NC0086550_Application_19990129

01�
P,
® Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
290 S.W. Broad Street • Post Office Box 1737 • Southern Pines, NC 28388
January 29, 1999
.n
Qo
-ri
r-t
m
CD
Mr. Mike Templeton
NC Department of Environmental Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Post Office Box 29535
0
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
to =
RE: Town of Fairmont
Robeson County, North County
Wastewater Discharge Permit Request
HUA FR9605.p
Dear Mr. Templeton:
As we have discussed, the Town of Fairmont has requested a discharge permit for construction of a new 1.75 mgd
wastewater treatment facility to discharge to the Lumber River just south of the intersection of US Hwy 74.
Regarding your concerns of the flow allocation, we again state that the Town has been planning this facility as a
regional plant since its inception. As such, it is imperative to the planning process to obtain the permit for the full
amount at this time. Additionally, funding is being provided in the form of a loan and grant from Rural
Development, which will be available only for the amount justified and permitted. Rural Development and
NCDENR have been instrumental during the planning process and have both supported the development of this
facility as a regional wastewater plant. The NCDENR Lumber River Basinwide Management Plan also designated
this as a priority for future wastewater discharges.
In discussing some of the proposed regional discharges to the system, the Fair Bluff, Cerro Gordo water allocation
cannot be fully documented at this time. However, our office is working diligently with Fair Bluff and Cerro Gordo
to develop a funding package for submission to the Economic Development Administration and the North Carolina
Rural Center, (Unsewered Communities Program) to provide service to this area. To date, EDA has expressed an
interest in funding a portion of tlic prujcct. Earlier this rcek, the Town of Bladenboro contacted Fairmcn t with a
request to discharge up to 250,000 gallons per day to the facility. It is these types of opportunities that are already
presenting themselves that make it imperative that we establish the initial permitted flow rate at the amount
requested.
If the Town can provide additional information to assist during your review, or if I may be of further assistance,
please contact this office.
Sincerely,
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.,
Bill Lester, Jr., P.E.
Southern Pines, NC • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • e-mail: [e-mail]
Myrtle Beach • Kill Devil Hills • Raleigh

i
SENT BY: E.a.C.WHITEVILLEX.; 10-30-08 2:34; 010 6421876 _
919 733 0719; #212
STEVEN V, YCISr
leokwwma
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MEMORANDUM
Tel: Mike Templeton, Division ofWater Quality
FR: Steve Y i1columbive. County Economic Development Commission
DATE- October :30, 1998
RR Fairmont Wastewater Treatment Facility Project
TELEPHONE
9106406608
'1 KLK Ax
910-642-1876
This is to confirm to you that the Columbus County Economic Development Commission will
work with Fairrnom and its planned treatment facility to provide needed wastewater service to
future industry that is interested in the area. This veatment facility will be very helpful to our
economic development program in Fair Bluff and the western end of Columbus County_ We are
appreciative of Fairmont's willinpess to work with us and are excited about participating in
this worthwhile regional project. If we can provide any additional information, please let me
know.
Thank you.
1'cn•1 OFFICE Box 456 • WItrsUVII.I.E, NUKrii CARDS IVh 28472

10-24-1998 8:07AM FROM
P. 1
Fikobbs,
Upchurch
Assn j4&.s�P.A..
Consultusg Engineers
P.O. Bait 1737
ACSIMILE
2.0 S. W Broad ,V#wI
Southern Pines, North Carolina 28387
[phone] FAX [phone]
TO: Mike Templeton
FAX NUMREi:
(919) 733 - 0719
Division of Water Quality
NO. OF PAGES:
2 (including cover)
FROM: WI-4 Buie
IIIJA PROjpCT #
FR9605.P
90US, U00hurch & Associates, P.A.
HUA k'jO.E No. #
DATE: October 24,1"8
TEM:
8:13 AM
RE: Town of Fairmont
Revised flow Justification
MESSAGE: 1Vifke:
Following are the revised Mows that we discussed on Friday. I understood from
Pawl Bawls that you needed this information this weekend. I will be hack in my
office on Tuesday, Please calf if you leave any questions.
dxumeW5

10-24-1998 8:08AM FROM
Source
Fairmont
Town
Annexed Areas
Shell Building
Town
School
Proctorville
Town
Boardman
Town
Fairbluff
Post-ir Fax Note 7671
Date
AYA
pages► i
To V 4cE AcC o
�`((
From 1mi4r —rr_a� 0- Eft:t l
��U F. � �`i\�,,,n�-��"�
Co./DVeptpttt.'�j�l.,&(!F L4
7'NE�W tt
Co. ��)..nl:.
Phone#
Phone�'#�9-11')-133--v`S
Fax# 91b—/ Z` Z
Fax# —0-H
Town of Fairmont
Revised Flow Justification
1996 Average Flow
Town Ncoozo}Z9
Columbus County
Industrial Park
SU13TOTA.L
Industrial Allowance (100/9 of flow)
Allowable Inflow and Infiltration
Orrum
Proctorvilic
Boardman
Fair Bluff
Projected Flow
243,000
59,400
100,000
19,500
l5X0
32,800
37,920
240,000
250,000
269,727
65,933
100,000
21,667
16,650
36,408
42,09�
272,300
J�
375,000
1,199,776
119,900
2,400 y 0
3,800
7,250
27,800
1,360,926 ✓ 10V
n
Total Projected Flow for 20 Year Planting Period 1.40 MOD

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Fayetteville Regional Office
June 16, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO : Mike Templeton
NPDES Permits Unit
FROM : Paul RawlQ,
Fayetteville Regional O ce
THROUGH : Grady Dobson
Fayetteville Regional Offic
SUBJECT : Staff Report and Recommendations
Proposed Town of Fairmont W WTP Expansion and Relocation
NPDES Permit No. NCO021059
Robeson County
Find attached the staff report and recommendations for the subject facility.
cv
r.�
It is the opinion of this office that the subject permit should be granted in keeping with basinwide
strategy.
If you have questions or require further information please advise.
Enclosure
cc: Technical Support Branch
FRO, NPDES Permits, Fairmont

t .♦
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes_x_No
If Yes, SOC No. EMC WO 94-11
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Mike Templeton
June 16, 1998
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Robeson
Permit No. NC 0 2105
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Town of Fairmont Wastewater Treatment Facility,
Proposed Regional Facility
Post Office Box 248
Fairmont, N.C. 28340
2. Date of Investigation: January 7, 1998
3. Report Prepared by: Paul E. Rawls
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Ben Hill, Town Manager
5. Directions to Site: The site for the proposed facility is located adjacent to US Hwy 74 at
the Robeson and Columbus County line. Traveling East from the City of
Lumberton on US Hwy 74 turn right onto SR 2312 (prior to the Lumber River).
Proceed to the end of SR 2312 to entrance of the proposed facility.
6. Discharge Point For Proposed Regional Facility:
Latitude: 340 35 ' 52 " Longitude: 78 ° 58
USGS map extract indicating treatment facility site and discharge point attached.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. J 2 U.S.G.S. Quad Name _ Evergreen, N.C.
7. Site size for proposed facility consistent with application?
_X* Yes No If No, explain:
* Town has purchased 10 acres for the proposed facility.
8. Topography: The 10 acre site is approx. 500 yards from the Lumber River. Per
information received from the project engineer the entire site as well as the access road is
above the 100 year flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: None within 500 feet.

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes_x_No
If Yes, SOC No. EMC WO 94-11
10. Receiving stream: The Lumber River
a. Classification: C-Swamp Waters
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 030754
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent
downstream uses: Boating, canoeing, fishing, wildlife propagation.
PART II -DESCRIPTION OF "PROPOSED" DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: 1.75 MGD(Ultimate Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Waste Water Treatment facility?
Current facility is rated at 0.50 MGD
Proposed facility will be located at a different location and will be
permitted at 1.75 MGD.
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility? 0.50 MGD, Proposed 1.75 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorization to Construct issued in the previous two years:
Not Applicable
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater treatment facilities:
Not Applicable to this application.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities:
The proposed treatment works will consist of a mechanical bar screen, aerated grit
chamber, influent pump station, premix basin, dual path aeration basin, secondary
and tertiary clarifiers, chlorination and dechlorination unit, post aeration and
effluent pump station discharging directly to the Lumber River. The facility will
also have sludge (residuals) digester and sludge thickening facilities.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: None reported or expected.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Not Applicable
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Not detailed in the application. This item
should be address at the time of ATC.
3. Treatment plant classification, "PRELIMINARY" rating sheet attached): * Class 3
*This preliminary rating was developed using the application information. Points may be
altered by actual final design of facility. THIS RATING IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
4. SIC Code(s): 01

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes x No
If Yes, SOC No. EMC WO 94-11
Wastewater Code(s).
Primary _12_Secondary --__
Main Treatment Unit Code: JL 12 0 0 3
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved? YES : Clean Water Management Trust Fund, municipal bonds and Farmers
Home Rural Development
2. Special monitoring or limitations requests: In keeping with basin wide strategy.
3. Important SOC dates: SOC currently being revised
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications July 1, 1998
Begin Construction November 1, 1998
Complete Construction February 1, 2000
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation:
The facility has been issued a FONSI as part of the application process. The region
concurs that a regional wastewater treatment facility is justified.
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This proposed facility is noted to be the Town of Fairmont Regional Wastewater Treatment
Facility. The Town has committed to serving the surrounding area and has formally stated to the
Robeson County Board of Education that waste from the Omlm school will be accepted upon
completion.
It is the r�cQmmeMation of this office to issue the requested permit in keeping with basin wide
strate �''\\
K r N M6A \ Date 6/16/98
Signature of report prep�arre/r
Date 6/16/98
Water Q lity Regional uper-visor

Sol,
V► it Caw,p
l •� \ I � r4 •,A
bend
o ra �l J 06
r m a,+,n` �_ _r �.,,� �1+�,b"� krrd \ :► rid�A a u
+ rfJ 0`. •r' : ,' �wr � Ci ` `.rd __ `�f � ���_ sip "Z�` ��`,� 4
`V�_ o�• . 1e o bi `� °�sC1 , J �S Spa At pn�
,1• ` L/ �, / s Ut -,AID IPA !,q¢ �' kN11f v 'r��hr o ,r , ?Q
CL
S�Q
�s�An1° E .� •�.�'� ' i� �._,u.Pv...
!�j , d � 0 1 �k� SSv� ¢'r'. ♦S\�• ��� ` \ S+\�t� � ~°o -^— ,1 � � � . Q o �
•�•� �0 P G+ �� X,rAlund Y>
ft
n� _
• _ • l ti-w,,,P, u ti �.. \ 1101r
/� •``' �c• � � J and _i.
el >
•\ ifs ^� �1�Q° t��,� �� 1\ Jacob
A ter. m artrsna
r sr board J � � �r°'�i'r • .01
` Ira rr� I 1110
04
1 ` ,1010, SM
floo
In 1
Ice. CANjL'
030751
s o s to _ is 20 A,+tul
. Nike
0
ORIGINAL

DIVISION OFWATER QUALITY
July 1, 1997
TQ Miniature Subbasin Files
SUBJECT: Outline For System
On Miniature Subbasin Files
The subbasin map displays estimated points of discharge, plotted according to
the attached facility listing. Please note that on the list of dischargers, the column
-D appears, which means "ceased discharging." If a facility has ceased operation
(for whatever reason: actually ceased, application withdrawn, application
returned, permit rescission, permit denied, permit revoked, permit not necessary,
etc.), a X is shown in the column to indicate yes. However in some instances, an
NPDES permit may have transferred to a Stormwater Permit. When this occurs, a
SM is shown in this same column to indicate Stormwater Permit. It is no longer
maintained on our databases, and additional information must be obtained from the
Stormwater and General Permits Unit. For each of these cases, the estimated
location of the discharge will continue to remain on the subbasin map.
Special Note. There may be discharge locations with the same given map
number. Since the plotting of these dischargers is on such a small scale map, space
is very limited. When there is more than one discharger within a close proximity
of the latitude / longitude reading; and the discharge location on the topographical
map is within the same general location (whether each facility discharger is on the
same receiving stream or not); then, the same map number will be used to
represent each of the dischargers. This will reserve space, allowing the' maps to be
viewed in a more legible, attractive format.
The facility list consists of all existing, permitted and proposed.
permitted dischargers. In instances where a facility is existing, unpermitted,
the facility will not be included on the list until the facility has been permitted.
If and when the facility is ever permitted, then it- will be included in the respective
miniature subbasin master file. At no time will proposed, unQermitted facilities
be included in this file. At the present, there is -no -factor . on the facility list . -
showing the distinction between the existing. and proposed permitted discharge.
This system is
comprised of vital information for
the Water Quality Section of
DWQ in
determining
all point source
discharge locations
within the State of North
Carolina.
The facility listings at the
present; however, are limited only to the
enclosed
information.
In the future,
the facility listings
will be updated to include
all, vital
information
concerning each
facility through
a computerized, digital
system.
Until then,
this format will
be the only resource available for point source
discharge
locations within the state.
Attachments

SUBBASIN: 30751
2/6/97
Man
Facility
Receiving Stream
NPDES #
County
1
NCDOC / McCain Hospital
UT Mountain Creek
NC0035904
(Hoke)
2
Campbell Soup Company
Lumber River
NCG500205
(Robeson)
3
JP. Stevens Company / Wagram Complex
Lumber River
NC0005762 - 001
(Scotland)
3
J.P. Stevens Company / Wagram Complex
Lumber River
NC0005762 - 003
(Scotland)
4
Laurmburg Maxton Airport Commission
Lumber River
NC0044725
(Robeson)
5
Oxendine Elementary School
Jordan Swamp
NC0033910
(Robeson)
6
Robeson County WTP
Lumber River
NC0048577
(Robeson)
7
Fina Oil and Chemical Company
UT Saddletree Swamp
NCO094107
(Robeson)
8
Deep Branch Elementary School
Lumber River
NC0034070
(Robeson)
9
Pembroke WWTP
Lumber River
NCO027103
(Robeson)
10
Acme Electric Corporation
Jacob Swamp
NC0030686
(Robeson)
10
Smita, Inc / Travel Lodge Motel
Jacob Swamp
NC0039725
(Robeson)
11
Ahrmac Knit Fabrics, Inc
Lumber River
NC0004618 - 001
(Robeson)
11
Alpha Cellulose Corporation
Lumber River
NCO005321
(Robeson)
11
Lumberton W WTP
Lumber River
NC0024571
(Robeson)
Design Flow Latitude Longitude CD
MGD
Mao Ouad
0.200
35002'57" 79021'26"
G 21 SE
1.5
3404542" 79019'37"
H21SE
4.5 /
3405900" 79021'05"
7.0
H 21 SE
—
3404956" 79021'06" Y
H21SE
1.0 /
34046'05" 79020'00"
4.0
H 21 SE
0.003
34048'25" 7901540" Y
H 21 SE
0.20
34046'35" 79019'57"
H21SE
0.0144
34040'22" 79000'27" Y
122 NE
0.0043
34037'38" 79008'50"
122 NW
0.82 /
3403955" 79012'15"
1.33
122 NW
0.0081
34036'02" 79005'54" Y
0.009
122 SE
0.01
34036'00" 7900549" Y
122 SE
2.5
34036'30" 7900030"
122 SE
1.81
34036'20" 78059'55"
4.0
123 SW
10.0 /
34036'10" 7805945"
20.0
123 SW

12/16/96�'
SUBBASIN: 30751
.Q
Facility
Receiving Stream
Design Flow
Latitude Longitude LD
NPDES #
County
MGD
Mao Quad
12
Alamac Knit Fabrics, Inc
UT Jacob Swamp
—
34035'10" 79000'10"
NCO004618 - 002
(Robeson)
122 SE
12
Cogentrix Eastern Carolina Corporation
Lumber River
Monitor
34035'08" 79000'05"
NC0058301
(Robeson)
122 SE
13
Builders Transport, Inc
UT Lumber River
0.0720
3403630" 79005'20"
NCG510055
(Robeson)
122 SE
13
Robeson County Wide WTP
UT Lumber River
0.01
3403624" 79005'47"
NC0084204
(Robeson)
122 SE
14
NCDOC / Robeson County Subsidiary
Lumber River
0.025
34037'16" 79004'25" Y
NC0027847
(Robeson)
122 SE
15
Pepsi Cola Bottling Company
UT Lumber River
0.103
3403641" 79000'08"
NCG500243
(Robeson)
122 SE
16
CP&L / Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
Lumber River
—
3403458" 78058'25"
NC0005363 - 00
(Robeson)
123 SW
16
CP&L / Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant
Lumber River
Variable
34035'10" 7805842"
NC0005363 - 002
(Robeson)
123 SW
17
Long Branch Elementary School
Long Branch
0.005
34032'05" 78057'30" Y
NC0029963
(Robeson)
123 SW
18
Soft Care Apparel, Inc
Lumber River
0.009
34035'40" 78058'55"
NC0031551
(Robeson)
123 SW
19
Orrum High School
Flowers Swamp
0.006
34°2748" 79000'30"
NC0034100
(Robeson)
122 NE
20
Fair Bluff WWTP
UT Lumber River
0.18/
34°18'58" 79002'29"
NC0020729
(Robeson)
0.23
122 SE
21
International Paper Company, Inc
UT Dunn Swamp
Variable
34019'23" 78051'36"
NC0074691
(Columbus)
J 23 SE
22
West Columbus High School
UT Porter Swamp
0.015
34019'44" 78055'22" Y
NC0043737
(Columbus)
J 23 SW

1600
1400
1200
1000
U)
N 800
600
cd
N
rd
41
R1
b�
A
w
o_
w A
!— o
a4a
O Ccd
z-5�
o�
0
400
S.
L umkr Beer ,ptJclia ?PC- F' PM rnQQr -a t-ecL
•.••••.•.•••••••••.t •••••.••• ••••..•.••.....•• ^ .L. •� ••••••••••.••••••.•••• V�••• �••• •.•••••.•••..• •..••.. �••••••. ••••••• •;.•.••••.••.
tl �• h N . Q• O Z •�i
OQ . 2 . J o . 0. • • �:
v ,
a
�. bete Wt1'
................................ ......................................................................... .
tn
s
• .................. �....................•
h..
•
.................. ................ .... y .�...................�................ �................ ...�. �..............�. ...............
rb
............................................................................................... ............................... ........t............... .
d .�
At
200
.................. .................... .................... ....................
....... ............. v
.............
............................................,�.............
'
Soy :
•
:
0
v
.............................................................................................................................................................
Z
.............
Wt
. ,
Z3
IqL
117
.................. :....... ............ ....................
:...................
....................
:.............
A
4Y`..:..... ....•......... :................... ............ 0.......
_ ..._ r.. _...r..... 7� . — ._ -I�
' 1-. •-
............... ....................... .................... .............. ...... .................... ..............
--•�•...
..1....................... .............. .....•.....•.......... •..
/09
i
? 7'Q2.
..........................................................
....................
................ ............
......... ...•... .................................... ..�................/.
36 '1 Q10
�j
Gt
250
-a
Zoo It
'D
150 -4-
h
too
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Miles upstream from State Line
27-93

Permit
Facility
Street
Citv
State ZiD
FContact
Phone
NC0004618
ALAMAC KNIT FABRICS. LUMBERTONP.O. BOX 1347
Lumberton
NO
28359
James H. Walters
(919)
739-2811
NG0005321
ALPHA CELLULOSE CORPORATION
P. O. BOX 1305 .
Lumberton
NO
28359
Cherie P. Oxendine
(919)
738-4201
NC0005363
CPBL WEATHERSPOON S.E. (PWR)
P.O. BOX 327
New Hill
NC
27526
Mick Greeson
(919)
546-4189
NC0020095
ST. PALLS WWTP. TOWN OF
P.O. BOX 364
St. Pauls
NC
28384
Joe N. Loflin
(919)
665-5165
NC0021059
FAIRMONT WWTP. TOWN
P. O. BOX 248
Fairmont
NC
28340
Jeffrev Lewis
(9191
628-9766
NC0024571
LUMBERTON. CITY-WWTP
P O BOX 1388
Lumberton
NC
28359
A. Rav Griffin. Jr.
(9191
671-3859
NC0025577
RED SPRINGS. TOWN-WWTP: S.MAIN 217 SOUTH MAIN ST
Red SDrina
NC
28377
Leonard Green
(9191
843-5849
NC0026921
PARKTON WWTP. TOWN OF
PO BOX 55
Parkton
NC
28371
Dan C. Webb
(9191
843-3259
NC0027103
PEMBROKE. TOWN-WWTP/NCRS 133 PO BOX 866
Pembroke
NO
28372
Mcduffie Cumminas
(919)
692-5616
NC0027120
MAXTON WWTP. TOWN OF
120 N FLORENCE ST
Maxton
NC
28364
Paul G. Davis
(919)
844-5231
NC0034070
ROBESON CO SCH-DEEP BRANCH
PO DRAW 2909
Lumberton
NC
28359
Charles Oxendine
(910)
738-4841
NC0034100
ROBESON CO SCH-ORRUM HIGH SCH
PO DRAW 2909
Lumberton
NC
28359
Charles E. Oxendine
(910)
738-4841
NC0035530
CROFT METALS INC-LUMBER BRIDGE
P. O. DRAWER 90
Lumber Bridge
NO
28357
Robert Bvrd
(910)
843-3391
NC0040185
MOUNTAIRE FARMS OF NC
P.O. BOX 339
Lumber Bridge
NC
28357
Don Bull(Nc)
(919)
843-5942
NG0048577
ROBESON CO WTP/MAXTON
ROUTE 2. BOX 283-A
Maxton
NC
28364
Mvron E. Neville
(919)
844-5611
NC0058301
COGENTRIX-LUMBERTON
P.O. BOX 1063
Lumberton
NC
28358
Frank Harrison cmarY
(910)
738-8742
NC0069612
ROWLAND. TOWN OF
P.O.BOX 127
Rowland
NC
28383
Mitchell Walker
(919)
692-5616
NC0084204
ROBESON. CO-WWTP/LUMBERTON
701 NORTH ELM ST.
Lumberton
NO
28358
James Martin
(910)
844-5611
NC0085413
LENNON OIL COMPANY —
P.O. BOX 53557
Favetteville
NC
28305
John Lennon
(910)
323-3261
NC0085685
ROBESON COUNTY WELL TRT. FAG.
701 NORTH ELM STREET
Lumberton
tC
28358
Mvron Neville
(910)
844-5611
NCG500091
REGAL BELOIT CORP-MAXTON
P.O. BOX 128
Maxton
NC
28364
Robert F. Baxter
(910)
844-5156
NCG500173
CONVERSE. INC.
4019 HWY 72 WEST
Lumberton
NC
28358
Frank J. Koltoniski
(910)
671-4200
NCG500205
CAMPBELL SOUP CO.
ROUTE 2.BOX 98
Maxton
NC
28364
Dennis Kruoinski
(910)
844-5631
NCG500243
PEPSI COLA BOTTLING COMPANY
P.O. BOX 1308
Lumberton
NC
28359
Andv Jones
(919)
738-6266
NCG500291
ROBETEX. INC.
P.O. BOX 1225
Lumberton
NC
28359
Jim Bunvard
(9101
671-8787
NCG510055
BUILDERS TRANSPORT. INC.
P.O. BOX 7005
Camden
SC
29020
John Ireland
(919)
739-0261
�O Aid �csfl-�� -wFd �+�—

k—1 jl+ RL
T*4k-.f- %
Pof fl%O.
OA4a
S22 NE..1
c— -sw
Oc -
OL&til C-Sw
"44e- -
uS&S' S-,?-I-aol

PERMIT NOTES
Town of Fairmont
Fairmont Regional WWTP
NCO086550
RECEIVING STREAM: Existing Proposed
Pittman Mill Branch Lumber River
Lumber River Basin Lumber River Basin
03-07-54 030751
14-3 0-7-4-3 14-(13 )
Class C Sw Class C-Sw
CHRONOLOGY AND NOTES
11/19/97 Received permit application, $400 fee, EAA (CW).
11/21/97 Preliminary review, 2.5 hr. Proposal is for construction of new WWTP for flows
from Fairmont, Proctorville, Orrum, and Boardman. Fairmont is under SOC,
apparently has prepared a preliminary engineering report.
2/3/98 CT FRO, Grady Dobson. LEM
2/5/98 Sent belated ack letter and request for staff rpt.
2/6/98 Connected w/ Paul Rawls, FRO. Discussed history and status of the project. PR
doesn't know of any planning problems left open: FONSI, site purchase, rights -
of -way, wetlands @ entry road, funding seem to be settled. Regional Office
supports the project and wants to see it move forward without undue delays. FRO
will prepare staff rpt once they receive the package.
6/18/98 Received staff report.
8/98 Steve Pellei received ATC package for new WWTP.
9/15/98 Steve returned ATC for lack of permit.
10/1/98 Spoke w/ Will Buie re projected flows. He will send justification for flows up to
about 1.4 MGD.
1/??/99 CF Vance McGougan of Hobbs & Upchurch. He had met with Bill Lester and
Michael Wicker (also H&U) about the flow issue; they concluded the project is
too far down the tracks to make such major changes now. Indicated that Rural
Development funding would fall through if permitted flow were less than the
proposed design value.
1/??/99 Met w/ Paul Rawls and Dave Goodrich to work out our response re flow issue.
Issue is that we need some reasonable justification for the flow value: the present

calculation is flawed and not approvable. All of us agree we support the
regionalization concept at Fairmont, that we support this project, that the Town
can build whatever size plant it chooses (so long as it adequately protects WQ). If
we have already approved a higher flow (1.4 — 2.0 MGD) in previous EA or other
reviews, then we may already be bound to use that flow in this permit. We still
need some type of justification, documenting how it was derived. Need to follow
up w/ Bill Lester to make sure we understand each other's concerns in the matter.
1 /22/99 CT Bill Lester, H&U, 1000 hrs. Went over the issue of design flow v. permitted
flow. BL understood our predicament (has been on the receiving end of the
problem himself). He explained what is going on now to negotiate hookups and
seek funding for connections with Fair Bluff and Columbus County. The Town
and County are actively seeking others to connect and are using the new plant as a
marketing tool. There is a good bit of interest and activity but no solid
commitments yet for any of these projects. BL confirmed that Rural Development
(formerly FHA) would only pay for that portion of the capacity that is justified,
that is, in the permit. I indicated we are not out to kill the regional plant but need a
new flow justification to replace the one in the Oct 97 EAA. He will summarize
this and send us a letter to argue for the higher flow level to be included in the
permit. I will resume work on the permit and will consider our next step once we
review the letter.
2/11/99 CT Bill Lester, 1015 hrs. Told Bill that we received his Jan 29 letter (by FAX on
2/8, by mail on 2/10) and are going to draft the permit with the 1.75 MGD flow
limit. In our opinion, the Town and HUA have still not justified it adequately. But
the number has been floated for so long and not questioned (until now) that it has
taken on a certain legitimacy, a life of its own. It is not worth the battle for us to
press the point at this time. — Because the design flow is so much greater than
present actual flows at Fairmont, our main concern is plant performance in the
first years of operation. It is essential that the plant design be selected to meet
effluent limits — and reliability requirements — at the initial flows as well as at the
design flow. ----- BL is optimistic about Fairmont's role as a regional WWTP
crystallizing quickly. Fair Bluff/ EDA meeting yesterday and recent conversations
with Bladenboro confirm these are both headed toward connecting. Equipment
designer has assured him the plant will perform "from Day One." ----- Permit will
go to PN in about three weeks, then 30-day comment period, and 1-2 weeks to
issue (if no issues arise). BL is meeting with Fairmont today, will pass the
information along.
3/15/99 CT Paul Clark re pretreatment: Per Part III boilerplate (#4), no SIU can connect
to POTW's collection system until an approved program is in place (see permit
boilerplate and regs for exact language). Development and approval processes
typically take 1-3 years to complete. Town would have to develop SUO,
enforcement response plan, long-term monitoring plan, etc. Can develop a
program voluntarily, or just develop SUO and/or other elements in anticipation of

industrial connections; can also consider a modified program, which has less
stringent requirements (e.g., monitoring), for smaller programs. The Town has an
`inactive' program at present, so they may have some elements already in place.
It would be in Fairmont's best interests to develop some or all elements of a
pretreatment program in the near future, to facilitate hookups for any industries
they successfully recruit. Otherwise, the industries' startups could be delayed
until the program is approved. We have no specific requirements for monitoring
to be done ahead of program development. If the Town has questions about how
to proceed, Paul is their contact on pretreatment issues.

Page 7
Note for Mike Templeton
From: Tom Poe
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 1998 4:35 PM
Subject: RE: Fairmont
To: Mike Templeton
Quick check of our existing files shows nothing.
I also checked w/ Paul Rawls in FRO, he knows area well, there are currently NO SILT
Industrial dischargers in area.
So, at this time there is no need for them to develop a pretreatment program or to get the Part
III. (B.) Pretreatment Program Implementation Language in their NPDES permit.
However, I assume they will get the standard NPDES language i.e. Part III, A.
"Requirements for control of pollutants attritable to Industrial Users", specifically Part III, A.
(4.) second sentence which says 'Prior to accepting wastewater from any Significant
Industrial User (SIU), the permittee shall either develop .... or modify their approved
.pretreatment program."
Hope this helps !
Thanks for checking with us.
From: Mike Templeton on Mon, Feb 16, 1998 15:36
Subject: Fairmont
To: Tom Poe
Hi, Tom -
I need to check on pretreatment issues at the Town of Fairmont
The Town has applied to replace its aging WWTP with a new regional facility near
Boardman, and to relocate the discharge from Ashpole Swamp to the mainstem Lumber
River. The regional plant would pick up flows from Boardman, Orrum, and Proctorville, in
addition to Fairmont.
My question is: Are there any pretreatment issues here - local programs, S/IUs, etc. - that I
should address in the NPDES permit?
Thanks for your feedback
- Mike T

Page 1
From:
Date:
Subject:
To:
Note for Mike Templeton
Darlene Kucken
Mon, Feb 16, 1998 2:53 PM
RE: Lumber R/ Fairmont
Jason Doll; Jay Sauber; Mike Templeton
N
cam%' "'� �,•,,''�'" .
Hi Mike - Welcome to DWQ! !
I'm not yet focusing my efforts on the LBR basin as I'm still in the middle of the YAD basin
plan. I do know what you're referring to and have therefore forwarded your note to Jason
Doll (modeling) and Jay Sauber (Intensive Survey Group). Last week I sent a message to
Jason asking if a memo of the outcome of the swamp studies had been compiled. I haven't
heard back from Jason yet, but he and Jay are the best folks to talk to about this issue.
Jason and Jay - I'd still like to meet with you guys after the YAD mtgs are over and get the
"skinny" on this before public workshops in April in the LBR. Thanks!
From: Mike Templeton on Mon, Feb 16, 1998 2:46 PM
Subject: Lumber R/ Fairmont
To: Darlene Kucken
Hi, Darlene -
I'm with the NPDES Unit and have a project in the Lumber basin. I want to check with you
on the status of the recommendations in the '94 basin report, before I go too much further on
the project.
Here's the background. The Town of Fairmont has submitted an Engineering Alternatives
Analysis, which proposes to replace its aging W WTP with a regional facility, and to relocate
the existing discharge over to the mainstem of the Lumber River. I am reviewing the package
and will probably draft the permit mod if this proposal is approved.
The '94 basin plan recommended specific control strategies for new and existing discharges
into the subbasins, including the two of concern here, 03-07-54 (existing) and -51
(proposed). The plan also recommended that we improve our modeling of D.O. impacts of
discharges into swamp waters.
Where do things stand right now? Was the modeling study ever completed? Are the
recommended control strategies still current? Is there anything else I should know before I
respond to the proposal?
Let me know if this is too complicated for an e-mail response. I would be glad to sit down
with you to go over the issues. (I'm still waiting for a staff report from the regional office,
and that may answer some questions, as well.)
Thanks.
- Mike T
x541

PERMIT DATA SHEET
NPDES Permit No.
Abbr. No.
Permittee
Contact
Salutation
Address
City
State
ZIP
Facility Name
Address
City
State
ZIP
NCO086550
Permit Type
New (relocated)
303(d) listed (YIN)
No
86550
Discharge Status
Proposed
Town of Fairmont
Sic #1
4952
Use Support is, ST, PS, NS)
Supporting
Mr. Jeffrey Lewis
SIC #2
Drainage Area (sq. mi.):
1,228
Mr. Lewis
SIC #3
S7010 (cfs):
122
P.O. Box 248
W W Code #1
01
W7Q10 (cfs):
250
Fairmont
W W Code #2
3002 (cfs):
304
North Carolina
W W Code #3
CA (cfs):
1,300
28340
W W Code #4
IWC (%):
2.2
Fairmont Regional W WTP
W W Code #5
Basin Code
USGS Sta. No.
02-1345-0000
Major
03
& 02-1345-0000
North Carolina
Minor
07
Subminor
51
Location 1
at the southern end of SR 2312, off US Hwy 74
Location 2
adjacent to the Lumber River
County
Robeson
Receiving Stream
Lumber River
Classification
C-Sw
River Basin
Lumber
Subbasin No.
030751
W WTP Status
New
Design Q
1.75
Regional Office
Fayetteville
Letter cc #1
Ben Hill, Town Manager
Letter cc #2
William R. Buie, Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates
Latitude
D 34
M 35
S 52 ....... ..............
Longitude
_. _ ....p,
D 78
M 58
S 04
Type Ownership
MU
Facility Type
Major
Main Tmt Unit Code
12-0-0-3 (proposed)
USGS Quad Map No.
J23NW
Quad Map Name
Evergreen, NC
Stream Index No.
14-13(e)
Permit Writer
Mike Templeton
Facility Class
3 (preliminary)
Ext.
541
Admin Cutoff:
3/17/99
Signature Block 1
Michael E. Templeton
Public Notice Date:
3/24/99
Signature Block 2
NPDES Unit
Issue Date:
5/10/99
Signature Block 3
00000 Standard Data Fields, 3/19/99

J �
• . �d
�0��)� 1A lS �
Nval 4" ) Ff�o
PQV cv-,�� �-y
S

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. William R. Buie
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
P.O. Box 1737
Southern Pines, NC 28388
Dear O,ion
The Divof Water Quality (Divisi
for modiication of NPDES Permit Ni
wastewater treatment facility and relo
$400 (check #12436) on November
February 5, 1998
LT!MAI
� E P**J Fi
Acknowledgement of Application
Permit No. NCO021059
Town of Fairmont
Robeson County
o received your request on behalf of the Town of Fairmont
)CO021059, to allow the Town to construct a regional
2.ate its discharge. We received the Town's application fee of
9, 1997.
I have been assigned to this prc je t and have begun my review of the engineering alternatives
analysis. The purpose of this let r is to acknowledge, although belatedly, that we have received
the request.
Please be aware that the Di ision's regional office must also provide recommendations from the
Regional Supervisor prior o final action by the Division. I am, by copy of this letter, requesting
that the, regional office pr are a staff report on this project. We will notify you of any comments
or questions or any addidonal information necessary for the application review.
If you have any questons, call me at [phone], extension 541.
Sincerely,
Michael E. Templeton
NPDES Unit
cc: Mr. Ben Hill, Town of Fairmont
Fayetteville Regional Office / Water Quality Section
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

Page 1
Note for Mike Templeton
From: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Dace: Tue, Feb 17, 1998 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: Fairmont EA ???
To: Mike Templeton
Cc: Lisa Martin
Mike - I have been told not to send the EA's to Permitting or to Central Files since they take
up so much room. What I do send to either Dave (for discharge) or Kim (for non-dishcarge)
projects is a copy of my letter to the town official and consultant with the FONSIs (Findings
of No Significant Impact) indicating that the EA process is complete and they can proceed
with their permit application. This is only done on projects where WQ section is the lead.
Thelma supposedly is keeping all these letters in a file down there. She is also keeping a data
base with all the FONSI's listed for you folks to know when something is approved. I have
full project files by County if you ever need to see if something has gone through us.
For projects that originate through Construction Grants (to get SRF monies), CG&L (Jay
Lucas is the contact) would be the lead agency - therefore they (CG&L) have the project files
and the final FONSIs (not me). I only have WQ section's comments on CG&L projects (as
they are provided through DENR review) but not the full file or the FONSIs.
The other potential twist to this process happens when the lead agency for the EA is not
DWQ at all (not CG&L or us), but a federal agency like Dept of Agriculture (Rural Dev.
Grant) or some other federal agency that is leading the EA process due to a federal permit or
federal monies. Then the EA is processed through the NEPA process (a federal process)
instead of the SEPA (state) process. We then see the documents through the Clearinghouse
process. SEPA stands for the NC (State) Environmental Policy Act while NEPA stands for
the National Environmental Policy Act.
This is what happened on the Fairmont project you are referencing. In that case the federal
agency developed the EA and the FONSI for Fairmont's discharge project and DWQ then
reviewed it as a commenting (but not lead) agency. USDA controlled the EA process.
Several folks from modeling and permitting (Carla Sanderson and Susan Wilson) commented
on the project. DWQ and DENR gave the go-ahead on Fairmont's draft EA and FONSI
(where USDA was the lead) back in January 1997 (through Clearinghouse review). I don't
have a final FONSI to give you, since USDA controls the issuance of that final document and
they don't normally send us such documents. The applicant, however, should have received
this FONSI from USDA and should be required by DWQ to attach it to their application for
an NPDES permit so that we have something for your files (NPDES and Central files).
Otherwise it appears as if we acted on the permit without them having gotten an EA/FONSI.
Hope that clarifies the process. You can borrow my file on this if it helps.
Michelle
From: Mike Templeton on Mon, Feb 16, 1998 3:12 PM
Subject: Fairmont EA ???
To: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Hi, Michelle -

Page 2
Can you tell me if the Town of Fairmont completed an EA for a new regional WWTP, within
the last couple of years? I have a permit application for the facility and no EA in the Central
Files to look at.
Thanks.
(By the way, I brought in that engineering rule, in case you find yourself looking for one
again.)

