbn on He.
WOES Penn* Norther N00041246. Lkhool n Corny Schools/West Lt O *
High School, Po box 403, Lkrdd irton, NC21093 has applied f« a modO-
• con for a facility located in Lk ccin County discharging treated waste-
water into en unnamed tributary cl Indian Creak and to Indian Creek
(phased permit) in the Catawba New Basin. WMttfNy ahba ne and ammo-
nia
rarogen starting Je nary 1, 2333 unless ks Hayed) are
water quality irrn0ed. This dischsroa may affect future Warriors in this
portion a the receiving steam
t ;r
set my hand
S. oa
and affixed my seal, the
My Commission Expires:
My Commission Expires May 27, 2006

DENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT MODIFICATION DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
INTRODUCTION
Lincoln County Schools / West Lincoln High School (herein referred to as WLHS or the Permittee)
requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to dispose treated
wastewater to the surface waters of the state. The Permittee has submitted an application to the
Division of Water Quality (the Division) to modify the existing permit. This Fact Sheet summarizes
background information and rationale used by the Division's NPDES Unit to determine revised
permit limits and conditions.
FACILITY RECORDS REVIEW
Existing Facility Description. West Lincoln High School currently serves 828 students and 77 staff
members'. The school utilizes a Class I wastewater treatment facility consisting of a septic tank with
dosing compartment (Division authorized in 1988), a sand filter, and tablet chlorine disinfection. The
permittee intends to expand and install a new facility and move the outfall. Table 1 compares existing
conditions with proposed modifications (MOD) to the permit.
Table 1. Comparison of Existing and Modified Permit Conditions
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name
Lincoln County Schools / West Lincoln High School
Applicant Address
P.O. Box 400, Lincolnton, North Carolina 28093
Facility Address
172 Shoal Road (NCSR 1002), Lincolnton, 28092
Permitted Flow(MGD)
0.010
New Flow (MGD)
0.014 (MOD)
Type of Waste
100% Domestic. Primary SIC Code 8211
(WW Code Prim. 03; Treatment Unit Code 44007)
Facility Class/Permit Status
Class I / Renewal
County
Lincoln
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream
UT of Indian Creek
Regional Office
Mooresville
New Receiving Stream (MOD)
Indian Creek
State Grid
F 13 NW
Stream Classification
C
USGS Topo Quad
Cherryville, NC
303(d) Listed?
Not listed
Permit Writer
Joe R. Corporon
Subbasin
03-08-35
Date:
•
Lat. 35° 29' 10" Long.
MOD: 35° 28' 42" Long.
22Apr02
81° 23' 42"
81° 23' 48"
Existing
MOD
Drainage Area (sq. mi.)
0.11
20.5
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
0
2.5
Winter 7Q10 (cfs)
0
7.1
30Q2 (cfs)
0
8.0
Average Flow (cfs)
0.15
26.7
IWC (%)
100
9.36
Fael Sheet
Permit MOD 25AprO2 -- NPDES Permit NCOO41246
Page 1

BACKGROUND FOR PERMIT MODIFICATION
Facility records date from 1975. This facility discharges five days per week, through Outfall 001,
almost year-round except during summer vacations and holidays when discharge is typically reported
as "No Flow." Although the permit specifies a design flow of 0.010 million gallons per day (MGD),
actual flow has averaged over the past three years about 0.004 MGD, or about 40% of permitted
capacity.
This facility currently discharges to a "zero -flow" stream (7Q10 = 0 and 30Q2 > 0), to an unnamed
tributary (UT) of Indian Creek, but proposes to move its discharge to the Indian Creek main stem.
Indian Creek is a Class C stream within the Catawba River Basin and is not "impaired" [not 303(d)
listed].
Considering discharge under "zero -flow" conditions, the Division required permit renewal (effective
April 1, 2002) to include:
1) an EAA, to be submitted within 180 days following the permit effective date;
2) ammonia (NH3 as N) limits of 2 mg/L (summer) and 4 mg/L (winter); as an
alternative to these limits, the Permittee may comply with a monthly Whole
Effluent Toxicity (WET) test (ceriodaphnia dubia at 90% effluent concentration);
3) a Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) limit of 17 µg/L;
4) DO stream conditions do not indicate impairment (see Instream Data), therefore
BOD$ limits remained unchanged.
Mooresville Regional Office suggested that the Permittee evaluate the assimilative capacity of Indian
Creek as an alternative discharge point, and estimate the cost to relocate Outfall 001. The Permittee
provided flow data acquired from J. Curtis Weaver (Hydrologist, USGS) indicating positive flows for
Indian Creek estimated at 7Q10 = 2.5 cfs (summer), 7Q10 = 7.1 cfs (winter), and 30Q2 = 8.0 cfs
located approximately 1,500 feet downstream. New discharge coordinates (provided by the NPDES
Unit using GIS Terrain Navigator software): Lat. 35° 28' 42" N, Long. 81° 23' 48" W.
MODELING RESULTS
The Division applied flow modeling, including the Level B Model, considering an expanded
discharge of 0.014 MGD and flow data for main -stem Indian Creek provided by the USGS (Letter
from J. Curtis Weaver to W.K. Dickson and Company, November 19, 2001). New data yield a
discharge instream waste concentration (IWC) is 0.83 %, and allowable ammonia concentration
(summer) of 90.9 mg/L suggesting that ammonia will not require monitoring. However, the dilution
factor for fecal coliform bacteria is 116.21 indicates that fecal limits will be required (200/100 counts
per m1). Level B Modeling indicates that "secondary Limits" protect water quality. Therefore limits
for BOD and TSS will not change at 30.0 / 45.0 mg/L (Monthly Ave./Daily Max.). Also dissolved
oxygen (DO) recovers immediately at the outfall with a minimum of 7.38 mg/L, well above the
Stream Standard of 5.0 mg/L for Class C waters. Therefore DO monitoring will likewise not be
required. Monitoring frequencies have been retained appropriate for an effluent -limited, Class I
facility.
Faet Shcct
Permit MOD 25AprO2 -- NPDES Permit NCOO41246
Page 2

Summary of Permit Changes
Modeling results and rational for the modified permit are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2.
PARAMETER
PREVIOUS
LIMITS
PERMIT
MODIFICATION
COMMENTS
Flow
0.010 MGD
0.014 MGD
Permittee justifies flow based on 905 existing
students and staff assuming 15 gpd / person.
No expansion of student body is projected.
Phased permit MOD based on flow.
BOD, 5 day, 20° C
30.0/ 45.0 mg/L
No changes
Level B Modeling indicates "secondary limits"
protect water quality.
Total Suspended
Residue
30.0 / 45.0 mg/L
No Changes
Level B Modeling indicates "secondary limits"
protect water quality.
Fecal Coliform2
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
No Changes
Modeling indicates a dilution factor of 116.21
which is <331 indicating that fecal limits are
required.
NH3 as N
(ammonia as nitrogen)
2.0 mg/1 / 4.0 mg/1
Deleted from permit
Modeling indicates allowable ammonia
concentrations of 90.9 mg/L (summer). If
>20.0 mg/L, no limit or monitoring required,
per DWQ policy. To allow for scheduling and
ATC, extended deadline for NH3 limits to
31Dec02 in footnote for A.(1.).
Temperature
No Changes
Required for all Class I WWTP
pH3
No Changes
Required for all Class I WWTP
Dissolved Oxygen
, Deleted from permit
Modeling indicates DO sag of 7.38 mg/L
occurs at the discharge point greater than the
stream standard of 5.0 mg/L. Therefore no
monitoring required.
Total Residual
Chlorine
No Changes
Modeling indicates an allowable concentration
of 1,976 µg/L. Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
has been retained considering that the facility
does not have de-chlor facilities.
INSTREAM
MONITORING
Temperature
Deleted from permit
Because no parameters are water -quality
limited, instream monitoring is no longer
required.
Dissolved Oxygen
Deleted from permit
Because no parameters are water -quality
limited, instream monitoring is no longer
required.
Fecal Coliform
Deleted from permit
Because no parameters are water -quality
limited, instream monitoring is no longer
required.
Fact Sheet
Permit MOD 25AprO2 -- NPI[ S Permit NCOO41246
Page 3

PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue:
May 8, 2002.
June 21, 2002
NPDES UNIT CONTACT
If you have questi • s egardin : • ► y of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Joe Corpdr-on . (919 33 •083 ext. 597.
NAME:
Regi • al Offic - Comments
DATE: Paale-Z
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
NPDES SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Fact Sheet
I'ertnit 40D 25AprO2 -- NPI:)ES I'ertnit NC(.X)4I246
Page 4

Level B Model -- Data Input Record
NPDES Unit -- Date: n..
J. Corporon /,.?ApiLAL
GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility Name
u1 �,rt c( Ncat,kJ t
NPDES No.
1JC 5C-) 4 < 2-44-(a
Type of Waste
'kACS-r'f C-
Facility Status
C 1*---11C,— / 1%6-<- ZSc. E-fluL Lc,-Ca1 C7ciN
Receiving Stream
j/Qp i,k-i'C 12,F-
Subbasin
0:1S — c —
County
G-6ACCLJJ
Regional Office
P-10 CS) L CL`
Topo Quad
C.(4C IL L 7.J (at= (0 C,
State Grid
I,
— (--;)i) w
FLOW INFORMATION
USGS Station Number
C .L 4:3 f- 33c:-)
6) N - ALS D -- C3 oAJC r
Date of Flow Estimate / Record
j / NOV e) (
Drainage, Sq Mi
0 , 5
s7Q10 (cfs)
.
w7Q10 (cfs)
,
Ave Flow (cfs)
�94 .a-
30Q2 (cfs)
W' . i
IWC @ Discharge
, 7 G °/n
Cummulative IWC
MODEL INPUT INFORMATION
WASTE PARAMETERS
Speculative Flow (MGD)
("0 t -1 MGD
MGD
Season
Summer
Whiter
Summer
Winter
Summer
Winter
CBOD (mg/L)
NBOD (mg/L)
'72
D.O. (mg/L)
-
SEGMENTS AND REACHES R1 R2
Reach Length (mi)
G .:
. `
Incremental Length (mi)
?
6 . 1
RUNOFF CHARCTERISTICS ( 1
R1 R2
7Q10 (cfs/mi)
QA (cfs/mi)
CBOD (mg/L)
NBOD (mg/L)
D.O. (mg/L)
TRIBUTRY CHARATERISTICS R1 R2
7010 (cfs)
-"'
-
QA (cfs)
CBOD (mg/L)
2
NBOD (mg/L)
1
D.O. (mg/L)
i .:
Slope (ft/mi)
Comments: Level B Model File Names --
J pk oe ,ariv C' f)c U :4-c Vtit ( (O`-L3 oJe„ col)- kmc
95" - R(° , , cf-Vr

State Gridiauad:
Latitude
Longitude
Receiving Stream
StreamClass
Lincoln County Schools
West Lirxooin High
F 34 NE / Chenyville. NC _
352-30' 10" N-
81 -282 42'W Permitted Fl
Ur of Indian Creek Drainage Basin:
C Sub -Basin:
ow:
l CJ
0.010 MGD
Catawba River Basin
03-08-35
I AE•:9 iAAi-1i•l A:'fI
North
NPDFS Permit No. NC0041246
Lincoln County

STOP: &Z�
CY'STInicv,
b�1 -9
W. (G '(
QL - F 0c�
60" t,,k - g0.s 5
Z of Fi-t
(4EC J chi 1)
S . (0 _ h::c
I
ki rikc biK
"1"44j-laq-
r✓
ACT - Scp-cr

MEMO From.
To.
Division of Water Quality
Subject:
ave, '7;
;Stet (CIO ,WW1i CC,
c.-mmk-o.c--
(A-SV fry
Date
;
�+ •5 - .Z
4'3.;r4
(3 SAD
3P L. _ }2C344
('L
• 6.-1/4/Lt
A7A
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
PO Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 / Phone: [phone]

MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : WEST LINCOLN HS
Receiving Stream : INDIAN CREEK
SUMMER
WLHS NEW OUTFALL
SUMMER
The End D.O. is 7.66 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 1.85 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 1.18 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.38 0.00 1
Reach 1 45.00 90.00 0.00 0.01400
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

Division of Water Quality
MEMO From• Date.
To: Subject:
l
(a Lc
1
C' r
jri-
.AtrA
NCDENR
//QL .c/2
tD
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
PO Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 / Phone: [phone]

