NC0089745_Mixing Zone Study_20180101

Final
Mixing Zone Study for
Consolidated Drinking Water Treatment Plant
Process Wastewater Discharge
to Wallace Creek
Prepared for:
�L
-
�+ Marine • Camp Lejeune
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
Mid -Atlantic
Prepared by:
LBC AH/BC Navy JV, LLC
(Operating in North Carolina as
AH— AH Environmental Engineering, PC)
Contract: N62470 -14-D-9022
Delivery Order: WE15
December 2017

Final
Mixing Zone Study for Consolidated
Drinking Water Treatment Plant Process
Wastewater Discharge to Wallace Creek
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
MID -ATLANTIC
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
Contracting Officer's Representative: David J. Cotnoir, PE
Prepared by:
AH Environmental Engineering, PC
201 N. Front Street, Suite 501
���0101 a rjj���i
.. R
Wilmington, NC 28401�•`R.
`� ti
[phone]
NC Firm License: C-3533
SEAL
— 0 —
Contract: N62470 -14-D-9022
r
Deliver Order: WE15
Y
H.
December 2017

2j•
y?i
MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
,f
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................V
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................vii
1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................1-1
1.1 OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................1-2
1.2 APPROACH..............................................................................................1-2
1.3 BACKGROUND..........................................................................................1-3
1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION...........................................................................1-5
2. SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED..............................................................2-1
2.1 EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS...................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Pilot Treatability Study................................................................2-1
2.1.2 COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate........................................2-2
2.1.3 Ogden NF Membrane WTP Concentrate....................................2-5
2.1.4 Projected Concentrate Values Based on Existing WTP Influent..2-6
2.2 RECEIVING WATER CHARACTERISTICS......................................................2-7
2.2.1 Historic Data...............................................................................2-7
2.2.2 Field Collected Data....................................................................2-8
2.3 CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN...................................................................2-9
3. CORMIX MODELING......................................................................................3-1
3.1 MODEL DEVELOPMENT.............................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Create a Test Model...................................................................3-1
3.1.2 Discharge Diffuser Header Alignment.........................................3-2
3.1.3 Identify Most Conservative Model Scenario (Base Model) ..........3-3
3.1.4 Summary of Base Model.............................................................3-7
3.2 DIFFUSER CONFIGURATION EVALUATIONS.................................................3-7
3.2.1 Discharge Port Spacing..............................................................3-8
3.2.2 Discharge Port Diameter, Number of Ports, and Diffuser Length 3-8
3.2.3 Discharge Port Vertical Angle.....................................................3-9
3.3 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL DISCHARGE LOCATIONS ................................ 3-1 1
4. CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................4-1
4.1 PROPOSED DIFFUSER LOCATION AND DESIGN...........................................4-1
4.2 PROPOSED RMZ......................................................................................4-2
4.3 TDZ DEFINITION.......................................................................................4-3
4.4 ANALYSIS OF COCS..................................................................................4-3
5. REFERENCES................................................................................................5-1
AH Environmental Engineering, PC j Final, December 2017
119-WE15

2j•
y?i
MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
,f
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
2015 Pilot Treatability Study NF Membrane Concentrate Water Quality
APPENDICES
A. Laboratory Report for COJ WTP Concentrate (20 Pages)
B. Laboratory Report for Existing WTP Influent (12 Pages)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
C. Critical CORMIX Model Prediction Files and Model Session Reports (15 Pages)
TABLES
TABLE PAGE
Table 1-1 Proposed WTP Process Waste Streams Discharged to NPDES
AH Environmental Engineering, PC jj Final, December 2017
119-WE15
PermittedOutfall..................................................................................1-4
Table 2-1
2015 Pilot Treatability Study NF Membrane Concentrate Water Quality
Summary.............................................................................................2-2
Table 2-2
Summary of NPDES Permit Compliance Data for the COJ NF
Membrane WTP Concentrate (October 2014 to September 2017) .......
2-3
Table 2-3
COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate Total Metals Data....................2-4
Table 2-4
COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate Radiological Data....................2-5
Table 2-5
COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate General Chemistry Data ..........
2-5
Table 2-6
Summary of NPDES Permit Compliance Data for the Ogden NF
Membrane WTP Concentrate (October 2014 to September 2017) .......
2-6
Table 2-7
Existing WTP Influent & Projected Concentrate Values .......................2-7
Table 2-8
Combined Summary of NCDEQ and UNCW Water Quality Data for
Wallace Creek (1998 to 2009).............................................................2-8
Table 2-9
Summary of Field Measured Parameters at the Mouth of Wallace Creek
on 27 April 2016..................................................................................2-9
Table 3-1
Test Model Inputs................................................................................3-2
Table 3-2
Model Results for Flow Condition Evaluation.......................................3-4
Table 3-3
Model Results for Ambient Velocity Evaluation....................................3-5
Table 3-4
Evaluation of Plume Buoyancy............................................................3-6
Table 3-5
Summary of Base Model Characteristics.............................................3-7
Table 3-6
Summary of Discharge Port Spacing Analysis.....................................3-8
Table 3-7
Evaluation of Diffuser Configurations...................................................3-9
Table 3-8
Evaluation of Diffuser Port Vertical Angles.........................................3-10
Table 3-9
Summary of Potential Discharge Location Geometry .........................3-11
Table 3-10
Summary of Discharge Location Evaluation......................................3-11
Table 3-11
Estimated 10:1 RMZ Dimensions and Areas.....................................3-12
Table 4-1
Summary of CoC Evaluation................................................................4-4
AH Environmental Engineering, PC jj Final, December 2017
119-WE15

2j•
y?i
MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
,f
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
Figure 3-1
FIGURES
FIGURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Figure 1-1
Map of Potential Discharge Diffuser Locations.....................................1-1
Figure 1-2
Concentrate Waste Clarifier Schematic...............................................1-4
Figure 3-1
Evaluation of Ambient Velocity's Effect on Mixing................................3-5
Figure 3-2
Preliminary Discharge Diffuser Design Schematic.............................3-10
Figure 3-3
Map of Mixing Zones at Potential Diffuser Locations ..........................3-12
Figure 4-1
Map of Proposed Diffuser and Associated RMZ..................................4-2
AH Environmental Engineering, PC
119-WE15
Final, December 2017

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
This page left blank intentionally.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC
119-WE15
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Final, December 2017

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AWWTP Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant
AH AH Environmental Engineering, PC
BRL below reporting limit
°C degrees Celsius
CAMLEJ Camp Lejeune
CFPUA Cape Fear Public Utility Authority
CHAS Castle Hayne aquifer system
CIP clean -in-place
CoC contaminant of concern
COJ City of Jacksonville
CORMIX Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System
DO dissolved oxygen
EAA Engineering Alternatives Analysis
ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Online
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ft2 square feet
ft/sec feet per second
gpm gallons per minute
IC25 sample concentration that causes a 25 percent reduction in a specified
indicator
kg/m3 kilogram per cubic meter
Lq discharge length scale
MCB Marine Corps Base
MG million gallon
MGD million gallons per day
mg/L milligrams per liter
MIDLANT Mid -Atlantic
ms/cm millisiemens per centimeter
N nitrogen
N/A not applicable
NAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering Command
NC North Carolina
NCAC North Carolina Administrative Code
NCDEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
ND not detected
AH Environmental Engineering, PC v Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
NF
nanofiltration
No.
number
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NSW
Nutrient Sensitive Water
NTU
nephelometric turbidity unit
P
phosphorus
pCi/L
picocuries per liter
ppth
parts per thousand
PSU
practical salinity units
RMZ
regulatory mixing zone
STORET
Storage and Retrieval and Water Quality Exchange
SU
standard unit
TDS
total dissolved solids
TDZ
toxic dilution zone
Temp.
temperature
TKN
total Kjeldahl nitrogen
TOC
total organic carbon
TSS
total suspended solids
UNCW
University of North Carolina at Wilmington
USGS
United States Geologic Survey
WQS
water quality standard
WTP
water treatment plant
AH Environmental Engineering, PC vi Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
OP MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AH/BC Navy JV, LLC (operating in North Carolina [NC] as AH Environmental Engineer-
ing, PC [AH]) conducted a mixing zone study for the proposed Marine Corps Base
(MCB) Camp Lejeune (CAMLEJ) consolidated drinking water treatment plant (WTP)
process wastewater discharge to Wallace Creek. This mixing zone study will be sub-
mitted along with and in support of MCB CAMLEJ's National Pollutant Discharge Elim-
ination System (NPDES) permit application.