NPDES FACILITY AND PERMIT DATA 11/20/97 14:38:21
UPDATE OPTION TRXID SNU KEY NCO021059
PERSONAL DATA FACILITY APPLYING FOR PERMIT REGION
FACILITY NAME> FAIRMONT WWTP, TOWN COUNTY> ROBESON 06
ADDRESS: MAILING (REQUIRED) LOCATION (REQUIRED)
STREET: P. 0. BOX 248 STREET: BROWN STREET
CITY: FAIRMONT ST NC ZIP 28340 CITY: FAIRMONT ST NC ZIP 28340
TELEPHONE [phone] DATE FEE PAID: 05/16/94 RNOUNT: 250.00
STATE CONTACT> LUCAS PERSON IN CHARGE JEFFREY LEWIS
1=PROPOSED,2=EXIST,3=CLOSED 2 1=MAJOR,2=MINOR 2 i=MUN,2=NON-NUN 1
LAT. 3,129339 LONG 0790616® N=NEWIM=MODIFICATION,R=REISSUE> R'
DATE APP RCVD 06/27/94 WASTELOAD REQS 06/01/94
DATE 'STAFF REP REQS 05/31/94 WASTELOAD RCVD 08/31/94
DATE STAFF REP RCVD 06/24/94 SCH TO ISSUE 11/21/91
DATE TO P NOTICE 10/06/94 DATE DRAFT PREPARED 09/01/91
DATE OT AG CON REQS / / DATE DENIED
DATE OT AG CON RCVD / / DATE RETURNED
DATE TO EPA / / DATE ISSUED 12/06/94 ASSIGN/CHANGE PERMIT
DATE FROM EPA / / EXPIRATION DATE 12/31/99
FEE CODE Y 3 ) 1=()IOMGD),2=(>lMGD),3=(>0.1MGD),9=(<O.1MGD),5=SF,6=(GP25;64,79).
7=(GP49,73)8=CGP76)9=CGP13,34,30,52)0=(NOFEE) DIS/C 01 CONBILL C )
COMMENTS: EFFECTIVE 1/l/95
MESSAGE: - ENTER DATA FOR UPDATE

/vCod z/oyl
00/Z y 3V/
AN7 TOWN OF FAIRMONT -� C/o Oa
P.O. Box 248, FAIRMONT, N.C. 28340, PHONE [phone]
FAX (91 O) 628-9584
November 18, 1997
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626
RE: Town of Fairmont
NPDES Permit Application
Dear Mr. Weaver:
In response to your letter dated November 17, 1997, please find
enclosed the Town's application fee of $400.00 for our NPDES Permit
Application.
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A. is coordinating the application
process for the Town. Any questions or additional information that you
need should be directed to their office.
Do not hesitate to contact the Town Hall if you have further
questions.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF FAIRMONT.
Ben Hill
Town Manager
BH/cb
Enclosure
'111111111-1ilb
POINT SOUfiCr DRANCH

Mill Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
290 S.W. Broad Street • Post Office Box 1737 • Southern Pines, NO 28388
October 28, 1997
Mr. David Goodrich
NC Department of Environment
And Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Town of Fairmont
Robeson County, North Carolina
NPDES Permit No. NC002105/'q
HUA No. FR9605.P
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
Please find enclosed three (3) copies of the Town's application to increase their discharge for the
above referenced system. Also enclosed are three (3) copies of the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis for the project.
As recommended in the report, the chosen alternative for this project is to construct a new
regional wastewater treatment facility that will serve not only the Town of Fairmont, but also the
Towns of Proctorville, Orrum and Boardman. The current discharge location is to Pittman's Mill
Branch which is considered a zero flow stream.
All costs provided within the report are based upon recent bid information in this area and/or the
Means Construction Index. Where applicable, vender quotes were solicited and provided within
the report. All unit costs provided within the cost estimates are for installed cost.
In reference to the requirement for preparing a soil report for the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis, we chose the best case scenario during our comparisons. Since the best case did not
yield the most cost feasible solution, we did not pursue the additional cost for obtaining the
services of a soil scientist. Additionally, the information noted, with regards to the soil types in
the area, were obtained from the Robeson County Soil & Water Conservation Office.
Southern Pines, NO Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Myrtle Beach, SC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Nags Head, NO Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]

Mr. David Goodrich
October 28, 1997
Page 2
If additional questions or concerns should arise during your review, or if we may be of further
assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
L)jt 01) 15uz;
William R. Buie, P.E.
WRB/eJJ
Enclosures

From:
Self <NIEW515>
To:
[e-mail]
Subject:
Re[2]: Fairmont
Date:
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 16:21:41
Carla Sanderson (Modeler) looked into the map on the moved discharge location (I left copies of
this map on your chair this afternoon). She said that the location looks OK. We will therefore
NOT need to do any additional analysis and the limits will remain the same. So--- guess we can
retract our last memo (which asked for an amended EA). Hope that completes this project!
Date:
Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:33:45 -0400
From:
[e-mail] (Melba McGee)
Subject:
Re[2]: Fairmont
To:
<[e-mail]>
I have talked with Parks about the discharge. When you get the map
that shows where the latest discharge point will be please let me have
a copy. I would like to send it to Parks and probably Wildlife. I
will alert the SCH that I am holding up our response until we have a
chance to review the map. If you happen to talk to Michael you might
want to tell him that the department will not respond until the map
has been reviewed. If you haven't seen the map by the first of next
week you may want to give him another call. Thanks, keep me posted.
Reply Separator
Subject: Re: Fairmont
Author. <[e-mail]> at Internet
Date: 6/17/97 1:58 PM
Finally got in touch with Michael Wicker this am. We will only change our
previous comments
(asking for an amended EA) if our modeling folks have a chance to review the
moved discharge
location (on a map) and they feel that this move will have no effect on
downstream dischargers.
Until Mike sends me a map (haven't seen anything yet) we are staying with our
last memo.
Will let you know more when I see something.
Michelle

Page 1
Note for Michelle Suverkrubbe
From: Carla Sanderson
Date: Wed, Jun 18,1997 4:03 PM
Subject: Fairmont
To: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Michelle - the location looks OK. We will not need to do any additional analysis and the
limits will remain the same. Thanks for the chance to review.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 11, 1997
TO:
Melba McGee
FROM:
Michelle Suverkrubbe
THROUGH:
Alan Clark
RE:
Comments on DWQ #11160
Fairmont EA/FONSI
Response to DWQ's FONSI Comments
Fairmont, Robeson County
�EHNR
FILE COPY
The Division has reviewed the letter from USDA/ Rural Development, which responds to
comments made by our Division on the EA prepared for the proposed Town of Fairmont WWTP
expansion EA. Prior to receiving this USDA letter, our Division had been contacted by Mr.
Michael Wicker of Hobbs Upchurch and Associates (the engineers for this project) regarding the
Town's proposal to again amend the location of the proposed discharge location from what was
finally included in the latest EA reviewed by our agency.
After reviewing the USDA responses to our original comments and in reference to the
recent communications with the project engineers, the Division has the additional comments
regarding the project:
The EA/ FONSI should be amended and recirculated through the State Clearinghouse to
include the final location for discharge into the receiving stream. An amended instream
analysis needs to be provided that includes an evaluation of the water quality at the
location of discharge and possible interaction with surrounding discharges. This is
necessary to determine appropriate limits for the discharge.
I can be reached at 919-733-5083, ext. 567 if the applicant has any questions.
m1sA11160 Fairmont EA
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

6-17-1997 2:21PM FRCM F I
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
CONSULTING ENCxWEERS
P.O. Box 1737, Southern Pines, NC 28383
To,:A?-A P ,aIIG
I -IC tDE HN
Phony: '
Faz#:G1�1 �I,rj^5lp�b
CC: ?
.l
zntz: JJ rt c- 17
Number o£pages including cover sheet 1_
xIro=
Phmc; 910-692 5616 F
Fax #: [phone] i;
�I�111
i / .CTLiti
r ��

6-17-1997 2:22PM FROM R 1.21
T': - "" �-- • �7A,_ __�+• •k• -+ ;;;; •�: — �r — 4 "= -ate — ..
1 t • �.r a•� — to �' +,rT ,7 .� M ,� Or. _ �"r �, „D,,,, �{� .� / y, 'r". �►. �„ y. �.M.-,�•••-^,
I �!• Lam\ l/ I diM. • A •!F - -dl-, "T"� �" �f► -�" " •� " �'_ r''�• �r -+� ""� �_'r / �'_
71
�•_, fir. \ +`' 4,
41,
•,._` , yam' .y. dYr ,d,,�yyi.Az
'� • ,r.._y_- = �• _ t
46
• •' i - •M_.k �1► gyp. .M•• '�" y"• 's1- •+IF ^•� .� � �� .rr: r: � .�r�i 1 r 1 Ch � •
-' � ' �`, w �Ir- .y. •++• �.�,. « .a► "''h.•M. — ...._ � '� .w _ rlt_ /'y ; i SalAalt � � � �.-Y.- �.� •--� 14
4N. qy. dY- -.ice _ _ .{`, ••-r•�T''"r� 1 Q j-�
ell,I • ,•' 1 ♦ ..1... -I ­ .� .,w • •� ; - US
of I --
/• \ �/ .` ..►. �,,,��"' -- r..— -.� +' � ;ram(•,. � r66.. r /�__Q
-a- III► — Q r r
\,• _ ,�y • •� \ ,I •••y •
Ilc—
If
... \
,*.. a &, lei
• _ . BoardmanCo
%1
0
s �.
.. _ ` /•
• .- �•..i :- ,.. r_ -t _�� _ � —• � •v" ; � �� fr Bear
Bay
It
oft
40
1511 ^,� w. •-v
13
do-
llu
rr
r ♦ I/
.,'. •
... � /,� � • 'may.. �r = '- 1••� - � Y .�- t • � • " • ♦ ,• � `� -- __ 1

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:33:45 -04M
From. [e-mail] (Melba McGee)
Subject: Re[2]: Fairmont
To: [e-mail]>
I have talked with Parks about the discharge. When you get the map
that shows where the latest discharge point will be please let me have
a copy. I would like to send it to Parks and probably Wildlife. I
will alert the SCH that I am holding up our response until we have a
chance to review the map. If you happen to talk to Michael you might
want to tell him that the department will not respond until the map
has been reviewed. If you haven't seen the map by the first of next
week you may want to give him another call. Thanks, keep me posted.
Reply Separator
Subject: Re: Fairmont
Author. [e-mail]> at Internet
Date: 6117/97 1:58 PM
Finally got in touch with Michael Wicker this am. We will only change our
previous comments
(asking for an amended EA) if our modeling folks have a chance to review the
moved discharge
location (on a map) and they feel that this move will have no effect on
downstream dischargers.
Until Mike sends me a map (haven't seen anything yet) we are staying with our
last memo.
Will let you know more when I see something.
Michelle

Page 1
Note for Michelle Suverkrubbe
From: Carla Sanderson
Date: Wed, Jun 4,199711:37 AM
Subject: Fairmont EA Addendum
To: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Michelle - Basically what we need to include in a response to the Town --
The EA needs to include the location for discharge into the receiving stream. As part of the
instrea n analysis, a review of the water quality at the location of discharge and possible
interaction with surrounding discharges needs to be evaluated in order to determine
appropriate limits.
Does this sound OK? Please let me know if this may be misunderstood in any way.
Thanks.

Q
May 6, 1997
UNITED STATES RURAL
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
AGRICULTURE
North Carolina Department of Administration
State Clearinghouse
Attn: Chrys Baggett
116 W. Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
11 I6 0 6-1 e -,' yi
325 East Fourth Street
Lumberton, NC 28358
[phone]
[phone] Fax
Teo '79gJ
��aH�yF
oFe?
F
Re: SAI NO 96E00000456
Town of Fairmont
Comments in response to Finding of No Significant Impact
Dear Ms. Baggett:
Rural Development completed an environmental assessment on the above project. A
copy of the environmental assessment was mailed to you on January 5, 1996, along with
a copy of the FONSI.
As a result of the review of the FONSI, additional comments were submitted to Rural
Development. We have carefully reviewed the comments. Please find our response
enclosed. We hope that the responding agencies will find their comments/concerns have
been adequately addressed.
We certainly appreciate your assistance and cooperation in this matter. If you have any
questions, please call me. You can reach me at [phone] or [phone].
Correspondence relating to this project should be submitted to my attention: USDA,
Rural Development, Alton Lennon Federal Building, 2 Princess Street, Room 339,
Wilminaton. NC 28401.
Sincerely,
R Poi E
Rural Development Manager
ures
c:\jrp\cpcAl 997\05\fairchfu.doc
Rural Development is an Equal Opportunity Lender
Complaints of discrimination should he sent to: Secretary of Apiculture, Washinpon. D.C. 20250 f

TOWN OF FAIRMONT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (ADDENDUM #2)
The purpose of this addendum is to address the comments that were generated by the
State Clearinghouse with regard to the original Environmental Assessment. Each
comment will be addressed separately.
1. Division of Environmental Management - Technical Support Branch
In response to the assumption made, the proposed discharge is 1.75 MGD. Additionally,
a detailed alternatives analysis will be submitted with the NPDES Discharge Permit
application.
Finally, the proposed design will allow for the expansion and addition of tertiary filters if
necessary. Additionally, the treatment plant will utilize two clarifiers that can operate in
parallel or in series. By operating the clarifiers in series, the effluent discharged will be
able to meet or exceed tertiary limits.
2. NC Wildlife Resources Commission
As indicated in the previous addendum, the new location of the wastewater treatment
plant and routing of the force main will provide for fewer impacts to the surroundings.
The proposed force main will be installed primarily in existing corridors as detailed
above.
The proposed wastewater treatment plant will be constructed with a dechlorination
system that will reduce the chlorine levels below those listed in the speculative limits. As
indicated above, even though the speculative limits do not indicate that the wastewater
must be treated to a tertiary level, the proposed clarifier configuration will allow the
proposed plant to produce effluent that will meet tertiary limits.
3. NC Division of Parks and Recreation
As indicated earlier, a dechlorination system will be utilized for the proposed wastewater
treatment plant, and the clarifier configuration will allow for the treatment of wastewater
to tertiary limits.

4. NC Division of Environmental Health
All water system improvements will be submitted to the Division for approval prior to
award of contracts.
5. NC Division of Forest Resources
Approximately 3.5 acres of woodlands will be impacted. This is a worst case scenario
estimate. As requested, the larger trees will be salvaged for pulpwood and sawtimber.
6. NCDEHNR - Fayetteville Regional Office
An NPDES permit application will be submitted prior to the submission of plans and
specifications for the proposed improvements. Any open burning will comply with all
local and state regulation. A sedimentation and erosion control plan wi11 be filed and
approved prior to bidding the project. 401 water quality certifications will be requested
for any wetlands impacted. No wells are proposed for abandonment. The regional office
will be notified if any underground storage tanks are found during the course of the
project.

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Rdsource.
❑ Project
located in 7th floor library
Office of Legislative
and Intergovernmental Affairs
Review Form
, b�
Project
Project Number.
County:
Date:
Date Response Due (firm deadline):
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
..Regional Office/Phone
Regional Office Area
to -House Review
❑ Asheville
❑ All RIO Areas
❑ Soil and Water
❑ Marine Fisheries
gAir
❑ Coastal Management
❑ Water Planning
Fayetteville
Water
❑ Water Resources
*nvironmental Health
❑ Mooresville
Groundwater
ildlife
❑ Solid Waste Management
❑ Raleigh
Land Quality Engineer
Forest Resources
❑ Radiation Protection
❑
❑ Recreational Consultant
❑ Land Resources
❑ David Foster
Washington
ElCoastal Management Consultant
Parks and Recreation
❑ Other (specify)
❑ Wilmington
❑ Others
nvironmental Management
❑ Winston-Salem
PWS
Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region:
Date:
In -House ReviewerlAgen
Response (check all applicable) 4
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager. In -House Reviewer complete individual response.
❑ No objection to project as proposed ❑ Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
❑ No.Comment ❑ Applicant has been contacted
❑ Insufficient information to complete review ❑ Applicant has not been contacted
❑ Project Controversial (comments attached)
❑ Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
❑ Consistency Statement not needed
❑ Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
❑ Other (specify and attach co ments)
t �,wh%
A fe I WQkoraa& Vie, ablull.
❑ Approve
❑ Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
❑ Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached) •
❑ Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
PS.104
nter o60 Le-rital Affairs
Offic of Legislative nd l . g

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
January 31, 1996
Memorandum
To:
Monica Swihart �V,7 --� pp),
Through:
Don S '
Ruth S wanel . ---, -
Dave Goodrich
From:
Susan A. Wilson`/
Carla Sanderson
Subject:
Fairmont WWTP Expansion, NCO021059
Environmental Assessment
Robeson County
The Technical Support Branch (TSB) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment for the
Town of Fairmont WWTP expansion to 1.75 MGD. Please note that one portion of the
document states that the expansion will be up to 2.0 MGD ( Exhibit I, p. 4), while the
document dated December 18, 1995 states that the expansion will be up to 1.75 MGD.
Technical Support assumes that the design flow upon expansion will be 1.75 MGD.
TSB's previous comments were based on the alternate sites that the Town had chosen due
to conflicts with NC Department of Parks and Recreation's plans for a park site. The
current site chosen was not one of the alternate sites that TSB reviewed in the preliminary
engineering report.
Therefore, TSB offers the following comments:
Please be aware that in formal application for an NPDES permit modification, an
engineering alternatives analysis will have to be submitted. As part of this analysis,
more detail will have to be provided with regard to spray irrigation (land application) of
the wastewater. Loading rates and soil analysis should be provided, along with a
detailed cost analysis, as outlined in the Division's Guidance for Evaluation of
Wastewater Alternatives.
(This above statement was included in the previous comments on the Town's Engineering
Report and will have to be addressed with the application for permit modification, since this
was not thoroughly addressed in the Environmental Assessment).
The effluent limits for this proposed facility reflect best professional judgement for a
discharge into swamp waters. Due to the uncertainty of the impacts, the possibility of
future upgrades for this facility should be considered. Discharges to swamp waters
are currently not evaluated through a modeling analysis, therefore the impacts to the
Lumber River at the proposed location have not been predicted. This area of the
river is slow moving and TSB currenity has no instream data available to determine the
existing conditions. Instream data collection will be part of the NPDES permit.
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Central Files

NCIJRC,HCP,FRLLS LAKE
TEL:[phone] Feb 08'96
9:20 N0.001 R.02
'"JI t/
'1 _North_Caroiina Wil&ife Resources Commission
391
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina27604A188, 919-733--3
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
E
TO: Melba McGee Intergovernmental Affairs
Office of Legislative
k Interg rnme
FROM: Bennett Wynne" O' -
Habitat Conservation program
DATE: February 6, 1996
SVBJECT: wastewaterttreatment al mplant, Town rofeFairmont,
Robeson County; North Carolina. Project 4 96-
0456.
The Wildlife Resources Commission has
sareviewed the
subject EA. Our comments are provided
provisions owith
f the Fish and Wildlife CoordinationAct
cthe C(48
Stat. 401, as amended; 16 V.S.C. 661 et. aeq.1.ina
Water Act of 1977 (asamended)
ded) and theetNorth
Carol amended; 1
Environmental Policy
NCAC-251•
The Town of Fairmont 's wastewater treatment system has
had difficulty meeting toxicity test requirements since 1993
and is currently operating under a Special Order of Consent.
Discharge to pittman Mill ntributedatomtoxicityall afailuresm with Q101n
of only 0.001 CFstoxicity
shortcomings, undersize and
addition to toxicity
deteriorated pipes have caused problems with infiltration
and inflow. The Town's treatconsument
planteandcdistributiont a
new 1.75 MG wastewater treatment p
system with discharge to the Lumber RBasednonrthe aproject's
constructed as a regional facility.
Preliminary Engineering Report, the plant would be but
constructed so that tertiary filtration could be added,
The Lumber
tertiary treatment is not initially proposed. is the
River is designated a Natural and Scenic River,

'c-4CWP.C,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Feb 08'96 9:20 No.001 P.03
central feature of Lumber River State pave, and
necis concern"
classified C Sw in the project area. F1 p North
fish species occur in the Lumber and
silverside5(L�abidesthes
Carolina's first record of the bra ect area.
sicculus) was collected from the river in thess finest
The Lumber River also provides some the St
redbreast sunfish angling. our wildlife enforcement
officers reported redbreast weighing 2 lb. being caught
downstream of Boardman in 1995.
The Town has changed the wastewater treatmer ent
plant Wt to
site from an area on SR 2245 along eu�to Lumber
an area accessed by SR 2244 to reduceimpactsr
provided
River state park. We support this relocation,
wetlands are avoided. As proposed, potential adverse
impacts to fish and wildlife resources include osss River
wetland habitat to pipeline construction and
scharggeectTo
water quality decline due to added wastewater di
minimize these impacts, we recommend the following p
modifications:
1. Locate new pipelineconstruction along existing road
right-of-ways to minimize impacts to wetlans.
ucted y
necessary stream crossings should be constr
perpendicular to the stream to minimize the amount of
work required within the riparian corridor.
2. provide tertiary treatment and dechlorinization for
wastewater discharged into the Lumber River at project
start up. The Lumber River's status as a Natural
e to
Scenic River, its outstanding re.creon nai�tatevaand its
boaters and anglers
offQerareispecies warrant this
importance as habitat for y not at
level of water quality protection immediate)
some point in the future.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this
project. if you need to discuss these comments22-9736.
additional assistance, please call me at (919) 5
CC: William Wescott, Coastal HabCon Coordinator
s:\boatfish\habcon\coast\d4 (niaafai2.doc)

N
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
February 7, 1996
Memorandum
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Stephen Hall
SUBJECT: FONSI/EA --Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements, Town of Fairmont,
Robeson County
REFERENCE: 96-0456
The Division's original concerns about the placement of the proposed wastewater plant have
been resolved and we strongly approve of this action to bring wastewater discharges from the
Town of Fairmont into compliance with state environmental regulations. However, since this
project will create a new discharge into Lumber River State Park, we will continue to have
concerns about possible impacts to the aquatic habitat as well as to* recreational uses of this
segment of the Lumber River until we are satisfied that the effluent will meet the highest
standards currently available.
In this regard, we would like to see a commitment to incorporate certain features be into the
design of this facility. We completely endorse either the use of a dechlorination process if
chlorination continues to be used, or the substitution of another method of disinfection, such
as ultraviolet light treatment. Chlorine and the compounds formed as chlorine interacts with
organic material have been well established to be quite toxic to aquatic organisms. The
discharge of these substances is therefore inconsistent with the goals of maintaining the
Lumber River as either a state park or a state river. We would also support the inclusion of
other methods that would improve habitat quality within the river. These include tertiary
treatment methods and the use of an oxidation ditch or an equivalent process for the removal
of nutrients. _

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Forest Resources 1/
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor �e
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary H 1V �
Stanford M. Adams, Director Griffiths Oldorest 0Westr
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
January 22, 1996
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative Affairs
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester vl jx
SUBJECT: EA and Preliminary Biological Assessment for the Town of Fairmont W WTP and Other
Improvements in Robeson County
PROJECT # 96-0456 and 96-0066
DUE DATE: 2-2-96
We have reviewed the above subject combined documents for this project and have the following comments:
1. The Biological EA indicates the following concerning woodland -
a. "Some trees will need to be removed along the shore of the Lumber River in order to construct the outfall."
These trees range from 8 to 18 inches DBH.
b. 'Initial construction activities should have minimal impact upon forest resources."
c. "The force main will be located in an existing road ROW and the wastewater treatment plant site will be
built in a soybean field."
2. The EA document indicates the following -
a. "c. All vegetation cleared will be hauled to the county landfill or otherwise properly disposed of."
b. "7. Forests. The currently proposed W WTP sites are not forested. The proposed force mains will run
along highway rights -of -way from the Fairmont area to the Lumber River area. Should the DOT site be
chosen, the effluent force main discharging to the river will traverse a small area of forest adjacent to the
river. It is anticipated that these impacts will be minimal."
3. Reading between the lines, it appears that woodland and forestry will W be significantly impacted. The
woodland and trees present are adequately described in the document. However, we still would like the
following added -
a. Number of acres of woodland to be impacted, even if less than 10 acres.
b. If practical, attempts should be made to salvage the larger trees that have to be cut for pulpwood and
sawtimber. If AU possible, then a statement to this effect.
4. We got the impression that the document does not completely address concerns expressed by N. C. Division of
Parks and Recreation concerning their Lumber River State Park facility especially in regards to odor and the
proposed discharge line.
5. We have no further comments at this time.
pc: Mike Thompson, Warren Boyeue - CO
File
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

ran
pm
pm
Fan
WASTEWATER TREATMENT &DISPOSAL
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
FOR THE
TOWN OF FAIRMONT
ROBESON COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA
rml
run
r O
r C
PREPARED BY
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES P.A.
fm 290 S.W. BROAD STREET
SOUTHERN PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
FM
OCTOBER,1997

t*I
WASTEWATER TREATMENT & DISPOSAL
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
TOWN OF FAIRMONT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
Introduction
fm
II.
Alternatives Considered
MR
III.
Analysis of Alternatives
IV.
Cost Comparisons
V.
Flow Justification
VI.
Recommendations and Conclusions
�+
Attachments
A. NPDES Permit - Town of Fairmont
B. Speculative Limits
C. NPDES Permit Application
D. Supporting Information - Land Application of Wastewater
E. Supporting Information - New Wastewater Treatment Plant
Page
1
2
3
6
7
8
I

F"
M"
rim
M"
P"
0"
MR
I. INTRODUCTION:
The Town of Fairmont is located in Robeson County in southeastern North Carolina. The
area is primarily agricultural in nature. There are several tobacco markets located in
Town, and the commerce is brisk when the markets are operating. However, the Town
has begun to focus on industrial and economic development to counter losses in the
farming industry.
Fairmont currently owns and operates a 500,000 gallon capacity wastewater treatment
facility that discharges to Pittman Mill Branch. The plant is a "Walker Process" style
plant being concentric circular concrete basins with a clarifier in the interior basin and the
outer basin split into an aeration basin and digester. The plant is operated under NPDES
Permit No.N00021059. Pittman Mill Branch is considered a low flow receiving stream
that affects the discharge limits. The Town currently is required to perform toxicity
testing at a concentration of 92%.
When the Town began testing for toxicity in 1994, they would pass and fail various tests
with no consistency. Through various toxicity evaluations performed by Burlington
Research, no clear source has been identified; however, ammonia has been suspected as
the major contributor. Because the existing treatment plant does not provide adequate
treatment, influent ammonia cannot be reduced to the necessary levels.
In 1994 the Town agreed to go under an SOC (Special Order by Consent) as a result of
their toxicity violations. A Preliminary Engineering Report was prepared in 1995 to
provide the Town with various options for the resolution of their wastewater discharge
violations. This Engineering Alternatives Analysis is an extension of the earlier
Preliminary Engineering Report.
Town of Fairmont Page 1 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.,
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis

II. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
As mandated, all environmentally feasible alternatives for wastewater treatment and
disposal must be analyzed. Following are the alternatives considered by the Town of
Fairmont:
A. Pump Wastewater to the City of Lumberton.
B. Land Application of Wastewater.
C. Upgrade of Current Wastewater Treatment Plant and Discharge.
D. Construct a New Wastewater Treatment Plant with Discharge to the Lumber River.
Each alternative will be studied with respect to capital construction costs, annual
operation and maintenance costs and incorporated into present worth cost analysis. A
summary of the preliminary design, design calculations and cost estimates will be
provided for each alternative.
Town of Fairmont Page 2 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis

MR
III. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES:
The various alternatives for wastewater treatment and disposal will be analyzed for a
determination of the most environmentally and economically feasible solution to the
�+ Town's wastewater treatment needs. The "do nothing" alternative has been excluded as
this would violate the terms of the Town's SOC. Following is an evaluation of each of
the above listed alternatives:
A. Pump Wastewater to Lumberton
In considering a regional alternative for the Town's discharge, pumping
their wastewater to the closest system was considered. The closest system
to Fairmont is the City of Lumberton. Several conversations between the
two municipalities have taken place; however, no agreements were
reached. Due to various concerns and lack of flow capacity, Lumberton
,.., decided that they could not allow Fairmont to discharge to their system. A
copy of their letter to the Town that indicates their decision has been
included in the appendix of this report.
B. Land Application of Wastewater
Land application of wastewater in cropped fields following storage in a
facultative or anaerobic lagoon is an environmentally feasible option. The
relatively high water table and available soils in the area are a concern.
However, there is land available relatively close to the existing wastewater
treatment plant.
The USGS topographical map and soil survey of Robeson County were
used to determine the predominant soils of the area. These soils are from
the Wagram and Norfolk series and have a moderate permeability of 2.0 -
6.0 in/hr. For purposes of this analysis, the best case permeability of the
soils will be used to evaluate cost feasibility. Should this option prove to
r•�, be economically feasible, a soil survey will be conducted to determine the
actual soil permeability. However, if this option proves not to be cost
feasible, the soil survey will not be conducted.
Application of wastewater is typically limited to days when rainfall is less
than 0.5 inches. Based on local weather data, storage of 60 days should be
required. Typically 30 days of minimum storage are required to provide
for preliminary treatment. The Cooperative Extension Service and State
Review Group typically recommend maximum application rates of 1" per
week; however, an application rate of 1.5" per week was selected to
evaluate the economics of this alternative.
MR
Town of Fairmont Page 3 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
MR Alternatives Analysis