Seg #
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Seg #
Reach #
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Reach #
Seg Mi I D.O.
0.00 7.38
0.10 7.39
0.20 7.41
0.30 7.43
0.40 7.44
0.50 7.46
0.50 7.46
0.60 7.48
0.70 7.49
0.80 7.51
0.90 7.52
1.00 7.54
1.10 7.55
1.20 7.57
1.30 7.58
1.40 7.59
1.50 7.61
1.60 7.62
1.70 7.63
1.80 7.64
1.90 7.65
2.00 7.66
Seg Mi I D.O.
CBOD
2.37
2.34
2.31
2.28
2.26
2.23
2.21
2.19
2.16
2.14
2.11
2.09
2.06
2.04
2.01
1.99
1.96
1.94
1.92
1.90
1.87
1.85
CBOD
SUMMER
WLHS NEW OUTFALL
SUMMER
NBOD I Flow I
1.77 2.52
1.73 2.52
1.70 2.52
1.67 2.52
1.64 2.52
1.60 2.52
1.57 2.69
1.54 2.69
1.51 2.69
1.48 2.69
1.45 2.69
1.43 2.69
1.40 2.69
1.38 2.69
1.35 2.69
1.32 2.69
1.30 2.69
1.28 2.69
1.25 2.69
1.23 2.69
1.21 2.69
1.18 2.69
NBOD I Flow I

Instream Waste Concentration (IWC)
West Lincoln High School — New Outfall to Indian Creek
NC0042246
Prepared By: Joe Corporon, NPDES Unit
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10(cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
0.014
2.5
7.1
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC ((Y.")
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF <331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
NPDES Servor/Current Versions/IWC
2.5
0.014
0.0217
17.0
0
0.86
1976
Ammonia (NH3 as N)
(summer)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L:
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/l)
Ammonia (NH3 as N)
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
116.21 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L:
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)
2.5
0.014
0.0217
1.0
0.22
0.86
90.9
7.1
0.014
0.0217
1.8
0.22
0.30
518.8
4/25/02

NOV-20-2001 09:23AM FROM-
T-591 P.001 F-425
FACSIMILE
616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
DATE: November 29, 2001 @ 08:11 AM
TO: MR. JOE CORPORON
AFFILIATION: NCDENR
FAX NO: [phone]
)OI3 NO.: 10058.00.CL A
RE: WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL EAA
MESSAGE: Per your request, included with
summary of low flow estimates for the proposed
the West Lincoln High School project. Mr. Curtis
(winter and summer), 30Q2, 7Q2 and average
estimated drainage area.
DWI<
DICKSON
Gngin oh3. PUnneR. SuIVCUO)
LandscupeArchitecu
704-334-5348
this fax is a copy of a cover letter and a
discharge location into Indian Creek for
Weaver of the USGS included the 7Q10
flows for Indian Creek, as well as the
Let me know if you have any questions and/or comments pertaining to this or any other
information. Thank you for your continued assistance on this project.
cc: Cooper Burton, El
FROM: Thomas A. Bach, PE / slw
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Telephone: [phone]
FAX [phone]
Number of pages including cover sheet: 3

' • NOV-29-2001 09:24AM FROM-
T-591 P.002 F-425
United States Department of the Interior
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
ism %
:►`' 2 6 2001
November 19, 2 0a1 tz,,
Mr. Themes A. Bach, PE - W.K. Dickson & Company, loe.
616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
Dear Mr. Bacb!
In response co your request for low -flow data, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) does not have site-spe-
ciflc, low -flow discharge data for Indian Creek 0.75 mile below NC 27 near Dora. NC (station id
0214342330, drainage area 20.5 m12). The low -flow characteristics that are provided on the attached sheet
have been computed by correlating the runoff characteristics from the downstream continuous -record site
Indian Creek near Laboratory (station id 02143500, drainage 69.2 mi2). Please note that the flow estimates
do not account for the presence of any diversions or regulation, present or future, which may occur upstream
of the request site.
To develop estimates of low -flow discharges at an ungaged site, low -flow yields (i.e., flows expressed in
units of cubic feet per second per square mile of drainage basin) at nearby index sites are typically averaged
to determine the yields applied to the request site. In this analysis, the presence of two other partial -record
measuring sites on Indian Creek between your request site and the continuous -record site indicate the pos-
sibility of higher low -flow characteristics. However, examination of USGS Water -Supply Paper 2341—C
"Hydrogeology and simulation of ground -water flow in the thick regolith-fractured crystalline rock aquifer
system of Indian Creek Basin, North Carolina" (Daniel and others, 1997) does not provide any information
to support the presence of pattern in the low -flow characteristics throughout the basin. Thus, given the more
limited data available at the partial -record sites, the most appropriate estimates appear to be those based on
the continuous -record site.
A charge for accessing and processing information has been assessed to partially offset these costs. Your
requested data and an invoice covering processing costs for these data are enclosed. Please forward the
original bill with your check to the U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 271, Reston,
Virginia 20192.
These data are preliminary and subject to revision pending approval for publication by the Director of the
U.S. Geological Survey. and are made available through our cooperative program of water -resources inves-
tigations with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact us at [phone].
Enclosures
Sincerely,
CL'Tw
e'Ve•-r
. Curtis Weaver
Hydrologist
(919) 571-4O00 • FAX (910) S77-4042

••NOV-29-2001 09:24AM FROII- T-691 P.003 F-426
SIMMARYSIV_LOLVILFIDSKESLILIMATES IN RESPONSE TO REOUEST
REQUEST NO: 91610 SITE NO: 01 _ . DATE: , 11/19/2001
SOURCE: Consultant ACTION:. _ New
STATION NUMBER: , 0214342330 STATION TYPE: Unga ed (estimate only)
STATION NAME: , Indian Creek 0.75 male below NC 27 near Dora, NC
LOCATION: Appro. 0.75 mile below NC Highway 27 and approximately 2.3 miles southeast of Dgrs ,
LATITUDE: 35°28'45" LONGITUDE: '23'49"
QUANDRANGLE NAME AND NUMBER: Cherryville. NC fF 13NWJ
COUNTY CODE: Lincoln F1091 STATE CODE: NC C371 DISTRICT CODE: NC 37
HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE: _ 03050102 ENR BASIN CODE: 03-0R-3$
DRAINAGE AREA! 20.5 mil
Flow statistics as follows:
AVERAGE FLOW: Estimated using 1.3 R3y 2 26.7 ft3/4 see note
ANNUAL 7Q10 MINIMUM PLOW: 0.1228 ft3isime 2.5 ft is see note U
ANNUAL, 30Q2 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.3916 ft3/sfm12 8.0 f 3ls see note �B._..J
WINTER 7Q10 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.3439 j' 3/s/mi 2 7.1 it3/s see note E B 1
ANNUAL 7Q2 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.3179 ft3Ishni2 6.5 As see note r B 1
NOTES:
[A] Estimate is based on records collected at or near the request site.
[B] Estimate is based entirely on runoff characteristics observed at nearby streams.
[Ca Estimate based on procedures given In USGS Water Supply Paper 2403 "Lowpflow Characteristics
of Streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Meson,1993).
ED] Estimate based on procedures given in USGS Water Supply paper 2403 and in conjunction with
streamflow records collected at or near the request site.
[El See remarks.
These data are considered provisional and subject to revision pending approval by the Director, USGS.
REMARKS:
• Low -flow estimates based on yiolds at downstream continuou-r cord site Star. 02143500 (drainage area 69.2
Xni), based on records in 1952-97 climatic years.
• requested by Mr. Tom Bach, W.K. Dickson & Company, Inc.
ENTERED BY: .TCW FEE CHARGED: $ 150

January 28, 2002
Mr. Joe Corporon, P.G.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
RE: Lincoln County Schools
West Lincoln High School WWTP Expansion
Intention to Initiate Alternative Two
WKD #10695.10.CL
Dear Mr. Corporon:
Regarding your review and comments of the Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA)
for the referenced project, (NPDES Permit Number NC0041 246), our consultant, W.
K. Dickson & Co., Inc., has recommended that we initiate EAA Alternative Two. We
concur with that recommendation and request to modify our existing NPDES permit
for the new discharge location along Indian Creek.
Enclosed are one (1) original and two (2) copies of the completed NPDES Permit
Application - Short Form D, three (3) copies of the USGS topographic map
(Cherryville Quadrangle Dated 1973) illustrating the new discharge location, and a
check in the amount of $215.00 for the NPDES permit fee. If you have any
questions and/or comments pertaining to this information, please advise.
Sincerely,
Lincoln County Schools
Thomas C. Seagle III, Maintenance Director
cc: Thomas A. Bach, PE, W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Enclosure
L: /projects/lincs/ 1069510c1/documents/Corporon0I 0702

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM D
To be filed only by dischargers of 100% domestic wastewater (<1 MGD flow)
Facility Name
Owner Name
Street Address
City
State
ZIP Code
Telephone Number
Fax Number
e-mail Address
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
North Carolina NPDES Permit Number
(if known)
NCOO 41246
Please print or type
1. Mailing address of applicant/permittee:
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL (WLHS)
LINCOLN COUNTY SCHOOLS
353 N GENERALS BLVD
LIINO3LNTON
NC
28093
,,n
J
( 704 ) 732.2261
( 704 ) 736.4321
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Name (If different from above)
Facility Contact Person
Street Address or State Road
City / Zip Code
County
Telephone Number
3. Reason for application:
Expansion/Modification *
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL (WLHS)
THCMAS C SEAGLE III, MAINTENANCE DIRECTOR
172 SHOAL RD
LINCOLNTON NC 28092
NC
( 704 ) 276.1402
Existing Unpermitted Discharge
Renewal New Facility
* Please provide a description of the expansion/modification:
WLHS HAS A CURRENT STUDENT POPULATION OF 780. THE SCHOOL WILL BE EXPANDED TO A MAXIMUM POPULATION
OF 900. THE NEW TOTAL FLOW FOR THE EXPANSION WILL BE 0.014 MGD BASED ON 15 GPD/STUDENT. FOR
PROPOSED DESIGN OF 22TP FACILITIES, SEE APPROVED EAA DATED DEC 11. 2001.
4. Description of the existing treatment facilities (list all installed components with
capacities):
THE EXISTING WASTEWAIEH TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR WLHS CONSISTS OF A 10,000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK WITH AN
ADJOINING 10,000 GALLON DOSING COMPARTMENT, A FLOW DIVERSION BOX, A 60' X 30' SURFADF SAND FTITFR
WITH TABLET CHLORINATION, AND A 6" RECEIVING OUTFALL LINE FLOWING INTO AN UNNAMED TRIBUTARY.
Page 1 of 2 Version 11/2000

NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM D
To be filed only by dischargers of 100% domestic wastewater (<1 MGD flow)
5. Description of wastewater (check all that apply):
Type of Facility Generating Wastewater
Industrial Number of Employees
Commercial Number of Employees
Residential Number of Homes
School X Number of Students/Staff
Other
900
Describe the source(s) of wastewater (example: subdivision, mobile home park, etc.):
HIGH SCHOOL
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipes (wastewater outfalls):
7. If the facility has multiple discharge outfalls, record the source(s) of wastewater for each
outfall:
N/A
8. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall):
INDIAN CREEK (SEE APPROVED EAA DATED DEC 11 2001 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION)
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the
best of my knowledge. and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
THOMAS C SEAGLE 111
Printed Name of Person: Signing
MAINTENANCE DIRECTOR
Title
01/28/02
Sig tune of Applic Q4ig Date Signed
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.66 (i) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any false statement representation, or
certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document files or required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any
recording or monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental
Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by
imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $10,000 or
imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both for a similar offense.)
Page 2 of 2 Version 11/2000

FEB-06-2002 05:49PM FROM-
.
T-191 P.001 F-741
FACSIMILE
616 Colonnade Drive
pik
_ K
DICKSONlir
lit. inn'" . PW pf UrS-Slrrvoi r)
Lm unelArad rnrc
Charlotte, North Carolina 28205 7C>]4-334-53t8
DATE: February 6, 2002 @ 03:37 PM
TO: JOE CORPORON
AFFILIATION: NCDENR
FAX NO: (919) 733 - 0719
JOB NO.: 10695.10.CL
RE; PROPOSED DISCHARGE LO
MESSAGE:
Joe,
T1ON
Included is a copy of the USGS Topographic map showing the,
location. Please call if you have any further questions.
Thanks,
Cooper
FROM: Cooper J Burton El
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc_
Telephone: [phone]
FAX [phone]
Number of pages including cover sheet: 2
p
posed discharge