AH used Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System (CORMIX) v8.OGT software to develop
and evaluate model scenarios to achieve the following study objectives:
• Identify a WTP process wastewater discharge location near the mouth of
Wallace Creek
• Develop a preliminary discharge diffuser design
• Define a regulatory mixing zone at the proposed discharge location
• Determine the dilution at the edge of a toxic dilution zone for toxic
contaminants
Refer to Figure 1-1 for a map that shows the potential discharge locations. AH recom-
mends Location Number (No.) 2 for the proposed concentrate discharge to the mouth
of Wallace Creek.
Each potential discharge location provided adequate mixing with Location No. 1
demonstrating the greatest mixing, and Location No. 3 demonstrating the least mixing.
Mixing at Location No. 2 was approximately the average of the other two locations.
Location No. 2 would allow for significantly reduced construction costs and complexity
relative to Location No. 1. Location Nos. 2 and 3 entailed similar construction complex-
ity and costs.
AH recommends a preliminary diffuser design with the following features (refer to Fig-
ure 3-2 for a schematic of the recommended diffuser and Figure 4-1 for a map showing
the recommended diffuser within Wallace Creek):
AH Environmental Engineering, PC vii Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• 90 -foot long diffuser header with ten (10) 2.5 -inch diameter discharge ports
(diffuser header diameter of 12 inches, consistent with concentrate force main
diameter per the Engineering Alternatives Analysis [EAA])
• Diffuser located approximately 300 feet from the shoreline
• Diffuser header oriented approximately parallel to the ambient flow direction
and northern shoreline
- Diffuser header alignment angle = 00
• Diffuser discharge ports oriented horizontally and normal to the diffuser
header
- Diffuser discharge port vertical angle = 00
- Diffuser discharge port horizontal angle = 900
• Diffuser discharge port height above channel bottom = 2.0 feet
AH proposes a mixing zone with the following geometry (refer to Figure 4-1 for a map
showing the recommended diffuser and proposed regulatory mixing zone):
• 190 feet x 130 feet
• 24,700 square feet (ft2)
AH Environmental Engineering, PC viii Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 1
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION
Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Mid -Atlantic (MIDLANT) retained
AH/BC Navy JV, LLC (operating in North Carolina [NC] as AH Environmental Engineer-
ing, PC [AH]) to conduct a mixing zone study for the proposed Marine Corps Base
(MCB) Camp Lejeune (CAMLEJ) consolidated drinking water treatment plant (WTP)
process wastewater discharge to Wallace Creek. This work was completed under
NAVFAC Contract N62470 -14-D-9022, Delivery Order WE15. AH also completed an
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) and a National Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System (NPDES) wastewater discharge permit application under the same delivery
order. This study evaluated three potential discharge diffuser locations near the mouth
of Wallace Creek. Figure 1-1 provides a map of these locations.
Figure 1-1 Map of Potential Discharge Diffuser Locations
• Potential Discharge Diffuser
Location Alternatives
so ?
11 j4
7 8� 6
11 7 �� 3
so MORGAN \ Pile
$ BAY
FI R 2.5s 15ft 4M '21 Location No. t
11 N10
10 h.
V�aNYaG
z
Location No. 2
9 �g -*
y
non
11 3 3
0 r arm
(ruins) �PtCUPOLA
4 h
http:11W1r charts.noaa2gov/1 nteraptiveC4ak
1
5 FIXED BRIDGE
HOR CL 19 FT
'
VERT CL7Fr
Location No. 3 UVHD PIPE
e O CLSFT
0
TOW/ERSJ
\� 0 0,�01. Miles
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-1 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) classifies Wallace
Creek as SB' waters and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NWS).
1.1 OBJECTIVES
AH conducted this study in pursuit of the following objectives:
• Identify a WTP process wastewater discharge location near the mouth of
Wallace Creek
• Develop a preliminary discharge diffuser design
• Define a regulatory mixing zone (RMZ) at the proposed discharge location that
provides 10:1 dilution
• Define a toxic dilution zone (TDZ) for toxic contaminants
The proposed mixing zone must be sufficient to dilute process wastewater (and asso-
ciated contaminants of concern [CoCs]) to meet all pertinent NC water quality stand-
ards (WQSs) at the edge (boundary) of the mixing zone. This mixing zone study will be
submitted along with and in support of MCB CAMLEJ's NPDES permit application.
1.2 APPROACH
AH compiled existing and field -collected characteristic data on the anticipated effluent
and the receiving water to develop a range of mixing zone model scenarios. Iteratively,
AH varied certain key model inputs to identify the most conservative model, then used
that model to define a RMZ that provided 10:1 dilution of the effluent. Model scenarios
were developed and evaluated with Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System (CORMIX)
v10.0GT mixing zone modeling software, developed by MixZon, Inc.
Tidal salt waters protected for all SC uses in addition to primary recreation. Primary recreational activi-
ties include swimming, skin diving, water skiing, and similar uses involving human body contact with wa-
ter where such activities take place in an organized manner or on a frequent basis.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-2 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 1
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE INTRODUCTION
1.3 BACKGROUND
The proposed project includes construction of a new WTP that utilizes nanofiltration
(NF) membrane technology. The proposed project includes the following components:
• Construction of a new NF membrane WTP with design treatment capacity of
8.0 million gallons per day (MGD). The new NF membrane WTP will serve the
Hadnot Point water system (during normal water system operations).
• Demolition of the existing Hadnot Point lime softening WTP (Building 20;
design treatment capacity of 5.0 MGD) after startup of the new NF membrane
WTP. The existing Holcomb Boulevard lime softening WTP (Building 670;
design treatment capacity of 5.0 MGD) will remain in service.
• Project Scheduling:
- Estimated start of construction: October 2018
- Estimated end of construction: April 2021
The proposed NF membrane WTP will generate multiple process wastewaters. The
following wastewaters are proposed for discharge at the outfall location recommended
by this report:
• NF membrane concentrate
• NF membrane feed-to-waste/flush
• Bypass treatment greensand filter backwash
• Raw water strainer backwash
The following process wastewaters will be discharged to the existing sanitary sewer:
• Concentrate treatment clarifier residuals (underflow)
• Neutralized NF membrane clean -in-place (CIP) solution
• Process area trench drains
Table 1-1 summarizes the proposed WTP process wastewater that will be discharged
at the proposed outfall. The wastewater will be pumped to the outfall by constant speed
pumps (one duty, one standby); therefore, the discharge to the outfall will either be 0.0
MGD or 2.4 MGD.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-3 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 1
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE INTRODUCTION
Table 1-1 Proposed WTP Process Waste Streams Discharged to NPDES
Permitted Outfall
A concentrate clarifier will treat the four process waste streams identified in Table 1-1,
with re -aerated supernatant pumped at a constant flow rate of 2.4 MGD (1,667 gallons
per minute [gpm]) to the proposed NPDES permitted outfall'. Figure 1-2 provides a
schematic of this process. Refer to the EAA (AH, 2017) for more project background
information.