The preliminary design data and preliminary cost estimates have been
included in the attachments of this report. The estimated land required for
spray fields and buffers is 540 acres. The estimated cost of this option is
$7,840,500.00 including land and professional services.
C. Expansion of Existing Discharge
As stated earlier, the Town of Fairmont currently owns and operates a
0.50 MGD wastewater treatment plant that discharges to Pittman's Mill
Branch. Pittman's Mill Branch is a tributary of Old Field Swamp located
in the Ashpole Swamp subbasin of the Lumber River. The 7Q 10 flow of
this stream is zero making this a "no flow" stream.
There are several concerns about the existing plant that affect this option.
There is no duality in the current system. The existing plant has only one
clarifier, one aeration basin, etc. Additionally, during heavy flows, the
detention time in the aeration basin is not sufficient to provide adequate
treatment.
If the Town was allowed to expand their discharge to Pittman's Mill
Branch, the limits would likely be lowered to 5 mg/l BODS and 2.0 mg/1
NH3N. An entirely new wastewater treatment plant would have to be
constructed to meet these discharge limits. Additionally, the Lumber
River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan outlines the Division of
Water Quality's policy for the expansion of discharges into zero flow
streams:
"It is DEM's (currently DWQ) policy not to allow new or
expanded discharges into "no flow" streams having a
7Q10 or 30Q2 equal to zero. In addition, existing
facilities on such streams will be targeted for removal
unless it is determined that there are no reasonable
alternatives."
Further, the Basinwide Management Plan lists both Old Field Swamp and
Ashpole Swamp as impaired waters. Low dissolved oxygen valves have
been recorded in these streams. Additional discharge to these waters may
further affect water quality.
Based on these environmental concerns, this alternative does not appear to
be feasible. The Town has serious concerns regarding the construction
and financing of a new wastewater treatment plant that would discharge to
Town of Fairmont Page 4 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis
n
r
r

Fmq
FM
RM
F"
W4
rEn
psi
a "zero flow" stream. Therefore, this alternative will be eliminated from
consideration due to environmental concerns.
D. New Wastewater Treatment_ Plant With Lumber River Discharge
The remaining alternative for consideration is the construction of a new
wastewater treatment plant with a discharge to the Lumber River. The
Town has requested speculative limits for a discharge to the Lumber River
near the U.S. Hwy. 74 crossing. Below is a summary of the limits. A
copy of the letter has been included in the attachments of this report.
BODS (mg/1) 15.0
NH3N (mg/1) 4.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) 5.0
TSS (mg/1) 30.0
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml) 200
pH (SU) 6-9
Total Phosphorus (mg/1) monitor
Total Nitrogen (mg/1) monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (ug/1) 28
The Town has been working with the local property owners and the NC
Division of Parks & Recreation to locate a site near the river that can
co -exist with the proposed Lumber River Park Headquarters. A site
acceptable to all parties has been located off U.S. Hwy. 74. A proposed
layout has been included in the attachments.
The proposed plant will consist of the following components:
Mechanical Bar Screen
Aerated Grit Chamber
Aeration Basin (with diffused air)
Dual Clarifiers
Chlorination and Dechlorination Facilities
Influent and Effluent Flow Measurement
Influent and Effluent Pump Station
Associated Piping
The estimated cost of the project is $5,217,640.00 with an annual
operation and maintenance budget of $270,420.00.
Town of Fairmont Page 5 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
am Alternatives Analysis

IV. COST COMPARISON:
Based on our review of the alternatives, there are only two (2) options that should be
considered from a cost standpoint. Pumping to the City of Lumberton was eliminated
due to their unwillingness to accept Fairmont's wastewater. Upgrading the existing plant
and discharge was eliminated due to environmental considerations.
This leaves the alternatives of Land Application and constructing a New Wastewater
Treatment Facility. The total capital cost and annual operation and maintenance cost of
each is summarized in the table below. The present work of each is shown as calculated
with an interest rate of 8.5% over 20 years.
m�. Y sv'7!
'... Capital C©s ` rn
"` 9 ®&M 0r0 eFp
:—sasLL"..:s..,�Iriw:�.+iu.3:'. .i:.:
Land Application $71,8401500.00 $2035,420.00 $927675,558.69
New WWTP $5,217,640.00 $270,420.00 $73,77%409.79
Construction of new wastewater treatment facility with a discharge to the Lumber River
is the most cost feasible alternative based on the present worth analysis.
Town of Fairmont Page 6 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis

r
V. FLOW JUSTIFICATION:
The projected flow for the proposed Fairmont regional wastewater treatment plant has
been based on Fairmont's projected service area and commitments to new users. A
breakdown of the projected flows has been included in this report in the following table:
Town of Fairmont - Projected Flows
r■*�
Source 1996 2016
Average Peak Aver
Peak
Fairmont
Town 243,000 638,000 269,727
708,172
Annexed Areas 59,400 148,500 65,933
164,833
Shell Building 100,000
100,000
Orrum
Town 19,500 48,800 21,667
54,167
School 15,000 37,500 16,650
41,625
Proctorville
Town 32,800 82,000 36,408
91,019
Boardman
Town 37,920 94,800 42,091
105,227
SUBTOTAL
1,265,043
Industrial Allowance (10% of existing peak flow)
114,960
�+
Allowable Inflow and Infiltration
Orrum (24 in miles of pipe x 100 gpd) 22400
6,000
Proctorville (38 in miles of pipe x 100 gpd) 3,800
9,500
Boardman (29 in miles of pipe x 100 gpd) 2,900
7,250
SUBTOTAL
22,750
TOTAL PROJECTED FLOW
1,402,753
ram
The average flows as listed in the table for the Town of Fairmont are based on the 1996
flow data. The average flows for the other communities are based on the household
too'
usage. The peak flows are based on a 2.5 peaking factor.
An unspecified industrial allocation of 10% of the existing peak'flow has been added to
the flow projections. Additionally, 100,000 gpd has been allocated for the Town's
industrial shell building that is currently not occupied. This allocation is based on
,., industrial prospects that have projected flow usage. Finally, an increase in the amount of
inflow and infiltration has been included in these flow projections. These inflow and
infiltration projections are based on the age of the systems.
The total projected flow for the 20 year period is estimated to be 1.40 MGD. Based on
current state regulations that require facilities to begin planning for expansions once they
reach 80% of the capacity of the facility, design flows must be based on this 80% rule.
Therefore, the recommended design flow of the proposed Fairmont treatment plant is
1.75 MGD.
Town of Fairmont Page 7 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS:
Based on our review of the alternatives available for wastewater treatment and disposal,
we recommend that the Town pursue construction of a new wastewater treatment facility
that will discharge to the Lumber River. This is the most cost feasible solution that is
also environmentally feasible. Implementation of this alternative will allow the Town to
abandon their existing wastewater discharge, will allow the Orrum Middle School to
abandon their discharge and will allow the Towns of Proctorville and Orrum to begin
their sewer systems.
I
Town of Fairmont Page 8 Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Wastewater Treatment & Disposal Consulting Engineers
Alternatives Analysis

ATTACHMENTS
fal
PER
I
I
fout 7

pro
NPDES PERMIT
TOWN OF FAIRMONT

Permit No. NCO021059
R•, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
P"
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.19
mn other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Rol Town of Fairmont
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Fairmont Wastewater Treatment Plant
Brown Street
Fairmont
Robeson County
to receiving waters designated as Pitman Mill Branch in the Lumber River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in '
Parts L U, and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective January 1, 1995
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on December 31, 1999
.. Signed this day December 6, 1994
I"
MR
r,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
P"

Permit No. NCO021059
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Fairmont
.
IIII
I
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.50 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of a manual
bar screen, submersible grit pump, solids cyclone and decanter. influent wetwell and pumps.
aeration tank with fine bubble diffusers, aerobic digestor tank, clarifier tank. effluent
chlorination and basin, flow meter, cascade post aeration, residual drying beds, and backup
generator located at Fairmont Wastewater Treatment Plant. Brown Street. Fairmont, Robeson
County (See Part III of this Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Pitman
Mill Branch which is classified Class C-Swamp waters in the Lumber River Basin.
I

i i 1-°.u. �., I T,, .`)\. . r" p( .I • I :I r ^� 1. .,xuu
C.' �1 I � 1 ro�, ,l.. �� II � '' 'w� '- 1' / 11 �'RA (Ii�/I��', _ ' •
f DISCHARGE POINT
.; \) , i. HIP �.•'-gy r.
<) '•4•� �� i `".• J j II ..V / �.�f}�/•F �� 't!; (�'>, .1� it Gem '
JI , �.�J 1 l 1 t•��Ay . ♦ r
';our -TW
?•' 1 ' �`• f(°• I i 1..r rti �r a1n.» i15) I .
At
MIS
• 1 ( °' I I • �' '*� '� - +'tom .,, v.� f
\)/ yoA,
�• - t('- �'— C.m
2r3a' 1 Q .._ _ .. o 1
t i ,.
� ••
I 1
A))
Town of Fairmont WWTP 6 Dlscharye Point
NPDES Permit No. NC0021059 '`f /

A. L.i-I-LUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL
Permit No. NCO021059
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized
to discharge from outfall serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Flow
BOD, 5 day, 20 °C"
NH3 as N
Dissolved Oxygen"'
Total Suspended Residue"
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Total Phosphorus
Temperature, °C
Conductivity
Chronic Toxicity
Discharge Limitatlons
MQnitorina
Maas rgment
_Requirements
sample
*SamS1e_
Mon. Ava:
Weekly Ave . Daily Max
Freauency
TYRO
Location
0.50 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
30.0 mg/l
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E,I
2/Month
Composite
E
Weekly
Grab
E,U,D
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/1
Weekly
Composite
E,I
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E,U,D
2/Week
Grab
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
Weekly
Grab
E,U,D
Weekly
Grab
U,D
Quarterly
Composite
E
*Sample location: E-Effluent, I -Influent, U - Upstream at Morro Street Bridge (Pittman Mill Branch), D-Downstream at Hwy 130
By-pass West (Old Field Swamp)
Upstream and Downstream monitoring shall be grab samples.
**The monthly average effluent 130135 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective
influent values (85% removal).
***The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mgll.
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 90%, February, May, August, and November; See Part II1, Condition E.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored weekly at the effluent
by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
—A A ---A -73 —71 ---A _7] "__ __A ] —7 `-1 -1 --1 7 _-7 --I

MR
Part III
Permit No. NC002 1059
r"
E. CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is 90% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document).
The permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance
with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date
of this permit during the months of February, May, August, and November. Effluent sampling
for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all
treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
ran Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed. using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
�+ Attention:
Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
r o Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
,.., NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document. such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
F"
MR
PM

SPECULATIVE LMTS
N

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
_ Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
.. Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
ApH120, 1995
Ms. Helen Lockley, Manager
Town of Fairmont
Post Office Box 248
Fairmont, North Carolina 28340
Subject: Town of Fairmont Waste Water Treatment Plant
N00021059 Subbasin: 03-07-54
Robeson County
Dear Ms. Lockley:
I am writing in response to your letter requesting speculative limits for a proposed relocation and
expansion of the Town of Fairmont's wastewater treatment plant. The wastewater discharge from
this facility currently flows into the Pitman Mill Branch which is located in the Ashpole Swamp
�. watershed. The proposed relocation is to the Lumber River mainstem at Highway 74 near the
Boardman gage.
As part of the preparation for the Lumber River Management Plan, the USGS developed a low
flow profile for the Lumber River which includes flow statistics at the Boardman gage. The
following represents those determinations:
Drainage Area: 1,228 miles2
.. summer 7010: 122 cfs
winter 7010: 250 cfs
0 average: 1,300 cfs
3002: 304 cfs
The recommendations made in this letter reflect management strategies for the Lumber River
Basin. The Lumber River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan describes the swamp -like
conditions which exist throughout most of the watershed. A good example is the Lumber River
mainstem downstream from Lumberton where DO concentrations approach 3 mg/I. This is
considerably lower than the rest of the river's mainstem and is well below the state standard of 5
mg/I. It is difficult to determine to what extent these low DO concentrations are natural or should
,., be attributed to point source discharges of oxygen -demanding wastes located just upstream. At
this time, DEM, (Division of Environmental Management) does not have an adequate tool to
evaluate these swamp systems. To address the uncertainty surrounding the water quality in the
Lumber River and the lack of a modeling tool, a permitting strategy was developed. Therefore,
recommendations for all new dischargers to the Lumber River watershed will receive advanced
secondary limits unless facilities are relocated to an area where more stringent limits are already in
place.
W
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10 % post -consumer paper

ISM
Town of Fairmont WVT= NCO021059
I"
The tentative limits for the Fairmont WWTP expansion from from 0.500 mgd to 2.0 mgd at Highway
74 near the Boardman gage on the Lumber River are as follows:
Flow (mgd):
2.0
BOD5 (mg/l):
15.0
NH3-N (mA:
4.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
5.0
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1):
30
Fecal Coliform (#/100ml):
200
pH (SU):
6-9
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
monitor
Total Nitrogen (mg/l):
monitor
�., Total Residual Chlorine (µg/l):
28
Quarterly Chronic'periodaphnia) Toxic ► T est at 2.E °i ;
February, May, August, and November
IBM Please be advised that response to this request does not guarantee that the Division will issue an
NPDES permit to discharge treated wastewater into these receiving waters. It should be noted
that a new facility involving an expenditure of public funds or use of public (state) lands and having
12M a design capacity of 0.5 MGD or greater (or a facility proposing an expansion of 0.5 MGD or
greater), or exceeding one-third of the 7Q10 of the receiving stream will require the preparation of
an environmental assessment (EA) by the applicant. DEM will not accept a permit application for a
project requiring an EA until the document has been approved by the Department of
PM Environment, Health and Natural Resources and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has
been sent to the state Clearinghouse for review and comment.
The EA should contain a clear justification for the proposed facility and an analysis of potential
alternatives which should include a thorough evaluation of non -discharge alternatives. In
addition, an EA should show how water reuse, conservation and inflowfinfiltration reductions have
been considered. Nondischarge alternatives, such as spray irrigation, water conservation, inflow
and infiltration reduction or connection to a regional treatment and disposal system, are
considered to be environmentally preferable to a surface water discharge. In accordance with the
North Carolina General Statutes, the practicable waste treatment and disposal alterative with the
least adverse impact on the environment is required to be implemented. If the EA demonstrates
�., that the project may result in a significant adverse affact on the quality of the environment, an
Environmental Impact Statement would be required. Monica Swihart of the Water Quality
Planning Branch can provide further information regarding the requirements of the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act.
Please note that Inflow and infiltration is still a concern for the existing facility. Contact with our
Regional Office indicates that ongoing efforts to remedy these problems are taking place.
Toxic specific limits have not been reviewed in this speculative analysis. The Technical Support
Branch would recommend coordination between your staff and our Pretreatment Staff to
determine possible toxicants involved in this proposed discharge. Our current information
indicates that no Significant Industrial Users, (SIU's) are currently tied into your plant. A complete
evaluation of limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants will need to be
addressed at the time of a formal NPDES application.
r� Under current Division of Environmental Management (DEM) procedure, dechlorination and
chlorine limits are recommended for all new or expanding dischargers proposing the use of
chlorine for disinfection. An acceptable level of residual chlorine in the proposed discharge is
28 µg/I for protection against acute toxicity. The process of chlorination / dechlorination or ultra
violet radiation may allow the facility to comply with the total residual chlorine limit.
rM

Town of FaimmnVW1 TP NCO021059
Again, please note that these limits are speculative and are for planning purposes only. The final
NPDES effluent limitations will be determined after a formal permit application has been submitted
,�, to the Division of Environmental Management. If there are any additional questions conce submitted
this matter, please feel free to contact Farrell Keough, (ext. 510) or me, (ext. 519) at 919
733 - 5083. ( )
Imn
Sincerely,
onald SLL
Assistant
Water Quality Section
cc: Dave Goodrich, NPDES Permits Group
Paul Rawls, Fayetteville Regional Office
Central Files
�n
ran
r�
P,
rq

i
n
7
7
NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION
N

ran
00irell CAROLINA DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES AAD CON4.0NITY DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
FOR
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM FOR AGENCY USE
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER
STANDARD FORM A -- MUNICIPAL
SECTION L APPLICANT AND FACILITY DESCRIPTION
Unless otherwise specified on this form all items are to be completed. If an item is not applicable Indicate'NA.'
pool ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR SELECTED ITEMS APPEAR IN SEPARATE INSTRUCTION BOOKLET AS INDICATED. REFER TO
BOOKLET BEFORE FILLING OUT THESE ITEMS.
fort
MM
fmn
awl
fml
Ia1
in"
1. Legal Name of Applicant
(see Instructions)
Please Print or Type
tat=� Town of Fairmont
2. Mailing Address of Applicant
(see Instructions)
421 S. Main Street
Number & Street
102a
City
102b
Fairmont
State
A62c
North Carolina
Zip Code
loza
28340
3. Applicant's Authorized Agent
.....
(see Instructions)
Jeffrey G. Lewis
Name and Title
.103C
•
Mayor
421 S. Main Street
Number & Street
1;03p
City
Fairmont
State
''"`°�'
0.34
North Carolina
Zip Code
t$
:�i`:03a:>
28340 �
w.-
910 628-9766
Telephone
103t.
�•
Area Number
4. Previous Application
J
Code
It a previous application for a per-
mlt under the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System has
been made. give the date of
application.
104
YR MO DAY
1 certify that 1 am familiar with the Information contained In this application and that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information
Is true, complete, and accurate_
Jeffrey G. Lewis
Mayor
i0e
Printed Name of Person
Signing
Title
-2021 Y R MO DAY
Signal r f Appt nt o uthorized Agent Date Application Signed
1�;o Carolina General Statute 143-215.6(b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly make
—iy false statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan
zr other document files or required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the
M" Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with
_= knowingly renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring device or method required to be
zoerated or maintained under Article' 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management
ORcommission implementing that Article, shall be guilty or a misdemeanor punishable by a fine
-•Dt to exceed $10,000, or by imprisonment not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C.
action 1001 provides a punishment by a fine or not more than $10,000 or imprisonment not
=,ire than 5 years, or both, for a similar offense.)

FOR AGENCY USE
S. Facility (see instructions)
Give the name, ownership, and physi-
cal location of the plant or other
operating facility where discharge(s)
Currently
Proposed
presently occur(s) or will occur.
Name
Town of Fairmont WWTP
Town of Fairmont Regional WWTP
Brown Street
Near US 74 @ Lumber River
Fairmont, Robeson Co.
Robeson County
Ownership (Public, Private or
Both Public and Private).
tl
0 PUB 0 PRV (3 OPP
Check block If a Federal facility
".to
0 FED
and give GSA Inventory Control
Number
Location.
421 S. Main Street
ri
Number & Street
.3
City
Fairmont
Countytact
Robeson
North Carolina
State
6. Discharge to Another Municipal
XX. fit
Fa4llity (see instructions)
a. Indicate it part of your discharge
kidii
0 Yes 0 No
is Into a municipal waste trans-
port system under another re-
sponsible organization. If yes.
complete the rest of this Item.
and continue with Item 7. It nor
go directly to Item 7.
b. Responsible Organization
Receiving Discharge
Name
4065,
N/A
Number & Street
A,
City
A"A
State
Zip Co -de
N/A
c- Facility.Which Receives DischargeZ
Give the name of the facility
P"
(waste treatment plant) which re,
v=. . "I
calves and Is ultimately respon-
sible for treatment of the discharge
from your facility.
d. Average Daily Flow to Facility
N/Amgd
(mgd) Give your average daily
flow Into the receiving facility.
Facility Disctsarges, Number and
Discharge Volume (sea Instructions)
Specify the number of discharges
described In this application and the
volume of water discharged or lost
to each of the categories below.
71
Estimate average volume per day In
million gallons per day. Do not In-
clude Intermittent or noncontinuous
overflows. bypasses or seasonal dis-
rim I
charges from lagoons, holding
i
Ponds. etc-

rom
f�l
Pam!
fun
To: Surface water
Surface Impoundment with
no Effluent
Underground Percolation
Well (injection)
Other
Total Item 7
If 'other' is specified, describe
If any of the discharges from this
107a2
107b1
107o1
10411?
1 P.x[1;.
�07gt:
,
Number of Total Volume Discharged.
Discharge Points Million Gallons Per Day
1 ( 10742 0.50
I
107b2
107C2
x1Q7.42.
a',t17,i2r
FOR AGENCY USE
fool
facility are intermittent, such as from
{:v
overflow or bypass points. or are
`•evC'v:
seasonal or periodic from lagoons,
holding ponds. etc., complete Item 8.
Moll
8. Intermittent Discharges
a. Facility bypass points
N/A
Indicate the number of bypass
108'sf;'
points for the facility that are
discharge points.(see instructions)
}•<;;`
fun
i
b. Facility Overflow Points
{,:}
NSA
Indicate the number of overflow
108tr>
points to a surface water for the
;%�
facility (see Instructions).
c. Seasonal or Periodic Discharge`'
...
:� �
`1g�a;�;
NSA
Points indicate the number of
.
points where seasonal discharges
'":
occur from holding ponds.?<
lagoons etc.
ti s�•:q
9. Collection System Type
Indicate the type and length (In
'Ar��9;;s�"<
miles) of the collection system usedz3
by this facility. (see instructions)
.iY46 �S�+nni}
lRof
Separate Storm
-,
A,
❑SST
fm!
Separate Sanitary
SAN
Combined Sanitary and Storm
❑ CSS
Both Separate Sanitary a na
f�l
Combined Sewer Systems
"`':
❑ BSC
Both Separate Storm anc
;:;.;
Combined Sewer Systems
❑SSG
21.38
Length
;w:.
miles
10. Municipalities or Areas Served
Actual Population
(see Instructions)
Name
Served
i!a}a
Town of
Fairmontit�vb:
2572
11iii>=;>
Town of
Proctorville
172
..
Town of
Orrum
-
110
Town of
Boardman
»_
211
�►
i Gala
t 1 fib
Total Population Served
',:c
30b5

FOR AGENCY USE
1 1. Average Daily Industrial Flow 1
Total estimated average daily waste III _ mgd
flow from all industrial sources.
Note: All major Industries (as defined to Section IV)
discharging to the municipal system must be
listed in Section IV.
12. Permits. Licenses and Applications
List all existing. pending or denied permits. licenses and applications related to discharges from this facllity.(see Instructions)
2.
3.
Issuing Agency
For
Agency Use
Type of Permit
Number
Date
Filed
Date
Issued
Date
Denied
Expiration
Date
•
or LicenseID
R/MO/DA
Y R/MO/DA
Y R/MO/DA
Y R/MO/OA
-
44
NC DWQ
#) KY4
NPDES
INCO021059
— .95/1/1
N/A
99/12/31
13. Maps and Drawings
Attach all required maps and drawings to the back of this application. (see Instructions)
14. Additional Information .
t 1:'
'"}• Item
's Number information
7 The existing WWTP and discharge location will be abandoned as part of
.t
a USDA --Rural Development Project. The new plant will be constructed
near the Lumber River off U.S. Hwy. 74. The new discharge will be to
the Lumber River.
1-4
1-4

Pill r
f#°I
STANDARD FORM A --MUNICIPAL
FOR AGENCY USE
1� SECTION H. BASIC DISCHARGE DESCRIPTION
Complete this section (or each present or proposed discharge Indicated in Section 1. Items 7 and 8. that is to surface waters. This includes
discharges to other municipal sewerage systems In which the waste water does not go through a treatment works prior to being discharged to
surface waters. Discharges to wells must be described where there are also discharges to surface waters from this facility. Separate
descriptions of each discharge are required even if several discharges originate in the same facility. All values for an existing discharge should
be representative of the twelve previous months of operation. II this is a proposed discharge. values should reflect best engineering estimates.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR SELECTED ITEMS APPEAR IN SEPARATE INSTRUCTION BOOKLET AS INDICATED. REFER TO
1" BOOKLET BEFORE FILLING OUT THESE ITEMS.
1. Discharge Serial No. and Name 001
a. Discharge Serial No. 2012
(see instructions)
b. Discharge Name 201b .Pittman Mill Branch
Give name of discharge. if any -
(see Instructions)
c. Previous Discharge Serial No Tate 001
If a previous NPDES permit.
application was made (or this dis-
charge (Item 4. Section 1) provide
previous discharge serial number.
2. Discharge Operating Dates
a. Discharge to Begin Date 202a
If the discharge has never YR MO
occurred but is planned for some
future date, give the date the
discharge will begin. .71
t
!
99 10
b. Discharge to End Date I1 the dis-
202b
charge is scheduled to be discon-
YR MO
tinued within the next 5 years.
give the date (within best estimate)
the discharge will end. Give rea-
son for discontinuing this discharge
in Item 17. )
._r
3. Discharge Location Name the
political boundaries within which
the point of discharge is located:
f"
North Carolina
State
2Rsa
Robeson
County
(if applicable) City or TownQ,.
'
Fairmont
4. DischargePoint Description
�-,�•.•
(see instructions)
Discharge is into (check one)
Stream (includes ditches. arroyos.
-:2•-cis
STR
and other watercourses)
= "
Estuary}£`
❑ EST
Lake
❑ LKE
Ocean
•j
❑ OCE
Well (Injection)
❑ WEL
Other
❑ OTH
P4
•
It 'other' is checked. specify type
204b
S. Discharge Point — Lat/long.
State the precise location of the
point of discharge to the nearest
second. (see instructions)
'
29 29
Latituoe
203
•34 DEG. MIN. SEC
79 6 21
INN Longitude
aaffq
DEG. MIN. SEC
• II -I
Agency Use
24"d
n >f
4 ? -
This section contains 8 pages.

G. Discharge Receiving Water Name
Name the waterway at the point of
discharge.(see Instructions)
1 204;
If the discharge Is through an out,; 204.0
fall that extends beyond the shoreline
FOR AGENCY USE
H I I
n
For Agency Use
303e
r
or Is below the mean low water line.
complete item 7.
h
7. Offshore Discharge
a. Discharge Distance from Shore 2071i N/A feet
b. Discharge Depth Below Water
Surface feet
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
001
For Agency Use
s1H hTc
�l4�itort
'. �tib •
If discharge is from a bypass or an overflow
as applicable, and continue with Item 11.
point or is a seasonal discharge from a lagoon. holding pond, etc.. complete Items 8. 9 or 10,
11. Bypass Discharge (see Instructions)
a. Bypass Occurrence
Check when bypass occurs
Wet weather
'14.46i1
❑ Yes (R No
Dry weather
20I12
Y.r
O Yes [x No
b. Bypass Frequency Give the
' actual or approximate number
Of bypass Incidents per year.
Wet Weather
NIA times per year ,.
Dry weather
f
N/A times per year
C. Bypass Duration Give the
average bypass duration In hours.
> ..,..
j
Wet weather
g^a>'•
N/A hours
Dry weather
Alas
_hours
d. Bypass Volume Give the
average volume per b
YPass Incident,In
thousand gallons.'
N/A ,
Wet weather
thousand If ga ons per incident
Dry weather
;ifloct�'
.
NIA thousand gallons per Incident ,
e. Bypass Reasons Give reasons
r ie9�l�
why bypass occurs.
N/A
Proceed to Item 11.
9. Overflow Oischarge (see instructions)
a. Overfi ow Occurrence Check
When overflow occur.
Wet weather
Dry weather
b. Overflow Frequency Glve the
actual or approximate incidents
per y "r.
Wet weather
Dry weather
❑ Yes (3 No
❑ Yes (X No
N/A times per year
N/A times per year
II-2

MEL—.0
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
MOW
001
rspq
C. Overflow Ouration Give the
average overflow duration In
hours.
N/A
weat weather
209c1
—hours
ICI
N/A
Dry weather
t:z__
—Hours
d. Overflow -Volume Give the
average volume per overflow
pmq
Incident In thousand gallons.
N/A
Wet weather
thousand gallons per Incident
N/A
Dry weather
d.*
thousand gallons per Incident
Proceed to Item 11
10. SeasonaVPcri odic Discharges
Mq
a. Seasonal/Periodic Discharge
Frequency If discharge Is Inter-
N/A times
from holding
per year
mittent a pond.
lagoon. etc.. give the actual or
approximate number of times
this discharge occurs per year.
b. Seasonal/Periodic Discharge
N/A
Volume Give the average
thousand gallons per discharge occurrence
volume per discharge occurrence
In thousand gallons.
f.
c.- Seasonal/Periodic Discharge
N/A
Duration Give the average dura-
—days
tion of each discharge occurrence
In days.
rMal
d. Seasonal/Periodic Discharge
Occurrence —Months Check the
OJAN []FEB OMAR
months during the year when
the discharge normally occurs.
OAPR OMAY OJUN
OJUL OAUG OSEP
0 OCT (:) NOV 0 DEC
a. Discharge Treatment Oescription
Describe waste abatement prac-
tices used on this discharge with
In" a brief narrative. (See Instruc-
tiolis)
Im
MEZ-al
IrOR AQKNCY USK
I
eatment consists of an influent trash basket,
aerated grit chamber, influent pump station, single
walker process style unit (including aeration
basin, clarifier & digester) chlorine contact
chamber & post aeration.
1111-1

b. Discharge Treatment Codes
Using the codes listed in Table 1
of the Instruction Booklet.
describe the waste abatement
Processes applied to this dis.
charge In the order in which
they occur. if possible.
Separate all codes with commas
except where slashes are used
to designate parallel operations.
If thls discharge Is from a municipal waste
treatment plant (not an overflow or
bypass). complete Items 12 and 13
12. Plant Design and Operation Manuals
Check which of the following are
currently available
a. Engineering Design Report
b. Operation and Maintenance
Manual
13. Plant Design Data (see instructions)
a. Plant Design Flow (Mgd)
b. Plant Design BOO Removal (%)
e Plant Design N Removal (%)
d. Plant Design P Removal (%)
e. Plant Design SS Removal (%)
t. Plant Began Operation (year)
g. Plant Last Major Revision (year)
DISCHARGE SERIAL_ NUMBER
001
S, GA, ASR, PG, DD, B
0.50 mgd
8-5 %
N/A '-%
N/A %
85- %
1972
1985
P" t
i
FOR AGENCY USE
.�x
i
i I
i
•
i
• �
I
•
I
i
i
Ir
n
i

Pon
r
P0l
MIN
P"
PM
P"
P"
fxq
PEI
Pal
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
001
14. Description of Influent and Effluent (see instructions)
FOR AGENCY USE
ar
Influent
Effluent
Parameter and Code
Q
QX
>
'S
75u
o N
..�.i,p
c .
cc
a�
N u
3 u
..r D
u
V N
E
V
Q>
a>
�3
1
i Q
:te a
z Q
to
(l)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Flow
Million gallons per day
0.420
0.420
0.243
0.638
CONT
365
N/A
50050
pH
7.25
7.91
1/7
55
G
Units
X
X
00400
Temperature (winter)
OF
N/A
59.15
54.81
66.02
1/7
52
G
74028
Temperature (summer)
OF
N/A
72.51
60.57
79.30
1/7
52
G
74027
Fecal Streptococci Bacteria
Number/ 100 ml
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
74054
(Provide if available)
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Number/100 ml
168.9
1/7
52
G
74055
(Provide if available)
Total Coliform Bacteria
Number/100 ml
NIA
N/A
N/A :
N/A
74056
(Provide if available)
BOD 5-day
mg/l
117.00
21.00
10.46
35.68
Weekly
52
G
00310
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
N/A
62.00
20
299
1/12
12
C
mg/I
00340
(Provide if available)
OR
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
mgJ 1
.
00680
(Provide if available)
(Father analysis is acceptable)
Chlorine —Total Residual
mg/I
N/A
0.36
0.29
0.45
2/7
104
G
50060
11-5

i.
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER FOR AGENCY USE
001
14. Description of Influent and Effluent (See instructions) (Continued)
Influent
Effluent
d
a .a
a
o
Parameter and Code
Q
d
>
o
� >
+ o
C .
otka
tom`
"
,'robes
��
a
a
a>
Q>
aQ
Ica
wa
zd
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Total Solids
mg/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
00500
Total Dissolved Solids
mg/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
70300
Total Suspended Solids
mg/1
96.04
18.50
9.90
31.00
1/7
52
C
00530
Settleable ?latter (Residue)
mI/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
00545
Ammonia (as N)
i•
mg/I
mg/1
15.72
9.10
3.17
20.65
1/30
12
C00610
r.
(Provide if available)
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
mg/1
N/A
14.13
9.00
20.7
1/90
4
C
00625
(Provide if available)
Nitrate (as N)
mg/1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
00620
(Provido if availabk)
Nitrite (as N)
mg/I
00615
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(Provide if available)
Phosphorus Total (as P)
mg/I
00665
N/A
0.52
0.30
0.66
1 / 90
4
C
(Provide if available)
Dimlvdd Oxygen (DO)
00300
03
8.72
8.36
9.58
1/7
52
G

FM
V"
FOR AGENCY USE
FOR DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
001
15. Additional Wastewater Characteristics
Check the box next to each parameter it it Is present In the effluent. (sec instructions)
MR
F"
MR
F"
RM
Faq
Parameter
Parameter
Parameter
(215)
0
(215)
°
(215)
B
_
a
a
a:
Bromide
Cobalt
Thallium
71870
01037
01059
Chloride
Chromium
Titanium
00940
01034
01152
Cyanide
Copper
Tin
00720
01042
01102
Fluoride
Iron
Zinc
00951
01045
01092
Sulfide
Ind
Algicides*
00745
01051
74051
Aluminum
Manganese
Chlorinated organic compounds*
01105
01055
74052 '
Antimony
Mercury
Oil and grease
01097
71900
00550
Arsenic
Molybdenum
Pesticides*
01002
01062
74053
Beryllium
Nickel
Phenols
01012
01067
32730
Barium
Selenium
Surfactants
01007
01147
38260
Boron
Silver
Radioactivity*
01022
01077
74050 -
Cadmium
01027
*Provide specific compound and/or element in Item 17. if known.
Pesticides (Insecticides, fungicides, and rodenticides) must be reported in terms of the acceptable common names specified in Acceptable Com-
mon Names and Chemical Names for the Ingredient Statement on Pesticide Labels, 2nd Edition. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C. 20250. June 1972. as required by Subsection 162.7(b) of the Regulations for the Enforcement of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodentieide Act.
11-7

I
DISCHARGE SEnIAL NUMBER
001.
16. Plant Controls Check if the follow.
Ing plant controls are available
for this discharge 2i
Alternato powtor source for major
pump(ng facility Including those
for collection system lift stations i �,z•0 qPS
Alarm for power or equipment
failure ❑.ALM
17. Additional Information
n
j
FOR AGENCY u5E
n
I
I!-� Qt'- S- GOVERNMEWT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 0 - $06-472

MR
I"
rim
��
1MR
iR
Pet
I"
Fri
Pq
1=1
Ps1
Tim?
111
MR
STANDARD FORM A —MUNICIPAL
FOR AGENCY USE
SECTION II. BASIC DISCHARGE DESCRIPTION
Complete this section for each present or proposed discharge Indicated in Section 1. Items 7 and 6. that is to surface waters. This includes
discharges to other municipal sewerage systems In which the waste water does not go through a treatment works prior to being discharged to
surface waters. Discharges to wells must be described where there are also discharges to surface waters from this facility. Separate
descriptions of each discharge are required even if several discharges originate In the same facility. All values for an existing discharge should
be represeetlative of the twelve previous months of operation. If this is a proposed discharge. values should reflect best engineering estimates.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR SELECTED ITEMS APPEAR IN SEPARATE INSTRUCTION BOOKLET AS INDICATED. REFER TO
BOOKLET BEFORE FILLING OUT THESE ITEMS.
1. Discharge Serial No. and Name 002
a. Discharge Serial No. 2012
(see instructions)
b. Discharge Name zotb Lumber River Discharge
Give name of discharge. It any
(see Instructions)
c. Previous Discharge Serial No 201.c N/A
If a previous NPDES permit.
application was made for this dis-
charge (item 4. Section 1) provide
previous discharge serial number.
2. Discharge Operating Oates 99 1�
a. Discharge to Begin Date 202a
If the discharge has never YR MO
occurred but is planned for some
future date. give the date the
discharge will begin.
b. Discharge to End Date I the dis-
202b
-b"
charge is scheduled to be discon-
YR MO
tinued within the next S years,
give the date (within best estimate)
the discharge will end. Give rea-
son for discontinuing this discharge
in Item 17.
3. Discharge Location Name the
political boundaries within which
Agency Use
the point of discharge is located:
State
2os�,
North Carolina
20.3d
Count
Robeson County
if City Town
applicable) or
4. Discharge Point Description
(see Instructions)
Discharge is into (check one)
'.;;..
Stream (intrudes ditches. arroyos.
204a%
STR
•'
and other watercourses)
:i 4•:•
Estuary's
; 2
❑ EST
Lake'
�',�•
❑ LKE
ate{,'• e
ry
Ocean
„'�
❑OCE
welt (Injection)
❑ WEL
Other
O OTH
.
It •other' Os checked. specify type 204b
S. Discharge Point — Lit/Long.
Iiq Stato the orecise location of the
point of discharge to the nearest
second. (see instructions)
Latitude 2034
fa4
Longi tune 20S6
.34 DEG. 35 . MIN.
78 DEG. 58 MIN.
52 SEC
04 SEC
II-1 This section contains 8 Pages.