FEB-06-2002 05:49PM FROM-
.
0,ZSCNAR(iC.QQPINPXEZ
LAr 35'2'?` 445-397
LoNG, 2 1° ?3. LI! 5-
47
'
464
T-191 P.002 F-741
J,_/ \ 1-1 1 I LA
1/4-,n1.,n,n1 v
NORTH AROLIN A
7.5 MINUTE SERI S (TOPOGRAPHIC)
NW/4 LINCOL.NT N 15' QUADRANGLE
465 90 000 F T 8 1 ° 2230"
35° 30'
3928
3927
640 000
EET
0
0
0
3926
3925

JS11-11-2002 14:34 FROM-Y K DICKSON
704 334 0078
T-013 P.001 F-037
FACSIMILE
pok WK
LIP DICKSON!
Engine -en . Planners. Serreyin
Landscape Arthifects
616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
704-334-5348
DATE: January 11, 2002 (a 01:59 PM
TO: JOE CORPORON
AFFILIATION: NCDENR
FAX NO: [phone]
JOB NO.: 10695.10.CL
RE: NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION — SHORT FORM D
MESSAGE: Per your phone conversation with Tom Bach, included
copy of the NPDES Permit Application — Short Form D for your review.
Let me know if you have any questions and/or comments pertaining to
information. Thank you for your continued assistance.
FROM: Cooper f Burton El
W.K. Dickson & Co., inc.
Telephone: [phone]
FAX [phone]
Number of pages including cover sheet: 3
with this fax is a
this or any other

!JAN-11-2002 14:35
FROM-W K DICKSON
704 334 0078
T-013 P.002 F-037
lily Contact Person
Street Address or State Road
City / Zip Code
County
Telephone Number
North Carolina NPDES Permit Number NC00 41246
(if known)
Please print or type
1. g address of appUccnt/permittee:
Facility Name
Owner Name
Street Address
City
State
ZIP Code
Telephone Number
Fax Number
e-mail Address
West Lincoln High School (WLHS)
Lincoln County Schools
th — —
353 NorGenerals Blvd
L o] 0
North Carolina
28092
( 70j4 73Z-226 —
( 704 ) 736-4321
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM D
To be filed only by discharges of 100% domestic wa itewater f c 1 MGD now
)
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDF,S Unit
16i i1 17 M Service Center,
L
LJ
2. location of facility producing discharge;
Name (If different from above) West Lincoln High School (WLHS)
F _ )
Thomas C. Beagle, III, Maintenance Director
172 Shoal Road
Lincoln#an, NC 28092
Linco —
( 704 76-1402
AMW
3. Reason for application:
Expansion/Modification * X
Renewal Existing Unpe 'tied Discharge
* Please provide a description of the a Nfi ew FAoility
pansion/modification: ��-
WILHS has a current student population of 780. The school will beexpanded
_to a maximL
population of 9U0. The n w total few for �e m
etltdcnt. For expansion will be 0.014 MGD based Ino S GPD/
Proposed design, of WWTF facilities, see approved
_
pAraved EAA dated Decerrlber 11, 20OI -
4, Description of the
capacities): existing treatment facilities gist all installed components with
The existing wastewater
treatment system, for WLHS consists of a I o00 with an. adjoining 10,000 — Q� gallon septic tankllon dosin
sand filter with, tablet �oruiation g Compartment, a flow diversion box, a 60' x 30' surface
tributary.
and a 6' recenring outfOM MAI,
all Iine flowing into an unnamed
Pagel of 2
Version 6/99

•JAN-11-2002 14:35 FROM-tl K DICKSON
704 334 0078
T-013 P.003 F-037
Other
5• Description of wastewater (check all that apply):
e of paciiitt, Geneastewa ter
Industrial
Number of Employees
Commercial Number of Employees
Residential
Spool Number of Homes
~x
Number of Students/Staff
IYPDES PERMIT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM D
To be filed only by dischargers of 1Q0% domestic wastewater (<1 MGD flow
)
Describe the source(a} of wastewater (example: subdivision, mobile home
High, School
park,etc,):
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipes (wastewater outfslls):
One
900
7. If the facility hues multiple discharge outruns, record the source(s) of Wastewater for each
N/A
S. Name of receiving sfreaia(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each oulfalf);
Indian Creels (See approved EAA dated December 11, 2001 for additional information
)
certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application
best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate. and that to the
Printed Name of Person Signing
Title
Signature of Applicant
Date Signed
North Carolina General Statute 143-216, .
Noricon in an aO(bl(2) provides that Any person who [glowingly makes any false statement representation, or
Y application, record, report. plan, or other document fi or required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
EnvUUvnmental Management Commission implementing that Article, orwho falsifies, tam
perc recording or monftoring device or method regsired to be operated Or maintained under Article with,
n�ulatians of the inY
Management Commission implementing that Article, shall be guilty of a misoemeanor punishable by aftne not to
imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section too exceed than
or by
imprisonment not more than 5 ycare, or both far a similar offense.) modes a punishment by a fine o1 not more than $9t),Ot10 or
Page 2of2
Mon &99

To: Jw(
From: GCA16v
Re:
CC:
Fax:
Date:
Pages:
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]
FAX [phone]
r--A) r g- —0 c)-?-e
( 4,r( el
!ti
0 Urgent
0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle

QG Michael F. Easley
7Govemor
1 William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
.S" North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorp, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
December 11, 2001
Thomas C. Seagle III, Maintenance Director
Lincoln County Schools
P.O. Box 400 .
Lincolnton, North Carolina 28093-0400
Subject: Review of Engineering Alternatives Analysis
NPDES Permit No. NC0041246
West Lincoln High School
172 Shoal Road
Lincoln County
Dear Mr. Seagle:
The Division of Water Quality (the Division) has reviewed your Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) for the subject site, received May 17, 2001. Your consultant, W. K. Dickson and
Company, submitted this EAA in response to the Division's request that you explore alternatives to
discharging treated wastewater under "zero -flow" stream conditions.
Proposed EAA Alternatives 1, 2 and 3 appear similar in that they propose to extend the discharge
piping 1,500 to 2,000 feet downstream to the main stem of Indian Creek. These appear to be economically
and environmentally viable solutions with Alternative 3 providing longer -range planing considering
possible failure of the Middle School septic system. Supporting data included in the EAA, and additional
data provided by the USGS through W.K. Dickson (November 29, 2001) suggest that the main -stem of
Indian Creek is significantly better for discharge in that it has consistently year-round stream flow.
Therefore, the Division concurs that extending the outfall will resolve the problem of discharging under
"zero flow" conditions.
If you intend to initiate one of these alternatives, please specify, and submit Short Form D
(attached) as part of your request to modify your NPDES permit (fee: $215). Please also specify the
proposed new discharge location. The Division must re-establish effluent limits at this new point.
Before constructing new facilities, you must subsequently apply for an Authorization to Construct (ATC),
but you may do so only after you have received a modified permit for the new discharge location.
If you have questions concerning sand -filter systems, contact the Department of Public
Instruction, Plant Operations Section, Bobby W. DeWeese [phone]. You may also contact me at
[phone], extension 597, or e-mail me at [[e-mail]].
Sincerely,
Joe Corporon, P.G.
Enclosure: NPDES Fee Schedule; Short Form D
cc: Central Files
Mooresville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit Files
Point Source Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
W.K. Dickson and Company, Attention: Tom Bach, 616 Colonnade Dr., Charlotte, NC 28205 A
NCDENR
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 919-733-7015 Customer Service
1-800-623-7748

DIVISION OF WATERQUALITY
November 29, 2001
Memo To: Dave Goodrich
From:
Prepared By:
Subject:
Rex Gleason
Samar Bou-Ghazale 6E567
Engineering Alternative Analysis
Lincoln County School System
West Lincoln High School
Lincoln County
The MRO concurs with the Consultant's (W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.) recommendation,
i.e. option 2 of the submitted Engineering Alternatives Analysis. It is our understanding
that the school system also concurs with this recommendation.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please advise.
;

ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS (EAA)
FOR
LINCOLN COUNTY
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL
APRIL, 2001
WKD #10058.00.CL
Prepared for
Lincoln County School System
Post Office Box 400
Lincolnton, NC 28093-400
,.,',�,� CAROL"?
, 41 O��sSfOV•• %;;
• / Q
r -
243eivG
ote
6'1%44 „el into
4'1 IC
Report Prepared by
W. K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
704/334-5348
RSCEtVED
WASFP nt.IN.1TY SECTION
2331
Mpg{ 1 7
Non -Discharge Perm0ng

I. SUMMARY
pm A. Introduction:
ragl
izel
POI
Mal
PM
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA)
The purpose of this EAA is to determine which effluent disposal alternative is the best
option for West Lincoln High School (WLHS) from both an economic and environmental
standpoint. This EAA also includes a Present -Value -of -Costs Analysis and a Soils Analysis
Report.
B. Summary of Findings:
Lincoln County Schools operate a wastewater treatment system at WLHS consisting of a
septic tank with dosing compartment, a flow diversion box, a surface sand filter with tablet
chlorination, and a 6-inch receiving trunk line flowing into an unnamed tributary deemed
as a zero flow stream. The existing wastewater treatment components will need to be
upgraded to handle the additional flow from the planned expansion at WLHS. A surface
water discharge method is recommended as the most viable option from both an economic
and environmental standpoint. It is recommended the existing surface water discharge
into the unnamed tributary be moved to Indian Creek since it has a Class C stream.
A detailed Soils Analysis Report was done to characterize the existing soils and to develop
soil loading rates/land area requirements for both the surface and subsurface systems. A
Present -Value -of -Costs Analysis was then done for each applicable effluent disposal
alternative. Options 1 and Option 2, at a projected flow of 0.014 MGD, are the
recommended systems to be utilized for the projected wastewater flows at WLHS. Both
the surface water discharge systems can be the best from an environmental standpoint if
the chlorination compartment structure effluent is closely monitored and if proper
maintenance is done on all system components.
The estimated Present -Value -of -Costs amounts for the recommended surface water
discharge systems at WLHS are as follows:
Option 1 - Surface Water Discharge System
Option 2 - Surface Water Discharge System
An in depth discussion of the summary of findings follows.
$599,700
$654,900

II. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Basic Identification of the Project:
1. Facility Name — West Lincoln High School
2. County — Lincoln
3. Facility Address — West Lincoln High School
172 Shoal Road
Lincolnton, North Carolina 28092
4. Facility Telephone No. — [phone]
5. EAA Preparer's Name — WK Dickson & Company, Inc.
6. EAA Preparer's Mailing Address/Telephone No. — 616 Colonnade Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina 28205
[phone]
B. Project Description:
The existing wastewater treatment system for WLHS consists of a septic tank with dosing
compartment, a flow diversion box, a surface sand filter with tablet chlorination, and a 6-
inch receiving trunk line flowing into an unnamed tributary deemed as a zero flow stream.
The unnamed tributary flows into Indian Creek, which has a Class C water classification in
the Catawba River Basin. Under the NPDES Permit Number NC0041246, the existing
wastewater treatment system permitted flow is 0.010 million gallons per day (MGD).
WLHS has a current student population of 780. Lincoln County School representatives
indicate that the school is to be expanded to a maximum student population of 900, which
includes building additional classrooms and restroom facilities. As far as possibly
combining the WLHS wastewater treatment system with the existing system at West Lincoln
Middle School (WLMS), the current student population at WLMS is 760 and no future
school expansions are planned at this time.
The new total flow for the WLHS expansion would be 0.014 MGD based on a 15 gallon
per day per student usage. The new wastewater flow, combining both WLHS and WLMS,
would be 0.025 MGD based on a 15 gallon per day per student usage. Flow restricting
devices could be installed on plumbing fixtures used in the future expansion of WLHS.
C. Existing Wastewater Facilities:
The existing wastewater treatment system for WLHS consists of a 10,000 gallon septic tank
1° with an adjoining 10,000 gallon dosing compartment, a flow diversion box, a 60 foot by 30
foot surface sand filter with tablet chlorination, and a 6-inch receiving outfall line flowing
into an unnamed tributary. The present and past performances of each treatment unit
MR within the WLHS wastewater system have been satisfactory. No inadequacies of either the
septic tank or surface sand filter have ever been noticed by Lincoln County Schools
Maintenance personnel.
FM
Solids that accumulated in the existing septic tank have been removed every 6 to 12
months. Existing sand surface laterals were replaced with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe

WI
W.
MCI
FICI
MCI
SIM
foil
IR
MI
Mil
this past year to improve the overall performance of the sand filter. Lincoln County Schools
Maintenance personnel have corrected all component deficiencies noted by the North
Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR) representatives at
the annual inspections. Both the septic tank and sand filter will continually need periodic
maintenance.
The size of both the septic tank and surface sand filter will have to be increased to
accommodate the projected wastewater flow generated after the proposed expansion of
WLHS. Septic tank design shall follow guidelines highlighted in the North Carolina
Administrative Code T15A:18A.1900, Section .1952. Since the projected wastewater flow
will be greater than 4,500 gallons per day, the septic tank shall be designed in accordance
with the following equation: V = Q; where V is the liquid capacity of the septic tank and
Q is the design daily wastewater flow. Surface sand filter design shall follow guidelines
established by the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources —
On -Site Wastewater Section (NCDENR-OSWS). In addition, sizing of the surface sand
filter shall follow the NCDENR—OSWS Design Protocol worksheet, including the
calculation of the daily wastewater flow rate and the selection of the type of sand filter, the
maximum filter loading rate, and the number of filters required. The schematic of the
existing wastewater treatment system, including the corresponding component sizes, is
shown in Appendix C.
D. Phased Construction:
The project will not be constructed in phases due to the proposed wastewater treatment
system having to meet the projected wastewater flows calculated for the expansion of
WLHS. In addition, the NPDES Permit for WLHS shall be revised at a later date in order to
highlight the projected wastewater flows (average daily and peak), the new wastewater
treatment system components (including size), and the revised effluent limitations and
monitoring requirements.
,-., III. EVALUATE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
PM
PM
A. Connecting to a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW):
There is neither a POTW nor corresponding wastewater collection lines within five (5)
miles of WLHS. This is not a viable alternative from an economic standpoint. In addition,
representatives with the City of Lincolnton and Lincoln County have stated that there are no
area -wide sewerage systems planned, within a five (5) mile radius of WLHS, for the next
five (5) years.
B. Connecting to a Privately Owned Treatment Works:
There is neither a privately owned treatment works nor corresponding wastewater
pcollection lines within five (5) miles of WLHS. This is not a viable alternative from an
economic standpoint.

s
gal
Foci
Foci
C. Surface Water Discharge Through the NPDES Program:
WLHS currently has an existing 6-inch receiving trunk line flowing into an unnamed
tributary deemed as a zero flow stream. The unnamed tributary flows into Indian Creek,
which has a Class C water classification in the Catawba River Basin. The U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) was contacted to obtain receiving stream flow information for Indian Creek.
The total drainage area, documented by the USGS, measured approximately 19 square
miles, with an average flow in Indian Creek of approximately 28 cubic feet per second (cfs)
at the discharge point. The corresponding 7Q10 and 30Q2 flows are approximately 2.4 cfs
and 7.6 cfs, respectively. The gauging station number is 02143500 and is named "Indian
Creek Near Laboratory".
Three surface water discharge system options were evaluated as follows:
1. Surface Water Discharge System (0.014 MGD) Revision — Option 1
2. Surface Water Discharge System (0.014 MGD) — Option 2
3. Surface Water Discharge System (0.025 MGD) — Option 3
Option 1: Install an 8-inch trunk line from the end of the unnamed tributary discharge to
the proposed discharge at Indian Creek. The distance between the existing discharge
header at the unnamed tributary and Indian Creek is approximately 1,500 feet. If the
wastewater treatment system for WLHS is to remain separate from WLMS, then the
existing 6-inch trunk line from the school site to the existing discharge header has capacity
for the projected flow of 0.014 MGD and can remain in service.
Option 2: Install an 8-inch trunk line along the existing unnamed tributary within the
boundary of the recently purchased 43-acre tract of land. A proposed pumping station
and 3-inch force main approximately 1,500 feet in length from the existing septic tank to a
proposed recirculating sand filter (3,600 square feet), with a corresponding recirculating
sand filter dosing tank (14,000 gallons), could be installed on the recently purchased 43-
acre tract.
The abandonment of the existing surface sand filter is recommended in both options
above due to the present odor problems at the football field during periods of high
demand. By using a recirculating sand filter, the odors would be minimized since the
recirculated effluent coming from the sand filter would dilute the wastewater inside the
proposed recirculating sand filter dosing tank. As referenced in Part C of this section and
according to Section .1952 (b) of the North Carolina Administrative Code T15A:18A.1900,
the existing septic tank (approximately 10,000 gallons) would have be increased to a
14,000 gallon size to meet the projected flow. This option would also include a proposed
chlorination compartment structure with tablet chlorination to insure necessary secondary
treatment and an 8-inch trunk line (approximately 3,000 feet in length) from a proposed
secondary treatment structure to a proposed discharge at Indian Creek.
Option 3: Under this option the wastewater treatment systems for WLHS and WLMS
would be combined as a single surface water discharge with a projected flow of 0.025
MGD. It is recommended that WLHS use the same design as Option 2 above. A
proposed 8-inch trunk line approximately 1,500 feet from WLMS to the a proposed

recirculating sand filter (7,200 square feet), with a corresponding recirculating sand filter
dosing tank (25,000 gallon), would be required.
Appendix A includes Present -Value -of -Costs Analysis for the above referenced options. In
addition, see Appendix C includes a schematic drawing and site plan of the major
treatment components.
D. Feasibility of Individual Subsurface Systems:
WLMS has an existing subsurface system that is designed to handle the current wastewater
flow from the school. If WLHS and WLMS wastewater treatment systems were combined
into one subsurface system, additional land would be required. Lincoln County Schools
has recently purchased a 43-acre parcel directly below the WLHS and WLMS parcels to
facilitate a possible subsurface type system. Calculations used to determine the proposed
land disposal capacity of each subsurface system are included in Appendix D.
A new pumping station and approximately 1,500 feet of 3-inch force main would be
required, from the existing septic tank to the proposed subsurface system on the 43-acre
parcel, if the WLHS wastewater treatment system was to switch from the surface water
discharge type to the subsurface type. The existing septic tank (approximately 10,000
gallons) would also be increased to a 14,000 gallon size to meet the projected flow
according to Section .1952 (b) of the North Carolina Administrative Code T15A:18A.1900.
All of the proposed subsurface systems, including conventional, low pressure pipe (LPP),
and drip irrigation systems, would require a recirculating sand filter dosing tank with a
corresponding recirculating sand filter structure to comply with NCDENR—OSWS
requirements. The recommended size of the proposed recirculating sand filter structure
and recirculating sand filter dosing tank, for the projected flow of 0.014 MGD for WLHS,
would be approximately 4,100 square feet and 14,000 gallons respectively. The
recirculating sand filter structure and recirculating sand filter dosing tank recommended
sizes would be approximately 7,200 square feet and 25,000 gallon, respectively, if the
projected flows for both WLHS and WLMS (projected wastewater flow of 0.025 MGD)
were combined into one wastewater treatment system. It should be noted that the
abandonment of the existing surface sand filter is recommended in either option referenced
above.
Section .1945 (b) of the North Carolina Administrative Code T15A:18A.1900 requires sites
to have sufficient available space for a repair area separate from the area used for the
proposed ground absorption sewage treatment and disposal system (subsurface). This
repair area shall be of equal size to the area designated for the subsurface system.
The following subsurface system option were evaluated:
1. Subsurface Conventional System (0.014 MGD) — Option 4
2. Subsurface Conventional System (0.025 MGD) — Option 5
3. Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System (0.014 MGD) — Option 6
4. Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System (0.025 MGD) — Option 7
The proposed size of the conventional system and LPP system for the projected flow of
0.014 MGD from WLHS fields is approximately 175,000 square feet (4.1 acres) and
5

,.
168,000 square feet (3.9 acres), respectively. For the projected flow of 0.025 MGD from
both WLHS and WLMS, the proposed sizes of the conventional system and LPP system
fields would be approximately 325,000 square feet (7.6 acres) and 303,000 square feet
(7.1 acres), respectively. Sizing of system fields for each type of subsurface system
referenced is based on the Long Term Application Rate (LTAR) recommended by the local
Soil Scientist. The recommended LTAR for each subsurface system is shown in the Soil
Analysis Report Requirements (Appendix B). See Appendix A for the Present -Value -of -
Costs Analysis of the above referenced options.
M+ E. Feasibility of Community Subsurface Systems:
This alternative is not applicable since there are no known community subsurface systems
,iii, within the area of WLHS.
F. Drip Irrigating (Surface & Subsurface):
12,9
The sizing of proposed structures for the wastewater treatment system for the recirculating
sand filters, dosing tanks, and piping would be the same for both the surface and subsurface
drip irrigation systems. The repair area shall be of equal size to the area designated for the
`.? subsurface system. A repair area is not required for the surface drip irrigation system, but
the application area calculated for the subsurface drip irrigation system is doubled. The
surface drip irrigation system shall be capable of treating wastewater to secondary limits
W' including disinfection.
WI
Evl
PR,
fowl
The drip irrigation system options evaluated are as follows:
1. Subsurface Drip Irrigation System (0.014 MGD) — Option 8
2. Subsurface Drip Irrigation System (0.025 MGD) — Option 9
3. Surface Drip Irrigation System (0.014 MGD) — Option 10
4. Surface Drip Irrigation System (0.025 MGD) — Option 11
The proposed size of the drip irrigation system fields for surface and subsurface
applications for the projected flow of 0.014 MGD from WLHS is approximately 350,000
square feet (8.2 acres) and 175,000 square feet (4.1 acres), respectively. For the projected
flow of 0.025 MGD to combine flows for both WLHS and WLMS, the proposed sizes of
the drip irrigation system fields for surface and subsurface applications would be
approximately 626,000 square feet (14.6 acres) and 313,000 square feet (7.6 acres),
respectively. Sizing of drip irrigation system fields for surface and subsurface applications
referenced are based on the Long Term Application Rate (LTAR) recommended by the
local Soil Scientist. The recommended LTAR for the drip irrigation surface and subsurface
systems is shown in the Soil Analysis Report Requirements (Appendix B). See Appendix A
for the Present -Value -of -Costs Analysis of the above referenced options.
G. Spray Irrigating:
the sizing of the wastewater treatment system proposed structures for the recirculating sand
filters, dosing tanks, and piping is the same for the spray irrigation system. A repair area is
not required for the spray irrigation system but the application area calculated is doubled.
The spray irrigation system shall be capable of treating wastewater to secondary limits
including disinfection.

MR
RR
WI
rigl
RR
FM
MI
Surface spray irrigation system options evaluated are as follows:
1. Surface Spray Irrigation System (0.014 MGD) — Option 12
2. Surface Spray Irrigation System (0.025 MGD) — Option 13
The proposed size of the spray irrigation system field for the projected flow of 0.014 MGD
from WLHS would be approximately 350,000 square feet (8.2 acres). For the projected
flow of 0.025 MGD from both WLHS and WLMS, the proposed size of the spray irrigation
system field would be approximately 626,000 square feet (14.6 acres). Sizing of spray
irrigation system fields referenced is based on the Long Term Application Rate (LTAR)
recommended by the local Soil Scientist. The recommended LTAR for the spray irrigation
system is shown in the Soil Analysis Report Requirements (Appendix B). See Appendix A
for the Present -Value -of -Costs Analysis of the above referenced options.
H. Reuse:
There are no publicly or privately owned treatment works with tertiary treatment and/or
corresponding wastewater collection lines within five 5 miles of WLHS that could transmit
the reuse water. This is not considered a viable alternative from an economic standpoint.
I. Possible Combinations of the Above Options:
Combinations of subsurface and/or surface systems could be utilized as documented in the
Soil Analysis Report Requirements shown in Appendix B. This particular option would not
be recommended since the operation and maintenance procedures for each subsurface
and/or surface system's vary. In addition, it would be unnecessary to combine subsurface
and/or surface systems with a surface water discharge system from both a practical and
economical standpoint.
1.0 IV. RECOMMENDATION OF SYSTEM OPTIONS
Surface water discharge systems, Options 1 and Option 2, at a projected flow of 0.014
MGD for the WLHS, are the recommended systems to be utilized in the future. The total
pin
present value of each system option, as shown in Appendix A, show them to be the best
selection from an economic standpoint. Both surface water discharge options can be the
best from an environmental standpoint if the chlorination compartment structure effluent is
' closely monitored and if proper maintenance is done on all system components. A site
plan showing the major components of each referenced surface water discharge system is
shown in Appendix C.