Figure 1-2
From WTP
A —
B —
C —
D —
Concentrate Waste Clarifier Schematic
Concentrate
Waste
Clarifier
Oxygen To Outfall
Diffuser
F�10.0 or 2.4 MGD
A= NF Membrane Concentrate
B = NF Membrane Feed-to-Waste/Flush
C = Greensand Filter Backwash Waste (Bypass Treatment)
D = Raw Water Strainer Backwash
To WWTP
2 The maximum (design) daily volume of process waste sent to the concentrate treatment clarifier is 2.1
million gallons; however, regardless of daily process waste volume generated, the clarifier supernatant
will be pumped at a constant flow rate of 2.4 MGD (1,667 gpm).
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15
Average Daily
F- Waste Stream
Volume Generated
(million gallons [MG])
NF membrane concentrate
0.480
NF membrane feed-to-waste/flush
0.105
Bypass treatment greensand filter backwash waste
0.045
Raw water strainer backwash waste
< 0.100
Total
0.730
A concentrate clarifier will treat the four process waste streams identified in Table 1-1,
with re -aerated supernatant pumped at a constant flow rate of 2.4 MGD (1,667 gallons
per minute [gpm]) to the proposed NPDES permitted outfall'. Figure 1-2 provides a
schematic of this process. Refer to the EAA (AH, 2017) for more project background
information.
Figure 1-2
From WTP
A —
B —
C —
D —
Concentrate Waste Clarifier Schematic
Concentrate
Waste
Clarifier
Oxygen To Outfall
Diffuser
F�10.0 or 2.4 MGD
A= NF Membrane Concentrate
B = NF Membrane Feed-to-Waste/Flush
C = Greensand Filter Backwash Waste (Bypass Treatment)
D = Raw Water Strainer Backwash
To WWTP
2 The maximum (design) daily volume of process waste sent to the concentrate treatment clarifier is 2.1
million gallons; however, regardless of daily process waste volume generated, the clarifier supernatant
will be pumped at a constant flow rate of 2.4 MGD (1,667 gpm).
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 1
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE INTRODUCTION
1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION
Following the introduction, this report presents information in the following sections:
• Section 2 summarizes the data collected in support of this study.
• Section 3 describes the model development process and the various
evaluations conducted.
• Section 4 presents conclusions and analysis of four CoCs.
• Section 5 is a list of references used in developing this report.
Appendices provide the following supplemental information:
• Appendix A contains a laboratory report for the City of Jacksonville (COJ) NF
membrane WTP concentrate sampling.
• Appendix B provides the laboratory report from the sampling and analysis of
the raw water influent at the existing Building 20 and Building 670 WTPs.
• Appendix C contains CORMIX prediction files and model session reports for
critical model evaluations presented in this study.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-5 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
This page left blank intentionally.
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 1-6 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
2. SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
During this study, AH considered existing effluent and receiving water quality data from
multiple sources, as well as field data collected under this project's scope of work.
2.1 EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
Sources of representative effluent data included the following:
• Pilot Treatability Study report at MCB CAMLEJ (AH, November 2015)
• NPDES permit compliance monitoring results from the COJ NF membrane
WTP
• Water quality sampling of the COJ NF membrane concentrate conducted by
AH (March 2016)
• NPDES permit compliance monitoring results from the Cape Fear Public Utility
Authority's (CFPUA) Ogden NF membrane WTP
• Water quality sampling of the MCB CAMLEJ raw water (used to project
concentrate water quality characteristics)
2.1.1 Pilot Treatability Study
Table 2-1 summarizes NF membrane concentrate water quality data collected during
a pilot treatability study conducted by AH in 2015. The treatability study was conducted
with a 20 gpm pilot WTP that treated source water with greensand filtration pretreat-
ment followed by NF membrane treatment. The source water for this study was the
existing Holcomb Boulevard WTP source water: a 2.0 MG raw water tank supplied by
a network of 18 wells that withdraw from the Castle Hayne aquifer system (CHAS).
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-1 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
Table 2-1 2015 Pilot Treatability Study NF Membrane Concentrate Water
Quality Summary
Parameter Average Result' Maximum Number (No.) of
Result Data Points
Magnesium (milligrams per liter [mg/L]) 9.1 9.1 1
Calcium (mg/L) 1 400 400 1
Iron (mg/L)
Not ted2
Not Applicable
10
(ND)
N
Manganese (mg/L)
0.19
0.19
1
Sulfate (mg/L
131
190
9
79
94
9
Silica (mg/L
1.53
9
Bromide (mg/L)
_ 1.8
9
Total Hardness (mg/L as calcium
1,160
1,400
carbonate [CaCO3])
7.6
7.7
9
pH (standard units [SU])
Total Dissolved Solids TDS) ((mg/L
1,300
1,300
1
Conductivity (millisiemens per
1.87
>2.0
9
centimeter [mS/cm]) _
_
Total organic carbon (TOC) (mg/L)
9.0 I
11.0
9 J
Notes:
1. The values are average values for
data collected from April to June 2015.
2. Iron and manganese were effectively removed by pretreatment (greensand
filtration). No
iron was detected in the feed water
to the membranes or the concentrate.
3. Of the nine bromide results, six were ND. To average these values, each
ND result was
assumed to be one-half the reporting
limit. The reporting limit varied from
0.20 mg/L to 4.1
mg/L.
2.1.2 COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate
In preliminary meetings between MCB CAMLEJ and NCDEQ, the latter requested col-
lection of additional data on NF membrane concentrate toxicity and ammonia concen-
trations. To fulfill this request, MCB CAMLEJ coordinated with the COJ to gather water
quality data on COTs NF membrane WTP concentrate. The COJ NF membrane con-
centrate was considered representative of the proposed MCB CAMLEJ concentrate
due to similar treatment technology and because each withdraws its raw water from
the same aquifer system (CHAS). The COJ NF membrane recovery rate is approxi-
mately 75 percent according to WTP operators.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-2 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
2.1.2.1 COJ NPDES Permit Compliance Data
AH obtained 36 months (monthly sampling from October 2014 to September 2017) of
the COJ's NPDES permit compliance monitoring results for their NF membrane WTP
concentrate from the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Enforce-
ment and Compliance History Online (ECHO) database. Table 2-2 summarizes these
data.
Table 2-2 Summary of NPDES Permit Compliance Data for the COJ NF
Membrane WTP Concentrate (October 2014 to September
2017)
Un -Ionized
Total N
Total P
Salinity
pH
Temp.
Ammonia,
(mg/L as
(mg/L as
(ppth)
(SU)
(°C)
NH3
N )
P )
(mg/L as N)'
Minimum
0.8
7.1
18.5
0.0097
0.8
0.0
Average
1.1
7.7
19.9
0.0353
1.5
0.1
951h Percentile
1.2
7.8
21.5
0.0520
2.3
0.3
Maximum
1.3
7.9
22.1
0.0609
3.0
0.4
Applicable
6.8
0.233
5.0
0.5
WQS or
See
to
See
(acute)
(summer)
(summer)
Criteria
notes2
8.53
notes4
0.035
10.0
1.0
(chronic)5
(winter)6
(winter)6
Abbreviations:
N - nitrogen Temp. - temperature
P - phosphorus °C - degrees Celsius
ppth - parts per thousand
Notes:
1. Un -ionized ammonia was calculated from measured values of total ammonia (NH3 + NH4')
in the concentrate, and historic average values of salinity, pH, and temperature in the
receiving water, Wallace Creek (refer to Section 2.2.1).
2. Effluent salinity shall not result in removal of the functions of a primary nursery area per
15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02B .0220 and .0222 Tidal Salt Water
Quality Standards for Class SC and SB Waters, respectively.