G. Discharge Receiving Water Name
Name the waterway at the point of
discharge.(see Instructions)
1 204
It the discharge is through an out.; 2046
fall that extends beyond the shoreline
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
002
Lumber River
For Agency Use
For Agency Use
303e
is •' ". � ;z ;�t•t.(�I.vI.,�.y+��.
. I
1
I
1
FOR AGENCY USE
r
I
or Is below the mean low water line,
For Agency Use
303e
is •' ". � ;z ;�t•t.(�I.vI.,�.y+��.
. I
1
I
1
FOR AGENCY USE
r
I
or Is below the mean low water line,
complete Item 7.
7. Offshoie Discharge
N/A
a. Discharge Distance from Shore
2076
feet
b. Discharge Depth Below Water
Surface
,20j -
N/A feet
If discharge Is from a bypass of an overflow
point or is a seasonal discharge from a lagoon. holding pond. etc.. complete Items 8.9 or 10.
as applicable. and continue with item 11.
S. Bypass Discharge (see instructions)
a. Bypass Occurrence
Check when bypass occurs
Wet weatherQi_at
❑ Yes XX No
Dry weather
29#iix
❑ Yes X$ No
b. Bypass Frequency Give the
' actual or approxln ate number
of bypass Incidents per year.
Wet Weather
_times per year '•.
Dry weather
N/A times per year
e. Bypass Duration Give the
Yr
average bypass duration in hours.i
Wet weather
.P>
N/A hours
Dry weather
's
-NIA hours
d. Bypass Volume Give the
average volume per bypass Incident.
""
In thousand gallons_
f
Wet weather
N/A thousand gallons per Incident '
Dry weather
N/A thousand gallons per Incident '
e. Bypass Reasons Give reasons
c r
why bypass occurs.
N/A
Proceed to Item 11.
9. Overflow DischarVe (see instructions)
a. Overflow Occurrence Check
when overflow occurs_
Wet weather
Dry weather
b. Overflow Frequency Give the
actual or approximate Incidents
per year.
Wet weather
Dry weather
❑ Yes )ONO
❑ Yes X3 No
N/A times per year
N/A times per year
H-2

PSI ,
tam
!R61
C. Overffow Duration Give the
average overflow duration in
flours.
wet weather
PSI
Ory weather
d. Overtlow•Volumc Give the
r;, average volume per overflow
Incident In thousand gallons.
Wet vieathar
fR Dry weather
Proceed to Item 11
10. Scasonal/Periodic Discharges
a. Seasonal/Pariodie Discharge
Frequency If discharge Is inter.
mittent from a holding pond.
lagoon. etc.. give the actual or
approximate number of times
MR this discharge occurs per year.
b. Seasonai/Perlodie Discharge
Volume Give the average
volume per discharge occurrence
�9 In thousand gallons.
c. Seasonal/Periodic Discharge
Duration Give the avers" dura-
tion of each discharge occurrence
In days.
d. Seasonal/Periodic Dlseharya
Occurrence —Months Check the
months during the year when
trq the discharge normally occurs.
Discharge Treatment
a. Discharge Treatment Ocscriptlon
Oescribe waste abatement prac.
1„n ticeS used on this dischar" with
a brief narrative. (See Instruc.
tlons)
R"
M
1>A
DISCIiARGC SERIAL_ NUMocR
002
N/A
hours
N/A Hours
W/A thousand gallons par Incident
N IA. thousand gallons per Incident
N/A times per year
N/A
thousand
gallons par discharge occurrence
NIAdays
.
OJAN
❑ FE13
O MAR
❑ APR
❑ MAY
O JUN
OJUL
❑ AUG
❑SEP
❑ OCT
❑ NOV
❑ DEC
r'OR AR[NCY U><fl
_Treatment will consist of a mechanically operated
bar screen, aerated grit chamber, influent pump
station, premix basin, dual aeration basins,
spCondary & tertiary clarifiers, chlorination,
& dechlorination, post aeration, effluent pump
station_, digester, sludge thickener

!"I
DISCHARGE
SERIAL NUMBER
i
FOR AGENCY USE
002
i
b. Discharge Treatment Codes
i
Using the codes listed in Table 1
211b
S • M
, GA, ASR - PG - 111), T
of the Instruction Booklet.
describe the waste abatement
Processes applied to this dis-
charge In the order In which
they occur, if possible-
Separate all codes with commas
.:•'
except where slashes are used
to designate parallel operations.
If this discharge is from a municipal waste,
treatment plant (not an overflow or
bypass). complete Items 12 and 13
12. Plant
Design and Operation Manuals
:<
Check which of the following are
currently available
a. Engineering Design Report
❑
b. Operation and Maintenance
Manual
❑
•
f
13. Plant Design Data (see Instructions)
1.75
a. Plant Design Flow (mgd.)
m9d
92.5
b. Plant Design ODD Removal (y.)
'
%
I
86.7
-
G Plant Design N Removal
N/A
rd.
Plant Design P Removal (X)
� •�
%
- rl
85
e. Plant Dcslgn SS Removal (x)<'
%
NIA
f. Plant Megan Operation (year
g. Plant Last Major Revision (year)
•
I
. I
-
f^
I
I
II-4

fil
M"
P�1
9M
Mq
MR
Pon
FMI
M
MR
RM
M"
lM
PW
MR
M"
DISCHARGE SERIAL_ NVMDER
002
14, Description of Influent and Effluent (see Instructions)
FOR AGENCY USE
's
Influent
Effluent
0 a
0 -a
;,
�•
Parameter and Code
Q
a
>
>
M
t~
ca o
� d
a
�
6.
o eMa
V
> >.
.D
p,
C t�
a>
a>
0 >
as
.°.� >
sQ
.'�. R
•.:.d
� C
za
a
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Flow
Million gallons per day
1.75
1.75
N/A
N/A
Cont.
N/A
/A
50050
pH
Units
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
hRP
00400
Temperature (winter)
F °
74028
N/A
60
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
rRP
Temperature (summer)
° F
N/A_
80
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
ARP
74027
Fecal Streptococci Bacteria
Number/100 ml
x
x
N/A
N/A
N/A
/A
74054
(Provide if available)
Fecal Coliform Bacteria
Number/100 ml
N/A
ARP
N/A
ARP.
74055
Vx
(Provide if available)
Total Coliiform Bacteria
Number/100 ml
N/A
N/A
N/A'
N/A
74056
x
x
(Provide if available)
DOD 5-day
mg1l
200
15
N/A
N/A
'ARP
N/A
ARP
00310
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
'
mg/1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
/A
00340
(Provide if available)
OR
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
mg/ 1
00680
(Provide if available)
(Either analysis is acceptabic)
Chlorine —Total Residual
mg/l
N/A
0.28
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
ARP
50060
ARP — As Required by Permit
11-5

DISCHARGE SERIAL. NUMBER
002
14. O.scrlptton of Influent and Effluent (see InStruCtIonS) (Contlnued)
FOR AGENCY USE
I
I
I
Influent
Effluent
Parameter and Code
u
° 3
°
M
0 A
A
,.v.
p,
d>
d>
as
zQ
w<
z<
(1)
(2)
(3)
(a)
(s)
(6)
(7)
Total Solids
mg/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
/A
N/A
00500
Total Dissolved Solids
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
/A
N/A
mg/I
70300
Total Suspended Solids
200
30
N/A
N/A
ARP
/A
ARP
mg/I
00530
Settleable ?Matter (Residue)
ml/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
N/A
OOsas
Ammonia (as N)
mg/I
30
4
N/A
N/A
ARP
/A
ARP
00610
(Provide if available)
Kjeldahl Nitrogen
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NIA
N/A
. mg/I
00625
(Provide if available)
Nitrate (as N)
mg/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
/A
N/A
00620
(Provide if availably)
Nitrite (as N)
Mg/I
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ARP
/A
ARP
00615
(Provide if available)
Phosphorus Total (u P)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
ARP
tng/l
00665
(Provide if available)
Dluovved Oxygen t"DO)
mg/l
5.0
N/A
N/A
ARP
N/A
ARP
00300
wx
ARP — As Required by Permit
II$

ran
FM
ran
"M
rR
MR
I"
fan
Ism
MM
rml
PM
MR
MR
MR
FOR AGENCY USE
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
002
IS- Additional Wastewater Characteristics
Check the box next to each parameter If it is present In the effluent_ (see instructions)
Parameter
a
Parameter
Parameter
(215)
(215)
a
(115)
_
Bromide
Cobalt
Thallium
71870
01037
01059
Chloride
Chromium
Titanium
00940
01034
01152
Cyanide
Copper
Tin
00720
01042
01102
Fluoride
Iron
Zinc
00r951
01045
01092
'
Sulfide
Lead
Algicides*
00745
01051
74051
Aluminum
Manganese
Chlorinated organic compounds*.
01105
01055
74052
Antimony
Mercury
Oil and grease
01097
71900
00550
Arsenic
Molybdenum
Pesticides*
01002
01062
74053
Beryllium
Nickel
Phepols
01012
01067
32730
Barium
Selenium
Surfactants
01007
01147
39260
Boron
Silver
Radioactivity*
01022
01077
74050
Cadmium
01027
rR *Provide specific compound and/or element in Item 17. if known.
Pesticides (Insecticides, fum6cides. and rodenticides) must be reported in terms of the acceptable common names specified in Acceptable Com-
mon Names and Chemical X--nes for the Ingredient Statement on Pesticide Labels. 2nd Edition. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
D.C. 20250. June 1972. as mquired by Subsection 162.7(b) of the Regulations for the Enforcement of the Federal insecticide, Fungicide, and
FM Rodenticidc Act.
11-7

DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
002
16. Plant Controls CheCk It tho follow.
Ing plant controls are available
for this discharge 2111
Allemato power sourCe for major
pumping laclllty Including those
for collection system lift station, 0 APS
Alarm for power or e4uipment
failure O-ALM
17. Additional Information
if'af
FOR AGENCY USE
Item
Number
Information
Discharge 001 will be abandoned (plugged) when Discharge 2 is
on-line.
r
II-8 •t•. S- GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 0 - $oo-sat

P�1 FOR AGENCY VSE
STANDARD FORM A —MUNICIPAL
SECTION M. SCHEDULED IMPROVEMENTS AND SCHEDULES OF IMPLEMENTATION
This section requires information on any uncompleted implementation schedule which has been imposed for construction of waste treatment
facilities. Requirement schedules may have been established by local. State.or Federal agencies or by court action. IF YOU ARE SUBJECT TO
SEVERAL DIFFERENT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULES. EITHER BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT LEVELS OF AUTHORITY IMPOSING
t� DIFFERENT SCHEDULES (ITEM lb) AND/OR STAGED CONSTRUCTION OF SEPARATE OPERATIONAL UNITS (ITEM lc). SUBMIT A
SEPARATE SECTION Ili FOR EACH ONE.
1. Improvements Required FOR AGENCY USE
a. Discharge Serial Numbers x w S0ed,�l�io.
Affected List the discharge
serial numbers. assigned In Sec•
0,
tion If. that are covered by this .,;,:A >:•.
implementation schedule p t. J`
b. Authority Imposing Requirement " k
Check the appropriate item Indl-
d' f ---•
cating the authority for the Im- v
Yr.7
plementation schedule If the x •' }
f�1 Identical Implementation sched-
ule has been ordered by more
than one authority, check the
appropriate Items. (see ln-
structions) r
41 ; LOC
Locally developed plan �P ARE
:a
Areawide Plan Q SAS
Basin Plan
State approved implementation0 SQS
1 f
schedule^'<
Federal approved water Quality ?<" WQS
standards implementation plan.
Federal enforcement procedure
or action ❑ ENF
State court order ❑ CRT
+.• CRT
Federal court order
FED
fort c. Improvement Description Specify the 3-character code for the
General Action Description In Table 11 that best describes the
improvements required by the implementation schedule. It more
than one schedule applies to the facility because of a staged con-
struction schedule. state the stage of construction being described
ICI here with the appropriate general action code. submk a separate
Section I I I for each stage of construction planned. Also. list all
the 3-character (Specific Action) codes which describe In more
detail the pollution abatement practices that the Implementation
schedule requires.
3-character general action NEW
description ?tt
3-character specific actions
SEC DIS SLD IPU FUM
descriptions � / /
2. Implementation Schedule and 3. Actual Completion Dates
Provide dates imposed by schedule and any actual dates of completion for Implementation steps
listed below. Indicate dates as accurately as possible. (see Instructions)
Implementation Steps 2. Schedule Y7 /Mi (Day�S 3. Actual Completion (Yr /Mo /Day)
a. Preliminary plan complete _j J /
b. Final plan complete 97 . 12 / 31
in" 98 1
c. Financing complete 6 contract . /04 / 5
awarded k.
S
/
d. Site acquired 97 06 30 �
}; 98 / 06 / 01
e. Begin construction i.IE'bxl�?
99 0 01
f. End construction :3t) /
g. Begin Olzcharge 99 10 1
:¢.•,;;x
>s4xq
h. Operational level attalncd 1pxli 99 } 2 A
f�q
III-1 This section contains 1 page.

Pal
FOR AGENCY USE
rw STANDARD FORM A -MUNICIPAL
SECTION IV. INDUSTRIAL WASTE CONTRIBUTION TO MUNICIPAL SYSTEM
Submit a description of each major industrial facility discharging to the municipal system. using a separate Section IV for each facility descrip-
tion. Indicate the 4 digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code for
the industry, the major product or raw material.
sand gallons per day). and the Characteristics of the wastewater discharged from the Industrial facility into the munlclpal system.
the flow (in thou-
Consult
I I I for standard measures of products or raw materials. (see instructions)
.
Table
1• Major Contributing Facility
(see instructions)
Name 401a N/A
Number& Street 401b
City 401 c
I#1
.
County 401 d
State 401e
Zip Code aot t
2. Primary Standard Industrial 402
Classification Code (see
Imi
instructions)
3. Principal Product or Raw Quantity
Units (See
Table 111)
Material (see Instructions)
Product 403a"
Pon
Raw Material 403b
��
n41�3f.•?.
4. Flow Indicate the volume of water
1
discharged into the municipal Sys- 404a thousand gallons per day
tem In thousand gallons per day
and whether this discharge is Inter- 404b 0Intermittent (int) 0 Continuous (con)
mittent or continuous.
S. Pretreatment Provided Indicate if 405 ❑Yes No
pretreatment Is provided prior to '
entering the municipal system
s." Characteristics of Wastewater
(see instructions) '
Parameter,
Name
Q_ x< Parameter
'
Number
.40 value
N
PM
.: P O 865-706 IV -I
This section contains 1 page.

L) M f-A 1-< I IVI t 114 1 Ur I Hh IN I hH1UH
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
'9007130" 6730wm-E. 401 LUMSERTON ONTERS�ATE 95) ;5 MI. 675 678
101' 1 5/1676 1677 1
dw 11 0
* .94- Lv..
Ole,
ff� _qw.
%
130)11 Z
VJJ zt," -dW
Clem
-ell-
40 tic
tt.
0\ Di
ern- a 4,
C3
73 A.- I
130 .
It TitIna7 11 a 7- 11 0 1 N. LLY
AWAson
SKI 'Cem
4u
+ (I
t 01,
am ... z .4,
•
v,
W-
_100—
d�
V,
e Kirkfield.
-940 7/.37
p
Cem
5_�
A4-
C.
C.
A
7
L
-4 07
\>
N
III V
F71-1
I I , ; t 7
Z am
BqllQCk,-. 7 21 'A
Cent RI Ems+
r 4
41)
2`
WTF
381 j j Ilk X ;7" 7�.
•
410- -a-
&
00
21
0
\v/ II
rc
P =,v Hill
J Bullock
00 Ce..m.
N
IN
4Z.
38f6"
-d-
am*
411-
)m ,A -7
.28 \ - / 1 \ , , rYem\ ///Jy
)C " db \ 'J.
-IMF-
0
0
.3.9 N,
7�
4— 49 wan -
134,
— _yT N3.f5L Ole
z
95
K
100
v,
r
47
AA
Nyu
"1 9,11 1
9-.
"N

at
-41
•� -Y►. - _ - -• .t .fir •�I•• - rIM• _ _ .. i-
-•4- may,• -ar- -�t' " ,yi- 'w- , -'W' •,iy,. ter„ ,,,W„ -YY• „�.•� .+�'- �,
.�. _� �. �- �• -�- - _ ,�T,� � _ �� !�` 7 .,,w _ -'w -'°`- Sri• _ _ _.. �
Islan
83
�Y•. • .•�• - _
-+fir ,W - +�- -ti:. �- �y ,W - •'�` - W` - ''y` �y -rv- _ _ _" d� - -,k- y►
z-•Y t} .. G •° _ '+Iti _ .yy- -..+ -.f � -W - •try .0. - -46 -yW- � -a- -+w � • , �
_"x "I` -•- 85 — \'mr �r "u` ,sy �t� �`-� - j► ,ly. _ -+� +� _ -ate - "o`
-_- ,�- _ +w -,�I y` — "�`` — +y ' w►- r .n°' — _ _ ,r +�
rt. _ - -_ er _ rP ,iu- •+W — -,w- ,w• •,w-_ - W` — ,IW 'y �Y-I -a- ul�_� � -,� •P-
�•- "'M'` •,Mr-_. � I —� — — �,.— ,� •+d!` \— -oy — � "Y`— _... — '•'y`•
.7-ice •:M•• . �° °•f) •y- •- Aw _•'�` - ' _ _ -+r-' •fW% -, -dP- -
U
,w• ° _ ` -MJ- _ -dk _- - - �.+•` - -11t- _ -�` \�J4• _fir- 'Y�� �b� -rY- may` Y4- -dh - ^� _ io• -'
White Oak �`- _-"�`� _-•�--•'� -�'� •�- - - �- ,� _.� .
_.� -�' Swamp - - �'''.�, - -�` -
-
�f� "-^� '"• - - 1y. - .�. �!F /�- - -_ -off.- -�` -f�4•• -rW _• _ •i!1- ti1M-•-.�„- -yam .�- -•M-
.t. - • �`"_ .Yy. _ty.. •+Y` 'AY' _ -,YH .�yf"� _ -�='"_ �16•- - -.,p}. �ll� - _ .•,P- �"II►• - -LY•- - - "�" '+w - •'Cr
'• '„` -•�'•� " _ _ - - _ ,rw- •�y., •er -+y- -er- -�. ` -,Ki- �" _ -GYP. -,W. - - ,w•• -+�•- -�'- -t•- -Ys- ry..
_ .� _�.w,.�. -•P- .ry. �a- — T �y — a,: -�' -��elr — =d ,y�-- --e�- -A -
- rr• - -ds-- _ _ �P �-+r- _ - -,� -•�- a ..� - --
` r - �.- - -a1 .4y. �Y - '~ ,Yr ,IM-1� ,r= -.Y►"A`
130 '"`-,rF _ _,�„ - r- max`• g.- �r r�.- -�r -.�, = `,ram n. - �✓ +go,-
- _ •+P- C O -_ -rlr 'a" - .� `& FYI• �` , .� . rP - _ .. _- --rr.-w_
\` X 8r
_.-. '��- - �,.,-w - - -+w- -+�- - �"' ..►. -�' .�,,,• .�r. .�,. "W` - - �T � � s man
9:7
0 0• �. ''� w- _ - - " ,Yr -+w _-�` ,w -_�• r SendpitL 0 ' C� \ b,
r=- — � o \ '�•—�. — �-� �'` 'w` tiY!- GYP- �--95 0 !
'W''--'�'•_ Ali-} _'�'� -;, rW. �` ' -IM` /
79
Al-
1506
lbw
r —.w. -r•. _-�• �_ _ / e `.; •_•• 5 •` mow-- •'�` mow. -rP- -un.. ' i
'~ "�" ww- -,ef•- may.. - -'�f � l:� ' '� .�'"�''_ � -ew_ �_ �- i Q�p--_-..,� O
''�"'"'W" -ram "y` > - -- • � , •',` -•I:- •�yY-- ,yY,--- , yL4� �• O a�j'' • � /•. •; •. --- �•
O
aging .
Sta
00
1508 !
• r
• .r
o — ,W. - „� • �P . t , .: • : • Boardman
rill
• Com _ •,rr• _ _ Gas 1
88
Dug 1574
-dL-+Y• — \
.. • .�„ - ,IP. �_. U Bear4TI
11
' -ey;• �- �- - '" _ "r` •�x"` �'�'` �- "rf '.,,,," t� `\ ��y; ` ` � Bay
' �r• -- �` - ' _w• ., &rya - -•L-F "" i. •�CO�'!N // \ \ t \ ' J ' ' '
-6 I \ O

Q
FEB.. 1997
ocsorrzo: WRB
DFW
WRB
scWr AS NOTED
PROPOSED STRUCTURE LA '�'C. T PLAN
■
a

f�1 -
MR
FE"
MR
MIR
MR
F"
MR
F"
mm
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Land Application of Wastewater
P"
MR
F"
mn
MR
mm
MR

FOR
Mq
DESIGN CALCULATIONS - LAND APPLICATION
Town of Fairmont - Alternatives Analysis
fm
Water Balance / Storage Information
Days <
Hydraulic
Cumulat.
Days >
"Month Days
Precip.
ET ET -PR
PERM
32 Deg.
PERC
Loading
Flow
Change
Storage
.5" Prec.
Jan 31
3.76
0.2 -3.56
2
1
57.60
54.04
6.10
-47.94
-47.94
3
Feb 28
3.59
0.5 -3.09
2
0
53.76
50.67
5.51
-45.16
-93.11
3
Mar 31
4.18
1.5 -2.68
2
0
59.52
56.84
6.10
-50.74
-143.85
3
Apr 30
3.33
2.7 -0.63
2
0
57.60
56.97
5.90
-51.07
-194.92
2
�+ May 31
4.07
3.3 -0.77
2
0
59.52
58.75
6.10
-52.65
-247.57
3
Jun 30
3.89
5.9 2.01
2
0
57.60
59.61
5.90
-53.71
-301.28
2
July 31
4.89
6.7 1.81
2
0
59.52
61.33
6.10
-55.23
-356.52
3
wn Aug 31
4.84
5.4 0.56
2
0
59.52
60.08
6.10
-53.98
410.50
3
Sep 30
3.85
4.6 0.75
2
0
57.60
58.35
5.90
-52.45
462.95
2
Oct 31
3.16
2.3 -0.86
2
0
59.52
58.66
6.10
-52.56
-515.51
2
Fm Nov 30
2.67
1.2 -1.47
2
0
57.60
56.13
5.90
-50.23
-565.74
2
Dec 31
3.39
0.3 -3.09
2
1
57.60
54.51
6.10
48.41
-614.15
2
annual 365
45.62
34.6 -11.02
2
2
696.96
685.94
71.79
-614.15
30
Average
3.80
2.9 -0.92
2
0.167
58.08
57.16
5.98
-51.18
2.5
ET - PR + PERC =
Maximum Hydraulic Loading
PERC = 0.04 ( Permeability) x 24 hrs x Days - Freezing Days)
Storage = Available Wastewater - Hydraulic Loading
Or Storage
= Nonspray Days
Selected Storage
60 days
'Flow Calculations
Design Flow
1,750,000 gpd
,, Application Rate
1.5 in / wk
Days / Week
5
Operation Cycle - 5 Zones Once per Week each
yonspray Days
30
,.,4pplication Period
239.29
365 days minus nonspray days x days/wk/7
Applied Flow
2,669,403 GPD
13.35
million gal/week
Acres Required
327.6869
Acres = (Flow) / ( 27,154 x Application Rate)
r■n
-
r"
fun
rR

Application Field / Sprinkler System Design
t�
Sprinkler selected
Senniger
Pressure
50 psi
Nozzle Size
0.25 in
Flow
13 gpm
Diameter
125
Overlap selected
50 %
'Spacing
62.5 ft
Selected Spacing
72 ft
Actual Overlap
57.6 %
"Number of Zones
5
Nozzles per Zone
550
Number of Rows
4
r"Nozzles per Row
137.5
Length of Pipe per Row
9900 ft
Total Pipe Length per Zone
39600 ft
r""Selected Diameter
6 inch
application rate = 96 x flow / spacing x spacing
application rate 0.24074074 in/hr
time of operation = daily app rate/hourly
6.23 hrs/d
# nozzles = flow / flow per nozzle
549.26
diameter x % overlap
total nozzles site 2750
total field pipe 198,000 ft
Wetted Area = [(2 x radius) + (no. rows-1) x (spacing) x 2 x (radius) + (nozzles per row- 1)] minus
r" [(Diameter ^2) - ((pi x (radius)^2/4 ) x (4 + (nozzles per row-1) x (rows- 1)/2]
Wetted Area = 3,218,656 sq.ft.
r•n 73.89017 acres/zone
369.4508 acres
Select 375 acres
rim
Pumn Station Calculation
Flow / (hrs of operation x 60)
f"Flow Applied per Day
Hrs Day Applied
Pump Size
ramLength of Force Main
Force Main Selected
Pump Selected
Rol
Lagoon Requirements
Mn
Sludee Zone
Treatment Zone
mmStorage
25 yr f' 24hr Storm
Freeboard
PmTotal
rR
2.67 MGD
6.23
7140.38 gpm
5500 if
16 inch
7200 gpm
DXW
30
30
Required Volume
Depth
)
2
3
52,500,000
7,018,717
3
52,500,000
7,018,717
0.5
1
9.5
105,000,000
14,037,433
r"

PR1
Berm Side Slope
3 horiz.
1 vertical
mmLength / Width
1.5 length
1 width
Trmt. + Storage Depth
6 ft
Selected Length
1350 ft
water surface
r-nWidth
900 ft
water surface
Water Surface Area
27.89 acres
Trmt.+ Storage Vol. Check
7048944 cf
52726101.1 gallons
ran
use 2 lagoons for storage
Top of Berm Length
1359
Top of Berm Width
906
,,,Bottom of Berm Length
1302
Bottom of Berm Width
868
Total Area
1,231,254 sq ft
28.2657 acres
Total Vol. to Top of Berm
11,091,381 cf
82963527 gallons
Estimated Excavation
410,792 cy
Type of Liner
clay
Thickness Required
I ft
Area of Liner
1,364,489 sq ft
Volume
1,364,489 cf
50536.62 cy
F"
Woven Wire Fence
4590 if
Barbed Wire Fence
16566.632 if
M"
Buffer Area
400 If outside wetted area
(c 100)^2x4)+4xc 100)x(wetted area sq.ft.)1%5)
Buffer
7,106,653 sq ft
163.1463 acre
Total = Buffer + Wetted
538.1463 acre
rAll
Mn
n
MR
MR
rR
0"

HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
1W Consulting Engineers
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Town of Fairmont - Alternatives Analysis
Land Application System
Item Description
Qty.
Unit
Unit Price
Total Price
I General - Bonds, Insurance, Administration, Etc.
1
LS
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
2 Land Acquisition
540
AC
$3,500.00
$1,890,000.00
3 Land Clearing and Grading
375
AC
$1,500.00
$562,500.00
�+
4 Crop Planting (Coastal)
375
AC
$1,000.00
$375,000.00
5 Barbed Wire Fencing
165,600
LF
$1.00
$165,600.00
6 Spray Piping - 4" PVC
198,000
LF
$4.50
$891,000.00
7 Nozzles- 1/4"
2,750
EA
$200.00
$550,000.00
8 Valves - 4" PVC
10
EA
$250.00
$2,500.00
9 Lagoon Excavation
522,144
CY
$2.00
$1,044,288.00
10 Lagoon Liner
50,536
CY
$5.00
$252,680.00
11 Lagoon Effluent Box
2
EA
$10,000.00
$20,000.00
12 Influent Piping
200
LF
$25.00
$5,000.00
13 Woven Wire Fence
4,590
LF
$3.00
$13,770.00
14 Irrigation Pump Station
1
LS
$300,000.00
$300,000.00
15 Header Piping- 12"
5,500
LF
$12.00
$66,000.00
.n
16 Tractor
1
LS
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
17 Mower
1
LS
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
18 Rake
1
LS
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
19 Baler
I
LS
$7,000.00
$7,000.00
20 Monitoring Wells
12
LS
$1,500.00
$18,000.00
21 Contractor's Overhead and Profit
1
LS
$250,000.00
$250,000.00
Total Estimated Construction Cost
$6,552,338.00
Engineering, Design, and Administration
$378,500.00
Construction Management and Inspection
$229,300.00
O
Surveying and Mapping
$25,000.00
Contingencies
$655,362.00
Total Estimated Project Cost
$7,840,500.00

_ HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET
Town of Fairmont
Land Application System
Personnel Services
Salaries
$100,000.00
FICA
$8,000.00
Retirement / Insurance
$20,000.00
Subtotal
$128,000.00
Operating Expenses
Office Exp. & Supplies
$3,000.00
Laboratory Supplies
$5,000.00
Transportation
$5,220.00
Electricity
$25,000.00
Supplies
$20,000.00
Gen. Maintenance
$17,000.00
Miscellaneous
$200.00
Subtotal
$75,420.00
Total Estimated Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs
$203,420.00
0

mn
rwi
I"
Im
PM
rMq
"W1
ART
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
New Wastewater Treatment Plant
MR
fam
p"
p"

mn
ram
rMn
ran
rX1
tan
M
rAn
rm1
Zo
ran
r=n
Pan
FM
pq
Job Name: Town of Fairmont WWTP
HUA No. FR9605
Date: 18-Aug-97
Description: Aeration Basin Sizing and Parameter Calculation Worksheet
Formulas:
Sludge Age (days) = Suspended Solids In Aeration
Suspended Solids To Aeration
MLSS (mg/1) = Desired Suspended Solids In Aeration
Weight Of Water In Aeration
MCRT (days) = Suspended Solids In Aeration
SS In WAS + SS In Effluent
Food To Microorganism Ratio = BOD To Aeration
MLVSS in Aeration
Input Parameters:
Calculated Parameters:
Wastewater Flow & Influent Conditions:
Calculated Parameters:
Peak Wet Weather Flow (mgd) =
4.375
ADF BOD5 Destroyed (lb/day) _>
2,700
Design Year Flow, ADF (mgd) =
1.750
ADF Ammonia -Nitrogen Destroyed (Iblday)=>
671
Start -Up Anticipated Flow (mgd) =
0.500
Yr.l BOD5 Destroyed (lb/day) =>
771
Design Sludge Return Rate (mgd) =
1.000
Yr.l Ammonia -Nitrogen Destroyed (lb/day) =>
192
Influent BOD5 (mg/l) =
200
Influent TSS (mg/1) =
200
Oxygen Rates
Influent TKN (mg/1) -
50
ADF Actual Oxygen Transfer Rate, AOTR (lb/day) =>
7,138
Effluent BODS Required (mg/l) =
15
ADF Standard Oxygen Transfer Rate, SOTR (lb/day) =>
10,926
Effluent TSS Required (mg/1) =
30
Yr.l Actual Oxygen Transfer Rate, AOTR (lb/day) =>
2,040
Effluent NH3-N (mg/1) =
4
Yr.l Standard Oxygen Transfer Rate, SOTR (lb/day) =>
3,122
Max Temperature (deg C) =
27
Site Elevation =
100
HP Required
Temperature Correction Theta =
1.024
HP At Average Daily Flow =>
182
Saturation D.Q. at Temp, Elev Cst (mg/1) =
7.99
HP At Year I Flow =>
52
Design Assumptions
Reactor Basin Volume (Based on IbBOD/1000 cuft)
Design MLSS (mg/l) —
2,800
Volume Required (gals) =>
673,219
Yr. I MLSS (mg/1) =
2,800
Detention Time (hrs) =>
9.23
RAS and WAS Concentration (mg(l) =
8,000
Transfer Alpha Value =
0.90
System Mass Requirements
Transfer Beta Value =
0.95
System Mass - BOD x MCRT x Yield (lb) _>
20,251
Mean Cell Residence Time (days) =
10
Volume Required (gal) =>
867,188
Operating Dissolved Oxygen, Co (mg/I) =
2.00
Detention Time (hrs) _>
11.89
lb BOD5/ 1000 cu R Aeration Vol =
30
Sludge Yield (lb TSS/Ib BOD5 Destroyed) s
0.75
Selected Volume - Input Value (gals)
970,000
Volatile SS Fraction (MLVSS/MLSS)-
0.65
Selected Basin Evaluation
RYte Coefficients
ADF Detention Time (hrs) =>
11.93
lb Oxygen/lb BOD5 Applied =
1.50
Yr. 1 Detention Time (hrs) _>
41.76
lb Oxygen/lb NH3-N Applied =
4.60
Mixing HP Required =>
174
ADF Process HP Required =>
52
H P Coefficients
ADF Food To Mass (lb BOD/lb MLSS) =>
0.20
lb 021BHP-Hr =
2.50
Yr. 1 Food To Mass (lb BOD/lb MLSS) =>
0.06
BHP/1000 Cu Ft =
1.5
ADF Sludge Wasting Rate (gpd) =>
23,888
Yr. 1 Sludge Wasting Rate (gpd) =>
28,575
r"

ran
Pa
rR
rot
fen
M
ruin
MR
10M
P)
Owl
pp
f"
ran
FM
MP
pa
Mq
Job Name: Town of Fairmont WWTP
HUA No. FR9605
Date: 18-Aug-97
Description: Clarifier evaluation
Formulas:
Surface Loading Rate (GPD/SF) = Flow Rate (GPD)
Surface Area (SF)
Hydraulic Detention Time (Hrs) = Tank Volume (GALS) x 24 Hr/Day
Flow (GPD)
Solids Loading Rate (Lbs/Day/SF) = Solids Applied (Lb/Day)
Surface Area (SF)
Weir Overflow Rate (GPD/FT of Weir) = Flow Rate (GPD)
Weir Length (FT)
Input Parameters:
Calculated Parameters:
Wastewater Flow:
Calculated Diameter:
Peak Wet Weather Flow (mgd) - 4.375
Surface Loading Basis (FT) =>
43.09
Design Year Flow, ADF (mgd) — 1.750
Solids Loading Basis (FT) =>
29.45
Start -Up Anticipated Flow (mgd) a 0.500
Weir Overflow Basis (FT) —>
27.85
Design Sludge Return Rate (mgd) = 1.000
Detention Time Basis (FT) =>
49.82
Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids Concentration:
Minimum Diameter Required (FT) =>
49.82
ADF MLSS (mg/1) = 2,800
Selected Diameter (FT) =>
60.00
Yr. I MLSS (mg/1) = 2,800
Calculated Conditions:
Clarifier Parameters:
Surface Loading Rate:
Number Of Units a 2
Peak Wet Weather (GPD/SF)
774
Sidewater Depth (ft) 15
Design Year, ADF (GPD/SF) =>
309
Design Surface Loading Rate (GPD/SF) = 600
Design Solids Loading Rate (Lb/Day/SF) = 30
Design Weir Overflow Rate (GPD/LF) = 10,000
Design Detention Time Mrs) = 6
Solids Loading Rate:
Peak Flow, ADF MLSS (Lb/Day/SF) =>
18
ADF+RAS, ADF MLSS (Lb/Day/SF) =>
11
ADF+RAS, Yr.l MLSS (Lb/Day/SF) =>
6
Weir Overflow Rate:
Peak Wet Weather (GPD/LF) _>
11,605
Design Year, ADF (GPD/LF)
4,642
Detention Time:
Peak Wet Weather Mrs) =>
3.48
Design Year, ADF (Hrs) a>
8.70
pA

M
n
MM
MR
r"
Fun
M
f"
P"
ran
M
M
n
r=1
f"
r+q
Job Name: Town of Fairmont WWTP
H UA No. FR9605
Date: 18-Aug-97
Description: Disinfection, Cascade Post Aeration, and Sludge Digestor Calculations
Formulas:
Cascade Aerator Deficit Ratio, r =
CS - Co
Cs-C
Total Cascade Vertical Drop Rqd
(0.11)(a)(b)(1+0.046)(T)
Pounds Of Solids Wasted Per Day =
(Q Was)(8.34)(MLSS Was)
Volume Of Thickened Sludge (gpd) =
Pounds Of Solids Wasted Per Day
(Thickened Conc - Decant Conc)(8.34)
Input Parameters:
Calculated Parameters:
Wastewater Flow:
Chlorine Contact Calculated Parameters
Peak Wet Weather Flow (mgd) =
0.200
Peak Volume Required (gal) =>
4,167
Design Year Flow, ADF (mgd) =
0.100
ADF Volume Required (gal) =>
2,083
Start -Up Anticipated Flow (mgd) =
0.045
Yr.I Volume Required (gal) =>
938
Number Of Chamber Trains =>
1.00
Chlorine Contact Basin Parameters
Required Channel Length (ft) =>
27.85
Design Channel Length (ft) =>
28.00
Required Detention Time (min) a
30
Design Channel Width (ft) =>
2.00
Number Of Chamber Trains =
1
Design Channel Depth (ft) —>
5.00
Design Sidewater Depth in Chamber (ft) =
5
Detention Time At Peak (min) =>
15.08
Design Width of Chamber (ft) =
2
Detention TIme At Yr. 1 (min) =>
67.02
Cascade Aerator Input Parameters
Cascade Aerator Calculated Parameters
Dissolved Oxygen Saturation Cs (mg/1) =
9.1392
Height Of Vertical Drop Required (ft) =>
11
D.O. Before Cascade Co (mg/1) =
0
Required Effluent D.O. C (mg/1) =
6
Sludge Digestion & Storage Calculated Parameters
Coeff a (1.0 For BOD<=I5mg/1) -
1.00
Coeffb (Assume 0.8 For a Step Weir) =
0.80
ADF Pounds Of Soilids Per Day =>
1,594
Wastewater Temperature (deg C) =
20
Yr.I Pounds Of Soilids Per Day s>
1,907
ADF Thickened Sludge Volume (gpd) a>
8,531
Sludge Digestion & Storage Input Parameters
Yr.I Thickened Sludge Volume (gpd) a>
10,205
ADF Annual Sludge Disposal Cost (S/Yr) _>
$155,695
ADF Sludge Wasting Rate (gpd) =
23,888
Yr. I Annual Sludge Disposal Cost (S/Yr) _>
$186,248
Yr. I Sludge Wasting Rate (gpd) =
28,575
Target Percent Solids After Thickening =
2.25%
Aerobic Digestion 503 Sludge Digestion & Storage Requirements
Target Decant Solids Concentration (mg/l) a
100
Sludge Disposal Cost ($/Gal) _
$0.05
ADF Volume Required At 20 Dec C (40 Days)=>
341,250
Yr. 1 Volume Required At 20 Dec C (40 Days)=>
408.214
ADF Volume Required At 15 Dec C (60 Days)=>
511,875
Yr. l Volume Required At 15 Dec C (60 Days)=>
612,321
z::]

HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Town of Fairmont - Alternatives Analysis
New Wastewater Treatment Facility
Item Description
Qjy.
ERR
Unit Price
Total Price
^'
I General - Bonds, Insurance, Administration, Etc.
1
LS
$95,000.00
$95,000.00
2 Site Grading, Paving, Fencing, Sidewalks
1
LS
$110,000.00
$110,000.00
3 Yard Piping
I
LS
$65,000.00
$65,000.00
4 Flow Splitter Box - Weirs, Gates, Etc.
1
LS
$30,000.00
$30,000.00
5 Aeration Basins
1
LS
$975,000.00
$975,000.00
6 Dual Clarifiers
1
LS
$310,000.00
$310,000.00
7 Air Piping
I
LS
$65,000.00
$65,000.00
8 Blowers & Blower Building
1
LS
$275,000.00
$275,000.00
9 Chlorine Contact Basin
I
LS
$55,000.00
$55,000.00
10 02 & S02 Feed Systems
1
LS
$35,000.00
$35,000.00
11 Post Aeration
1
LS
$12,000.00
$12,000.00
12 Effluent Pump Station
I
LS
$125,000.00
$125,000.00
13 Sludge Digestion
I
LS
$265,000.00
$265,000.00
14 Sludge Dewatering Facilities
I
LS
$85,000.00
$85,000.00
15 Electrical, Mechanical Construction
I
LS
$210,000.00
$210,000.00
16 Standby Generator
I
LS
$150,000.00
$150,000.00
17 Laboratory and Control Building
I
LS
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
18 Plant Instrumentation
I
LS
$145,000.00
$145,000.00
Total Estimated Construction Cost
$3,147,000.00
Engineering and Design
$188,500.00
Construction Management and Inspection
$63,800.00
..
Contingencies
$290,000.00
Land
$135,000.00
Total Estimated Project Cost
$3,824,300.00
M

W
HOBBS, UPCHURCH &ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Town of Fairmont - Alternatives Analysis
Wastewater Pumping S stem
Y
Item
Description
9M
unit
Unit Price
Total Price
1
12" PVC Force Main
50,000
LF
$12.00
$600,000.00
2
12" Ductile Iron Piping
1,000
LF
$30.00
$30,000.00
3
20" Steel Casing
850
LF
$110.00
$93,500.00
4
Pump Station Upgrade
1
LS
$130,000.00
$130,000.00
5
Mechanical Screening
1
LS
$85,000.00
$85,000.00
6
Grit Removal
1
LS
$50,000.00
$50,000.00
7
Odor Control System
1
LS
$45,000.00
$45,000.00
8
12" Plug Valves
9
EA
$2,500.00
$22,500.00
9
Air Release Valves
7
LS
$2,500.00
$17,500.00
10
Creek Crossings
I
LS
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
11
Seeding and Mulching
14
AC
$1,500.00
$21,000.00
12
Erosion Control Measures
I
LS
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
Total Estimated Construction Cost
Engineering and Design
Construction Management and Inspection
Contingencies
Total Estimated Project Cost
an
we
M
M
W
$1,139,500.00
$88,600.00
$39,700.00
$125,540.00
$1,393,340.00

HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET
Town of Fairmont
New Wastewater Treatment Facility
Personnel Services
Salaries
$100,000.00
FICA
$8,000.00
Retirement / Insurance
$20,000.00
Subtotal
$128,000.60
Operating Expenses
Office Exp. & Supplies
$3,000.00
Laboratory Supplies
$5,000.00
Transportation
$5,220.00
Electricity
$60,000.00
Supplies
$20,000.00
Gen. Maintenance
$17,000.00
Miscellaneous
$200.00
Sludge Disposal
$32,000.00
Subtotal
$142,420.00
Total Estimated Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs $270,420.00
W

e o United States Rural Economic
4405 Bland Road, Suite 260
Department of and Community Raleigh, NC 27609
Agriculture Development [phone]
Services [phone] Fox
January 4, 1996
4b -bey`°
SUBJECT: Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact
and Necessary Environmental Findings for
Town of Fairmont - Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements Project
TO: Project File
The attached Environmental Assessment has been completed for the subject proposal by the
Rural Economic and Community Development environmental reviewer. After reviewing the
assessment and the supporting materials attached to it, I find that the subject proposal will not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the preparation of an
environmental impact statement is not necessary.
I also find that the assessment properly documents the proposal's status of compliance with the
environmental laws and requirements listed therein.
-7 DAMES C. K
State Director
Rural Economic & Community Development
Attachment
Rual Economic and Community Development Services Is an Equal Opportunity Lender
Complaints of discrimination should be sent to:
Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250

JAI v 8 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Town of Fairmont - Sewer Project
December 18, 1995
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND NEED
The proposed project involves the construction of a new 1.75 mechanical wastewater
treatment plant near the Lumber River along with approximately 5 ,000 LF of 12" Forced
Main. Also included In the project is the replacement of 4,100 LF of 4" and 6" existing
collection lines that do meet today's standards along with the installation of approximately
26,430 LF of new gravity collection lines In areas soon to be annexed into the town. The
proposed system will serve approximately 1180 existing customers and approximately 134
new residential customers. The total estimated project cost is $6,871,300.
The proposed improvements are needed to correct problems with the old existing system in
the town. Currently the town is under a Special Order by Consent and a Moratorium
because of its failure to pass required toxicity tests. This SOC and Moratorium severely limits
the growth of the town. The proposed project will correct these problems.
If. PRIMARY BENEFICIARIES AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
The primary beneficiaries of the proposed project will be the residential population of the
Town of Fairmont. This project will cause no significant increase in business for the existing
businesses in the area since the users of the system will be people who are already living in the
area. Building and construction supply businesses may experience a temporary improvement
in business during the construction of the project.
There are no related activities in this case which are defined as interdependent part of a
USDA, Rural Economic and Community Development action.
Ill. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA
The sewer collection Improvements are proposed to be installed in the Town of Fairmont.
The wastewater treatment plant will be located approximately one mile south of U.S. Hwy.
74 between SR 2244 and SR 2245. The forced main from the Town of Fairmont will be
installed in the right-of-way of NC Hwy 130 and then along SR 2245 to the plant. Town of
Fairmont is located in Robeson County, North Carolina. See Exhibit 11 "Project Maps".
iV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
1. Air Quality: There will be no emissions resulting directly from the proposed project
after the project is completed. During construction the machinery utilized to Install the sewer
system will produce some emissions resulting from combustion of petroleum products used to
power the equipment. The specifications will require equipment utilized on the project to
operate within emissions limits as established by the State of North Carolina for construction
equipment. During the installation of collection lines, the vegetation to be cleared will be
hauled to the county landfill or burned. All burning will be conducted under controlled
conditions with the appropriate burning permits from local authorities. All construction
related air emissions will be temporary and will not have a significant impact on the air
quality.

2
2. Water Quality: The quality of surface and/or underground water will not be adversely
affected by the proposed project. The current treatment plant discharges into Pittman Mill
Branch which Is a low flow stream. Fairmont's wastewater discharge makes up practically the
entire flow of the stream. Because the discharge will now be in the Lumber River, a much
larger flow of water, and because the entire treatment process will be upgraded, the water
quality for this area will be improved.
3. Solid Waste Management: Solid waste created by the proposed project will Included
steel bands, wood shipping timbers, plastic buckets, PVC pipe trimmings, and other normal
waste from building construction. Contract documents shall Included the following: "Wastes
shall not be buried or burned on the site or disposed of into storm drains, sanitary sewers,
streams, or waterways. All waste shall be removed from the site and disposed of In a manner
complying with local ordinances and antipollution laws." The Engineer is responsible to
assure that this portion of the contract is met. The by-products of the treatment will be
disposed of in the county landfill.
4. Land Use: The proposed project will not have any significant impacts, either directly or
indirectly, on land use within the town.
The construction of the sewer system will not significantly contribute to residential or
industrial growth within the project area as there Csvery little new lines in the proposed
system. There will be some growth because persons growing up in the area and others
moving into the area for employment will likely construct homes along the sewer lines. Such
development has occurred in the past along existing sewer lines In the area and will likely
continue in the future.
All new sewer lines will be constructed within the town limits of Fairmont or in residential
areas which will become a part of Fairmont very soon. This area has been determined to be
"urban buildup" and therefore no prime or important farmland exist within this part of the
project area.
The wastewater treatment plant will be constructed pproximately one mile south of U.S.
Hwy 74 between SR 2244 and SR 2245. The forc main from the Town of Fairmont will
be installed in the right-of-way of NC Hwy 130 and th along SR 2245 to the plant.
As is the case in most of eastern North Carolina, many areas of Important farmlands occur
along the forced main proposed route. However, there are no other reasonably alternative
routes to consider. Furthermore, the same would be true about important farmlands
regardless of the route chosen.
Also, several areas of floodplains and wetlands exist both in the town limits and along the
proposed forced main route. The floodplains and wetlands occur primarily near the swamp
crossings and near the Lumber River. The wastewater treatment site is one of a few small
tracts in that area that Is not located in a floodplain or wetland. Although the majority of
the construction will occur in existing highway rights -of -way, any wetlands or floodplains
disturbed during construction will be return as close as possible to Its natural state at the end
of construction.
To mitigate the above environmental concerns, the town will be required to agree not to
place connections to this system for new construction in areas of important farmlands for
other than residential or agricultural purposes. Furthermore, the town must agree not to
install connections for any new construction in areas of floodplains or wetlands.

S. Transportation: There will be minor Interruptions in traffic flows during construction.
The impact of these delays will be minimized by the use of safety personnel and avoiding
traffic blockages during peak travel times. Since these delays will be few and of short duration,
it is determined that there will be no significant Impact on transportation. No effect Is
anticipated after construction.
b. Natural Environment: This project will have no adverse effect on the natural
environment. According to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer, there are
no structures or sites of historical significance located in areas to be used for the construction
of the proposed project.
7. Human Population: There will be no relocation of people caused by the project. The
proposed project could accommodate a moderate amount of population increase, however,
the history of this area would indicate there will be only very modest increases in population.
There will be no significant change in services required such as health care, social services, and
fire protection.
As discussed in Section IV 2, positive impacts of the project on the quality of ground water
should improve the general health of the present and future population in the service area.
8. Construction: During the construction phase there will be minimal temporary effects on
air quality, noise levels, soil erosion, and siltation. Impacts will be minimized in each of these
areas as discussed above. Approval for Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plans will be
obtained from the Land Quality Section of the N. C. Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development before any development begins.
9. Energy Impacts: The major type of energy used for this project will be electricity for
treatment and pumping of sewer. The electricity will be supplied by CPBLL and will not have
measurable impact on the total supply of energy for the area.
V. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT
The project is not within nor will it Impact an area affected by the Coastal Zone Management
Act.
Vl. COMPLIANCE WITH ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION'S
REGULATIONS
USDA, Rural Economic and Community Development Instructions 190 1-F.1 A has been
reviewed and the proposed sites does not contain or affect a historic place listed in the
National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic Preservation Officer has determined
there are no properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance which would be
affected by the proposed project.

El
VII. COMPLIANCE WITH THE WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT
The discharge point for the proposed wastewater treatment plant is the Lumber River. This
river is included in the Wild and Scenic Rivers Inventory List for North Carolina. However,
the proposed project will not significantly change the quantity, quality, or flow characteristics
of the river as the flow of the Lumber River is many times in excess of the discharge of the
proposed plant. The North Carolina Department of Health and Natural Resources, Division
of Parks and Recreation has indicated in a letter dated November 17, 1995 that the
proposed plant will not cause a problem with the Lumber River State Park. Also a biological
assessment was completed by Dr. J.H. Carter III and Associates on October 13, 1995 which
indicated the proposed project would have no significant impacts on natural resources of
concern or protected species.
VI11. COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
J.H. Carter III and Associates conducted a Preliminary Biological Assessment for the project
area and has determined that the project will not have significant impacts on natural resources
or protected species. This assessment is attached as Appendix A.
IX. COMPLIANCE WITH FARMLAND PROTECTION ACT AND DEPARTMENTAL
REGULATION 9500-3, LAND USE POLICY
RECD has analyzed the project's potential impacts on important land resources covered by
these regulations (see section IV). The conclusion was reached that there could possibly be
indirect impacts of important farmland as result of the project. The mitigation requirements
were also discussed in section IV.
X. COMPLIANCE WITH EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988, FLOODPLAIN
MANAGEMENT, AND EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990, PROTECTION OF WETLANDS
The project potential impacts on floodplains and wetlands was analyzed and discussed in
section IV of this report. The conclusion was reached that there could be direct and indirect
impacts to floodplains and wetlands. The mitigation requirements were also discussed in
section IV.
XI. COMPLIANCE WITH COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES ACT
This project will not be located within the Coastal Barrier Resources System.
XI1. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
The state of North Carolina does have a State Environmental Policy Act. However, on a
federal action where an environmental assessment is performed no further reviews are
required by the State.
XI11. CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
The Intergovernmental Review process has been followed. See attached Clearinghouse
Comments. Comments included concerns for endangered species, important farmland,
wetlands, and floodplains. All have been addressed in other sections of this assessment.

X
11� 5
XIV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF PARTICIPATING FEDERAL AGENCY
No other environmental assessments have been prepared by any participating Federal agency
in this project.
XV. REACTION TO PROJECT
Public hearings have not been held concerning this project. No adverse reaction has been
noted.
XVI. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The project as proposed will provide much needed sewer improvements for the residents of
Town of Fairmont. No other cumulative impacts are expected as a result of this project.
XV1I. ADVERSE IMPACTS
Several minor adverse impacts may be associated with this project. These impacts are
identified below:
A. Some possible erosion and sedimentation during construction.
B. Some localized decrease in air quality around construction.
C. Some pipeline construction will occur in floodplains and wetlands at stream and swamp
crossings.
D. Potential for some indirect conversion of prime and important farmland, floodplains, and
wetlands.
No major adverse impacts have been identified for the project. All the major impacts 'are
positive and related to the improved health and quality of life for residents of the service
area.
XVIII. ALTERNATIVES
There are no other sites or designs that would have less impact on the environment than the
project as proposed. Several alternatives were considered for the site of the treatment plant.
The original site was located between Pea Ridge Road (S.R. 2244) and the Lumber River.
Following execution of the option for this property, the Town was contacted by the Division
of Parks and Recreation and informed that the property along Pea Ridge Road had been
designated as a proposed State Park headquarters. Asa result the Town relinquished its
option on this site and looked in other areas. The proposed site is located between Pea Ridge
Road and S.R. 2245. The Division of Parks and Recreation has indicated this site will not
adversely affect their plans for the area.
Also considered was the modification of the existing treatment plant. However, as previously
mentioned, the existing plant discharges into the Pittman Mill Branch which Is a low flow
stream. The construction of a new plant at this site does not guarantee the resolution of the
toxicity problems due to the lack of dilution. Another alternative considered was to pump to
the City of Lumberton. This option was cost prohibited. Still another alternative considered
was a Land Application system. This option was discovered to be cost prohibited and
environmentally unsafe because of the high water table in the area and the possibility of
groundwater contamination.

6
Another alternative could be to do nothing. This alternative is not acceptable to the residents
of the Fairmont.
XIX. MITIGATION MEASURES
A. All permits required by state and local government (i.e. burning, SexE, etc.) shall be
obtained prior to the beginning of construction.
B. Final specifications will require equipment utilized on the project to operate within
emissions limits as established by the State, for construction equipment.
C. All vegetation cleared will be hauled to the county landfill or otherwise properly disposed
of.
D. Solid wastes shall not be buried or burned on site or disposed of into storm drains,
sanitary waters, streams or waterways. All waste shall be removed from the site and
disposed of in a manner complying with local ordinances and anti pollution laws.
E. Impact on Farmland: To minimize future impacts on prime and important farmland the
Town will be required to adopt the following mitigation measure:
TOWN OF FAIRMONT RESTRICTION ON FUTURE SEWER SERVICE AND SITE
SELECTION TO PROTECT FARMLAND.
The sewer system will not Install future service taps for NEW construction outside of
the town limits to non-agricultural or residential development without first determining
if the site contains important farmlands and then if it does the written concurrence of
the USDA, Rural Economic and Community Development must be obtained. The
town further agrees to select future facility sites to avoid conversion of important
farmland.
F. impact on Floodplains: To minimize future impacts on floodplains the Town be required
to adopt the following mitigation measure:
TOWN OF FAIRMONT RESTRICTION ON FUTURE SEWER SERVICE AND SITE
SELECTION TO PROTECT FLOODPLAINS.
The sewer system will not install future service taps for NEW construction located on
identified floodplains.
G. Impact on Wetlands: To minimize future impacts on wetlands the Town will be required
to adopt the following mitigation measure:
TOWN OF FAIRMONT RESTRICTION ON FUTURE WATER SERVICE AND SITE
SELECTION TO PROTECT WETLANDS.
The sewer system will not install future service taps for NEW construction located on
Identified wetlands.
The above restrictions will become effective upon the completion of the proposed
construction project.

L
XX. CONSISTENCY WITH RECD ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES
This project is consistent with the Agency's environmental policies and the State Office's
Natural Resource Management Guide.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIONS
The following recommendations shall be completed:
a. Based on an examination and review of the foregoing information and such supplemental
information attached hereto, I recommend that the approving official determine that this
project will not have a significant affect on the quality of the human environment.
b. I recommend that the approving official make the following compliance determinations for
the below listed environmental requirements.
Not in In
Compliance Compliance
X Clean Air Act
X Federal Water Pollution Control Act
X Safe Drinking Water Act Section
X Endangered Species Act
N/A Coastal Barrier Resources Act
N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act
Section 307(c))1) and (2)
X
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
X
National Historic Preservation Act
X
Archaeological and Historic
Preservation Act
X
Executive Order 11988, Floodplain
Management
X
Executive Order 11990, Protection
of Wetlands
X
Farmland Protection Policy Act
X
Departmental Regulation 9500-3,
Land Use Policy
X
State Office Natural Resource
Management Guide

:,
c. 1 have reviewed and considered the types and degrees of adverse environmental Impacts
identified by this assessment. I have also analyzed the proposal for its consistency with RECD
environmental policies, particularly those related to important farmland protection, and have
considered the potential benefits of the proposal. Based upon a consideration and balancing
of these factors, I recommend from an environmental standpoint that the project
X be approved.
not be approved because of the attached reasons.
gn ture o4-0
• • � oncurring UlVci-aff—
&DAte
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR'S REVIEW
I have reviewed this environmental assessment and supporting documentation. Following are
my positions regarding the adequacy and the recommendations reached by the prepared. For
any matter in which I do not concur, my reasons are attached as Exhibit .
Do Not Concur Concur
X Adequate Assessment
j� Environmental Impact
Determinations
X Compliance Determinations
Project Recommendation
7�� kl. Av-e-� - 114 AY (V
gnature of State nviron enta or orator Date

' DA-FmiLk
-arm FmHA 1940-20
ev. 1-92)
Position 3
/ FORM APPROVED
OMB NO. 0675-0094
REQUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION I Name of Project
J Fairmont
Vabtewater iftroyetae
Location
.II =a• iiaa a .-cua,al, JLa«, u1 i.ucai r-nvirvnmentai impact statement or Analysis been prepared for this project?
O Yes IJ No ❑ Copy attached as EXHIBIT I -A.
1 b. If "No," provide the information requested in Instructions as EXHIBIT I.
m 2. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHOP) has been provided a detailed project description and has been requested to submit
p
comments to the appropriate FmHA Office. $] Yes ❑ No Date description submitted to SHPO July 24, 1995
,n 3. Are any of the following land uses or environmental resources either to be affected by the proposal or located within or adjacent to the
project site(s)? (Check appropriate box for every item of the following.checklist).
Yes
No
Unknown
Yes
No Unknown
Industrial .............................................
❑
❑
18. Beaches...........................................................
❑
®
f
❑
Commercial...........................
❑
❑
19. Dunes ..................................................
IV
Residential...........................................
K1
❑
❑
20. Estuary............................................................
O
$1
O
Agricultural .........................................
®
O
❑
21. Wetlands.........................................................
M
❑
❑
Grazing.................................................
❑
O
®
22. Floodplain......................................................
JP
❑
O
Mining, Quarrying .............................
❑
O
23. Wilderness.....................................................
❑
%]
❑
(designated or proposed under the Wilderness
Forests ..................................................
®
O
❑
Act)
24. Wild or Scenic River ....................................
0
❑
O
Recreational ........................................
®
❑
❑
(proposed or designated under the Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act)
Transportation ....................................
®
❑
❑
25. Historical, Archeological Sites ..................
❑
O
(Listed on the National Register of Historic
Parks.....................................................7
❑
❑
Places or which may be eligible for listing)
liospitals..............................................
❑
2
❑
26. Critical Habitats............................................
07
❑
(endangeredlthreatened species)
Schools.................................................
O
❑
27. Wildlife...........................................................
IV
❑
O
Openspaces ........................................
E
Cl
O
28. Air Quality .....................................................
❑
11
❑
Aquifer Recharge Area .....................
❑
❑
29. Solid Waste Management ............................
❑
11
❑
30. Energy Supplies ............................................
Cl$1
❑
Steep Slopes ........................................
❑
LK
❑
31. Natural Landmark .........................................
❑
X
O
Wildlife Refuge ..................................
❑
Ek
O
(Listed on National Registry of Natural
Landmarks)
Shoreline ..............................................
❑
O
32. Coastal Barrier Resources System. ............
❑
r
❑
m 4. Are any facilities under your ownership, lease, or supervision to be utilized in the accomplishement of this project, either listed or
under consideration for listing on the Environmental Protection Agency's List of Violating Facilities? ❑ Yes
® No
` 6 — 1G 70
Signed:
(Date)
(Ap'plicanrf
(Ma/yoZr—
I
Town of Fairmont
(Title)
Public reporting burden for this collection of information
is estimated
to average 10 to 40 hours per response. Including the time for reviewing in-
structions, searching existing data sources, gatheringand maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send
commen is regarding this burden estimate or any oter aspect of this collection of information, includin suggestions for reducing this burden, to Depart-
ment of Agriculture Clearance Officer, OIRM,
Room 404-W Washington,
Iuction Project (OJIM No. 0575.0094). Washington, D.C.20903. Please
D.C. 20260; and to the O14ice of Management and Budget, Paperwork Re-
DO NOT RETURN this form to either of these addresses. Forward to FmHA
only.