1 11 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 D 1
r
TOTAL PRESENT VALUE
Interest Rate: 8.00% Discrete Compounding
Number of Years: 20
Option No.
Description
Est. Capital Costs
Present Value
Est. Recurring Costs
Present Value
Total Present Value
1
Surface Water Discharge System - 14,000 GPD
$ 481,900.00
$ 481,900.00
$ 12,000.00
$ 117,817.20
$ 599,700.00
2
Surface Water Discharge System - 14,000 GPD
$ 537,100.00
$ 537,100.00
$ 12,000.00
$ 117,817.20
$ 654,900.00
3
Surface Water Discharge System - 25,000 GPD
$ 856,800.00
$ 856,800.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,092,400.00
4
Subsurface Conventional System - 14,000 GPD
$ 644,000.00
$ 644,000.00
$ 19,200.00
$ 188,507.52
$ 832,500.00
5
Subsurface Conventional System - 25,000 GPD
$ 1,178,800.00
$ 1,178,800.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,414,400.00
6
Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System -14,000 GPD
$ 739,500.00
$ 739,500.00
$ 19,200.00
$ 188,507.52
$ 928,000.00
7
Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System - 25,000 GPD
$ 1,346,700.00
$ 1,346,700.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,582,300.00
8
Subsurface Drip Irrigation System - 14,000 GPD
$ 925,800.00
$ 925,800.00
$ 19,200.00
$ 188,507.52
$ 1,114,300.00
9
Subsurface Drip Irrigation System - 25,000 GPD
$ 1,674,400.00
$ 1,674,400.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,910,000.00
10
Surface Drip Irrigation System - 14,000 GPD
$ 863,700.00
$ 863,700.00
$ 19,200.00
$ 188,507.52
$ 1,052,200.00
11
Surface Drip Irrigation System - 25,000 GPD
$ 1,550,200.00
$ 1,550,200.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,785,800.00
12
Surface Spray Irrigation System - 14,000 GPD
$ 863,700.00
$ 863,700.00
$ 19,200.00
$ 188,507.52
$ 1,052,200.00
13
Surface Spray Irrigation System - 25,000 GPD
$ 1,550,200.00
$ 1,550,200.00
$ 24,000.00
$ 235,634.40
$ 1,785,800.00

Poi
rat
ra
SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE SYSTEM - OPTION 1
14,000 GPD - REVISION TO EXISTING SYSTEM
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price ,
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00 '
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
400
$ 4,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Trunk (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,600
$ 112,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 30,000.00
1
$ 30,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 7,000.00
1
$ 7,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 419,000.00
12
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 62,900.00
1
$ 62,900.00
Total
$ 481,900.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 12,000.00

ry
PI
SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE SYSTEM - OPTION 2
14,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Chlorination Structure
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
9
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Trunk (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
2,000
$ 140,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 33,500.00
1
$ 33,500.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 7,000.00
1
$ 7,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 11,500.00
1
$ 11,500.00
Subtotal
$ 467,000.00
13
Contingency (15°/°)
LS
$ 70,100.00
1
$ 70,100.00
Total
$ 53 7,100.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 12,000.00

SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE SYSTEM - OPTION 3
0 25,000 GPD
1.1
Pal
Ingt
Imml
nit
PM
WI
rag
r=1
MI
caq
mil
1l
MIR
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Chlorination Structure
LS
$ 7,000.00
1
$ 7,000.00
7
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
9
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Trunk (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
3,500
$ 245,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 45,000.00
1
$ 45,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 15,000.00
1
$ 15,000.00
Subtotal
$ 745,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 111,800.00
1
$ 111,800.00
Total
$ 856,800.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
$ 24,000.00

•
sag
061
r
r
r=1
raEl
SUBSURFACE CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM - OPTION 4
14,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Subsurface Conventional System
LS
$ 225,000.00
1
$ 225,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 36,000.00
1
$ 36,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 12,000.00
1
$ 12,000.00
12
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
Subtotal
$ 560,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 84,000.00
1
$ 84,000.00
Total
$ 644,000.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 19,200.00

fug
PIA
rya
Farl
PEI
PER
Farl
SUBSURFACE CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM - OPTION 5
25,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Main (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,500
$ 105,000.00
9
Subsurface Conventional System
LS
$ 400,000.00
1
$ 400,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 19,000.00
1
$ 19,000.00
13
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 1,025,000.00
14
Contingency (15°6)
LS
$ 153,800.00
1
$ 153,800.00
Total
$ 1,178,800.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
$ 24,000.00

SUBSURFACE LOW PRESSURE PIPE SYSTEM - OPTION 6
,z,•14,000 GPD
rl
rya
Fea
1l
PIM
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System
LS
$ 300,000.00
1
$ 300,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 42,000.00
1
$ 42,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 14,000.00
1
$ 14,000.00
12
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
Subtotal
$ 643,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 96,500.00
1
$ 96,500.00
Total
$ 739,500.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
(Total
Year
_
$ 19,200.00

rIM
FMCI
Fol
PFT
rkl
1
SUBSURFACE LOW PRESSURE PIPE SYSTEM - OPTION 7
• 25,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Main (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,500
$ 105,000.00
9
Subsurface Low Pressure Pipe System
LS
$ 535,000.00
1
$ 535,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 66,000.00
1
$ 66,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 22,000.00
1
$ 22,000.00
13
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 1,171,000.00
14
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 175,700.00
1
$ 175,700.00
Total
$ 1,346,700.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
$ 24,000.00

Fallq
Pal
129
r=1
r#q
1l
SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 8
14,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Subsurface Drip Irrigation System
LS
$ 450,000.00
1
$ 450,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 50,000.00
1
$ 50,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 18,000.00
1
$ 18,000.00
12
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
Subtotal
$ 805,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 120,800.00
1
$ 120,800.00
Total
$ 925,800.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 19,200.00

SUBSURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 9
rs9
rs9
rs9
rs9
MPT
1.9
25,000 GPD
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Main (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,500
$ 105,000.00
9
Subsurface Drip Irrigation System
LS
$ 800,000.00
1
$ 800,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 80,000.00
1
$ 80,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 28,000.00
1
$ 28,000.00
13
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 1,456,000.00
14
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 218,400.00
1
$ 218,400.00
Total
$ 1,674,400.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
, $ 24,000.00

SURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 10
mit 14,000 GPD
rER
9011
I1
u•,
r�l
r+ta
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
' 1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Surface Drip Irrigation System
LS
$ 400,000.00
1
$ 400,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 48,000.00
1
$ 48,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 16,000.00
1
$ 16,000.00
12
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
Subtotal
$ 751,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 112,700.00
1
$ 112,700.00
Total
$ 863,700.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
_
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 19,200.00

SURFACE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 11
mm . 25,000 GPD
WI
MI
fail
MI
ran
MI
r+)
MI
Pol
PM
MI
MI
Pal
MI
MI
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Main (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,500
$ 105,000.00
9
Surface Drip Irrigation System
LS
$ 700,000.00
1
$ 700,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 75,000.00
1
$ 75,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 25,000.00
1
$ 25,000.00
13
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 1,348,000.00
14
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 202,200.00
1
$ 202,200.00
Total
$ 1,550,200.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
$ 24,000.00

SURFACE SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 12
ma - 14,000 GPD
Pal
MO
rW1
Pal
Poi
MEI
iml
rill
PM
roil
MA
ral4
MI
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 32,000.00
1
$ 32,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (14,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 40,000.00
1
$ 40,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (4,100 SF)
LS
$ 120,000.00
1
$ 120,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 2,000.00
1
$ 2,000.00
8
Surface Spray Irrigation System
LS
$ 400,000.00
1
$ 400,000.00
9
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 48,000.00
1
$ 48,000.00
10
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
11
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 16,000.00
1
$ 16,000.00
12
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 8,000.00
1
$ 8,000.00
Subtotal
$ 751,000.00
13
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 112,700.00
1
$ 112,700.00
Total
$ 863,700.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 200.00
12
$ 2,400.00
Total
Year
$ 19,200.00

SURFACE SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM - OPTION 13
„.,•25,000 GPD
PRI
ESTIMATED CAPITAL COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Septic Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
' $ 58,000.00
1
$ 58,000.00
2
Grinder Pump Station
LS
$ 60,000.00
1
$ 60,000.00
3
3" PVC Force Main (SDR 21)
LF
$ 10.00
1,500
$ 15,000.00
4
Recirculating Sand Filter Dosing Tank (25,000 Gallon)
LS
$ 72,000.00
1
$ 72,000.00
5
Recirculating Sand Filter Structure (7,200 SF)
LS
$ 210,000.00
1
$ 210,000.00
6
Proportional Flow Splitter
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
7
Yard Piping
LS
$ 4,000.00
1
$ 4,000.00
8
8" PVC Gravity Sewer Main (SDR 35) Incl. Rock
LF
$ 70.00
1,500
$ 105,000.00
9
Surface Spray irrigation System
LS
$ 700,000.00
1
$ 700,000.00
10
Engineering Services (Survey/Design)
LS
$ 75,000.00
1
$ 75,000.00
11
Bidding/Award Services
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
12
Construction Services (Administration/Observation)
LS
$ 25,000.00
1
$ 25,000.00
13
Soils Evaluation & Analysis
LS
$ 10,000.00
1
$ 10,000.00
Subtotal
$ 1,348,000.00
14
Contingency (15%)
LS
$ 202,200.00
1
$ 202,200.00
Total
$ 1,550,200.00
ESTIMATED RECURRING COSTS
Item No.
Item Description
Units
Unit Price
Quantities
Total
Cost
1
Operation & Maintenance Cost
Month
$ 800.00
12
$ 9,600.00
2
Laboratory Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
3
Operator & Support Staff Cost
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
4
Utility Costs
Month
$ 400.00
12
$ 4,800.00
Total
Year
$ 24,000.00

1J
IWO
PRELIMINARY SOIL AND SITE EVALUATION
FOR THE 42 ACRE
WEST LINCOLN COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL TRACT
LINCOLN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
by
Toney C. Jacobs and Associates, inc.
Consulting Soil Scientists
168 Broadbill Drive
Mooresville, NC 28117
[phone]
fax [phone]
e-mail jacobs @i-america.net
April 23, 2001
Submitted to: Mr. Ed Hatley, Asst. Supt.
Lincoln County Schools
P.O. Box 400
Lincoln, NC 28093-400
r Mr. Tom Bach, P.E.
W. K. Dickson
616 Colonnade Dr.
Charlotte, NC 28205
Paul ennin !SrS
Tone . J . • . Us, LSS, CPSS

fan
a.w
Introduction
Preliminary soil and site evaluation for the 42 acre West
Lincoln County High School Tract
On April 18, 2001, Toney C. Jacobs and Associates performed a preliminary soil
and site evaluation on the approximately 42 acre tract behind the West Lincoln County
Middle School. This evaluation was made to satisfy the requirements of the Engineering
Alternative Analysis (EAA) being completed by W.K. Dickson for the West Lincoln
High School and to advise the wastewater engineer and school system personnel of the
soil resources present and the feasibility of an on -site wastewater disposal system,
'a' preliminary loading rates for such a system, and soil or site specifics to consider in
system design. The report addresses soil and site criteria for permitting through
NCDENR-DEH and NCDENR-DWQ. It is our understanding the high school is
currently using sand filter pretreatment and stream discharge for wastewater disposal. It
is also our understanding the school system is in the process of renewing their NPDES
permit issued by the NCDENR-DWQ.
For our evaluation, the Lincoln County School Maintenance Department backhoe
was used to dig pits which were supplemented with hand auger borings. Mr. Tom Bach,
P.E., with W.K. Dickson was present for the evaluation. Because of the dense vegetation
and mechanical problems, the backhoe was only able to dig a limited number of pits. The
ral
recommendation for an on -site ground absorption system is based on a combination of
factors, including, but not limited to 1) topography and landscape positions, 2) soil
characteristics, 3) wetness conditions, 4) soil depth, 5) soil restrictive horizons, and 6)
available space.
Vol
MCI
Site
The 42 acre site is located directly behind the West Lincoln Middle School (Fig.
1). During our evaluation, only two property irons were found, and these were adjacent
to the school track facility. The property lines were not flagged and the school personnel
present did not really know where the property lines were. The site was wooded in pines
and hardwoods. The vegetation was very thick over most of the tract. In many areas it
was extremely difficult to walk across the site because of the many tree blow -downs and