3. WQS per 15A NCAC 02B.0220 and .0222.
4. Temperature shall not be increased above the natural water temperature by more than 0.8
°C during the months of June, July, and August nor more than 2.2 °C during other months
and in no cases to exceed 32 °C due to the discharge of heated liquids.
5. EPA's Saltwater Ambient Water Quality Criteria for ammonia.
6. Expected discharge limits for total nitrogen per NCDEQ guidance received via email 12
November 2015.
2.1.2.2 COJ WTP Concentrate Sampling Data
AH collected water quality samples of the COJ NF membrane WTP concentrate in
March 2016. These samples were analyzed for chronic toxicity, ammonia, metals, and
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-3 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
a number of other parameters. Appendix A contains the laboratory report for these
analyses.
A five -point multi -concentration chronic toxicity test using Americamysis bahia (mysid
shrimp) was performed on the COJ concentrate at dilutions of 40:1, 20:1, 10:1, 5:1, and
2.5:1. The IC253 for the indicators Survival and Growth did not correspond to any of the
dilutions tested (i.e., none of the dilutions tested caused a reduction in Survival or
Growth of 25 percent or more). Therefore, the IC25 for this sample corresponded to an
effluent concentration greater than 40 percent (2.5:1 dilution = 40 percent effluent + 60
percent diluent). Note that the RMZ proposed in this study conservatively achieves 10:1
dilution. Tables 2-3, 2-4, and 2-5 summarize other analytical data resulting from AH's
March 2016 sampling effort.
Table 2-3 COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate Total Metals Data
(7 March 2016)
Parar
Aluminum (mg/L)
Arsenic (mg/L)2
_Barium (mg/L)
_Calcium (mg/L)
Copper (mg/L)2
Iron (mg/L)
_Lead (mg/L)2
_Magnesium (mg/L)
_Manganese (mg/L)
Silicon (mg/L)
Sodium (mg/L)
Zinc (mg/L)2
Teter' Result
Reporting Limit
Below Reporting
0.1
Limit (BRL)
BRL
0.01
BRL
0.01
200
10
BRL
0.013
0.58
0.1
BRL
0.005
34
0.1
0.043
0.01
47
25
190
25
BRL
0.03
Notes:
1. The data presented in this table are total metals data.
2. WQSs per 15A NCAC 02B .0220 and .0222 (applicable to the dissolved form of the metal):
a. Arsenic = 0.069 mg/L (acute), 0.035 mg/L (chronic)
b. Copper = 0.0048 mg/L (acute), 0.0031 mg/L (chronic)
c. Lead = 0.210 mg/L (acute), 0.0081 mg/L (chronic)
d. Zinc = 0.090 mg/L (acute), 0.081 mg/L (chronic)
3. The reporting limit for copper (0.010 mg/L total copper) is greater than the WQSs of 0.0048
mg/L dissolved (acute) and 0.0031 mg/L dissolved (chronic).
3 The IC25 is the sample concentration that causes a 25 percent reduction in a specified indicator.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 2
SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
Table 2-4 COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate Radiological Data
(7 March 2016)
Parameter Result Detection Limit
Radium -226 (picocuries per liter [pCi/L]) 0.6 0.2
Radium -228 (pCi/L) ND 0.8
Combined Radium -226/228 (pCi/L) 0.6 N/A
Gross Beta (pCi/L)' 56.6 4.6
Note:
1. Per 15A NCAC 02B .0220 and .0222, the annual average activity level (based on at least
one sample collected per quarter) for gross beta particle activity shall not exceed 50 pCi/L.
Table 2-5 COJ NF Membrane WTP Concentrate General Chemistry Data
(7 March 2016)
Parameter
Result
Reporting Limit
Total Ammonia (NH3 + NH4+) as N (mg/L)
0.69
0.1
Un -Ionized Ammonia (NH3) as N at pH 7.8, 1.0
ppth salinity, and 19.3 °C; calculated (mg/L)'
Nitrate/Nitrite as N (mg/L)
0.019
BRL
-
0.1
0.5
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) as N (mg/L) 1.2
Total Nitrogen as N (mg/L)
1.2
0.6
pH (SU)
7.8
-
Total Phosphorus as P (mg/L)
0.43
0.05
Chloride (mg/L)
27
1
Fluoride (mg/L)
2.3
0.1
Sulfate (mg/L)
BRL
1
Bicarbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 (mg/L)
1,000
5
Carbonate Alkalinity as CaCO3 (mg/L)
BRL
5
Hydroxide Alkalinity as CaCO3 (mg/L)
BRL
5
Total Alkalinity as CaCO3 to pH 4.5 (mg/L)
1,000
5
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) (mg/L)
BRL
3.1
TDS (mg/L)
1,200
50
Note:
1. EPA's Saltwater Ambient Water Quality Criteria for ammonia are 0.233 mg/L (acute) and
0.035 mg/L (chronic) as un -ionized ammonia (NH3 as N).
2.1.3 Ogden NF Membrane WTP Concentrate
The CFPUA's Ogden NF membrane concentrate was considered representative of the
proposed MCB CAMLEJ concentrate due to similar treatment technology and because
each withdraws its raw water from the CHAS. The CFPUA NF membrane recovery rate
is between 75 and 80 percent according to WTP operators. The CFPUA data presented
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-5 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
herein were not used in the analysis of CoCs (specifically copper) in Section 4.4 of this
study; however, these data validate the values ultimately used in that analysis. AH used
the data presented in Section 2.1.4 for copper in the Section 4.4 CoC analysis.
AH obtained 36 months (monthly sampling from October 2014 to September 2017) of
the Ogden WTP NPDES permit compliance monitoring results for its NF membrane
WTP concentrate from the EPA's ECHO database. Table 2-6 summarizes NPDES per-
mit compliance data for the following parameters: copper, fluoride, and zinc.
Table 2-6 Summary of NPDES Permit Compliance Data for the Ogden NF
Membrane WTP Concentrate (October 2014 to September 2017)
Total Copper'
Minimum
BRL
Average
0.002
Percentile
Maximum
0.004
0.008
Total Fluoride I Total Zinc'
0.46
BRL
0.64
0.002
0.79
0.82
0.014
0.018
Notes:
1. WQSs per 15A NCAC 02B .0220 and .0222 (applicable to the dissolved form of the metal):
a. Copper = 0.0048 mg/L (acute), 0.0031 mg/L (chronic)
b. Zinc = 0.090 mg/L (acute), 0.081 mg/L (chronic)
2.1.4 Projected Concentrate Values Based on Existing WTP Influent
AH sampled the influent raw water feeding the two main MCB CAMLEJ WTPs (Building
20 and Building 670) from 9 October to 13 October 2017 for total and dissolved copper,
lead, nickel, and zinc. Grab samples were collected from each well rotation (five total
samples). A well rotation is a number of wells typically run together as a group. Based
on the analytical results, AH calculated projected average and maximum concentrate
values for each parameter. Average concentrate values assumed an 85% membrane
recovery rate (concentration factor of 6.67). Maximum values assumed an 87.5% re-
covery rate (concentration factor of 8.0). Table 2-7 summarizes the results. Appendix
B provides the laboratory report for the sampling effort.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-6 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
Table 2-7 Existing WTP Influent & Projected Concentrate Values
Influent Projected
Parameter Concentration (mg/L) Concentrate Value (mg/L)
Averaae Maximum Average I Maximum
Total
Dissolved'
Copper
0.0010
0.0017
0.0064
0.0138
Lead
0.0001
0.0001
0.0009
0.0010
Nickel
ND
ND
N/A
N/A
Zinc
0.0082
0.0116
0.0545
0.0928
Copper
0.0005
0.0011
0.0036
0.0086
Lead
ND
ND
N/A
N/A
Nickel ND ND
Zinc 0.0061 0.0096 0.0405 0.0770
Notes:
1. WQSs per 15A NCAC 02B .0220 and .0222 (applicable to the dissolved form of the metal):
a. Copper = 0.0048 mg/L (acute), 0.0031 mg/L (chronic)
b. Lead = 0.210 mg/L (acute), 0.008 mg/L (chronic)
c. Nickel = 0.074 mg/L (acute), 0.0082 (chronic)
d. Zinc = 0.090 mg/L (acute), 0.081 mg/L (chronic)
2.2 RECEIVING WATER CHARACTERISTICS
AH reviewed the following sources to compile receiving water characteristic data near
the mouth of Wallace Creek:
• 2000 to 2002 water quality data collected by the NCDEQ (obtained from the
United States EPA Storage and Retrieval and Water Quality Exchange
[STORET])
• 1998 to 2009 water quality data collected by the University of North Carolina
at Wilmington (UNCW) (monitoring effort funded by MCB CAMLEJ)
• Water quality monitoring conducted by AH in the vicinity of the potential
diffuser locations on 27 April 2016
2.2.1 Historic Data
Table 2-8 is a combined summary of the NCDEQ (2000 to 2002) data and the UNCW
(1998 to 2009) data on salinity, pH, temperature, and ammonia. This data set was gen-
erated from over 200 total monitoring events conducted near the mouth of Wallace
Creek.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-7 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 2
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
Table 2-8 Combined Summary of NCDEQ and UNCW Water Quality Data for
Wallace Creek (1998 to 2009)
Un -Ionized
Salinity pH Temp. Ammonia,
(ppth) (SU) (°C) NH3
(mg/L as N)'
Notes:
1. Un -ionized ammonia was calculated from measured values of total ammonia (NH3 + NH4+),
salinity, pH, and temperature.