M
114w/
EXHIBIT I
1. Primary -Beneficiaries
OCT 1 7 1995
The proposed project includes the annexation of five areas adjacent to the existing Fairmont
Town limits. These areas contain existing residential and commercial users. The provision of
wastewater service will be a benefit to future residential, commercial and industrial users in these
areas. In addition, if the wastewater treatment plant is located near the Lumber River as planned,
a force main carrying untreated wastewater will be required from the existing site of the Fairmont
wastewater treatment plant to the Lumber River plant site. Several miles of property on both
sides of the force main route will have a possibility of access to wastewater treatment.
The school at Orrum is currently under an SOC to resolve its wastewater problems. It is
anticipated that the school will tie on to the proposed system. The communities of Orrum,
Proctorville and Boardman will have access to the new wastewater treatment plant as proposed.
Both Columbus and Bladen Counties have expressed interest in using the proposed wastewater
treatment plant located at the Lumber River for wastewater disposal. The proposed wastewater
treatment plant could serve as a regional facility for the overall benefit of the area.
2. Area Description
a. The overall project area would consist of the presently incorporated and annexed
areas of the Town of Fairmont and the wastewater treatment plant site of approximately five to
10 acres. Two plant sites are presently under consideration. The preferred site is located near the
Lumber River and is currently owned by the North Carolina Department of Transportation. The
secondary site is located in the designated industrial park area outside of Fairmont. In the event
that the river site is chosen, a non -treated wastewater force main will be required from the
existing Fairmont WWTP's site to the plant site near the Lumber River, a distance of
approximately 11 miles. In this event, an additional force main will be required to convey
treated effluent from the proposed plant site approximately one mile to the Lumber River.
Should the secondary industrial park site be chosen, a treated effluent force main will be required
from the wastewater plant approximately 10 miles to the discharge point in the Lumber River.
The terrain of the project area is flat with very little relief. Present land uses of the area range
from residential, commercial and industrial near and in the Town of Fairmont, agricultural,
residential and institutional (Orrum school) along the proposed force main route and recreational
near the Lumber River (The proposed discharge site is near the proposed Lumber River State
Park). In addition to these uses, there are forested areas and wetlands which are located near the
proposed facilities.
b. Effect on Resources in Item #3.
1. Industrial. The proposed wastewater treatment system will provide
improved wastewater service to existing industries. It will also provide additional wastewater

treatment capacity so that the area may attract new industries. This area of Robeson County has
been designated an Enterprise Community and an Enpowerment Zone. Development of these
areas are considered a high priority nationally.
2. Commercial. The proposed facility will provide improved wastewater
service to existing commercial establishments in the Town of Fairmont. Annexation of new
areas will stimulate additional commercial growth in the area.
3. Residential. The proposed facilities will provide improved wastewater
service to existing and future residents of the Town of Fairmont. In addition it will provide
wastewater service to existing and future residents of the areas to be annexed and may allow
access to residents living in the On -urn and Boardman areas.
4. Agricultural. The proposed project should not directly impact a
significant amount of agricultural land. The proposed treatment plant will likely be built on land
currently not used for agricultural purposes. The force main from the Town of Fairmont to the
Lumber River area will pass by but should not impact agricultural lands. If the DOT plant site is
chosen, the effluent force main from the plant to the river may cross land currently under
agricultural use but should have little or no permanent affect on this use.
7. , Forests. The currently proposed WWTP sites are not forested. The
proposed force mains will run along highway rights -of -way from the Fairmont area to the
Lumber River area. Should the DOT site be chosen, the effluent force main discharging to the
river will traverse a small area of forest adjacent to the river. It is anticipated that these impacts
will be minimal.
S. Recreational. The North Carolina Department of Parks and Recreation
currently proposes to obtain land and build a State Park adjacent to the Lumber River south of
US #74 in the area of the proposed discharge. If the DOT plant site is chosen, the effluent force
main will cross the proposed park area but should have little or no impact on recreational uses of
the facility.
9. Transportation. The wastewater force main from the Fairmont area to the
Lumber River will be laid along existing road rights -of -way. During the construction period,
traffic along these roads may be minimally affected. Growth of the Fairmont area will result in
more automobiles in the area. No significant impacts on transportation of the area are foreseen.
10. Parks. The North Carolina Department of Parks and Recreation proposes
to build the Lumber River State Park adjacent to the Lumber River south of US #74 in the area of
the proposed plant site and discharge. The initial proposed WWTP site was on land sought by
the State of North Carolina for the park. Because of opposition to the project caused by this
conflict, the Town of Fairmont is currently seeking alternate sites for construction for the
WWTP. Although the effluent force main from the proposed plant might traverse future park
property, the impacts should be minimal.
2

M
12. Schools. Existing schools in the Fairmont area will receive the benefit of
improved wastewater treatment. Addition wastewater capacity will be available for the
expansion or location of new schools in the area. The proposed wastewater force main will go
by the Orrum school which is currently under an SOC for its difficulties with wastewater
disposal. It is anticipated that the school will tie in to the proposed system, thereby eliminating
its wastewater treatment problems.
13. Open Spaces. There are areas along the proposed force main route that
could be considered open spaces. The project should have no impact on any such spaces.
21. Wetlands. Portions of land at and near the Lumber River as well as small
areas near the Town of Fairmont are considered wetlands. Avoidance of the disturbance of
wetlands is a primary concern in locating sites for construction. There should be minimal
disturbance of wetlands by the proposed project. It is inevitable that the force main will cross
some wetland areas. Care will be taken in design and construction to minimize any negative
impacts to these areas (See J.H. Carter and Associates report, Appendix A).
22. Flood Plain. The 100 year flood plain encompasses most areas within
several miles of the Lumber River near the proposed discharge point. While the flood plain is
very large, anticipated flood depths are very shallow. The proposed force main will necessarily
be in the 100 year flood plain at some points. The proposed WWTP sites are not in the 100 year
flood plain. There should be minimal impact to the flood plain by this project.
24. Wild or Scenic River. The Lumber River is designated as a wild and
scenic river. This designation will be taken into account by the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management in permitting the discharge into the river. Environmental impacts to
the river are being studied to ensure the nature of the river is not changed.
27. Wildlife. Wildlife occurs in all areas of the project including the Town of
Fairmont and its environs: the force main route, the potential plant site and the river into which
the plant will discharge. Biological surveys have been made of all areas including the river.
There should be minimal impacts to wildlife by this project (See J.H. Carter & Associates report,
Appendix A).
3. Air Oualitx
a. No specific air quality data is available for the Fairmont area. Appendix B
contains air quality data gathered by the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
for the surrounding area.
b. The proposed W WTP facilities should produce only small amounts of air
emissions. These will come from open wastewater treatment tanks. There should be negligible
effects from the discharge. There may be some odor associated with the treatment plant. The
proposed DOT location is well buffered from other inhabited areas and should cause no odor
problems. A well run WWTP treating largely domestic effluent should not produce a great deal
of odor.
3

There are no existing air emission problems with benefited users. Any new industries will be
required to meet air quality and permitting standards of the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management. The area currently enjoys excellent air quality. This project should
not result in a significant degradation of this quality.
C. Topographical and meteorological conditions of the area should not hinder the
disbursal of air emissions.
d. Air emission controls will be implemented where required by the Division of
Environmental Management per applicable permits.
4. Water Qualify
a. Appendix C contains a partial analysis of groundwater used as a potable water
source for the Town of Fairmont. The water is of excellent quality. The pH is normally around
7.3. No iron removal is required. Treatment of the water consists of the addition of fluoride and
chlorine for disinfection. The Town has no complaints from customers about water quality.
b. Fairmont obtains its water from three wells located in the area. These wells
currently are pumped at the rates of 600, 500 and 450 gpm. A local well driller has informed the
Town that could they withdraw more from these wells by increasing pump sizes. The area has an
excellent source of groundwater. Additional wells could be added as needed to increase the
water supply. It is anticipated that the wastewater treatment plant will be sized to discharge a
maximum of 2 mgd. Water requirements for the Town of Fairmont will be larger than the
permitted capacity of the WWTP. The groundwater supply is adequate for any foreseeable
needs.
C. The proposed WWTP will discharge up 2 m d o treated wastewater into the
Lumber River. The Lumber River at the proposed disch oint is classified as C-Swamp
waters. The North Carolina Division of Environmental Management was contacted earlier this
year to request speculative limits for the discharge. Appendix D contains a letter from DEM to
the Town of Fairmont with speculative discharge limits for the WWTP. The water discharge
from the plant should be of quality equal to or better than the proposed discharge limits. The
wastewater entering the proposed treatment plant will be a mixture of domestic and industrial
wastewater. The characteristics of future industries cannot be speculated upon at this time. New
industries will be screened to prevent the discharge of wastewater which will be harmful to the
treatment process and cause conflict with the NPDES discharge limits.
d. Wastewater entering the proposed WWTP will be subjected to various means of
treatment. The wastewater will be screened and degritted, aerated, clarified, disinfected,
reaerated, and pumped to the discharge point. If chlorine is used for disinfection, dechlorination
will be required to eliminate the toxic effects of chlorine in the effluent. It is anticipated that the
mode of treatment will be extended aeration which is a conservative design that should easily
meet the proposed discharge limits.
4

F W5
e. The treatment system will be adequate for the requirements of the project.
f. Surface runoff from any construction related to the project will be managed in
accordance with erosion and sedimentation control measures as well as stormwater regulations.
Surface runoff should not be a problem, however, some temporary runoff might occur during
construction.
5. Solid Waste Management
The Town currently collects solid wast.c8for residents. Commercial waste is collected by a
contractor. All waste is disposed of in the Robeson County landfill. It is anticipated that the
County will continue to provide disposal for solid waste.
6. Transportation
a. The Fairmont area is served by rail and a network of highways and secondary
roads. Fairmont is located very close to I-95 and US #74.
b. No new transportation patterns are anticipated to arise as a result of the proposed
project.
C. Not applicable.
d. No capacities of the existing transportation system should be exceeded as a result
of the project.
7. Noise
a. There should be only minimal noise impacts from the proposed project. The
WWTP will be located either in an isolated forested area or in an industrial area. The noise from
the WWTP will not be offensive at either site. Construction noise of a temporary nature will
have the greatest impact with this project. Industries which might locate in the area in the future
will have unknown noise impacts.
b. No land uses should be significantly affected by project noise.
8. Historic/Archaeological Proper -ties
a. There are no known areas of historic or archaeological significance related to the
proposed project. Appendix E contains a letter from the North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources. David Brook, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, concurs with this after a
review of the project.
b. Not applicable (See Appendix E).
9. Wildlife and Endangered Species
5

a. The project area has been subjected to a survey by J.H. Carter & Associates,
Consulting Biologists. Wildlife resources are addressed in their report as contained in Appendix
A.
b. Endangered and threatened species and critical habitats are addressed in the report
by J.H. Carter & Associates, Consulting Biologists, as contained in Appendix A.
10. Energy_
a. The Town of Fairmont energy sources consist of electricity and stored fossil fuel
products. The Town does not have access to natural gas at this time. There is a natural gas
pipeline in the general area.
b. The supply of energy to the Town of Fairmont is not specifically limited. The
proposed facilities and their beneficiaries should cause no problems with energy supplies.
11. Construction
Construction of the project will be performed in accordance with the requirement for erosion and
sedimentation control plans. The relatively flat nature of the area will reduce the possibility of
erosion. Construction noise will be abated by the utilization of properly maintained equipment.
Most construction will take place in isolated areas where noise pollution will not be of concern.
12. Toxic Substances
a. The Town of Fairmont is presently having some difficulty with toxicity of its
current wastewater discharge. Testing is being performed to identify the source of the toxicity.
There are no known toxic hazardous or radioactive substances being utilized by project
beneficiaries. The proposed WWTP may utilize chlorine for disinfection but will be required to
dechlorinate prior to discharge.
Location of the WWTP discharge will allow a great deal of dilution of the wastewater at
discharge and should reduce or eliminate the toxic effects of the wastewater effluent.
b. Any toxic, hazardous or radioactive substances utilized by the WWTP or primary
beneficiaries will be stored in accordance with all environmental regulations.
13. Public Reaction
a. Primary objections to the proposed project have resulted from the original intent
to build a wastewater treatment plant on lands slated to become part of the Lumber River State
Park. Other sites are now being considered for the location of the WWTP. No other major
objections have been raised.
b. There has not been a public hearing held regarding this project at this time.
6

C. The proposed project has been the subject of major discussions in the Town
Council for several months. In addition, some newspaper articles have been printed about the
Town's wastewater situation. The project has been discussed in meetings of the Lumber River
Council of Governments and other interested groups. The possible annexation of areas as
proposed in the project has been a frequent subject of discussion in Town Council meetings and
the general area.
14. Alternatives to the Proposed Project
a. Alternative Locations. There have been several alternatives considered for the
location of the proposed WWTP. The original intent was to locate the plant at the Lumber River
on land which has been planned for an eventual Lumber River State Park. Objections raised to
this location have prompted the Town to look for alternative sites. The alternatives presently
under consideration are the industrial park area just outside of Town and an area approximately
one mile from the Lumber River which is currently owned by NCDOT. The NCDOT tract is
preferred at this point.
b. The system design will be modified as needed to meet the requirements imposed
by the eventual plant site location. It is currently anticipated that an extended aeration process
will be utilized in the WWTP.
C. In addition to the proposed project, consideration has been given to the -following
alternatives:
1. No action.
2. Land application of wastewater.
3. Expansion of wastewater plant at current discharge location.
After careful consideration, the proposed project best meets the needs of the community and
area.
15. Mitigation Measures
Mitigation of negative environmental impacts will be accomplished by predesign planning to
avoid such impacts, by proper facility design to meet environmental requirements and by
utilization of proper construction methods. An example of this approach is the relocation of the
plant site to avoid environmental controversy surrounding the proposed Lumber River State Park
site. All construction will be subject to erosion and sedimentation control regulations. Design of
pipelines and facilities will be performed to minimize any impact on wetlands, flood plains,
forested areas and agricultural lands.
16. Permits
a. An authorization to construction facilities will be required by the Division of 11--
Environmental Management. An erosion and sedimentation control permit will be required for
7

M
construction. A wetlands permit may be required depending on the extent of wetlands
encroachment.
b. Delineation of wetlands is being performed by J.H. Carter & Associates. No other
permits have currently been applied for.
17. Other Federal Actions
The proposed project area is in an Enterprise Community and an Enpowerment Zone as
designated by the Federal Government. While no specific action other than this project are
currently proposed, this project helps to meet the goals of these programs.
8

XORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
114 WEST JONES STREET
09-05-95 RALE IGH NORTH CAROLINA 27503-8003
i
i
I
i
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
M;,LEP, TG !
T,'—,IWv OF FAIR`".ONIT
h-E Lti'l L U C K L E Y
I-AIRMLNlI NC 133407OZ43
UJ=C I VESC:1IP, rION
FROM
M1RS• CHRYS BAGG TT
DIRECTOR
N C STATE CLEAR NGHOUSE
PRG'PGSEI? CCjNSTRUCTI,ON OF A NEW WASTcWATER TREATMENT PLANT AN
A PUMPING SYSTI?M THAT WILL DISCHARGE INTO THE LUMBER RIVER A A
EAT_NSIO"�1 Cf S9f'ER SERVICE TO FIVE AREAS TO BE ANNEXED EY TOON
SAi NIL- 6C�000 ' iC0 �
'� � 6b C, DA NO — 10418
TH-- AbUVE PROJLT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
IN t tktaLVE-R NMtN �AL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW H x THE FOLLOWING 6
E
is su6mi"rTED 1( ). NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED WHICH CONSTITUTE THE SLATS PROCESS
RECOMMENDATION
I
ShUUi� YOU HAV� ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL S
TNI
-
OFt-ICE
t�lli
--
33 TZ32 THESE
Cuil,rLN I S ARc V�LIU �UNT'IL 09-05-98 f OR THIS
I
REVIEW*
IF
HE PROJECT IS
i
FOR i�U-LADING AFTER THIS DATE? PLEASE
RESUBMIT
FOR
kEYIEW+
I
Note to Rural Economic & CommWtyi':Development:
The N.C.
Department
of
Environment, Health & Natural'Resoarces would like for an-envirorimental
assessment to be prepared.for this proposal and
submitted
to the
State
Clearinghouse for intergovernmental review.
C.C. REGIO"'.! ti
RECD, Lumberton
Will Buie, F obbs, Upchurch & Associates
I
Pest4t" Fax Note 7671
To
- ►
Co./Dept.
Co.
..
Phoned
Fax #

M
i
To:
From: '
Through:
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMEMAL MANACEMENi'
August 24,1995
Monica sw;nart P4 --�
n
Susan, Wilson
Calla Sanderson Re
Din Safrit
Ruth Swanek la:.3
Dave Goodrich
(�ne11a�1Mcf� u�
Subject: F ianont WVVTP Expansion
PWirninary Engineering Report
1 NCO021059
Robeson County
The Technical Support Branch (TSB) has reviewed the ppa�liminary engineeri
the Fairmoo t WWTP expansion to 1.75 MGD. The follow; comments are
the Town's!further consideration:
se be aware .tliat in formal application for an NPDES permit, an en.'
natives analysis will have to be submitted. As of this analysis, I
have to be provided with regard to spry irrigation (land 'cation;
rewater. Loading rates and soil anal sis should .be rovid4 lon i
fled cost anal sis as outlined in the Division's or
• t _ .. t
In �ection VI. the. selected alternative is a puiuPing system and the consl
ne , wastewater treatment plaint at the Lumber River approximately one
of U.S. HWY U.' Section VIL discusses the alternate site for the treaW
the' Fairmont Industrial Park due to conflicts with the N.C. Department
and Recreation's plans forME
at the Lumber River site. According to
analysis. submitted as part report, the site at Fairmont appears to 1
ecgnomically feasible. In light of conflicts with Parks and Recreation' 1
the; outcome of the cost analysis the Technical Support Branch encourag
Of the alternative site at the Fairmont Industrial Park for the wastewater t
plat.
If h further evaluation the Fairmont Industrial 'ark Site is not found tv 1
fe . ible alternative, the Town should provide more detailed explanation
en ironmental consequences for m g the existing pit and subset
dischar a to the Lumber River. Also, ' yanthe optionto locate the plant on is
Faijrmont and the Lumber Diver (near Orrum) should be furdmw evaluate
explained in detail. `
Please inc udc this information as part of the final engineering report and prior to
apnlicatio for an NPDES permit.
cc: Faye vine Regional Office
Centr Files
t for
for
the
�a
fiction of a
pile south
at plant at
of Parks
the cost
the most
ins and
s pursuit
the most
i between
and

-- �_•-ar.u1112
State of North Caraltrta
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Leg'slative fix' Intergovernmental Affairs
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
I
i
TO: Chrys Baggett
Sitate Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee 4 '
Review Coordinator
ID E H NFZ
RE: q6-0066 Fairmont WWTP Expansion, Robeson County
DATE: August 30,1995
�(OEiVE D
S F 5 5995
N.C. ST TE CLEARINGHOUSE
Divisions v ithin the Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Re;
with project officials on June 21,1995 contenting the referenced proposal. I
presented at the meeting identified the construction of the plant at the Lumbe
the preferred alternative. As part of this review, we find the Town of Fairmo
to recognize this alternative as their preferred. While this is probably a prop(
could proceed with adequate planning, this department continues to object to
Fairmont's preferred alternative. As previously discussed with project offich
preferred alternative would be in conflict with the Division of Parks and Rect
master plan for development of a state park. This issue is obviously of great
to this depar ent.
Our primary concern atithis point is to continue to coordinate with the Tor
Fairmont. Our divisions have identified strong concerns over the impacts to t
environment in the preferred alternative versus locating the wastewater treatn
the Fairmont Industrial Park site. We ask that issues raised by our reviewers
thorough consideration prior to the preparation of the environmental documes
met
aver as
continues
d that
e Town of
. their
tion's
I
P.. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
Eau I-op•--Uu ity AffinYi�tive Action Employer SOT. recycled/ 10% post-eomumer paper
Of
natural
It plant at
given
Should

ML'•MO"DUM
I
TO: Melba Mct3ce
Ufliee of Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: Franklin T. McBride, Manager �y
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: August 25, 1995
SUBJECT: Notification of Intent to Apply for Assistance • Preliminary
Report forTown of Fairmont wastewater collection and trot
improvements, Robeson County, North Carolina, project #
staff' biologists with the Wildlife Resources Commission has reviewed o subject
en iWildlif report. Our comments ate provided in accordance with provisions f the rich
and Wildlife Coordination Act (49 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S,C.ronmental licy Act 661 et. soq, , the
Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended) and the North Carolina p
(G.S. 113A 1 et seq., as amended; 1 NCAC-25). Envi
The Town ofFainnont's wastewater treatment
toxicity test requirements since 1993 and is currentlyOperatingstem l undera Special rder of
Consent. Discharge to Pittman Mill Branch, a small stream with 7Q10 of only (� 001
CFS, has contributed to toxicity failures, In addition to toxicity shortcomings, undersire
and deterivrptOd pipes hav0caused problems with infiltration and inflow, The T wn's
consultants ,�tave recommended that a new 1,75 MGD wastewater treatment p) and
distribution eystem with discharge to the Lumber River near Boardman be const acted as
a added,
a facility, While the faculty is to be constructed so that tertiary fihrattoopp can be
added, tertiary treatment is not proposed at this time. Tho Lumber River is desikrtated a
Natural and ;Scenic River and is classified C Sw in the project area. Also, the L fiber
River supports one of North Carolina's most Outstanding redbreast sunfish fishorties.
Downstream of Boardman this year, wildlife enforcement officers observed angf rs
catching redbreast weighing up to 2 lbs.
1'he alp lication describes an area on SR 2245 along the Lumber River as�the
preferred site for wastewater treatment construction. The N.C. Department of p4s and
Recreation, howevor, has designated this area as part of their master plait for development

Project No. 96- 0066 2
August 25, 1995
In a statetria park. Consequently, an alternative plant site has been identified Industrial Park. fled at Faitmant's
Pot i fntial adverse impacts. to 11sh and wildlife resources include loss of ri tui•
wetland habitat a9sociatcd with the Lumber River eonstmetion site loss o P
habitat to pipeline construction, and Lumber River water ualit decl' f wetland
wastewater; dischArge. To tamtm�xa these �mpaCts, we roc9om � 1rie dur, to added
modifications: mend the followin project
Locate the wastewater treatment plant at the Fairmonthi -
This site should minimize riparian wetland impacts as well as � ark site,
incornpatibility with the state park. ca flicts of
z. I r.acate new pipelin construction along existing road right -of. -ways
minirnize impacts to wctlAntl&• ,4,n. necessary to
c►on.�►tructad e Y a�,stream crossings should be
required withinpendlCular to the to minimize the amount f. work
he riparian corridor.
3 • Provi& tertiary treatment for wastewater. The Lumber
Natural and Scenic River and its outstandim redbRiver'AS tatus as a
w�►rrant this higher Laval of water quality 9 Ast sunf sunfish fi4ery
a ty protection.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Ug ro'ect. If you these comments or need additional assistance, please call Bennett y need to discuss
522.97,6. ett Wynne at (919)
B W/fin

State of North' Carolina
Department, of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division Of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
August 7,1995
MEMORANDUM
TO: IAelba McGee,bffice of Legislative Affairs
FROM: Don H, Robbins; Staff Forester N^
SUBJECT: Town of Fairmont Preliminary Engineering Report for W WTP
County
PROJECT # 96-0066
DUE DATE: 8-25-95
i
We have reviewed the above subject document and have the following continents:
The report does not address any impacts to woodland. During the June 21,1995 m
project it was learned that some limited impacts to woodland would occur and they
addressed in the EA document.
2. We have no objections to the Town upgrading their system We would like woodland
3. We would not be in favor of Alternative D (# 4), Land Application of Waste Water.
3. We need more information concerning this project.
I
pc: Warren Boyette- CO
File
in Robeson
on this
be
P.O. Box 27607, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/ 10%post-consumer paper

:=On nC RRF.AS & RECREATION`�.[NDAEE ULOG. 11. 17. 1995 1@ p, 1
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division at Parks & Recreation
James B, Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
Dr. Philip X. McKneily, Director
November 17, 1995
Mr. William R, Buie
Hobbs, Upchurch and Associates
P.O. Box 1737
Southern Pines, North Carolina 2g3g8
Dear Mr, Buie:
Thank you for your letter updating us on the plans for the proposed Fairmont Wastewater
Treatment Plant. The new site to the west of Pea Ridge Road, combined with the access road
from SR 2244, is outside the master -planned boundaries of the Lumber River Stato Park.
Impacts to the park from the new site would be significantly less than the previously proposed
site.
We still have some concerns with regard to odor and the proposed discharge line, but we
believe these impacts can be minimized in the project's design process.
We appreciate the Town's efforts to protect the park from unnecessary impacts. We look
forward to working with you further during the design phase.
Since -rely,
Carol A. Tingley y `
CAT/gsr
cc: James Sessoms, Superintendent
Lumber River State Park
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Corofina 77611.7667 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An EquC40PPOrtunify Alf1mCMV6 AC96A Empteynr 60% tecyeled/ 1 V% pwt-cgnwmer paper
••• ENO •..

mo-
ME4 MO..
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
August 25, 1995
TO: Melba McGee
Pffice: of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: �arol Tingley, Chief 0,
Planning and' Natural Resources Secti
SUBJECT: Town Hof Fairmont Improvements to WWTP, Robeson County:
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the Preliminary Engineering rt for the
Wastewater. Treatment Plant. for the Town of Fairmont in Robeson County. The ivision does
not object to t�e discharge of effluent into the Lumber River. However, the Di ision strongly
objects to the referred location of the treatment Want ad'acent to the Lumber River in the Pea
P 3
Ridge area. e oppose building the treatment plant at Yea Ridge foar these reasons:
1. The roval of the wastewater treatment plant at this site would be in coin, lict with state
park facilities previously planned at Pea Ridge. These facilities are identified in the
Lumbar River. State Park master plan; environmental documentation for this plan is
complete and has been approved by the public and the State Clearinghou
In 1981, following preparation of a feasibility study by the Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR) and preceded by years of tremendous public
suppo the ;Lumber River was designated as a component of the N.C. Na and Scenic
Rivers 'ystem by the N.C. General Assembly. At the same time, the G Assembly
autho " the establishment of the Lumber River State Park in accordance with the State
Parks Act of 1987. In 1990, the Lumber River State Park Advisory Committee was
appointed by the Secretary of the DEHNR to help guide the planning and drvelopment of
the par . The committee raised funds from local citizens and obtained a $40 000 matching
grant f rom the Carolina Power and Light Company for the preparation o a park master
plan. The plan was prepared by the N. C. State University and was approved by Secretary
Howe in July 1994. An Environmental Assessment for the Lumber River State Park
Maste flan was produced by the Division and received final approval from the State
Cieari &house in April 1994.

� V
! 1 -
1
Melba McGee !
Page 2
August 25, 19�,5 ;
2. The approval of the yastewater treatment plant at the Pea Ridge site woul have adverse
impacts' on a state project that already involves the investment of significan public funds.
I
!
Since the park's establishment, the Division has received four grants totaX ing over $1.6
million Trom the Natural Heritage Trust Fund for land acquisition along river; 2,1.39
acres hove been acquired so far, with several additional acquisitions pendin . In addition,
over. $1.0 million were allocated for the Lumber River State Park land a uisition in the
1993 State Parks Bond referendum. These monies are designated for imp ementation of
Phase 11 of the park master plan, which includes acquisition of the park's m or access area
at Pea Ridge. Public funds are now being spent on Phase I acquisition an development
.for the _umber River State Park along the southern section of the river; wl are currently
working with the State Property Office to acquire sufficient property a(I Pea Ridge to
imp.leth! cnt the master plan. This property includes the proposed wastelater treatment
plant site.
3. Pea R ' ge was designated as the park's major development site on the soutt, ern end of the
river because it is the only site large enough for a major access area on at part of the
river. Because it is the park's southern headquarters site, Pea Ridge will b the Focus for
the development of permanent and extensive visitor facilities along this regic n of the river.
Consequently, the ]division anticipates that it will receive significant visit r use.
The n),aster plan calls for a visitor center with an office and an auditorium, group and
Tamil i canoe and drive-in family camping,maintenance h uarters staff
Y,picnicking, Y q
residelacilities,
'es, parking, and river access facilities at Pea Ridge. In anticipa on of buitlding
these we, have been working with the Department of Transportation on the
planned widening of US 74 where it crosses the Lumber River near Pea I 'Age to ensure
that thg .roadway design includes a safe access to the park at that location
4. The. proposed location of the wastewater treatment plant, which will in the park
campground area, -would permanently degrade the visitor experience at the park, and
would igreatly impair our ability to manage the site efficiently and safely. We feel very
strongl:,y that such an operation in the interior of the park would be highly detrimental to
the pa�k and is incompatible with the park's intended use.
There I would be long-term problems with noise, odor, aesthetic al
lab it, and vandalism that cannot be easily mitigated. The plant's press
our ability to expand and relocate park facilities over the years. In a
would .face long-term problems of access through the park for
maintenance, construction, repair, and expansion.
ance, safety,
• would hinder
I
on, the 'Down
nt operad.on,

r
1�
Melba McGee
Page 3
August 25, 1995
The Division strongly objects to the preferred alternative that locates the waste ter treatment
plant. at Pea Ridge. This alternative would result in significant impacts to the Lum r River State
Park. Becaus� the Pea Ridge park facilities are not yet in place, the impacts of the proposed
treatment plant would be later in time, but still reasonably foreseeable (T15 :01C.0100).
Therefore, a Finding of No Significant Impact would not be appropriate for a project as
currently proposed. However, we would not object to placing the wastewater treat project
plant at
the Fairmont ' ' strial site;. we feel that the use of this site would address the eo cerns of both
the Town and Division. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this p posal.
CATIJMEIgsr

Stag of Wort"l rolina
Department of Environments Health', and'Waturail Rosources Fnenng Office:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL R� EVIEW'— PROJECT COMMENTS oject Nber. Due Date:
After review of this pro}ecl it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Ouestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Normal Process
Regional Office. I
Tirno
�ERMITS SPECIAL. APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOU;REMENTS
(statutory time
Permit to construct b ope ate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award Of
30 days
fatuities. sewer system a tensions, b sewer construction contracts On -site inspection, Post•applicatio
sys!ems not discharging itto state surface waters. technical conference usual
(90 days)
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water andlor
Application 180 days before begin activity. On -sits inssvea
on
90.120 days
Germt to operate and construct wastewater facilities
Pee -application conference usual. Additionally, obtain perr
iit to
o• .cnzirging into state surface waters.
construct wastewater treatment faciiilypranted after NPD
& Reply
(NIA)
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPOES
permit -whichever is later.
'
30 days
—1
Water Use Pe•mrt I
Pre -application technical. conference usually necessary
—
I
(NIA)
7 days
r—
Vveu-:ori31ruchon Permit i
j
Complete application, must be received and permit Issued
prior to the installation of a wet1.
(15 days)
Applicatidn't:opy must be served on each adjacent rlparia
property
55 days
—
Dredge and Fill Permit I
owner. On -site inspection. Pre -application conference u8u
I. Filling
r-
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
(90 days)
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit. l
Parma tb construct b oWate
Air Pollution Abatement
��sr-sit -es a•taio- Emission
Sources as per 15A NCAC 21t1.0
NIA
A -try open bv!ning associale4
with subject proposal
must De in compliance wikh
15A NCAC 20.0520.
Dem+.;;Illlor. Of renovatio-13
of structures containing
asbestos material must b
in compliance with 15A
r—
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires
notification and removal
NIA
prior to Demolition. Contact
Asbestos Control Group
y ,� 9.733.082D
'
,
Corrplrsx Source Permit required
under 15A NCAC 2D.Ot3170.
The Sekl:rnentat►on Pollution
Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion
6 sedimeniall0
control plan wilt be ►equir6l
if one,or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality
ct.) at least 30
.� s riefcre be rnn�n ac
wit . A fee of hot the first acre and $20.00 for esch agoiftnal a r or part must ggoompant
the plan.
Li!
The 5@dimentation Pollut
n Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the ►eferrenced Local Ordinance.
On -site Inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR. Band
amount
_
Minina Permit
i varies with type mine and number of acres of affected Jar
d. Any area
—
mined greater than one acre must be permited, The apprc
priate bond
I must be received before the permit can be Issued.
!girth Carolina Burning permit
On -site Inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if p
rmil
exceeds 4 days
I
Special Ground Clearance
Burning Permit .22
On -site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources req
Ired "if more
u
Count ies in coastal N.C. *ith
organic soils
than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved.
nSpec tians
should be requested at least tort days before actual burn
s olanned.''
01 Cid Attiring Facilities
i
Darn Safet; Permit
i
i
I
NIA I
If permit required, application 60 days before begin cbnt uction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare pl kne.
inspect construction, certify construction Is according to EHNR approv.
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An ineWIllon of a to IS neces-
sary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of .00 must ac-
company the applloatlon. An auditional proceasinp f0V fsaaed on A
percentage or the total Dialect cost will be required uoon comaletion.
60 days
(90 days)
lip days
(80 nays)
20 days
130 davol
130 days)
30 days
(80 days)
1 day
(NIA)
1 day
(NIA)
90-120 days
(NIA)
30 days
(80 dAy9J
Continued on reverse

c
PERMITS
i
Permit to 4rill expioratory Oil or gas well
Gcoenysical Exploration Pqrmit
- i
$late Ldke9 ConslreCtion ,ermit
.J
f
`--r
Normal Process
Timg
(stallvoory (ime
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
limit)
File surety bond of $5.000 with EMNR running to State of N.C.
10 days
conditional that any well opened by drill operator Dail, upon
(NIA)
abandonment; be plugged according to EHNA rules and rCdulaitlions.
Application filed with EHNR of least 10 days prior 10 i8flua of permit
10 days
Application by letter. No standard applictlitiOrk form. +
(NIA)
Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must lklude
15-20 days
descriptions b drawings of structure d proof of ownership)
(NIA)
of riparian property.
60 days.
401 Water Quality Conific4tion ,�MCOM �.�%_
NIA (00 days)
l 53 dbys
_j LAMA Permit for MAjQR develo0ment $2%.00 fee must accompany application I (150 days)
22 days
CAMA permit for MINOR levelooment $50.00 fee must accompany application (25 days)
-� Several geodetiC (rionumeAls are located in or near the project area. if any monuments need to be moved or destroyed.
,J N.C. Geodetic Survey. Box 27667. Raleigh. N.C. 27611
At)anjrjnment Of any well , if required. must''ba In accordance with Title 15A, SuhChapter 20.0100.
Not iflcatio.1 of the proper regional office Is r6quested If "orphan" underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered dui
u
Corso lance w,m 15A NC 2H.1000 (Coastal Slormwater Auies) is re4etlred.
• Oiner comments (attach a dhitional pages as; necessary, being certain to cite comment autnority):
i
notify:
any excavation operation.
45 days
(NIA)
i
{
i
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional
Office marked belovw
Asheville Regional Office
❑ Fayetteville As
onal Office
59 Woodfin Place
Suite 714 Watch e
via Building
Ashev`Ile. NC 28801
Fayetteville, NC
28301
(704) 51.6208
[phone]
❑ Moor svilte Regional Office
rat
❑ Ralel h Region
�r�rrett brf
i Office
Suite 101
919 Nkirth Main Street, P.O. Box 950
3800
e,
Moora�sville. NC 28115
Aataigh NC Z7
[phone]
(919) 73S-2314 ;
❑ Wash
i
ngton Regional ;Office
❑ Wilmington Aa
Ionol office
1424 a
�arolina'Avenue
127 Cardinal fir
a Exlcnsion
Wasn
ngton. NC 27889
Wilmington, N
28405
(919);6.6481
(919) 39&3900
❑ Winston-Salem Regional Office
8023 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
[phone]