2
MCI
thick underbrush. There was a major draw/stream running the entire length of the tract
and Indian Creek is the western boundary of the site. We initially thought the draw/steam
crossing the site was near the northern property line. After overlaying the boundary map
with the USGS topo sheet, it appears the draw/stream is closer to the middle of the site
(Fig. 2). The Lincoln County soil survey map shows a similar location (Fig. 3.) Because
we did not know where the property line was, no holes were dug between this stream and
the northern property line. Our site specific evaluation addresses the area between the
steam crossing the tract and the southern property line. There were also numerous
smaller draws across the tract. Slopes were generally 8-15% on the upper landscapes and
15-20+ near the streams. The County soil map has a combination of B,C, and D slopes
mapped.
OrMe
Soils
�► A combination of nineteen pit or auger borings were placed on the site. These
hole locations are approximately located on Fig. 1 and are coded for subsurface septic
system suitability (DEH). All profile descriptions are included in the Appendix. Of the
19 holes, 9 were classified as provisionally suitable (PS) for conventional septic systems,
6 were only PS for low pressure pipe (LPP) septic systems, and 4 were classified as
unsuitable. The holes coded as PS for LPP septic systems would also be PS for
subsurface drip septic systems. Also, the holes classified as unsuitable could probably be
reclassified as PS for subsurface drip septic systems.
The Soil Survey of Lincoln County has the site mapped as Cecil and Pacolet
(Woody, 1995). Cecil and Pacolet soils are similar, but Pacolet soils are shallower.
Generally the soil solum of Pacolet soils is 20-40 inches deep and the solum of Cecil soils
is 40-60 inches deep. The site specific soil evaluation concurred the soils on -site are
similar to those mapped by the USDA-SCS. If our hole locations are overlain the county
soil map, it shows that were we found conventional system depth soils was where the
SCS mapped Cecil soils and where we classified the soils as LPP depth or unsuitable, the
soils were generally mapped Pacolet.
Where the holes were coded as PS for conventional systems, generally there was
6 inches of sandy loam topsoil over red clay to clay loam B horizons, which extended to

3
fgn
36-48 inches deep. In some holes, the Bt horizon graded into a BC horizon. Also, there
was saprolite present at some holes at less than 48 inches deep. Saprolite is considered
unsuitable for any subsurface system over 1000 gpd. Structure of the Bt and BC horizons
was generally subangular blocky, with some inclusions of angular blocky structure. All
consistencies indicated non -expansive, kaolinitic mineralogy. Also, colors indicated
well -drained, highly oxidized soils. In the holes described, there were no mottles of two
chroma or less indicating seasonal soil wetness. If holes were placed closer to the
. streams, soils wetness indicators would probable be found.
The main soil limitation observed was depth to rock. The holes classified as LPP
or unsuitable had saprolite present or were terminated in hard, weathered rock. Several
of the auger holes ended in refusal at less than 30 inches deep. Much of the rock was
observed in the auger borings, and pits will be necessary to determine the true nature and
extent of the rock. Pacolet soils are generally shallow to sandy loam saprolite and not
harder rock.
Fin Summary and Conclusions
Based on our preliminary evaluation, we feel the site has some potential for on-
r4"' site wastewater disposal. While there were several holes that were PS for subsurface,
conventional septic systems, we cannot at this time say for certain there is enough
useable area for a 900 student (10,800 gpd) system. Because of the thick vegetation and
lack of any surveyed property lines, additional work will be required to determine if there
is enough useable soil and topography for a conventional, subsurface septic system. We
do know that the streams greatly reduce the useable area of the 42 acre site and that the
preliminary evaluation showed there were areas of unsuitable soil across the site. If the
school intends to pursue a conventional system option, the property lines must be flagged
and a loader will be required to push access paths across the site to allow ingress/egress
for the backhoe. Based on our preliminary evaluation, an LTAR of approximately 0.2-
0.25 gpd/ft2 would be required for a conventional system. Approximately 8-10 acres of
useable soil and topo would be required for a 10,800 gpd conventional septic system.
At this time we feel the site will probably support a 10,800 gpd surface or
subsurface drip system. The dripper tubing would be Iaid on the surface for a DWQ

4
PEI
rm
surface drip system or installed approximately 4-6 inches deep for a DEH subsurface drip
system. An approximate loading rate for a DEH drip system would be 0.1-0.125
gpd/ft2. For a DWQ surface drip system, an approximate loading rate would be 0.5
inches of wastewater per week or 26 inches of wastewater per year. Both these loading
rates would require an approximately 5 acre drip field.
The soil work for this report was only a preliminary evaluation. If you choose to
pursue an on -site disposal option, a more comprehensive soil/site evaluation will be
required for the permitting process. As mentioned earlier, surveying and site clearing
will be necessary for furthers soils work. Thanks for the opportunity to assist with this
project and please call if you have any questions. It will probably be helpful if we can
meet with Mr. Ed Hatley, Assistant Superintendent with Lincoln County Schools, to
ml discuss possible on -site wastewater disposal options.
MEI
WI
M1

0
O
U1
0
r,
:'.c)iii 11..
0,
•J
.CV
1.
n showing pit
boring locations
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 28117
Figure 1
(q

ran
o,tot Ccti��
PIO
J
i
owing pit
lig locations
�'
`)
ti
� ' •
CO
'0()
�11
r1. Dj�4,
tt . roc
f
S gtOtZ
'� s• c.< L,I? 4 �JcQ
cvkAl '.C- G ip,;1•4„.
0 U 't3 %A. SM.,
(�
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, hlc.
168 Rrnadhill Tyr.
Figure 1

!
USGA topo map
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 28117
Figure 2A

r
(z)
V
tw
I I
tiv
frel
I
r (f
'1
r 1
•
MCI
f=1
opo map with
to boundaries shown
•
•'1•
/':.
hl ,/
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
168 Broadbill Dr.
rR,.,,.•,.�.,�11� .T.Tr ',RI 17
Figure 2B
•
•

)1n County
;urvey map
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 2R1 17
s.;),
Y. • • •
. 3
Figure 3

JOB: LiNCL^� G.
TCJ CONSULTING
SITE / SOIL EVALUATION
P. S PHONE: DATE: t` t.Cle
LOCAl1ON: I PIN: COUNTY: PROPERTY SITE:
PROPOSED FACILITY: WATER SUPPLY: On -Site Well_ Community_ Public EVALUATION: Auger Boring Pit , Cut
WEATI TER: ANTECEDENT MOISTURE: SURFACE WATER:
FACTORS
PROFILE_ (
PROFILE_ Z
PROFILE
PROFILE_
LANDSCAPE POSt17ON.%
HORIZON I DEMII
0 "7
a • «
o '
v -Zezz•
Crilor . Amid
etZfi,/
e a II
1
if
Tenure
oC.(
` V.1
sl
3
Sweeten
CAre
Ural xa1to
a
C
Car.Arerrn
.� art Z..•\
~ l s e
I C
v.-'e
%pylery
HORIZON DEITH El
.1 • t
l 3. + a 1
C � ti,i7
4 � g 4
Cyr . Memel _
r� a
c, ,1� !
�..1) cft.A
Teeture _._-
L
r - S �a)
."
Matter
c A e
re _
a"%. r
w WIC
TN..— %.1 s SK
ry. s C3
c,rrh uve
�t i i
-.ge ' 0
��
i` : SCI
Ilorrndery
►
f
;IOR:!ON III DErrll
? R ..' Li P
c l ..4 e
Color . Hamel
a
m+• --I fa.I) $ 411)
fL d .} VI►t •
Tenure
to)
oshe
/
4. t `)) I
V
Structure
i1SVA
Crohtence
sQ
'
�1:r "he 1-
go under►
I
HORIZON W DEPTH
Color - Marten
Terrors ,
Morita
Wye.,*
Co.heeoce
•
Bootee"
a
SOILw6TNP0
-
RESTRICIIV•f. HORIZON
SAPROUTE
,
LIAR
• e/R3►�
Zoo
`
....— _ a 2
CLAVPICATION .
PJ
JP
1/
TV 41. Li•
Doi "47-t4c
LEGEi`
LANDSCAPE
R - Ridge if
S • Shoulder
L - Linen slur
S • Foot pIope
N • Nose slope
H • Head slope
tc•Comm s!
Cr • Citron sk
T . Teasm
P - Flood Plain
Minn
s•sand
Is•loamy la
si - sandy to
1- loon
. si•si71
s • sit loom
ski - silty clay
d • clay loaf
sd • stttdy c!
se • sandy el
. sic • silty da/
c-day
CONS1SrFNCE
Ns . sort.stict
Ss • slightly st
S - sticky
Vs • 'try stir
Np - tioet-play
SP-*MY i
P - plastic
Vp-etry pia:
iP
vfr • etty hie
fr • friable
fi - firm
vli - very ferry
efe - esteems'
EDILEMBE
-
m - massive
cr • cnnnb
6r - granular
sob - subsngul
eh - angular t
M-phty
Ix - priunstk

TL1 CONSULTING
SITE / SOIL EVALUATION
"'1 O'13:
LOCATION:
PROPOSED FACIUTY:
PHONE: DATE:
PIN: COUNTY: PROPERTY SIZE:_`_
WATER SUPPLY: On -Site Well Community_ Public EVALUATION: Auger Boring__ Pit_ Cu*
�WCA'II IER: ANIECEDENT MOISTURE: SURFACE WATER:
FACTORS
PROFILE_ Ql.
PROFILE_[ c
PROFILE_ l )
PROFILE_
ta. LANDSCAPE PegTION.%
•
,
1roR;ZON 1 DEPIH1
't'% i c
v (
S `' ^_`
,
\"
iCalm •. 1•b•vrf
3.'a 41
.7
`
•
• •
Troup
4 :4— Rvk
../
(5
4,..
Groeer,t —.
'`
C
k x
Cwnwrr _+
1
w
4,
•
aI
MQ G
Fts+ndrf
.
HORIZON DEPTH II
.a1
— 3 `�
1..C/7%.
jc.ior.ie
Uetk
Travis �.
r
Matta
t S ikQ ak
Sentclum
‘AV C&S
ri...•
C„rr,rerrt�
is js Q
•
cit---
%iaandel
IL ;Inl:?ON 111 DEi rH
] 3'' t t
I Co .r • /.breed
tk` `
Teaturt
1I Maekr
•
Soudan
Carhoroce
Soandtry
H4 HORIZON IV DEPTII
Co/or - trle.•vry
Ttawre
Maitre
lllllll���l------------D
roreare
••arietors
1
i Plant! try
SOIL WETNF_O
•
`
RUNICr1YR HORIZON
iAAPROLITE
f
LTAR
•
l is
ter►
CLASSIFICATION
•
US �iqt)
LS
�� ,
•
LEGEND
LANDSCAPE POSrnc
R • Ridge j,c /F_ r f 1
S - Shoulder
L - Linear slope
S - Font dope
N • Nose slope
H - Head slope
• Ce • Concave slope
Or • Convee slope
T-Terme
P - Flood Plain
TEX11 E
b • loamy sand
sl - sandy loam
1•loam
si - tilt
sr7 • sib loam
ski • shy clay boos
d • day loam
Id • sandy day loco
sc•sandyday
sic - silty clay
e-clay
Ns • non -sticky
Ss - slightly stkky
S - stkky
Vs • Icy sticky
Np - rion•plastk
Sp • slightly plastic
P • plastic
Vp - vtry Oak
MQ I
vfr -very friable
fr • friable
ii•firm
vli • very firm
eR - totem* fines
s in
m - msuhe
er - crumb
gr • granular
ssb • sobaegular blocky
ah - angular blocky
Pi • Plot,
pr • prismatic

TC•1 CONSULTING
SITE / SOIL EVALUATION
1201
t;1
fil
1%1
1�1
IEI
II
l�l
Fri
'JOB: PHONE: DATE:
PIN: COUNTY: PROPERTY SIZE:
PROPOSED FACILITY: WATER SUPPLY: On -Site Well_ Community___ Public_ EVALUATION: Auger Boring_ Pit_ Cut
WEATI TER: ANTECEDENT MOISTURE: SURFACE WATER:
LOCATION:
FACTORS
PROFILE._(
PROFILE_ 1 Cr
PROFILE_ l
PROFILE_
LANDSCAPE POSITION.%
HORIZON I DEPTH
Q ..wS_
[� 4
Cake • Wore
A�
L S
L
Thew!7
�
SrrVe01R ____
i A
( 1
S
Caewts rr
— v
c• r
1�
_
Rwrd•ry
'
HORIZON DEPTH II
'
~"t
1
G `•+ T
.
Cedar • lamer/
11 V Olk
" 4
`
j
Trews
,...._1\43,
Moffitt
5W
bdrurfunt
%Nit% '''' \Avis, C.444%.
(*N.% I th k_
i...%4 4s/s.c.
.
c...,..,..
.c.
,
r
T
&widest
i IOR: TON III Demi
—.. "AA Oa
. )
Coke - !`lined
Y"•d `,
_
Thrum
urn, -
Madge
Snucturt
-
�(5 ,
Caruuerve
_
eR
Ik
•
HORIZON IV DEI'tli •
3 4 ~
)/`
T�
- S l z V9
LIatLe
i
conJemere
fe. r 47.1ariZ
Iimnb•ry
9OIL WETTiFR
•
RESTRICrIVZ. HORIZON
SAPROLJIE
LTML
• �� F ~�
•
CIAO P1GTtON
Vs . �
Ins
O
pr '� fi.
LEGEN
IdS11D P
R • Ridge jr.)/
S • Shoukler
L • Linear slope
S • Foot Elope
N • Nose slope
H • Head slope
Cc - Concave sir
Gr - arms do!
T -Terace
P - Flood Plain
T IRA
s • sand
l+ . loamy sar
si • sand/ loa
1•Ioam
• si•aill
sit . site lam
ski- silty clay lr
d-clayloaR
del . gadr ela
st - sandy eb
sic - $y diy
e-diy
CONSISfEnC
Ns - nan41ielrr
Ss•Ifightlyati
S•sticky
Vs - *11;dck
Np - don -peril
Sp - ilIpbIy pl
p. plastic
Vp-*?plot
HMI
vfr-*y[rub
fr • 'Aside11- fail
vi -very fern
efi • eauernely
SIMRE
sa - singk Fs
m - massive
er - curds
sr • pander
lab • safisngula
ab • angular bi
Fi • Phil
pr • prismatic

WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL COMPLEX
i
1
1500'±
6"
„
6„ 10,000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK
♦ W/10,000 DOSING COMPARTMENT
8"
340'-6" CI PIPE
FLOW DIVERSION BOX
CHLORINATION COMPARTMENT -N
630'-6" TC PIPE
400'-6" TC PIPE
SURFACE WATER
DISCHARGE HEADER
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
INDIAN CREEK
SURFACE SAND FILTER
1,800 SQUARE FOOT
(60FTx30FT)
EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
ONE UNE SCHEMATIC
UNCOLN COUNTY SCHOOLS
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL (EAA)
LINCOLNTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Nmr of 1.
eeri
E16 COLCw re ORM
WK 7>) ►� >
h0,
1
1
-
.—
1009a00.C:
DICKSON .
, P4,n,,,, , $f .,.. f,,y,,, A.., P.0 KC
tagm,t Alo gull
Cliru \1003E00\6-8x11A1 c
Boca R FL Inmra C

J
PROP. 3" SS FORCE MAIN
(APPROX. 400')
PROP. RECIRCULATING SANG -
FILTER DOSING TANK
SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE
OPTION 1
RO\� 1Q0�
QA WEST LII
5� � MIDDLE
REBUILD EXI
FILTER RECICULA
EXIST.
6"
DISCHARGE
PROP. 8" GRA
\\
\\•/
\\\\\_ /NDIAN CREEK
NE
1
(APPROX. 1500'
TY DISCHARG
PROP. DISCHAR HERj
I-7—
i
SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE
OPTION 2
REBUILD EXIST. SEPTIC TANK
PROP. 3" SS FORCE MAIN
\(APPROX. 1500')
ROP. SEPTIC TANK
P'OP. RECIRCULATING SAND FILTER DOSING TANK
PRQP. RECIRCULATING SAND FILTER STRUCTURE
PROP. CWLORINATION COMPARTMENT
NEW 41/43-ACRE TRACT \
PROP. 8" GRAVITY DISCHARGE LINE
(APPROX. 200Q')
PROP. DISCHARG HEADER
TAB1101.
CRAM 9Y
AONNCC
rnco a
1,07.OW0
NONE
n ee
MAY 2001
ia
cos&oo
SITE PLAN FOR PROPOSED
SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE OPTIONS
LINCOLN COUNTY SCHOOLS
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL (EAA)
■ a�
agi n m • l,nwri . SZrowm,
Lnievr Nr.M:rdr
Ole CU.0M= 0.r[
2111105
(7OVAL0i -5110
Olga Otiose Oe+e7S x
Maas, NC Mims l% 01 MC
loam mow. 11.1•D{w-MC
1
1

ROAD
0
LEDFORD
HUMMINGBIRD TRAIL
owekut
INDIAN CREEK
PRIMITIVE CHURCH
ROAD
tNOIAN CREEK
TO LINCOLTON, NC
(APPROX. 10 MILES)
WESTERN SKY COURT
EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM
ONE LINE SCHEMATIC
UNCOLN COUNTY SCHOOLS
WEST LINCOLN HIGH SCHOOL (EAA)
LINCOLNTON. NORTH CAROLINA
% K'
Wax
1
515 CALONN/IDE DintOOZE-
rec.-221203
WK
iaillil
($)
•
1
DICKSONOther Mow Cultsiddc.
SC
t A Mi.dt • Stamm AtCwd . CA NC
@osa Raton. FL Mbn% otan. NC
NC LH\t006000\6-5511.0w0

W K fV
WP DICKSO
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Wndscape Architects
1
JOB NAME 1NEST L kCO(J4 N a �aa COMPUTED BY_�T�
CLIENT
11� G.N sCA440LS
01J-s iTE sls/EM cALcvL4-,lotiS
wKD No. I00:$.0O.CC.
SHEET NO. 0F_
DATE
DATE
Qj pEs 16N FLov/ AATE Poor f? ass
sniper/II Is 6Po/srvW61 r
s o p s rvoG-� rS x�� �POls rvo�r
pElc,� r"Love �� CQ� 9
_ �o�i�Cs�yl�,000.Gvo�
pis 1 �,N F+.a,�► �-m (u) -_ 13,
�. wEi
t' I.11,Icgt J Ms weir o«JCOUJ .MS C8/081/166
90o srvoM TS + 7b0 srvo6'TL — 090 s;va6Nf\
pEsIGN FLOW RAM (o.,)
1 e ioo s r va 6NrS x IS GPD s rvo Istu r
p6st (0 &i-o W M-r (o) j'# , 90
D GPO C sA4 a,s-, 000 GP��
sI2iN, '
UAW r, 1qN T JGJf�S (cuith.Nflo1JAL S1SMM)
oF�t"b �
� ..0, �0 GOB r� (oP rloN
000.4P.Q. �,r � lF
PI-ELImjl'/My sot.: avo..__s.1E cy#.4..tel".00 (44.564.04-r/y6...__LM-WC7)
,.Tf-64(A__dorikyLA6.04.:=_;,)1, (09_ Ao . #14/p1•27.
�_
A. wEsr t.1,Jcoc4) Hs : goo
CHECKED BY
10.64G14 _Buyp 4 4/4.4... j...,.- _ -
FT
v 0 PE AQ.cN - 54066 cN4MIS s .__!w .0 . Fr i"pr" s
.,-)6 ni _ 70 0_0o ..FrZ R .. . o._ r_'- __ficG G 444. N. " r7,
sr° Fr
r
-• --- - -- use Li o c1 . _��_._v� � CSC _:@ ..4.�s_fr.)
_
Town_ avAdge- rR.is Fs =j17 so0 F-T s-e) Pr = -70 T11.90046-.S
$orr 1161414cl Ate 9. o Fr c6NTER fl CA:40fL2
sE 1preLAS 'W TRetk,46 Pam- Fib 2.5b Fr. Ti&GIf L64G1 i1
IS G/0/Sf✓OC-t/i

Put
Pal
SEA
1p
rf.64 c4.8u(J044:4 -6A = _jO 000
WK
DICKSON
WKD NO. )001.0 .00. CC.
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Landscape Architects SHEET N 0 . OF
JOB NAME WEST 1 l'1COLJk1 141 (e41') COMPUTED BY TA' DATE q/z3% of
CLIENT L.1r1GGLJV Cov jPf sC/4OOLS
CHECKED BY DATE
04-S via S'fsMAI cALC4,11.,44)014S
Q b6S 1GN A.ArE PQOSic fi or JS
A. wesr L.1,JGoL.iJ Hs : 900 srvo6rlrs is- 6PD/SrvD6Ai1'
Des1GN FLOW Mre (c) = 90o srv, . irS x 1 s GPD/s rvoGNr•
pel'60 $A -re (off - 131so 0 G PD (s4y/,000i,P&)
S. w&sr L1,cot.,J Ns Welr L,riGow .fl1S Collii166
900 srvao`►TS + 7bo . lo6'4 II 1,440 s r vo6N, ts- G/alsfvoc-vr
Des 1 GN s t.o ' UTE. (o) = 1, (9(.0 S r vo 6Nr& x IS GPI 1 s rvo 6A. T'
pescc,r4 FLOW M-rE (CO = 2.4)90o GOD (s41 1.s, 000 00
© iamb O F ti. 4) r► eU M rteo GH ES cuAhle j r101V 4L S Y S fl 4.1)
A. wesr-L1pcvtA µs. Q= 1�i UQO.- 4Pit,._- _ c.rak __ o,lo -Goo/FTC (oP tnom 4)
4( ._See .. PIS raw my sod
,tiv _ i, IL Ft_4Lvarroj (c0,06124/4five vaude)
. -r c,N _6orrekv C.A =.: , N, 000 G PD o. AO. FQ pr2
USisL, HbPE Aa•CN-544PC9 c � S±"� 0 Fr Worm $
.....th60c. 4 (.6ARr ..... �- _..10 00 _... f rz. -- ... 4.0 . _ r . _TicAoi..c.646Pi - 17,500 Fr*.
use go . c! ff- -to) 1 rs_ _.@ _6.A s' Fr , oQ ;so Fr_ per. rxisAk"
•.
f-O4L 4vMg6R- 10.64cN 6 -i 17,.roo• Fr = ; si r = _ 70 TP A kH6-s
sore: mama Ake 9. a Fr (. AMA to CISAJTEll,
use 7 fp s;';lea riterk i pa- Fmtts 2.0 Fr. TP.&Jcd- (,64mr)-1

�► WK
• r DICKSON
WKO NO. 1005'0, 0O.GL
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
landscape Anhttects SHEET N O . A__O F
JOB NAME WEST LWCol~/4 - s (6AA) COMPUTED BY TAL DATE 14/12 3/0)
CLIENT L i+rJ COW .CO/Any SCAC0L.1 CHECKED BY DATE
ASO,o Fr+
Fo,
i 0 - TP-& C,NES
e 9.0 Fr o.c.
APP.&oX , FT 100 . o Fr
aPP�x.ms4 = zs0 0 0 Fri
(c, 014444-i;
Tonit itlykhe, AMA ()SS au24-1 x 7 peas
rvr1-L A1'Patox. fi-4 N4- s Li. i Ac ies
mre t Nat. LI . ! AC :j iztopfL 44-M »LSo
g, WEST" t.i,1cvW 14s/ w63r L41Jcal/J nos coM, ,AvGJ :
pc,
Q= 74,o00 GPt• LT1/Z U O.7o6tA/r'- (oPrlotJS)
,., TILE '4 6nr-T)41 = 15;000 GP.o o. o..:4po%r2-
T c,i+ oorI n AL6A = ,AS; o0o Fit" .
i., i ----__ . .....
vi rj;c .4014 aw .:-.7— mil $ C14.4lic�t w/ i o_pr w_oo—.
ro-94,cH .4ce6 T . _._ _..12_s, 0 00 r-r _. '1. o pr TR-e.# LefiGi»
raZi
.9. vs 6 pro C onu6/L a z s' Fr , z.S• F-r /&1 rfl 6WC.#
•• - rant- Nv 419611...14-6sc,Fiei-.3.11x0 Fr ;i- xo Ft = .r Ties 046
runt ritociffd RA-6. 9 . o c6v 1 11. To Ciftntit.
vsE ,a EMUS 10 itek.1461 .PO- .... , z5b Fr *No; try46IN
Nolt : use Om& oenArL M 1160 VG

fart
fort
tact
�WK
DICKSON
WKD NO. lOuf'3 . O(l . Q
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Landscape Architects SHEET NO. 3 OF
JOB NAME weir L IN cow HS (613"') COMPUTED BY rAQ DATE y /1.3/a l
CLIENT L.1o1 CouJ COvnl r' std.100L.
CHECKED BY DATE
APPttoX. ARA -• 15-0. 0 Fr x too Fr 4PPOty. = 2c 000 FrL (o.r8
Tor-L APpiloy. 04 = 0. 51 A((4S X 13 F1 et S
TP nAL APPRO y . AAA = 7. 6 40-6-1
NOTED awl7, (p 4.(.,2S RE/'4 !IL A26.4 s eg o
SizidG op OR-,,J FI ELd 1 ?-e4 GN4S (L�OI�/,LVAG 106 PISIC-A1)
rim A. weir L+n1Go u0 ffl : Ck = ,'/, oo0 6Pt L-TAAZ = 0.10. 6 00/ArL (OP r10N b;
Ian
firt
ragl
min
ic See P P4 C, M , NAA-1 SOIL AND s III ev4Guq-r! J (cws4v4rw v41,3/5)
De Xiti ' FiC-Lb ALGA !N, 000 Epp 4 0. 70 G pO /FT Z
Q RAw Frees: Arl.64 = 140 , 00 0 Frz
UStn1G T)tE (Aire/tip/4 OP S FTZ' P64t 1 Fr of T jGH.)
TS$N GH L6 J.4. f.)3 . =. PO1000 1✓r t -._.S F rzl Sr
r4T t ---
S,Nc.E ._/_►'�!4xln�� _t.,4.��4t..t.6NG%7�-°i 3 coo fL Is tte-camfrremosd
belt& DES !bn1 , o L
` ---- r.s/tad FAG-e,eS as aeraMWeliBetrvt/.- �-
2.'1,000 Fr s 3,000 Fr/F,6t.4 =_9..33 Plead1 (Say 10 Patti
ol►4G A miNainvm LAIDIAL.1.64‘14 0pp.1y0 F£_.(vJl.c6t 6
atim tFo Lb .— 7. 0- pr.__c` rivet, 1l0E_
2.)600 F r/F,crrib s s N o Fr ,r c.