2.2.2 Field Collected Data
AH collected samples and measured multiple water quality parameters from a boat in
Wallace Creek. A peristaltic pump was used to draw water from just below the surface
and from multiple depths.
Grab samples were collected from just below the surface for ammonia analysis at Lo-
cation No. 1 (refer to Figure 1-1) on 27 April 2016. The samples were collected during
the outgoing tide (three hours before low slack tide), low slack tide, and incoming tide
(three hours after low slack tide). Total ammonia (NH3 + NH4+ as nitrogen) was less
than the reporting limit (0.10 mg/L) for all three samples. AH also measured the follow-
ing water quality parameters using a multiparameter sonde and a flow cell:
• Temperature
• pH
• TDS
• Conductivity
• Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
• Flow velocity
Field measurements were taken with each ammonia sample and at two other potential
discharge diffuser locations (refer to Figure 1-1). Measurements were taken at multiple
depths (two -foot increments) and at various tide stages. Depth ranged from approxi-
mately five feet at Location No. 3 to ten feet at Location No. 2. Generally, the measured
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-8 Final, December 2017
119-WE15
minimum 'I.0
5t'' Percentile 3.1
1.0
5.0
U.000U
0.0000
7.2
7.6 J
Average
13.1
7.8
20.3 J
0.0014
95th Percentile
21.2
8.5
30.2
0.0034
Maximum
24.6
8.9
33.5
0.0264
Notes:
1. Un -ionized ammonia was calculated from measured values of total ammonia (NH3 + NH4+),
salinity, pH, and temperature.
2.2.2 Field Collected Data
AH collected samples and measured multiple water quality parameters from a boat in
Wallace Creek. A peristaltic pump was used to draw water from just below the surface
and from multiple depths.
Grab samples were collected from just below the surface for ammonia analysis at Lo-
cation No. 1 (refer to Figure 1-1) on 27 April 2016. The samples were collected during
the outgoing tide (three hours before low slack tide), low slack tide, and incoming tide
(three hours after low slack tide). Total ammonia (NH3 + NH4+ as nitrogen) was less
than the reporting limit (0.10 mg/L) for all three samples. AH also measured the follow-
ing water quality parameters using a multiparameter sonde and a flow cell:
• Temperature
• pH
• TDS
• Conductivity
• Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
• Flow velocity
Field measurements were taken with each ammonia sample and at two other potential
discharge diffuser locations (refer to Figure 1-1). Measurements were taken at multiple
depths (two -foot increments) and at various tide stages. Depth ranged from approxi-
mately five feet at Location No. 3 to ten feet at Location No. 2. Generally, the measured
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-8 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 2
SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
parameters did not vary significantly between locations, or with depth or tide stage.
Table 2-9 summarizes the April 2016 measurements.
Table 2-9 Summary of Field Measured Parameters at the Mouth of Wallace
Creek on 27 April 2016
Parameter Location No. 1
Location No. 2
Location No. 3
Average Temperature (°C)
23.2
24.6
24.1
Average pH 8.0
Average DO (mg/L) 8.1
Average Turbidity
(nephelometric turbidity units 2.0
[NTU])
Average Calculated Salinity 15.4
(practical salinity units [PSU])
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.2
3.6
12.9
14.7
14.9
Average TDS (mg/L)
15,090
14,900
14,880
Average Conductivity (mS/cm)
24.3
24.0
24.0
Maximum Velocity (feet per 0.40
second [ft/sec])'
Minimum Velocity (ft/sec)' 0.05
0.30
not recorded2
0.10
not recorded2
Note:
1. Values were rounded up to the nearest 0.05 ft/sec.
2. Velocity was not recorded at Location No. 3. AH assumed the velocity at this location was
equal to the velocity at Location No. 2 for this mixing zone study.
2.3 CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN
AH identified the following CoCs based on the data presented in this section and guid-
ance from NCDEQ:
• Un -Ionized Ammonia (at NCDEQ's request)
• Copper (Projected concentrate value based on existing WTP influent was in
excess of WQS; refer to Table 2-7)
• Gross beta activity (COJ effluent sample result in excess of the WQS; refer to
Table 2-4)
Section 4.4 offers predictions of the concentrations of these CoCs at the edges (bound-
aries) of the RMZ and TDZ proposed in Section 4.2 and Section 4.3 of this study, re-
spectively.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-9 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
This page left blank intentionally.
SECTION 2
SUMMARY OF DATA COLLECTED
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 2-10 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 3
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CORMIX MODELING
3. CORMIX MODELING
AH was tasked to perform CORMIX model simulations under worst-case ambient con-
ditions to evaluate the following key design points:
• Potential discharge locations — AH modeled three locations, each with
different channel widths and depths.
• Preliminary discharge diffuser configurations — AH modeled various diffuser
orientations, port orientations, number of ports, and port diameters.
3.1 MODEL DEVELOPMENT
AH developed the worst-case Base Model following the procedures outlined in this sec-
tion.
3.1.1 Create a Test Model
The first step in the model development process was to create a Test Model that could
be used to iteratively evaluate various receiving water conditions and identify the most
conservative scenario. The most conservative scenario would become the worst-case
Base Model for evaluation of potential discharge locations and diffuser configurations.