\11.) i\iA,I,L; R, L,,�K'J SC)I,IZCES
i.v ISIO" O1-:.1*N VIp�0NMEN'J`AL E lEA 1. � K
County �es
Inter-Agency Project Review Responset>�,.�,
roecr ►'Marne Type of Project yC'�x0
The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications fo all, water system
improvements must'be approved by the Division of Environmental Heal h prior to -the award
of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NC,A. 18C .0300 et. seq.).
For Ulf rxxmanon, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919) 733-2 60.
f-----� This project will be classified as a non -community public water supply and must comply with
' state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant
should' ontact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
r--- if this �rojecc is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure o feet of adjacent
-----� waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the •shell is I sanitation progra
M, the'appXicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch at (919 72b-,5827.
i
-----, The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project nay produce a mosqu to breeding problem.
For information concermug appropriate mosquito control measures, the applicant should:
contacC the Public Health Pest Management. Section at [phone].
e advised that prior to the 'removal or dem lition of dilapidated
r--, The a�pllcant should b advi p p
' structu�res, an extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order. to - prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. The information, conce! Wing rodent, control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Manag ment.Section:-at (919)
733-6407.
i
The applicant should be advised to contact . the local health depa ment regarding their
�--� requirements for septic. tank installations (as required under 15A. NC C 18A .1900
septic tank and other on -site waste dis os 4 methods, contact the
For information concerning p p
On -Site Wastewater Section at.. [phone]. �
r----� The a f plicant should be advised to contract the local health departmmen I regarding the sanitary
�--� facilities required for this project.
if existing water lines will be relocated durin theconstruction, 1 as for the water line
reloc �tion must be submitted to the Division o�Environmental Heat ) Public Water Supply
Section, Flan Review Branch, 1330 St. Maly's Street, Raleigh, North rolina, [phone].
esw IAL<,.s
Sect n/Branch
`! t4T71t 3 og (ltc,ised 9/93)
,:f Envimnmutital E{calth

APPENDIX A
J. Igo CARTER III AND ASSOCIATES REPORT,
' r.J A. � �. l •. r*� .. �.. .. ! ... ..... .... .. .. . .[r /11.r-.ILY'l�• r_1,.. .. .i .. ♦. .. ... \I

PRELIMINARY BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FAMMONT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT,
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared By
Ms. Tracy Hippensteel and Dr. J.H. Carter III
Dr. J.H. Carter III and Associates
Environmental Consultants
P.O. Box 891
Southern Pines, NC 28388
Submitted 13 October 1995
To
Hobbs, Upchurch and Associates, Inc.
Consulting Engineers
P.O. Box 1737
Southern Pines, NC 28388

PRELIMINARY BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
FAIRMONT WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT,
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
INTRODUCTION
The City of Fairmont is in the process of obtaining funding from the Farmer's Home
Administration for a new wastewater treatment plant and associated sewer lines, with an outfall
into the Lumber River. As part of their review for this project, Farmer's Home Administration is
required to conduct an environmental assessment of the proposed project. This assessment was
written to address potential impacts of the water treatment plant and sewer line construction on
species listed as threatened or endangered, or proposed for such listing by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended.
State listed species were also considered.
PROJECT AREA
The project area is located in the south-central portion of Robeson County, in the
southern Coastal Plain of North Carolina (Figure 1). The topography is relatively flat and the
soils are generally sands, loamy sands, and sandy loams, with the Norfolk, Rains, Lynchburg, and
Goldsboro series being most widespread. The Lumber River floodplain is dominated by the
Johnston series.
Historically the uplands were vegetated with various longleaf pine (Pinus palustris)
dominated communities including Pine Savanna and Mesic Pine Flatwoods. These communities
occurred on coarse to fine sands, sandy loams, and loamy sands. All were characterized by
frequent fire, sparse to open understories, and a diverse herbaceous flora dominated by wiregrass
(Aristida stricta).
Wetland communities included Wet Pine Flatwoods, Pocosins, Coastal Plain Small Stream
Swamps, and Carolina Bays. These communities occurred on wet, acidic sandy and/or organic

INr71 o
. � 1.19u1
Figure 1. Location of the proposed sewer system improvements, Fairmont, Robeson County, North Carolina.

soils. Frequent fires on the uplands penetrated the edges of these communities creating a distinct,
diverse, ecotonal zone. Carolina Bays are wetland depressions up to 100 or more acres in size
that are found in the Coastal Plain. Numerous Carolina Bays occurred in the project area and
were originally vegetated with various hydrophytic communities including pocosin, grass -sedge
savanna, and cypress savanna. Most have been drained and converted to agricultural use.
The Lumber River is designated as a North Carolina Natural and Scenic River. a river
and its floodplain contain high quality wildlife habitats as well as unique and relatively undisturbed
vegetative communities such as the Cypress -Gum Swamp community type.
Few native plant communities remain in a relatively natural condition in the project area
with the exception of the Lumber River. Timbering, fire exclusion, and agricultural development
have seriously altered the landscape in most of this portion of the County, and agriculture is now
the dominant land use. Fragmented woodlots with loblolly (Pinus taeda) and longleaf pines exist
throughout the project area, though none are extensive or fire maintained. Most forests in the
area are young loblolly pine plantations, second -growth loblolly pine stands with dense hardwood
understories, or hardwood stands. Fire has been excluded from most forest communities for
many years.
METHODS
Protected species that could potentially occur in the project area are listed in Table 1 and
Table 2. The project site was surveyed between 25 July and 6 October 1995 by biologists familiar
with the species of concern and their habitats. Foot surveys were conducted in potential habitats
of protected plant species within 500 feet of the proposed sewer line right-of-way (ROW) and on
and around the proposed treatment plant site. Foot transects were approximately 50-100 feet
apart depending upon the type and quality of habitat. High quality habitat was surveyed at or near
100% coverage. Habitats were also assessed up to one-half mile on either side of the proposed
sewer line ROW and the proposed wastewater treatment plant site.
Surveys for RCW clusters and cavity trees were conducted within one-half mile of the
proposed ROW and for one-half mile around the proposed treatment plant site. Potential RCW
habitat separated by more than 330 feet of non -habitat from project sites was not surveyed unless

Table 1. Federal candidate, threatened, and endangered animal species which may occur in Robeson County,
North Carolina.
State status is listed in the second column.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal
State
ANIMALS:
Aimophila aestivalis
Bachman's sparrow
C2
SC
Alligator mississippiensis
American alligator
T
T
Ammodramus henslowii
Henslow's sparrow
C2
SR
Corynorhinus rafinesquii
Rafinesque's big -eared bat
C2
Sc
Cyprinella zanema pop.2
Santee chub
Sc
Elassoma boehikei
Carolina pygmy sunfish
C2
T
Etheostoma marine
pinewoods darter
Sc
Falco peregrinus
peregrine falcon
E
E
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
E
E
Noturus new species
broadtail madtom
SC
Ophisaurus mimicus
mimic glass lizard
C2
Sc
Picoides borealis
red -cockaded woodpecker
E
E
Rana capito capito
Carolina gopher frog
C2
Sc
Semotilus lumbee
Sandhills chub
SC
Federal:
State:
E = Endangered
E = Endangered
T = Threatened
T = Threatened
C2 = Candidate
SC = Special Concern
SR = Significantly Rare

Table 2. Federal candidate, threatened, and endangered plant species which may occur in Robeson County, North
Carolina. State status is listed in the second column.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal
State
PLANTS:
Amorpha georgiana var. georgiana
savanna indigo -bush
C2
E
Astragalus michauxii
Sandhills milkvetch
C2
C
Chrysoma pauciflosculosa
woody goldenrod
_---
E
Dionaea muscipula
Venus' flytrap
C2
C
Echinodorus parvulus
dwarf burhead
C2
C
Eriocaulon lineare
narrow pipewort
E
Fimbristylis perpusilla
Harper's fimbry
C2
T
Ilex amelanchier
Sarvis holly
3C
SR
Lindera subcoriacea
bog spicebush
C2
E
Lophiola aurea
golden crest
----
E
Lysimachia asperulifolia
rough -leaf loosestrife
E
E
Macbridea caroliniana
Carolina bogmint
C2
C
Muhlenbergia torreyana
pinebarren smokegrass
3C
E
Oxypolis canbyi
Canby's cowbane
E
E
Parnassia caroliniana
Carolina grass-of-parnassus
C2
E
Plantago sparsiflora
pineland plaintain
C2
E
Platanthera integra
yellow fringeless orchid
3C
T
Rhexia aristosa
awned meadow -beauty
C2
T
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
E
Rhynchospora decurrens
swamp forest beaksedge
C2
C
Solidago verna
spring -flowering goldenrod
C2
E
Sporobolus teretifolius
wireleaf dropseed
C2
T
Thalictrum cooleyi
Cooley's meadowrue
E
E
Toreldia glabra
Carolina asphodel
C2
C
Federal: State:
E = Endangered E = Endangered
C2 = Candidate T = Threatened
3C = Candidate 2 C = Candidate
SR = Significantly Rare

N
RCW clusters were found in the immediate area. RCW surveys followed methods described in
Guidelines for Preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for the Red -Cockaded
Woodpecker by Gary Henry, USFWS, 1989.
Surveys for freshwater fish and mussels were conducted upstream and downstream of the
proposed outfall site on the Lumber River in order to develop baseline data.
PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Most of the landscape in the project area has been altered by agriculture, forestry, or
residential development, and few examples of natural communities remain. Agriculture is the
dominant land use, with cotton, soybeans, and corn fields most common. Most forests which
occur in the project area are small woodlots imbedded in the agricultural landscape. These
woodlots are generally dominated by loblolly pine with dense hardwood understories of
sweetgum (Liquidumbar styraciflua) and red maple (Acer rubrum), though a few longleaf pines
still exist. Other forested areas are loblolly pine plantations less than 30 years of age or areas that
have been recently cut -over and are now regenerating loblolly pine and hardwoods.. Most of the
area has been logged within the past 50 years, with few trees greater than 50 to 75 years old,
other than a few trees located in yards and along roadsides.
Most of the project area consists of highly disturbed habitats, and all of the roadsides had
been recently mowed. Most of the plant species listed in Table 2 occur in frequently burned Pine
Savanna or Wet Pine Flatwoods habitats. These species include rough -leaf loosestrife
(Lysimachia aspendifolia), Venus' flytrap (Dionaea muscipula), Carolina grass-of-parnassus
(Parnassia caroliniana), spring -flowering goldenrod (Solidago verna), wireleaf dropseed
(Sporobolus teretifolius), and Carolina asphodel (Tofieldia glabra). This type of habitat does not
exist within the project area. The woodlots in the project area were being invaded by hardwoods
and dense thickets of shrubs and vines.
Cooley's meadowrue (Thalictrum cooleyi) also occurs in Pine Savannas, but can be found
along roadsides and in fields. Most of the fields in the area are in crops, recently plowed, or are
used as pasture. No habitat for Cooley's meadowrue was found in the project area.

Several species in Table 1 occur along rivers and in swamps. These include Harper's
fimbry (Fimbristylis perpusilla), Carolina bogmint (Macbridea caroliniana), and swamp forest
beaksedge (Rhynchospora decurrens). These species are known to occur along the Lumber
River, as is Sarvis holly (Ilex amelanchier), but none have been found so far in our surveys.
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), a federally endangered plant, occurs in sandy woods
and along disturbed roadsides. Appropriate habitats were searched for this species, but none were
seen.
Four species of mussels were collected in the Lumber River in the project area. These
include the Carolina slabshell (Elliptio congarea), the northern lance (Elliptio fisheriana), the
variable spike (Elliptio icterina), and the Southern pondhorn (Unioments obesus). None of these
species are protected.
Five "special concern" fish species are listed for the Lumber River (Table 1). These
species were not found during the fish sampling, however, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission has recently identified a new species, the brook silverside (Labidesthes sicculus) for
the State from the project area.
The Carolina gopher frog (Rana capito capito) breeds in temporary fish -free pools and
forages in sandy woods, especially Pine -Scrub Oak Sandhills. Likewise the mimic glass lizard
(Ophisaurus mimicus) occurs in Pine -Scrub Oak Sandhills and Pine Savannas. This type of
habitat no longer exists in this area. The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensii) occurs in
the Lumber River and associated swamps, but is unlikely to be directly affected by construction
activities and future development.
Very few areas are suitable for red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) cavities or
clusters due to past logging activities, few old pine trees, and dense hardwood midstories.
Bachman's sparrows (Aimophila aestivalis) and Henslow's sparrows (Ammodramus henslowii)
occur in grassy pinewoods, but no such habitat occurs within the project area. The bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephahts) and the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) may occasionally pass
through the project area, but there appears to be little likelihood of impacts from this project.
Rafinesque's big -eared bat (Corynorhinus raftnesquii) roosts in old buildings, caves,
mines, and large hollow trees, usually near water. There are no caves or mines in the area and no

OR
old buildings will be destroyed in the initial construction activities. There are scattered large dead
trees in the Lumber River floodplain area. Disturbing these trees should be avoided if possible.
Initial construction activities should have minimal impact upon forest resources. The force
main will be located in an existing road ROW and the wastewater treatment plant site will be built
in a soybean field. Some trees will need to be removed along the shore of the Lumber River in
order to construct the outfall. These trees may include cypress (Taxodium distichum), river birch
(Betula nigra), carolina ash (Fraxinus caroliniana), and laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), varying
in dbh from 8-18 inches.
Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will be restricted to the pipeline ROW, mostly at small
stream crossings along roads, and the outfall through the Lumber River Swamp.
PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
This project appears to have no significant impacts on natural resources of concern or
protected species at this stage of design.

N
V
r
APPENDIX ]B
AREA AIR QUALITY DATA

P -9
L SLEW ALR QLL4LnYSTANDA,RDS
Ambient air quality progress is determined by
measuring ambient pollutant concentrations and
comparing the measured concentrations to the
oDnesponding standard. The "ambient air" is
defined by the Environ ental Protection Agency
CEPA) as "that portion of the atrinos�ihere, external
to buildhW, to which the general public has ar
cess." The ambient air quality standards are das-
sified as primary standards, secondary
standards„ or both. The primary standards were
established allowing an adequate margin of
safety for protection of public health. Secondary
standards were established with an adequate
margin of safety to protect the Public welfare
from adverse effects associated with pollutants in
the ambient air. In protecting public welfare, air
pollution effects on the following are cnnsidered:-
soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-made
materials, animals, wildlife, weather, visibility..
climate, property, transportation, economy, per-
sonal comfort, and well-being. The scientific
criteria upon which the sWrdards are based are
periodically reviewed by EPA and the standards
are m-established or changed based upon the
findings An "Oxceedance" is defined as a meas-
urement that is greater than the ambient air
quality standard for a specific averaging time.
The national primary and secondary standards
and the North Carolina ambient air quality
standards are in Table L Brief
descriptions of air pollutants for which ambient
• air quality standards exist are included in Section
M of this report.
TABLE b Summary Of National And N.G Ambient Air Quality Standards
POLLUTANT 71ME OF AVQ NAT. PRML STD NAT. SEC SM
MC SIB
TSP a
Ann. Geo. Mean
75 µg/m3a
None
75 µg/m3 .
24 Hourb
260 µg/m3a
150 µg/m3a
150 µg/m3
PM-10
Ann. Aries Mean a
50 µg/mom
Same as prima
50 µg/In
24 Hour
150 µg/mt
Same as prim
150 µg/mt
502
Ann. Anth. Mean
80 µg/m
blone
80 µg/m3
24 Hour b
365 µg/M3
None
365 µg/m3
3 Hour b
None
1360 µg/m3
1300 µg/m3
NO2
Ann. Arith. Mean
.053 ppm
'Same as prim
A53 ppm .
CO
'
8 Hour b
1 Hour b
9 ppm
None
9 ppm
35 ppm
None
35 ppm
03
1 Hour'
0.12 ppm
Same as prim.
0.12 ppm
Pb
Quarterly
Arith. Mean b 15 µg/m3 Same as prim. 15 µg/m3
a. The National Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) standards were replaced by National Particulate
Matter-10 micrometer, aerodynamic diameter, (PM-10) standards on 7-31-87 by EPA. The North
Carolina PM-10 standard is effective July 1,198&
b. Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
c. Not to be exceeded on more than an averagge of one day per year.
(Four days with an exceedance at a site in three years or less is a violation.)
µg/ms - micrograms per cubic meter of air
microgram - one millionth of a gram, Where 454 grams = L pound
ppm - parts per mMion
3 '

• • Locations. of ®�I.1 orinset
1es
A%ghWW waxen Hanplon 04"
A" PAW &oleo dam Coma Person � � A HeAtad
0
wlttu ® Hatfb><
Orono
. wales Yadl3n � � bsrlle
AvW GL&ad hatifi
0Not"40
Coy t.Aort `l
Coldwel Ate:an Do& � Ed G ty"el Oon
ARsdson
® dole ladel DaMmon Raldaph A
A ® Chatham wdle
� VMtton � tfeautoA
tluaeorslbe el ® Cala*ba ® L..1 HWa
��. Q Rowan Johnston* r
�t7nGol, 5 A AL Greene J
liunedad C t tee
61ot+an+ )Oct= H e�ston ` go*, mWe Harrell � Wayne tents Coven
PaR enctand
Clvadss Malian © PorrltCo
i C1cY Jams
REd>fseon •per
• Won• Anson'tole � of
®
' Ondow
oIIond .
Robeson M den
• A Pendor C
A Particulate Matter -10 um
Total Suspended Particulate CelIt �Hanover
• i
Ozone MMiMQGk
Q Nitrogen Dioxide.
*'Sulfur Dioxide :.1•
O Carbon Monoxide
Q Multi ple Pollutant .Sites
12/21/93

DATE 95/06/08 EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS) PAGE 1
AMP450 AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
QUICK LOOK REPORT
SULFUR DIOXIDE (42401) NORTH CAROLINA UNITS: 001 UG/CU METER (25 C)
P OBS OBS
0 M REP MAX 24-HR > MAX 3-HR > MAX 1-HR ARIT
SITE ID C T CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YR ORG #OBS 1ST 2ND 365 1ST 2ND 1300 1ST 2ND MEAN METH
37-003-0003 1 3
37-013-0003 1 3
ALEXANDER CO STATE ROAD 1177 94 001 8208
31
28
0
110
87
0
240
184
10 009
37-013-0004 1 2
BEAUFORT CO
NC HIGHWAY 306 94 001 8092
58
53
0
172
121
0
303
234
9..009.. .
37-021-0099 1 3
BEAUFORT CO
SOUTH FERRY LANDI 94 001 8198
48
35
0
136
114
0
198
194
9 009
37-047-0001 1 2
CAMDEN CO
COUNTY ROAD 1136 94 001 2014
38
27
0
71
65
0
82
80
11? 009
37-051-1002 1 3 FAYETTEVILLE
COLUMBUS CO
CUMBERLAND C
ACME-DELCO SAMPLI 94 001 8189
HOPE MILLS POLICE 94 001 2686
36
34
24
29
0
69
67
0
117
105
9 009
37-059-0099 1 3
DAVIE CO
FORK RECREATION C 94 001 8007
47
42
0
0
65
111
57
104
0
0
71
157
69
147
11? 009
it 009
37-061-0002 1 3
37-067-0022 1 2 WINSTON-SALEM
DUPLIN CO
HWY 50 KENANSVILL 94 001 2698
24
21
0
38
36
0
47
43
9? 009
37-109-0004 1 3 LINCOLNTON
FORSYTH CO
LINCOLN CO
1300 BLK. HATTIE 94 002 7995
RIVERVIZW ROAD 94 001 4368
61
52
56
45
0
0
150
149
0
224
210
19 039
37-117-0001 1 3
MARTIN CO
HAYES STREET MW 94 001 509
17
12
0
120
28
109
26
0
0
229
39
227
34
137 009
8? 009
37-119-0034 1 3 CHARLOTTE
37-145-0099 1 3
MECKLENBURG
PLAZA ROAD AND LA 94 003 6022
34
31
0
106
96
0
207
149
11? 060
37-147-0099 1 3 FARMVILLE
PERSON CO
PITT CO
SR 1102 i NC 49 94 001 131
US 264 NEAR FARMV 94 001 8198
21
29
21
0
35
31
0
54
50
14? 009
25
0
53
44
0
70
61
8 009
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES
NOT SATISFY SUM HARY CRITERIA

DATE 95/06/C8 EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AMP450 AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM PAGE 1
QUICK LOOK REPORT
OZONE (44201) NORTH CAROLINA UNITS: 007 PPM
OZONE SEASON: APR 01 TO OCT 31
P
O M
VALID DAILY 1-HR MAXIMUM * MISS DAYS SITE ID C T CITY COUNTY ADDRESS w REP *NUM NUM---------
��'-'''-'-" VALS>.125 * ASSUMED <
YR ORG MEAS REQ 1ST 2ND 3
RD
4TH
MEALS
EST • STANDARD
METH
37-003-0003 1 2
37-021-0030 1 2 ASHEVILLE
ALEXANDER C STATE ROAD 1177 94 001
207
214
.094
.092
.089
0
0.0
.019
37-023-0004 1 3 MORGANTON
BUNCOMBE CO ROUTE 291 3 BREV 94 004
BURKE CO 126 AND 1254
214
214
.101
.082
.086
.096
0
0.0
3
0
019
37-029-0099 1 2
94 028
CAMDEN CO COUNTY ROAD 1136 94 001
214
198
214
219
•103
:301
.098
.096
0
0.0
0
047
37-033-0001 1 3
It 37-051-0008 1 1
CASWELL CO CHERRY GROVE REC 94 001
169
214
.098
.123
.113 095
:099
.094
0
0
0.0
10
019
37-051-1,002 1 1 FAYETTEVILLE
CUIYIDERLAND 1/4MI SR1857/U33 94 001
CUMBERLAND HOPE MILLS POLIC 94 001
213
219
•109
.092
094
0
0.0
0.0
3
019
019
37-059-0099 1 2
37-061-0002 1 3
DAVIE CO FORK RECREATION 94 001
210
213
214
214
.106
.086
.096
•091
.091
0
0.0
4
4
019
37-063-0013 1 1 DURHAM
DUPLIN CO' HWY 50 KENANSVIL 94 001
DURHAM CO 2700 NORTH DUKE
211
214
.093
.085
.088
•082
.084
.083
063
0
0
0.0
0.0
1
2
019
019
37-067-0007 1 2
94 001
FORSYTH CO 5337 OLD RURAL H 94 002
210
209
214
214
.104
.102
.097
.095
0
0.0
0
019
37-067-0022 1 3 WINSTON-SALEM FORSYTH CO 1300 BLK. HATTIE 94 002
210
.121
.ill
.093
0
0.0
2
019
37-067-0027 1 2
37-067-1008 1 2
FORSYTH CO 7635 HOLLYBERRY 94 002
212
214
214
.104
.094
.098
•098
098
.093
0
0.0
2
019
37-069-0001 1 2
FORSYTH CO 3656 PIEDMONT ME 94 002
209
214
.106
.094
.105
.084
09S
.082
.093
0
0
0.0
0.0
2
0
047
37-081-0011 1 1
FRANKLIN CO 431 3 HILLBOROUG 94 001
213
219
.115
.105
•
0
0.0
047
37-081-0011 1 2
GRANVILLE C WATER TREATMENT 94 001
208
214
.102
.101
.100
106
.101
0
0.0
1
019
37-087-0099 1 3
GUILFORD CO KEELY PARK, KEEL 94 001
HAYWOOD CO
211
214
.114
.105ogg
2
019
37-101-0099 1 2
TOWER BLUE RIDGE 94 004
JOHNSTON CO HIGHWAY 301 i SR 94 001
115
214
.070
.077
.075
.074
0
0.0
1
019
37-109-0004 1 2 LINCOLNTON
LINCOLN CO RIVERVIEW ROAD 94 001
211
212
214
214
.107
.103
.097
.097
0
0.0
3
019
37-119-0034 1 1 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG PLAZA ROAD AND L 94 003
213
214
.115
.108
.108
.107
0
0.0
2
019
37-119-1005 1 2
MECKLENBURG 400 WESTINGHOU3E 99 003
212
214
.110
:106
.101
0
0.0
1
047
37-129-0009 1 1
37-129-0002 1 2
MECKLENBURG 29 NO MECKLENBUR 94 003
212
214
.115
.115
•106
113
110
.105
0
0.0
0
047
37-147-0099 1 2 FARMVILLE
NEW HANOVER 6028 HOLLY SHELT 94 001
PITT CO
212
214
.106
.114
.104
.110
.096
.lOS
.095
0
0
0.0
0.0
2
2
047
019
1 2
US 264 NEAR FARM 94 001
ROCKINGHAM 6371 NC 65 9 BET 94 002
202
214
214
.087
.086
Oe537-157-0099
.103
0
0.0
12
019
37-159-0021 1 3
37-183-0014 1 1 RALEIGH
ROWAN CO WEST ST i GOLD H 94 001
180
214
214
.111
.124
108
.116
.103
103
.103
0
0
0.0
0
019
37-183-0016 1 3 FUQUAY-VARINA
WAKE CO E MILLBROOK JR H 94 001
WAKE
213
214
.122
.107
.110
.104
.108
.10 2
0
0.0
0.0
0
1
019
37-199-0003 1 3
CO 202 NORTH BROAD -94 001
YANCEY CO BLUE RIDGE PARKW 94 001.
187
214
.
019
167
214
.093
.092
.090
.089
0
0.0
4
019
c

DATE 95/06/08
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS)
AMP450
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
PAGE 2
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PM-10 TOTAL 0-10UM (81102)
NORTH CAROLINA UNITS: 001 UG/CU METER
(25 C)
P
O M
SCHEDULED
WTD
SITE ID C T CITY
COUNTY
REP NUM NUM S NUM ----MAXIMUM VALUES----- VALS.> 150
ADDRESS
ARITH
YR ORG OBS OBS OBS REQ 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH HEM
EST
MEAN METH
37-189-0003 1 3 BOONE
37-191-0004 1 2 GOLDSBORO
WATAUGA CO HARDIN PRK ELEMENTARY 94 001 37 36 75 275 38 36 35 34
0 0.00
21? 062
37-195-0002 1 2 WILSON
WAYNE CO
WILSON CO
HWY 70 WEST PATROL ST 94 001 '61 61 97 63 50 39 39 38
N.Q. CORNER OF KENAN 94 001
0 0.00
21 062
60 60 95 365 52 49 39 39
0 0.00
227 062 -
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
C

DATE 95/06/08 EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM (AIRS) PAGE
AMP450 AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM 2
QUICK LOOK REPORT
NITRIC OXIDE (42601)
NORTH CAROLINA
P
0 M
SITE ID C T CITY
COUNTY
REP
ADDRESS YR ORG #OBS
1ST
MAXIMUM VALUES
2ND 3RD
4TH
ARITH
MEAN
METH
UNITS
INT
37-033-0001 1 3
37-037-0004 1 3
CASWELL CO
CHERRY GROVE RECREA 94 001 2985
.03
.02
.01
.01
.001?
075
007
1
37-063-0013 1 3 DURHAM
CHATHAM CO
DURHAM CO
RT4 BOX62 PITTSBORO 94 001 2558
2700 NORTH DUKE STR 94 001 2402
.02
.02
.01
.01
075
007.
1. _
37-067-0022 1 2 WINSTON-SALEM
FORSYTH CO
1300 BLK. HATTZE AV 94 002 7861
.111
.078
.062
.058
.0068?
082
067
1
37-067-0022 2 3 WINSTON-SALEM
37-067-1008 1 3
FORSYTH CO
1300 BLK. HATTIE AV 94 002 2521
.326
.054
.275
.049
.274
.048
.274
.047
.0128
.0058?
025
074
007
007
1
1
37-069-0001 1 3
FORSYTH CO
FRANKLIN CO
3656 PIEDMONT MEMOR 94 002 2466
431 S HILLBOROUGH S 94 001 2657
.044
.043
.029
.028
.0052?
074
007
1
37-077-0001 1 3
37-109-0004 1 3 LINCOLNTON
GRANVILLE CO
WATER TREATMENT PLA 94 001 2513
.05
.05
.04
.04
.03
.03
.03
.02
.0017
.001?
075
075
007
007
1
1
. 37-119-0034 1 3 CHARLOTTE
LINCOLN CO
MECKLENBURG CO
RIVERVIEW ROAD 94 001 2564
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKE 94 003 8383
.05
.05
.04
.04
.002?
075
007
1
37-119-0034 2 3 CHARLOTTE
37-119-1009 1 3
MECKLENBURG CO
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKE 94 003 2563
.464
.051
.460
.050
.453
.050
.444
.050
.0243
.0075?
014
014
007
007
1
1
37-157-0099 1 3
MECKLENBURG CO
ROCKINGHAM CO
29 NO MECKLLNBURG C 94'003 2218 1.000
6371 NC 65 0 BETHAN 94 002 2862
.050
.050
.048
.0066?
014
007
1
37-159-0021 1 3
37-183-0015 2 3 RALEIGH
ROWAN CO
WEST ST i GOLD HILL 94 001 2555
.05
.03
.05
.03
.04
.03
.04
.03
.002?
.001?
075
075
007
007
1
1
37-183-0016 1 3 FUQUAY-VARINA
WAKE CO
WAKE CO
808 NORTH STATE STR 94 001 1068
201 NORTH BROAD STR 94 001
.05
.05
.05
.05
.002?
075
007
1
1909
.03
.02
.02
.02
.001?
075
007
1
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
C