Pia
fag
fart
farl
WK
NIP DICKSON
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Landscape Architects
JOB NAME weer 1.frIwW , (c:AA)
CLIENT LWCOW CatP471I Sc/.J&,i
70 Fr
WKD NO. Marl .00.CL
SHEET NO. T OF
COMPUTED BY n4f DATE y1a 3 f o /
CHECKED BY DATE
io Fr
GENTEA Fe p M4n11Fg7
1.0 LRrE($ a Lo Fr o.c.
,NGL6 S 66 G6/1 GTN Dv& 1S t iuv r✓. A6
Co N /WIL.S (ai a ?►o'/i
AAIPm(. AQ6A s 1140.0 Fr X 'Lao Fr rtp0Po( AL4 = 16 $ oo r"rz' (o.3'k')
rag rum. APP I. = 0.39 i S) io F, Eras TDil 4,p0iti,X. 4444 = 3.9 ,i-c1 M-S
Pat
'JO NE-G.b 3.9 Akitsi Re -MIX AN-64 A-L-i0
8. VW- L,11 Court IDS / weir ii J CocJV 4t co48,d66
0,= Lc, 0 4Cpt.
o. r 0 6fi prL .._
Dtu-,N F a AA.6.4_= . 1'S' ov o GPh ._ O. to 600If'
b NM sN F a4a p -e/f = 1 sO, o a o. Fr
vs,ig I)I- cAr/ --�! J S _@ .' 64 l o j)t&VC41
.. __ o of 0
_ __T o4 _(,C-616 # s. SO uo o fit... _- S'spry! �r
P11o11 _7)
s iriLe. #s- M A-u iMuM LAr 4L L& G!N boo Pr _t.s__ -4Mans cJJ
P 64- ti rs cd) 06.1164 L-a vfiw r s %Li p 6as 4.1 oerstetilacz R e vi
S'O, u oo r .. 3, 00o pr/F, = 14. 67 Rail (,w i cu i )

WK
iffF DICKSON
WKD NO. ! egc1..00. CL
Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
Landscatx Architects SHEET NO. r OF
JOB NAME Wit r L."J coLU ,4 S (6AA) COMPUTED BY r,3e DATE y / 13/0 /
CLIENT LuuICoW CULiNri . i.l44OL
CHECKED BY DATE
VSj,J6 A M t,iMvM WW1_ LWOW 0A 1LIO Fr( w/ cG.ivr&t. Feu
mow IFF+t — 10 Fr E, s ,OE )
2,776 Frbiet4 No Fr C it6 t = Ao I.' am-L.1 F,6t/S
PPPP4X, ALG4 . mt . 0 Fr x i .o Fr ivPit4X.. -A46e4 =14, soo ;TL(o ,3 9 . u4&
m ►-L A pP iox . ovum = 0.37 4GS x / a F► &c4 ,S AM. RPPRof. attc4 = 7.1 A.cA&S
Noi • wesz 7.! ,4G .& /LOAM.- ALGA MO.
a s,zi & 0AkiNi F16145(VAAVSOPS.ACE4S SOL/A( D!P s ysrE/u)
A. w6zr L,dI CuLd Ns = 14,000 610 44 1 TAA. = 0.10 6 Pa r/-Z (oP floNs
* see p -&L►M ,A/v-y soli AviO s try el/Au/AT/on) (coNs6A-vilfiv& vAtwej
DA.4'i'J FICA. A44SA = 111,000 CPA 4 0.10 611OlFt`'
our ±.Fr _._444A = !'D,ovo Fri
# P M � -C 1V/..G -1 g-IGavmn ry O+'/7 J , use Z. o yr c.c. M ivcsi. t �✓G . .
SP4-(4J(,
TVe,d4 4E146 N (44y . 106, 00o F:tLs. A.o Fr
11 d,4 6 L.0 6 i1 n►r s s 4P-Lf = 7p,000 Ar
_...Ir ._. Pam-_. M av v (-Fc,fv ._0(ffir1 446 - MAJ ))g' 414)04164V _. W^!T oo
1 ipP64 144.P.C_ F�eus !s a , ovo ,r
70) 000 5,000 FrFtEI,D = !11 F 61. 4
* VSE u,4 wo06t Fuld S W 2.r o f r airAAt 46%4 /X
•. s", 000 Fr = 7.cb FrAA/T:44k = xo Logit441

MEI
Pwl
WK
WI DICKSON
W)(D NO. Movs$, oo,CL
Engineer • Plunnen • Surveyors O F
Landuape A.chitects SHEET N O . is
JOB NAME weir LAto(A) /r (Gm) COMPUTED BY Tite DATE q l23/01
CLIENT Lt tl -911J CUV+VrY r (.1-4oOL4
CHECKED BY DATE
k 1,so F r
APEX.At64=) O.oPrx sox. Fr
)o LAVAL( c A.o Ar o,C..
1NtI.641E0 (-6407/ Ov6 g MGt.cow,44
caara+/ks (BY : 2.o 7� )
4p, ft4x AKm . i2, too , r 2 ( 0.29 it&J
Tb M-t. B.p P . 4L6,4 = o. 79 04C&j x 1 y Fi S Tonic• ,��'tix ,QitB•a = y.1 A.dAwS
: Nte-e L .1 ALIM j.C,PM*L 4t&4• 111,10
8. wet r L,,J C01 NI/ weir Li.lcOW Ms Crwig i,✓6d
A
2.C, oo._0_ GPb
LTV- = o.1p.6,0
Art'
Fi &(d P s)av o G Pp L o. 0 o 6 Po/Frz. -
p,c�.,�r F!dlA ALTEA= AC ;Quo
. Pfit M a / v. F4-cfr .1 04o44M cwaiv niv else . o -r c.c. oxlmst wrrs
s(avl.Jc,
111 1-6/1/4)6 ols-cfsfAkii -0_00 f1-4* ;,0 Pr
rv&,ac LAG Nl,61.SAJ.
Y I 1S; 000 fT
I Pa- m4Nfix6.41oviLechs A+ t om m G-gMnt,Al fN 414.x lmvil q o✓,vr of
Dit,APWL t.046 /'6ti fi L6 .Is r, 000 Jar :. is 000 Fr+ cop Zi r,�

WK
WI DICKSON
MR Engineers • Planners • Surveyors
lrndscape Architects SHEET NO. 7 OF
JOB NAME iiiiCi r 1,11`)tUW ?,- (&te4 ) COMPUTED BY f DATE 11/4 31 0,
CLIENT LIiJCULA) GGl.'V f SCiJO(JL CHECKED BY DATE
tolgt
rag
Psi
Fes,
WKD NO. /00UO.CC.
it VSE ►JNavvpGd FrEtA.1 Gv/ 2 rr L4Tt4U LesG 1 ,S
S a a o Pr ÷ CO Fr itAITNAA.L = �p LITUALI
APP14.0Y. r eGA a,o Fr x so. 0 A.r imp/Loy. /1/244 = /2, Soo Fr2-(0. -
1b - 40011 V, 4444 T. 0 7.9 ik.sterj X � S rit-teti 1044. 4•61.4g 4t 4 =..7.; ,4t
N6l6 : Ne'o 7.3 41,11-Cs fLe14/2 4#- 1?- 4.Lt o .

Pin
0
paq Engsnecrs • Mennen • Surveyors
lrndscape Architects
W -i
1
faq
rml
fag
ran
111 WK
DICKSON
JOB NAME W451LIPICOLV lam (613/4)
CLIENT LJ,)CO Lit CO✓NT`/ SCHOOL.;
WID NO. /00::. 00, CL
SHEET NO. J OF
COMPUTED BY T4 DATE £1.4LJ0
CHECKED BY DATE
RED�RGJC,����G SA.uo F1tlE/ snide, G4CG✓tAriOP/1
w6rLI4lcow 14L : AElio4 PulwRalr (60 /4,000 Get)
A. sago- 414 X,n1v/Y1 r'LJI/L Fr/ALWA/1d Lu44'NG PA a (IYIL/L)
m L . = 3.r0 ODiFrz C c .v4r,v6 v4 ..vv
8. CuM hi/rG /H,N, m vnn F, L/ 2. wiLPILE 4&6r4 (au- 4
.)
m S 4 = D D F MLA wry : DDT = DeSi6d DA'c.y Flow MI6 (GAL)
ms A = 14,000 6 PD = 3, ro 6P%r2- ms' = 4,000 Frz
C. SE(.6c.T NVII#IL oF Fiu .S (i ,) r!F = A
b. Sr-L Cf FILF A. 0,m6NSiot4S (Ft-, FW)
FL = G 4- Fr (L6J1Gni) Fist ! - 3A Pr (wieni)
E (.uMPV rE F iLle &. i VR!-C.E A L&4 (Fs4)
FS4. = FL x Fw FSA = .G+L Frx 32 Fr Fs4 = A,og8 Fr'L
F.. corm p vr 1Zrxi �, �T I 1Vt6 4 (rPA)
TM ._= ..N.F..
FAA- btF -TM
:FF4 = x z, 094 _fir __-.
Daiwa Lcituysa. fkA-re (FLA)
FFA 2. .4, .096 r-Z omit
Fut. �- 14,090 G P D ÷ 11,096 Frl• F P.. = 3.42. GP_Okr 1

P
PEIE
FP ER
PER
WK
rW DICKSON
ma NO. )003$. co.CL
Enq+aeers • Planners • Surveyors
Landscape Architects SHEET NO. X OF
JOB NAME w6 sr Ltnl Cu ) J.J: (EAA) COMPUTED BY TAB DATE 4/Pi/0 l
CLIENT Li ti C L'J CIV ti T? S C'*LJ CHECKED BY DATE
d weir Lrftkc u LJJ )44 weir L,'1 L OuV Al; ccM9, n/u :
pt;1GtJ 1 LOv►1 Q,1l1c = 5-10000 GPb
Foil
4. 5 L T trukx,invm F 1 Lf6A. FokvA44 LU AO, d! G ter (fru .i .)
1Y1LP.. = 350 GPD/Frz- (co sat/Ar,vE VALLie.)
. coM P v J1. Ih , in w14 F 1 U' C. S t/rt- -GG AZ 611 ("c 4_
17x1S 4 174 IMP M t A whitsce D OI = i e /64 Pay FL.144/ A nT (Gay
Ms.4 = 1S, 000 GPb 3.so GPD/rz. ,1sA = 7, J'!3 Fr?"
C. SeL6CT NVMP. tQ. F1LTJitS"(NF) NF
D. seta Fb,nic$Nsio,J (Ft_) Fw)
FL = 6o Fr (u.ic,n4) ;o r (w,O nl
6, coisiPvIE Fn..t c,E (FS4)
FSA = FL. x l:vJ . Fs4 _ . ko.FT x 30 Pr FSA.:. I, Soo
F. ci n ✓fL _ tuna L F, L:T k ,44. . (.r_F4aForl
-
OEM
PIER
rrA. = _NF_. T A =µx 1, au0P-r s 7 200 rL.T J»3_4
- - - --G - ;44 /1 of E Fl L.f L D G-i & J _ .OA�d _," RAM L (pi,t) - - -
F(14- = ADP f"rv4 Pt/L = 000 GP1; 4 7,;00 rL-R-=__3-.97 6:8)
�F1''