AH assumed initial values for several of the Test Model inputs. These values were
varied in subsequent model runs to determine the preferred discharge diffuser config-
uration and location. AH assigned assumed values to the following model inputs to
create the Test Model:
• Discharge location characteristics (channel depth and width, distance from
nearest bank, and channel roughness coefficient)
• Effluent flow rate and density
• Discharge diffuser orientation with respect to the ambient flow direction
• Discharge diffuser length, port height above channel bottom, number of ports,
port diameter, port vertical angle
• Dilution factor
Table 3-1 summarizes the Test Model inputs used in this study.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-1 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
Table 3-1 Test Model Inputs
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
Input Parameter
Test Model Value
Simulation Type'
CORMIX II
Dilution
10:1
Effluent Flow Rate
2.4 MGD
Effluent Density2
999.1 kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3)
Average Channel Depth3
5.0 feet
Channel Depth at Discharge Location3
6.0 feet
Channel Width3
1,000 feet
Diffuser Distance from Nearest Banka
180 feet
Darcy -Weisbach Friction Factor4
0.04
Diffuser Port Height Above Channel Bottom
2.0 feet
Diffuser Port Diameter
3.0 inches
Number of Diffuser Ports
8
Diffuser Port Vertical Angles
00
Diffuser Header Length
70 feet
Diffuser Header Alignment Angle6
00
Discharge Port Horizontal Angle'
900
Notes:
1. CORMIX I simulates single -port discharges. CORMIX II simulates multiport diffusers.
2. Effluent density was calculated from the average temperature and salinity values presented
in Table 2-2, a Summary of NPDES Permit Compliance Data for the COJ NF Membrane
WTP Concentrate (October 2014 to September 2017).
3. Values approximate the conditions at Potential Discharge Diffuser Location No. 3, which
was arbitrarily selected for test model development. Depths were estimated from National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Raster Navigational Chart 11542.
Channel width and diffuser distance from bank were estimated using 2012 orthoimagery of
MCB CAMLEJ. Distance from nearest bank was based on diffuser distance from the
northern shoreline of Wallace Creek.
4. Darcy -Weisbach friction factor was set equal to the value used in the mixing zone study
conducted in support of the MCB CAMLEJ Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant
(AWWTP) NPDES permitting effort (effluent discharge to the mouth of French Creek).
5. A discharge port vertical angle of 01 means the port discharges in a horizontal direction
(into the xy-plane).
6. A diffuser header alignment angle of 01 orients the discharge diffuser header parallel to the
ambient flow direction and channel bank. An alignment angle of 901 orients the diffuser
header normal (perpendicular) to the ambient flow and channel bank.
7. A discharge port horizontal angle of 00 means that the diffuser discharge port is oriented to
discharge in the same direction as the ambient flow. A horizontal discharge angle of 901
means that the diffuser port is oriented discharge normal to the ambient flow.
3.1.2 Discharge Diffuser Header Alignment
AH selected a discharge diffuser header alignment angle of 0° for preliminary design
of the proposed discharge diffuser header. According to Wastewater Management for
Coastal Cities: The Ocean Disposal Option (Gunnerson, 1988), perpendicular diffuser
header orientation (alignment angle = 900) provides optimal initial dilution when the
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-2 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
ambient flow velocity is significant. However, for ambient conditions where velocity is
low and current direction is not well-defined, parallel orientation (to the likely ambient
flow direction) provides a more robust design. If adequate initial dilution can be
achieved when the current is parallel to the diffuser header, improved dilution can be
expected for other current directions. Parallel discharge header orientation also results
in a minimum impact to the creek cross-section with respect to other orientations
(header alignment angle greater than 00).
All evaluations herein and the preliminary discharge diffuser port design use a horizon-
tal discharge angle of 901. For unsteady flow conditions (i.e., where tidal reversal oc-
curs), diffuser ports must be oriented vertically (vertical angle of 900) or normally (hori-
zontal angle of 900) to the ambient flow. Alternative horizontal angles would result in
adverse conditions in tide cycles where the ambient flow is in opposition to the dis-
charge flow.
3.1.3 Identify Most Conservative Model Scenario (Base Model)
AH ran the following sets of simulations to identify the most conservative (worst-case)
model scenario (Base Model). The Base Model was then used to evaluate potential
discharge locations and diffuser configurations (varying diffuser header lengths, num-
ber of discharge ports, port diameter, and port vertical angle).
• Ambient flow condition evaluation: compared steady-state and unsteady
ambient flow conditions range of ambient velocities
• Ambient velocity evaluation: based on ambient flow condition evaluation
results, analyzed smaller range of ambient velocities to identify most
conservative scenario
• Plume buoyancy evaluation: compared positively buoyant effluent to
negatively buoyant effluent for the most conservative ambient flow condition
and velocity
Each simulation utilized the Test Model as described in Section 3.1.1.
3.1.3.1 Ambient Flow Condition Evaluation
To determine which ambient flow condition was most critical, AH ran CORMIX II simu-
lations for steady-state and unsteady (tidal) flow conditions over a range of ambient
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-3 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
velocities. The range of velocities was based on field measured velocities (refer to Ta-
ble 2-9). For the unsteady flow condition analyses, the minimum modeled velocity was
assumed to occur 30 minutes after low -slack tide and the maximum velocity was as-
sumed to occur 3 hours after the low -slack tide. Intermediate velocities were linearly
interpolated at 30 -minute intervals. Table 3-2 summarizes the results of the flow con-
dition evaluation.
Table 3-2 Model Results for Flow Condition Evaluation
Time (hours Ambient Computed Horizontal Distance from Port Opening
after slack) Velocity to Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
(
f/
This evaluation of ambient flow condition indicated that the unsteady (tidal) analysis is
more conservative over the range of ambient velocities measured in the field. There-
fore, AH selected unsteady flow conditions for the Base Model.
3.1.3.2 Ambient Velocity Evaluation
The flow condition evaluation results presented in Table 3-2 indicated that the most
conservative scenario occurs under unsteady, tidal conditions, approximately one hour
after a slack tide. AH conducted a more refined set of model runs (CORMIX II, unsteady
conditions) for a range of velocities interpolated every 0.1 hours between 0.4 hours to
1.6 hours after slack tide. Table 3-3 presents the results of the ambient velocity evalu-
ation. Figure 3-1 represents these data graphically.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15
t sec)
Steady -State Analysis
I Unsteady Analysis
0.5
0.05
6.7
6.7
1
0.10
84.2
142.3
1.5
0.15
60.0
86.8
2
0.19
58.6
83.9
2.5
0.24
47.3
62.9
3
0.29
42.5
54.8
This evaluation of ambient flow condition indicated that the unsteady (tidal) analysis is
more conservative over the range of ambient velocities measured in the field. There-
fore, AH selected unsteady flow conditions for the Base Model.
3.1.3.2 Ambient Velocity Evaluation
The flow condition evaluation results presented in Table 3-2 indicated that the most
conservative scenario occurs under unsteady, tidal conditions, approximately one hour
after a slack tide. AH conducted a more refined set of model runs (CORMIX II, unsteady
conditions) for a range of velocities interpolated every 0.1 hours between 0.4 hours to
1.6 hours after slack tide. Table 3-3 presents the results of the ambient velocity evalu-
ation. Figure 3-1 represents these data graphically.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 3
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CORMIX MODELING
Table 3-3 Model Results for Ambient Velocity Evaluation
Time
(hours after slack)
Ambient Velocity
(ft/sec)
Computed Horizontal Distance from Port
Opening to Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
0.5
0.05
6.7
0.6
0.06
7.3
0.7
0.07
7.8
0.8
0.08
8.4
0.9
0.09
9.0
1
0.10
142.3
1.1
0.11
121.7
1.2
0.12
107.6
1.3
0.13
97.9
1.4
0.14
91.2
1.5
0.15
86.8
Figure 3-1 Evaluation of Ambient Velocity's Effect on Mixing
150
E❑
❑ , 140
120
m 0
rn r 100
a ,T 80
NQS 60
L o
2 rn 40
m 20
Cn
CL CL
E I 0
0 0 0.04
0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Ambient Velocity
(ftlsec)
0.14 0.16
The ambient velocity evaluation results indicated that, for unsteady, tidal receiving wa-
ters, there exists a critical time after tidal reversal (with an associated velocity), that
results in the least favorable mixing conditions. This time/velocity will vary depending
on discharge location and diffuser configuration; therefore, this critical point must be
determined to develop the proposed mixing zone.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-5 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 3
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CORMIX MODELING
3.1.3.3 Plume Buoyancy Evaluation
Next, AH ran multiple CORMIX II simulations for unsteady flow conditions to compare
the effects of relative buoyancy on mixing. Buoyancy was evaluated to test the sensi-
tivity of the discharge to seasonal effects (ambient water temperature) and weather-
related ambient water quality variation (salinity). Densities of the effluent and ambient
waters were calculated using the temperature and salinity data presented in Section 2.