DATE 95/06/08 EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEM
AMP450 AIR QUALITY SUBSYSTEM
QUICK LOOK REPORT
CARBON MONOXIDE (42101) NORTH CAROLINA
P
0 M REP
SITE ID C T CITY COUNTY ADDRESS YR ORG #OBS
(AIRS)
UNITS: 007 PPM
MAX 1-HR OBS>
1ST 2ND 35
MAX 8-HR
1ST 2ND
PAGE
OBS>
9
1
METH
37-033-0001 1 3
37-037-0004 1 3
CASWELL CO
CHERRY GROVE RECREATION 94 001 2876
1.0
1.0
0
1.0
1.0
0
054
37-051-0007 1 2 FAYETTEVILLE
CHATHAM CO
RT4 BOX62 PITTSBORO NC27 94 001 2307
.7
.7
0
.5
.4
0
37-063-0011 1 2 DURHAM
CUMBERLAND CO
DURHAM CO
CUMBERLAND CO ABC BOARD, 94 001 8464
201 NORTH ROXBORO ST 94 001 8664
9.8
8.8
0
6.6
6.0
0•
.054
054
37-063-0012 1 2 DURHAM
37-063-0013 1 3 DURHAM
DURHAM CO
4001 CHAPEL HILL BLVD 94 001 8666
8.8
9.9
7.9
9.9
0
0
5.9
5.2
5.7
5.2
0
0
054
054
37-067-0022 1 3 WINSTON-SALEM
DURHAM CO
FORSYTH CO
2700 NORTH DUKE STREET 94 001 2484
1300 BLK. HATTIE AVENUE 94 002 2749
2.0
1.8
1.9
0
1.6
1.4
0
054
37-067-0023 1 2 WINSTON-SALEM
37-067-0025 1 2 WINSTON-SALEM
FORSYTH CO
1401 CORPORATION PARKWAY 94 002 8685
8.1
1.8
8.0
0
0
1.7
6.0
1.3
6.0
0
0
000
054
37-067-0026 1 2 WINSTON-SALEM
FORSYTH CO
FORSYTH CO
100 SW STRATFORD RD •94 002 8623
1590 BOLTON STREET 94 002 0683
7.6
5.3
6.6
0
3.7
3.1
0
054
37-067-1008 1 3
37-069-0001 1 3
FORSYTH CO
3656 PIEDMONT MEMORIAL D 94 002 2439
1.3
5.0
1.2
0
0
4.1
.8
3.9
.8
0
0
054
000
37-071-0015 1 3 GASTO NIA
FRANKLIN CO
GASTON CO
431 S HILLBOROUGH ST 94 001 2298
1555 EAST GARRISON BLVD 94 001 3846
1.0
7.7
.•9
0
.8
.6
0
054
37-077-0001 1 3
37-081-1011 1 2 GREENSBORO
GRANVILLE CO
WATER TREATMENT PLANT 30 94'001 2558
.9
7.6
.8
0
0
4.5
.5
4.2
.5
0
0
054
054
37-109-0004 1 3 LINCOLNTON
GUILFORD CO
LINCOLN CO
401 WEST WENDOVER 94 001 8686
RIVERVIEW ROAD 94 001 2596
6.6
6.0
0
5.0
4.6
0
054
37-119-0032 1 2 CHARLOTTE
37-119-0034 1 1 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
5137 CENTRAL AVE. 94 003 8691
1.0
11.4
1.0
10.8
0
0
.9
7.0
.8
6.4
0
0
054
054
37-119-0034 2 3 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
MECKLENBURG CO
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKEDELL 94 003 8664
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKEDELL 94 003 2439
9.2
2.0
8.5
1.9
0
6.5
5.8
0
054
37-119-0035 1 2 CHARLOTTE
37-119-0037 1 1 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
1330 SPRING ST GPJMLLE 94 003 8614
8.0
7.4
0
0
1.8
6.2
1.6
5.9
0
0
O11
054
37-119-0038 1 2 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
MECKLENBURG CO
423 EAST WOODLAWN RD 94 003 0373
301 N TRYON ST
8.7
7.8
0
5.6
5.0
0
054
37-119-1009 1 3
MECKLENBURG CO
94 003 8644
29 NA MECKLENBURG CAB CO 94 003 2480
9.6
8.9
0
0
8.0
5.8
0
054
37-135-0005 1 3 CHAPEL HILL
37-159-0021 1 3
ORANGE CO
109 1/2 EAST FRANKLIN ST 94 001 1341
.9
9.1
.9
9.0
0
.8
6.1
.8
6.0
0
0
O11
0540
37-183-0011 1 2 RALEIGH
ROWAN CO
WAKE CO
WEST ST i GOLD HILL AVEN 94 001 2511
420 S PERSON ST
.9
.9
0
.7
.6
054
37-183-0013 1 3 RALEIGH
37-183-0015 2 3 RALEIGH
WAKE CO
94 001 8516
EF HUTTON, HAZY 70 WEST 94 001 4155
9.4
8.2
9.1
7.0
0
0
7.1
5.1
6.9
4.7
0
0
054
054
37-183-0016 1 3 FUQUAY-VARINA
WAKE CO
WAKE CO
808 NORTH STATE STREET 94 001 2271
201 NORTH BROAD STREET 94 001 2599
1.9
1.9
0
1.9
1.5
0
054
r
1.4
1.3
.
0
.8
.7
0
054
C

APPENDIX C
PARTIAL GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS
i
- I
r
E

'QO.
Oxford Laboratories, Inc. Analytical and Consulting Chemists
DATE RECEIVED 07-18-94 1316 South Fifth Street
DATE REPORTED 08-04-94 Vdmin6ton, N.C. 28401
94W8870 [phone]
Paz [phone]
PAGE 1 OF 2
TOWN OF FAIRMONT
P. 0. BOX 248
FAIRMONT. NC 28340
ATTENTION: JOHNNY SRITT
TOWN OF FAIRMONT, N,O, A
AU& 5 1994
RECEIVED
$AMPLE DESCRIPTION: IOC (3) .SAMPLES 07-1*ooFax Note 7671 F' -!a . "prgw���
0%—Id.4y FromTb
EP12. EP2
3. EP3
�,cc•senia;aPP
as8ariva, �as"'ea PPM .r,4 DON
s >< RE$ULT w
f
a free .�
Co. . I
P MO *
P1i0rIe"
Faa" U.. ..
F- D
� .'•3 r \ ! ".l \"7" r f *� 'W tin .r v�
c:001 <.001 <.001
Chromium„as Cr, PPM
<.005
<.005
<.005
,
Total Cyanide', as CN, PPM
<0.005
<0.005
<0.005
Fluoride,- is F,` PPPI _
0.48
0.25
0.25
aw Fe,PPM
a 300 .-is
20Iron.
575
Ao
manganese. as Mn, PPM
'.010
.006
.009
Mercury. as Hg, PPM
<.0002
<.0002
'<.0002
Nickel, as Ni, PPM
.005
<.005
<,005
S ;n
selenium, as Se, PPM
<.005
<.005
<.005
sad
Sodium, as Na, PPM
22.0
27.5
23.0
• ` ~r _v� •fr
:;;•:Y"y�,•
Sulfate Turbidimetric, as SO4,
PPM 1
1
1
-=•,t>_/::;•

DAT. 101/19
AMP4:iu
NITRIC OXIDE (42601)
P
OM
SITE ID C T CITY COUNTY
EPA AEROMETRIC INFORMATION RETRII SYSTEM (AIRS)
AIR QUALITY SUBSYSILA
QUICK LOOK REPORT
PAGE 1
NORTH CAROLINA
REP MAXIMUM VALUES ARITH
ADDRESS YR. ORG *CBS 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH MEAN METH UNITS INT
37-033-0001 1
3
CASWELL CO
CHERRY GROVE RECREA 93 001
1185
.025
.016
.010
.005
.0050?
014
007
37-067-0022 1
2 WINSTON-SALEM
FORSYTH CO
1300 BLK. HATTIE AV 93 002
8139
.383
.360
.293
.272
.0115
025
007
37-067-0022 2
3 WINSTON-SALEM
FORSYTH CO
1300 BLK. HATTIE AV 93 002
2931
.166
.109
.103
.096
.0061?
074
007
37-069-0001 1
3
FRANKLIN CO
431 S HILLBOROUGH S 93 001
1160
.037
432
.027
.025
.0052?
014
007
37-077-0001 1
3
GRANVILLE CO
WATER TREATMENT PLA 93 001
1972
.029
.026
.026
.020
.0051?
014
007
37-109-0004 1
3 LINCOLNTON
LINCOLN CO
RIVERVIEW ROAD 93 001
1632
.050
.050
.050
.050
.0072?
014
007
37-119-0034 1
3 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKE 93 003
8073
.464
.425
.404
.377
.0232
014
007
37-119-0034 2
3 CHARLOTTE
MECKLENBURG CO
PLAZA ROAD AND LAKE 93 003
1740
.086
.086
.085
.077
.0076?
014
007
37-119-1009 1
3
MECKLENBURG CO
29 N2 MECKLENBURG C 93 003
1467
.049
.047
.041
.040
.0058?
014
007
37-157-0099 1
3
ROCKINGHAM CO
6371 NC 65 0 BETHAN 93 002
1520
.048
.038
.026
.025
.0052?
074
007
37-159-0021 1
3
ROWAN CO
WEST ST & GOLD HILL 93 001
1214
.032
.028
.025
.020
.0051?
014
007
37-183-0015 1
3 RALEIGH
WAKE CO
808 NORTH STATE STR 93 001
3070
.264
.235
.234
.224
.0125?
082
007
37-183-0015 2
3 RALEIGH
WAKE CO
808 NORTH STATE STR 93 001
1862
.148
.140
.136
.123
.0060?
014
007
37.183-0016 1
3 FUQUAY-VARINA
WAKE CO
201 NORTH BROAD STR 93 001
2161
.062
.043
.040
'.036
.0051?
014
007
? INDICATES THAT THE MEAN DOES NOT SATISFY SUMMARY CRITERIA
C

Oxford Laboratories, Inc. Analytical and Consulting Chemists
DATE RECEIVED 07-18-94
1316 South Fifth Sheet
DATE REPORTED 08-04-94 Wilmington, N.C. 28401
94WS870 [phone]
Far [phone] -
PAGE 2 0£ 2
TOWN OF FAIRMONT P.O. i
P. 0. BOX 248
FAIRMONT. NC 28340
ATTENTION: JOHNNY BRITT
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: IOC (3) SAMPLES 07-18-94
1.-•EP1
2' EP2
'4 fj- '
� ` ,! i,a + � t'_ c^�', fT e� .REStl�t'i$Sf[i� �•••'L�.G4i4��FCiw'� ..,. .1.t P ......: :4... ,...t. .. ;' Y.Y. is• A!i rz�/K `w .a14 ,L
�.r. Z♦rr�'�`�ar.3 r�,r,ht��,? - 1.�vY.., �.[ya�y,`✓ k �N,�r;/r ,..y.rnyrrx.�.'��i�
Thallium, 'ai Tl. 'PPH <,'001 <:001
PH (Lab) 7.20 •7.15 7.15 rr.•_;c
` ROGSR C OXFORD. CHEMIST
� ._� , i'- �'1- � ' r i-/1iJ��t' 4 �, r: I�� Y,e,,,MJ` w�Iy II�•� �'.�� Y
ry .'1,�'•raa
•1�a
.. .. _.. .. .. _ .......:.. _...:nerd:

(Ixford Laboratories, Inc. Analytical and Consulting Chemists
1316 South F1h Street
INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS Wfl°ain&a, N.C. 29401
[phone]
• _ Fes [phone]
.ABORATORY ID#: _3r_ � _Z - .
HATER SYSTEM ID#: ,,,a -1-0 - -Z _t - _Q •a zl
COUNTY: .
4AME OF SYSTEM: 7 w.a _ _ i �'Mw�► �"'
-
3AMPLE TYPE: (E•Entry Point: Sa-Spedat)
XLLECTED ON: DATE _■,_ �1•1 fl.2y (tMM/ODNY)
TIME: O 7:, f,�, am (HH:MM AM or PM)
,OCATION WHERE COLLECTED: __....r"hile.ta_-. - 1
..�. ..:..�-.--.�...—�..:..:�.:
.00ATIQN/SOURCE CODE: E P 1 Collected By:
& r:
MAIL RESULTS TO,
OF SYSTEM:
( Community
NON -COMMUNITY
P.o. 8 Y a, _--
} PRIVATE
�, .... • C.. 3 ` f , .a
..WATER SOURCE{Sj• ' ' :•:.:-::�: -
r.ri•. •., _.f. .'• .i �. � y��.I `! .�yf i�Y. ,. � •_••r, (�•. •.•. M++V V.`D' �• ~ r•� •• :. :•���yi���•
TELEPHONERFACE'.."'''-;t�:,•�:":ti+
1020
.- "' CHROMIUM, ingn
•
I2 5
..
1024
CYANIDE, m9A
1025
FLUORI0E, mg/i
_
1028
IRON, �
�Q.l
1032
MANGANESE. mg/I
2Q.L
1035
MERCURY, mgA _
1Q:L
1036
_�NICXXL, meA
1I.0_
•�•
1052
, SODIUM, ftil -
�Q
1055
SULFATE, melt
13 7_
1074
ANTIMONY, mgn
17,o
1075
BERYLLIUM, mg/I
17-0-
1085
THALLIUM
170
1925
PH, units
i a 5
�_ •Q.�
0.200
_ Q.
4.000
.r _ •�L�
0.050 . .
•�_ .� D2 •0.002 .
_
_ _ .�11�•
.0.100
•.Q� _
. N/A..
=� •---
' N/A
0.006
0.004
0.002
> 6.5
LIME
1 SODA ASH �
( } CAUSTIC. .
{ ) .WATER SOFTENER
_
( } POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE
{ ) PHOSPHATE, IRON CONTROL
( j PHOSPHATE; MAN.e.- CONTROL
(/ 1 OPHOSPi•f�TE,:GORR.ON'CROL
LABORATORY NOTE: • . :.- :.,~
A result preceded by the "less than" symixt must
be less than ,or equal to the detection Omit or
one-tlnh (1/5) of the allowable-Cmit.
( j SAMPLE UNSATISFACTORY { ) RESAMPLE REQUESTED
6•dte Analyses Begun: ,■,�ZJ / g y., rime Analyses Begun: Y.;•.l)Sl. M
es Completed: 1 y c/ Time Analyses!;Xml"
feted:
Date Anelys t� �� ._ �.._...P .L3..s�.�.......� .. .
Laboratory Lam : � V (A-) � S 7 0 l Certified 8�r.
COMMENTS:

Oxford Laboratories, Inc. Analytical and Consulting Chemists
1916 South FM Str"t
INORGANIC CHSHItCAL ANALYSIS T��°n' N.C. 28401
[phone]
. , .. .... _ .. _. _ Pax (910) 343-OW
LABORATORY to*: _1..,,,L ,^.7 11..1_. /
WATER SYSTEM 10#: -JQ,� -• .Z. -- � p�`� COUNTY: _/QQQC'Sc7/�•J
NAME OF SYSTEM: _...=&& & a E �i4.`rJhy.�►'�'" - ■.� ... ._..
SAMPLE TYPE: (EMEM Point: S•Special)
COLLECTED ON: DATE_,., �.L b3ywwoo17 TIME: Q 7:�D &M (HH:MM AM or PM)
LOCATION MERE COLLECTED: -- - g... � x � .....�.
LOCATIONISOURCE CODE.., P „ Collected By: 4 �s
MAIL RESULTS TO: E OF SYSTEM:
� (c� Community
To� E. w�r.��n�ww ■. �w.w. w -
( j NON -COMMUNITY
P. PRIVATE
2 P-31t WA Etc)
T..A.4N�1 ' LrS.V O-••.+••-�: ,', s'•.••M•-.�- `•/• A' +� •�- •,jT •,�tl'•'F•��.
ONE f ■�y X. 0 �' . ,�. ,� - SURFACE a�l� .■'t ... ':,';: x,� . �,:;...
L.NyJ0.MWV.i. nt,�r. . ,,.• ..1� a:.:�,.,,.:' �ii�'•... ••�:'.i•ryr1MA�.�t!.�.-•l.t:. _a1it•IASF.DY� :� a iY�f,
.► rNAME :'•' -.,•� `-�"�GOflE•} RESUt:TS;. , UMf�S'-�
t005 ► ENIC. '•. ... ":12 3 ;-; N_•.�c. S �� 0:060
1015-_� t CADMitJM, M911
1O24 CYANIDE, m� I0 � Q'��� 0,200
I= . -*.FLUORIDE, WQA _ _ _ _Q • 4.000
102e IRON, ffw - .1QL 0.300
1032 MANGANESE, mgA 101- 0.050
1035 ..:MERCURY, MCA 1QX - •A IZZ O-OM
1036 • ' NtCK�L,'m9n _ 1 ZR. _ •.Q.�'� • 0.1 ao
,a,-. s $QENIUMo, "3?"'�. .�p S -10.050
1 052 •' =' fl 50W LIM, t QL�•.
• -SULFATE m 13 7 ' NIA
1ti55 � gli .. L _--
1074 ANTIMONY, mgll I7.Qr . _ .,, 1 0.006
1075 BERYLLIUM, nVA l?Q- zs- _ .as2L 0.004
loss . THALLIUM 17.o_ 4 ML 0.002
1925 pH. units 1 3 5 —I.J.5 > es
O SODA ASH . • '
(.) CAUSTIC
t } WATER SOFTENER
( ) POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE
( PHOSPHATE. IRON CONTROL
( ) PHOSPHATE, MANG. CONTROL
( :) .PHO6PHATE,' C0RR. CONTROL � :. •r ;
•.} v_�.IY..E .R .'Ni.l.sa'�,.r••. • •fib • •.��, ,t �q • `.
�r
LABORATORY NOTE: '
A result preceded by the less than' Symbol must
be less than or equal to the detection Omit 4r
one -fifth (116) of the allowable•Iimit.
( ) SAMPLE UNSATISFACTORY ( ) RESAMPLE REQUESTED
. ate analyses Bequn:.Q7-/ I,••2(l
Data Anatyaes Completed: , a 0 �� V
Laboratory tog #:.S4 1d) I?S7y ,Z
COMMENTS:
Time Analyses Begun: •/ (.,: v G M
Time Analyses Completed: !2-2-Lo •_M
Certified By: oc L) Ov rL

�w
Oxford Laboratories, Inc. Analytical and Consulting C&emiste
1316 South Fitch Street
INORGANIC CHEMICAL ANALYSIS Wrain$tcn, N.C. 28401(910) �83.8'i93
Fa: [phone]
ABORATORY ID#: __'L 1 .1 —.Z -1—
HATER SYSTEM iD#: Q 3 — 7 ,� — COUNTY:._.,../y .
4AME OF SYSTEM:
;AMPLE ,i►� oA� r`Iytoe�t - ..�_.r..�.r....._._._ ...._..,..
;AMPLE TYPE: , E (E•Entry Point: $=Special)
COLLECTED ON: DATE , z!1 f J_2Y (MM/DD/YY) TIME: Q,��DS_M (HH:MM AM or PM)
.00ATION WHERE COLLECTED: S '
.00ATIOiWSOURCE CODE: Collected By: n1ft}� h - 6:11= - rr _ ..._...�.
vIA1L RESULTS TO: TYPE OF SYSTEM:
75 F• r f` (� I Community
unity
( ) NON—COMMUNITY
PRIVATE
. C• Dd WATE14 SOURCE(S):
• { � GROUND -•- .;•. , ti ., .
TELEPHONE # .t �F 06_ ,. ..{ ) .SURFACE ,
• .. • . • • - . ' • • ! .•• . • �'. �/� ~ •{ , �1 1r' `tJRCHASED �T l k .! .• r •., •i
�i�rtrsr��asrse�.� z._� •_4;"i _�, a�.3iit�-N
ODE n���,NAME CODE !-�{RESULTS
;'ha=� ,:.::•-�
AN. � . •. � �.NffN•MffMff
1005+� �,AASE�11C. �'
.
MIfft• ;:. '� *Mff•fM�ff NNNMf*
•4.OS0 '�.�,
�014 '• �y 8A mg/i ' ~ -.
�_�_ti'
- 00.
' 101 s
c�wMtuM, mgii
_ �. _
_ :� :��1 ��
`0
102a
� ::CHROMIUM. mgA125
- •400
..
1024
::CYANIDE, mgA
8
,G �r
0.200
1025
: FLUORIDE, mgA
_Q - zj-
4.000
1028
IRON,, m94s
.■��j(�]/j,�
IQL
.» ~ S
_
1 �I�/�
C
MAN `, M •
.1Q.1,
oA
w _ ..r �
0.050
0
1035
MERCURY. m9A
Ill.
.c _ .jw-oz•
0.002
03g
NICKEL, mg/l„
17.1L
w . je S
o . 100
1045 -
' • 'fl-'SELENIUM, mgn : �;
. l ..'�
: ;0.050 -:
its
SOC40K mQn `l
�,�.t-
•.�_ _
PYA
1055
SULFATE, mg/I
137
^� -__w
' NIA
1074
ANTIMONY, mg/I
l7-Q
C_ _ •jWL
0.006
1075
BERYLLIUM, mgA
370
.e,, _ ,•orp/
0.004
1085
THALLIUM
3.70
.c_ /
0.002
1925
pH, units
1 3 5
_'7.1 j�
> e.5
CHLOFUNATEO % t,.�..;•�, ti ,�;r.�.
sins.; • J`:. 1-4
t
�.DATED ►1,.
a.�. ALUM •'l�tiH• :�, 'r ! t',7.•1, ~ fr. "„� ..
( ) ODA ASH
{ } CAUSTIC
( } WATER SOFTENER
{ } POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE
{ ) PHOSPHATE, IRON CONTROL
( ) PHOSPHATE, MANG. CONTROL
j ) PHOSPHATE, CORK. CONTROLOTHER
LABORATORY NOTE:
A result preceded by the "less than' symbol must
be less than or. equal to the detection Limit or
one•-9tth (1/5) of the ailowable.Amit.
( ) SAMPLE UNSATISFACTORY j ) RESAMPLE REQUESTED
.ie Analyses 89gun: Q 71_
Date Analyses Completed:.a „Q o?,/, F -L
Laboratory Log #: 94 W rka2O_- t-3__
COMMENTS:
Time Analyses Begun: -1_(o:5'
Time Analys ornpleted: l aj.r {t,., ,_M
CertlOed 8y.� �---

U
APPENDIX D
SPECULATIVE NPDES DISCHARGE LIAMITS

State of North Carolina
Department of Envirorlm-erit,
Health and Natural Resources
�- Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April20, 1995
Ms. Helen Locldey, Manager
Town of Fairmont
Post Office Box 248
Fairmont, North Carolina 28340
ITA
[DEHNFi
Subject: Town of Fairmont Waste Water Treatment Plant
NCO021059 Subbasin: 03-07-54
Robeson County
Dear Ms. Locldey:
I am writing in response to your letter requesting speculative limits for a proposed relocation and
expansion of the Town of Fairmont s wastewater treatment plant. The wastewater discharge from
this facility currently flows into the Pitman Mill Branch which is located in the Ashpole Swamp
watershed. The proposed relocation is to the Lumber River mainstem at Highway 74 near the
Boardman gage.
As part of the preparation for the Lumber River Management Plan, the USGS developed a low
flow profile for the Lumber River which includes flow statistics at the Boardman gage. The
following represents those determinations:
Drainage Area
1,228miles2
summer 7Q10:
122 cfs
winter 7010:
250 cfs
Q average:
1,300 cfs
30Q2:
304 cfs
The recommendations made in this letter reflect management strategies for the Lumber River
Basin. The Lumber River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan describes the swamp -like
conditions which exist throughout most of the watershed. A good example is the Lumber River
mainstem downstream from Lumberton where DO concentrations approach 3 mg/I. This is
considerably lower than the rest of the river's mainstem and is well below the state standard of 5
mg/I. It is difficult to determine to what extent these low DO concentrations are natural or should
be attnbuted to point source discharges of oxygen -demanding wastes located just upstream. At
this time, DEM, (Division of Environmental Management) does not have an adequate tool to
evaluate these swamp systems. To address the uncertainty surrounding the water quality in the
Lumber River and the lack of a modeling tool, a permitting strategy was developed. Therefore,
recommendations for all new dischargers to the Lumber River watershed will receive advanced
secondary limits unless facilities are relocated to an area where more stringent limits are already in
place.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper
3

�.el' 11 awn of Fairmont VWlrf P NCO021059
The tentative limits for the Fairmont WWTP expansion from from 0.500 mgd to 2.0 mgd at Highway
74 near the Boardman gage on the Lumber River are as follows:
Flow mgd):
(
BOD$ (mg/l):
2.0
N m
NH3-(��
15.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I):
4.0
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1):
5.0
Fecal Colifonn (#/100ml):
0
PH (S�:
200
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
6-9
Total Nitrogen (mg/l):
monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (µg/I);
monr
monitor
to
Quarterly Chronic'(Ceriodaphnia) Toxic1.!y Test at 2.!E % ;
28
Febniary, May, August, and November
Please be advised that response to this request does not guarantee that the Division will issue an
NPDES permit to discharge treated wastewater into these receiving waters. It should be noted
that a new facility involving an expenditure of public funds or use of public (state) lands and having
a design capacity of 0.5 MGD or greater (or a facility proposing an expansion of 0.5 MGD or
greater), or exceeding one-third of the 7Q10 of the receiving stream will require the preparation of
an environmental assessment (EA) by the applicant. DEM will not accept a permit application for a
project requiring an EA until the document has been approved by the Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources and a Finding of No Significant impact (FONSI) has
been sent to the state Clearinghouse for review and comment.
The EA should contain a clear justification for the proposed facility and an analysis of potential
alternatives which should include a thorough evaluation of non -discharge alternatives. in
addition, an EA should show how water reuse, conservation and inflow/Enfittration reductions have
been considered. Nondischarge alternatives, such as spray irrigation, water conservation, inflow
and infiltration reduction or connection to a regional treatment and disposal system, are
considered to be environmentally preferable to a surface water discharge. In accordance with the
North Carolina General Statutes, the practicable waste treatment and disposal altemative with the
least adverse impact on the environment is required to be implemented. if the EA demonstrates
that the project may result in a significant adverse affect on the quality of the environment, an
Environmental Impact Statement would be required. Monica Swihart of the Water Quality
Planning Branch can provide further information regarding the requirements of the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act.
Please note that Inflow and infiltration is still a concern for the existing facility. Contact with our _
Regional Office indicates that ongoing efforts to remedy these problems are taking place.
Toxic specific limits have not been reviewed in this speculative analysis. The Technical Support
Branch would recommend coordination between your staff and our Pretreatment Staff to
determine possible toxicants involved in this proposed discharge. Our current information
indicates that no Significant Industrial Users, (SiU's) are currently tied into your plant. A complete
evaluation of limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants will need to be
addressed at the time of a formal NPDES application.
Under current Division of Environmental DEM Management 9 ( )procedure, dechlorination and
chlorine limits are recommended for all new or expanding dischargers proposing the use of
chlorine for disinfection. An acceptable level of residual chlorine in the proposed discharge is
28 µg/I for protection against acute toxicity. The process of chlorination / dechlorination or ultra
violet radiation may allow the facility to comply with the total residual chlorine limit.

awn of Fairmont WWTP NCO021059
Again, please note that these Omits are s
NPDES effluent limitations Vitt be determined uaft r a fo�rmaai for Tanning purposes only. The final
io, the Division of Environmental Management, if there area it application has been submitted
this matter, please feel free to contact Farrell Keough, (ext.51 p)�or me (extio519 concerning
(919)733 - 5083. ( ) at (919)
Sincerely,
onald Safrit, P.
Assistant Chief for Techn' Support
Water Quality Section
cc: Dave Goodrich, NPDES Permits Group
Paul Rawls, Fayetteville Regional Office
Central Files

APPENDIX E
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER LETTER

wr•
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
August 9, 1995
Helen Lockley
Town of Fairmont
P.O. Box 248
Fairmont, NC 28340-0248
Re: Wastewater Treatment/Annexation
Improvements, Fairmont, Robeson County,
96-C-0000-0066
Dear Ms. Lockley:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price. Jr., Director
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties of
architectural, historic, or archaeological significance which would be affected by the
project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as currently proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
'00
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc:
State Clearinghouse
Rural Economic and Community Development, Lumberton
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

o � �
EXHIBIT H
PROJECT MAPS
PREPARED BY
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
290 S.W. BROAD STREET
SOUTHERN PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
OCTOBER,1995

man, UPgkI k ASmCU�IES, P.I�
fonia resin o�x w�vm axr
_
fllliNtY xYEI YItv.Oonf
_
r�u�.t
ewesw�raw.��am
-

I
U�Oyb1{A IINT. A]IIIYlI�
li�[MI�IWJ WId'Oy� YIYICi
'1" d 'S31VKIOM V H] MI 'SWW
rn
'n
itGmvau
3LVN=LT/

_ - AROIMN
72
i
>< ; Y.
COMM t/
ALTERNATE WASTEWATER
TREATAENT PLANT SITE
PR TOM
u xe
nP� \
FROPOSE[> FORGE KAIN�'\,
FA 11
3
l 1
• I \
�g ' AV A\
EXISTING WASTEWATER \
y$ TREAT AEN7 PLANT SITE
ii
XOBBS. VPAIWCX i ASSOWTES. PA
i4
i30
»>urX>r xwoe neenmm _
�r�\'• ro1N r rnwar
♦ bA f 2q'p MN W1
r

"V 1 3 1995
I
I
Is
ROBESON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
r-
Ass late Editor, of THE ROBESONIAN, a news-
paper published in Robeson County, N. C., being
duly sworn, says that at the time the attached
notice was published in THE ROBESONIAN, said
newspaper met all of the requirements and quali.
fications prescribed by North Caroline General
Statute 1.597; that said newspaper had a general
circulation to actual paid subscribers; and, was
admitted to the United States mail as second
class matter in Robeson County, N. C.; and fur-
ther, that the attached notice was published in
THE ROBESSONIAN once a week for ----.con-
secutive weeks on the following issue dates
.19 Jr.
-Associate Editor
Sworn to and ssuubscribed before me
this the ._,_qday of d
NOTARYCPbBLIC
My commission expires: 5-- -7, 9Y

chat
- I m11e 1Vort11
e Road
of Fairmont
q vee,''
Saturday. Oct. 14th
• a1, then
7.00 - 11:00 sun
'
Iota $1$nS
Furniture.
Shed] Appliances.
�� of Strerylb 1
Housewares at Stub
■ �©llf'' I
Keep Up
'he Trend
Recycle
This
ewspaper
gain
JGERTIPS �41,
`\
V
--11' AW /'
assifled Pages are here to help youl
A
vsaa..,a.aa
OUT
k o11
SALE!
NEED
REAL
ESTATE
rh�c
ZEAL%
ESTATE
FOR
NEED
'r
EU
RENT?
LHECK
obi t
For,
RENTt
Read the
Classlfleds
TURKEY SHOOT
Each Friday & Saturday
night until Christmas, Billy
Cox Grocery & Markel,
HWY 41, 5 miss East of
Lumberton. 739-9617
T
220 Lost & Pound
Found 1015/95 Black
Chow on Hwy 74 EasL
Call 738-2475.
LOST: Walker Female
b1 White Pond Section.
Reward Offered.
628-0763 or 628.6649
230 Notices
Attention Deer Hunters
Anyone who paid for hunt-
ing privileges in Bladen
I arty or Robert
DISABILITY DENIED?
Angry, & Irusirated, bills due?
Get help todayl 9f0422-94/9.
PUBLIC NOTICE OF
POSSIBLE IMPACT TO
AN IMPORTANT LAND
RESOURCE
The United States Depart.
ment of Agriculture, Rural
Economic and Community
Development (RECD) has
received a preapplication
for financial assistance
from the Town or Fair-
mont. The specific ale.
Tfi hts of this proposed ac.
tion is the expansion of Its
sewer collection system
and the construction of a
new sewer treatment
plant. RECD has assessed
the potential environmen.
tal impacts of this pro-
posed action and has de-
lemlined that if implement-
ed, areas of impact farm.
lands, wetlands and/or
floodplains could be direct-
ly and/or indirectly impact.
ed due to the installation of
the sewer system and the
related construction that
may occur after the sewer
lines are installed.
Any whiten comments re-
garding this determination.
should be provided within
thirty (30) days of this pub-
lication to W. Jerry Batten,
Rural Development Man-
ager, Rural Economic and
Community Devolopment.
325 E. Fourth Street, Lum-
berton, NC 28358. RECD
will make no further deci-'
sions regarding this p0.
Posed action during this
thirty day period. AF
VVE'LL FIX IT
Jewelry and watch repairs
is our expertise. Our Jew-
elers can mend a chain,
tighten a mounting, or set
your watch on schedule.
we can resize your rings,
clean an Intricate setting
and so much more. We
guarantee our work be.
cause jewelry service is
what we're all about.
BOB'S JEWEL SHOP
Downtown Lumberton,
Cash For Homeowners
Credit Problems Understood
No implication Fe As low as
s10.000 for a9vmonn.
$25.000 for 3239hr,onth.
s40,000 for s3e2/mnin.
Fired rates e00-ifira 5]
mynmmy wit. tseuug
HALLMARK CLINIC AND
COUNc "ING SERVICES
71-. t Russell St.Faye, NC 28310
(91 ) 323 3792
NC TOLL FREE
1-[phone]
SC TOLL FREE
1-[phone]
340 Home
Improvements
CAROLINA BUILDERS
Vinyl sitting, Repluement
windows, Room additions,
Roofing. we do It all. loft%
financing evallable.739-3610.
Affordable Protection.
Burglar and Fire Alarms.
Residential & Commercial
24 hour Monitoring.
Alarm Technologies.
1.600.516.2108
Yard work, remodeling,
build utility building.
R.C. Construction,
-800-614-3321 pager.
m work- Room Add6.
ns, Decks, Small
ba, 30 years expert.
etice. 671-4671
cklears Construc6on-
emodeling Painting,
sears washing. A price
can afford. 671-9216
_ silty Home Improve-
nts at reasonable pric-
tFree Estimates. 100%
- Pancing. Better Home
rovemen.l�. 86�5-4969.
R BERSOO N'S MASONRY
all Brick Work of All
-pes. Underpinning,
G s, etc. Free Estimates.
(910)e43-5215.
tarwick's Construction,
ainting & Pressure
,. ashing. 618-0153
ak"ers Roofing & Repair
738-3721.
fing- No job too big or
'small. 20 years experi-
ence. 843-2707, 6.10pm.
343 Plumbing/
Electrical
FOWLER'S ELECTRICAL
& FIX IT. 628-83T7
345 Domestic/
Janitorial
Libby's����
843-5820 or 843-8579
Seeking Houses to clean.
52"541 7:30 to 8:30 pm
355 Other
Dirt hauling, backhoe work
& septic tanks. Cell Jim
Hodges: Days, 628-8121
& Nights, 628-8282.
Chair caning & Wicker
repair. 818-1521.
CALLIHAN'S SEPTIC
& WELL SERVICE
865.4853 or 865-3584
Hunt's Small Lot Clearing.
Backhoe, Dirt & Gravel
Hauling. Septic Tank &
Line Cleaning. 628-6750