Average effluent density was set to 999.1 kg/m3 and mixing was compared at high and
low values of ambient density. AH calculated ambient density using the data presented
in Table 2-8. The high ambient density (1,016.5 kg/m3) was calculated using the 95th
percentile salinity (21.2 ppth) and the 5th percentile temperature (7.6 °C). The low am-
bient density (997.9 kg /M3) was calculated using the fifth percentile salinity (3.1 ppth)
and the 95th percentile temperature (30.2 °C). Table 3-4 summarizes the results of the
plume buoyancy evaluation.
Table 3-4 Evaluation of Plume Buoyancy
The results of this test suggested that for the given scenario, plume buoyancy (the
density of the plume relative to the density of the receiving water) has negligible influ-
ence on initial mixing. Therefore, either a negatively buoyant plume or a positively buoy-
ant plume could be used in the Base Model. AH selected the positively buoyant plume
because the average effluent density (999.1 kg/m3) was less than the average ambient
density (1,008.1 kg /M3) calculated using the average salinity (13.1 ppth) and the aver-
age temperature (20.3 °C).
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-6 Final, December 2017
119-WE15
Computed Horizontal Distance from Port Opening to
Time
Ambient
Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
(hours
after
Velocity
Negatively Buoyant Plume Positively Buoyant Plume
slack)
(ft/sec)
(Ambient Density = (Ambient Density =
997.9 kg/m3) 1016.5 kg/m3)
0.5
0.05
6.7 6.7
1
0.10
142.3 142.3
1.5
0.15
86.7 86.8
2
0.19
83.9 83.9
2.5
0.24
62.9 62.9
3
0.29
54.8 54.8
The results of this test suggested that for the given scenario, plume buoyancy (the
density of the plume relative to the density of the receiving water) has negligible influ-
ence on initial mixing. Therefore, either a negatively buoyant plume or a positively buoy-
ant plume could be used in the Base Model. AH selected the positively buoyant plume
because the average effluent density (999.1 kg/m3) was less than the average ambient
density (1,008.1 kg /M3) calculated using the average salinity (13.1 ppth) and the aver-
age temperature (20.3 °C).
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-6 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
3.1.4 Summary of Base Model
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
Table 3-5 summarizes the characteristics of the worst-case Base Model used for further
evaluation of various preliminary discharge diffuser configurations and three potential
discharge locations.
Table 3-5 Summary of Base Model Characteristics
Input Parameter
Base Model Value
Simulation Mode
CORMIX II (multiport)
Ambient Flow Condition
Unsteady (tidal)
Dilution
10:1
Effluent Flow Rate
2.4 MGD
Effluent Density
999.1 kg/m3
Darcy -Weisbach Friction Factor
0.04
Receiving Water Density
1,016.5 kg/m3
Receiving Water Velocity'
Diffuser Header Alignment Angle2
Discharge Port Horizontal Angle3
0.05 ft/sec — 0.3 ft/sec
00
900
Notes:
1. Minimum and maximum velocity values were based on field measurements taken in April
2016 at the mouth of Wallace Creek (refer to Table 2-9).
2. A diffuser header alignment angle of 0° orients the discharge diffuser header parallel to the
ambient flow direction.
3. A discharge port horizontal angle of 90° means that the diffuser discharge port is oriented
normal to the ambient flow.
3.2 DIFFUSER CONFIGURATION EVALUATIONS
Section 3.1.2 identified the preferred diffuser header orientation (with respect to ambi-
ent flow direction). The simulations presented in this section evaluate other character-
istics of the discharge diffuser including diffuser length, number of ports, port diameter,
and port vertical angle. The objective of these evaluations was to identify a preliminary
diffuser configuration that meets the following design criteria:
• Minimize the area of the RMZ (while achieving 10:1 dilution)
• Achieve port discharge velocity greater than or equal to three meters per
second (9.84 ft/sec)4 at concentrate discharge of 2.4 MGD
• Optimize diffuser length to reduce overall footprint in Wallace Creek
4 The EPA's Technical Support Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control (1991) recommends
for new discharges a discharge port exit velocity greater than or equal to three meters per second.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-7 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
AH used the Base Model summarized in Section 3.1.4 and channel geometry associ-
ated with Location 3 (arbitrarily selected during test model development) for each of
the following analyses.
3.2.1 Discharge Port Spacing
AH ran a series of model simulations to determine a preliminary design port spacing
distance. AH modeled port spacing distances from five (5) feet to 20 feet. AH ran each
simulation at the critical time after tidal reversal (and associated ambient velocity), that
resulted in the least favorable mixing conditions for that spacing distance. For this anal-
ysis, AH assumed a diffuser with eight 3.0 -inch discharge ports, and a vertical angle of
00. Table 3-6 summarize the results of the model runs.
Table 3-6 Summary of Discharge Port Spacing Analysis
Port
Time (hours
Ambient
Spacing
after slack)
Velocity
(feet)
(ft/sec)
5.0
1.4
0.14
7.5
1.1
0.11
10.0
1.0
0.10
12.5
0.9
0.09
15.0
0.8
0.08
17.5
0.8
0.08
20.0
0.7
0.07
Computed Horizontal Distance from Port
Opening to Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
161.2
161.0
142.3
137.5
141.9
125.8
143.2
The model results indicate that discharge port spacing greater than or equal to ten feet
provides appreciably better mixing than port spacing less than ten feet. AH set the
preliminary design discharge port spacing to ten feet. This spacing distance was used
for the remainder of the diffuser configuration evaluations.
3.2.2 Discharge Port Diameter, Number of Ports, and Diffuser Length
With the discharge port spacing set to ten feet, port diameter and discharge velocity
(greater than or equal to 9.84 ft/sec) control the number of ports and the diffuser length.
AH simulated various diffuser configurations at the critical time after tidal reversal (and
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-8 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
associated ambient velocity) that resulted in the least favorable mixing conditions for
that configuration. Table 3-7 summarizes the results of the various diffusers simulated.
Table 3-7 Evaluation of Diffuser Configurations
Port Diffuser
Number
Time
(hours
Ambient Discharge
Horizontal
Diameter Length
of Ports
after
Velocity Velocity
Distance
(inches)' (feet)
(ft/sec) (ft/sec)
(feet)'
slack)
2.0 16 150
0.7
0.07 10.6
125.3
2.5 10 90
0.9
0.09 10.9
120.3
3.0 7 60
1.1
0.11 10.8
126.4
4.0 4 30
1.6
0.15 10.6
136.5
Notes:
1. The discharge port diameters evaluated
represent
readily available discharge port sizes
(typically duckbill check valves).
2. This value represents the computed horizontal distance from the diffuser discharge port
opening to achieve 10:1 dilution.
Based on this evaluation, AH recommends a 90 -foot long diffuser header with ten 2.5 -
inch diameter discharge ports spaced ten feet apart.
3.2.3 Discharge Port Vertical Angle
The discharge port vertical angle is the angle that defines the port orientation with re-
spect to the xy-plane. For example, a port vertical angle of 00 indicates a port that
discharges into the xy-plane. A port vertical angle of 90° represents a port that dis-
charges in the positive z -direction (vertically upward). AH ran model simulations of the
90 -foot long diffuser header recommended in Section 3.2.2 and varied the discharge
port vertical angle. Table 3-8 summarizes the results of this evaluation.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-9 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 3
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CORMIX MODELING
Table 3-8 Evaluation of Diffuser Port Vertical Angles
Port Vertical Angle (degrees)
Computed Horizontal Distance from Port
Opening to Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
0
120.3
15
126.9
30
150.9
45
209.5
60
N/A'
75
90
N/A'
N/Al
Notes:
1. Dilution of 10:1 was not encountered within the predicted plume region (i.e., 10:1 dilution
could not be achieved in the region modeled).
Results from this modeling exercise suggested that orienting the diffuser discharge
horizontally (in the xy-plane) provides the greatest initial mixing. In shallow waters (such
as Wallace Creek), vertical port orientation can cause surface boundary impingement
that limits initial mixing. Further modeling suggested that to accommodate vertically
oriented diffuser ports, the receiving water depth would need to be greater than ap-
proximately 14 feet (the maximum channel depth at any of the potential discharge lo-
cations was approximately ten feet). Figure 3-2 shows a schematic of the 90 -foot dif-
fuser.
Figure 3-2 Preliminary Discharge Diffuser Design Schematic
.x -,x, - Nearest Bank
Dh5char -
Head
UtgOing ae 9e er
TiDischarge Port {typ.)
a V Ax�z
\Discharge into
creek (typ.)
'nc°rhino
Tide
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-10 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
ANWASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 3
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CORMIX MODELING
3.3 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL DISCHARGE LOCATIONS
Section 1 of this report identifies three potential discharge diffuser locations (refer to
Figure 1-1 for a map of these locations). The simulations and results presented in this
section demonstrate how the channel geometry at each location (summarized in Table
3-9) affects initial mixing.
Table 3-9 Summary of Potential Discharge Location Geometry
Input Parameter
Location
No.1
Location Location
No.2 No.3
Average Channel Depth'
7.0 feet
6.0 feet
5.0 feet
Channel Depth at Discharge Location'
9.0 feet
7.0 feet
6.0 feet
Channel Width2
1,900 feet
1,100 feet
1,000 feet
Diffuser Distance from Nearest Bank2
700 feet 300 feet
180 feet
Notes:
1. Depths were estimated from NOAA Raster Navigational Chart 11542.
2. Channel width and diffuser distance from bank were estimated using 2012 orthoimagery of
MCB CAMLEJ. Distance from nearest bank was based on proposed diffuser locations
along the inside edge of the main channel within Wallace Creek.
AH evaluated the potential discharge diffuser locations using the Base Model and the
preliminary diffuser design presented in Section 3.2. Each location simulation was eval-
uated at the critical time after tidal reversal (and associated ambient velocity), that re-
sulted in the least favorable mixing conditions for that location. Table 3-10 summarizes
the results of this evaluation.
Table 3-10 Summary of Discharge Location Evaluation
Time (hours Ambient Computed Horizontal
Location No. after slack) Velocity (ft/sec) Distance from Port Opening
to Achieve 10:1 Dilution (feet)
1
2
3
0.8
0.08
59.2
0.9
0.09
84.1
0.9 0.09
120.3
The model also provided values for the distances in the x- and y- direction from the
discharge where 10:1 dilution was achieved. Using those values and diffuser length,
AH estimate the xy-dimensions and plan area of the 10:1 RMZ associated with each
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-11 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 3
CORMIX MODELING
potential discharge location. Table 3-11 presents the RMZ dimensions and areas cal-
culated for each location.
Table 3-11 Estimated 10:1 RMZ Dimensions and Areas
Location No. X -Dimension Y -Dimension Plan Area
(feet) (feet) (square feet [ft2])
1 118 58 6,844
2 125 83 10,375
3 131 119 15,589
The rectangular polygons shown on the map in Figure 3-3 are scaled representations
of the calculated mixing zones at each potential discharge location.
Figure 3-3
Map of Mixing Zones at Potential Diffuser Locations
The results of this evaluation indicate that the deeper channel associated with Location
No.1 results in better initial mixing. However, none of the estimated mixing zones oc-
cupy a significant portion of Wallace Creek. Appendix C contains prediction files and
model session reports for the evaluation conducted for each location.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 3-12 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
r WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 4
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CONCLUSIONS
4. CONCLUSIONS
This mixing zone study was completed in support of MCB CAMLEJ's NPDES permit
application to discharge NF membrane WTP concentrate to the mouth of Wallace
Creek. AH developed a worst-case Base Model (as discussed in Section 3) and used
that model to evaluate multiple diffuser configurations and three potential discharge
diffuser locations. This section summarizes the recommended preliminary diffuser lo-
cation and design, and provides a brief analysis of three CoCs.
4.1 PROPOSED DIFFUSER LOCATION AND DESIGN
AH recommends installing the proposed discharge diffuser at Location No. 2. Though
Location No. 1 provides the best initial mixing, Location No. 2 offers adequate initial
mixing with considerably reduced construction costs and complexity.
AH recommends a preliminary diffuser design with the following features (refer to Fig-
ure 3-2 for a schematic of the recommended diffuser and Figure 4-1 for a map showing
the recommended diffuser within Wallace Creek):
• 90 -foot long diffuser header with ten (10) 2.5 -inch diameter discharge ports
(diffuser header diameter of 12 inches, consistent with concentrate force main
diameter per the EAA)
• Diffuser located approximately 300 feet from the shoreline
• Diffuser header oriented approximately parallel to the ambient flow direction
and northern shoreline
— Diffuser header alignment angle = 0°
• Diffuser discharge ports oriented horizontally and normal to the diffuser
header
— Diffuser discharge port vertical angle = 0°
— Diffuser discharge port horizontal angle = 90°
• Diffuser discharge port height above channel bottom = 2.0 feet
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-1 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 4
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CONCLUSIONS
4.2 PROPOSED RMZ
AH proposes a 10:1 RMZ based on the results of the evaluations summarized in Sec-
tion 3.2 and 3.3, and assuming the discharge diffuser will be installed at Location No.
2. The calculated 10:1 RMZ dimensions for this location were 125 feet by 83 feet
(10,375 ft2). To account for uncertainties inherent in computer modeling of natural sys-
tems, AH applied a factor of safety of 1.5 to the calculated dimensions and rounded the
product up to the nearest ten feet for a proposed RMZ with the following geometry:
190 feet x 130 feet
• 24,700 ft2
Figure 4-1 is a map showing the proposed discharge diffuser with a scaled represen-
tation of the proposed RMZ.
Figure 4-1 Map of Proposed Diffuser and Associated RMZ
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-2 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 4
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE CONCLUSIONS
4.3 TDZ DEFINITION
Per EPA guidance, AH also defined a TDZ for toxic contaminants as the most restrictive
of the following:
• Ten percent of the RMZ (approximately 15 feet from the diffuser)
• Five times the local water depth (approximately 35 feet from the diffuser)
• 50 times the discharge length scale (Lq); where, Lq is the square root of any
discharge outlet cross-sectional area (approximately 9.2 feet from the diffuser)
50 times Lq is the most restrictive definition with a horizontal distance from the diffuser
of 9.2 feet.
4.4 ANALYSIS OF COCS
AH used the effluent and receiving water data presented in Section 2 and the proposed
dilution factor (10:1) to predict the concentration of the following CoCs at the edges of
the RMZ and TDZ:
• Un -ionized ammonia (at NCDEQ's request)
• Copper (Projected concentrate value based on existing WTP influent was in
excess of WQS; refer to Table 2-7)
• Gross beta activity (COJ effluent sample result in excess of the WQS; refer to
Table 2-4)
Concentration at the edge (boundary) of the mixing zone was calculated using the fol-
lowing equation:
Ceffluent S Cambient
Ledge — S. + Cambient
where Cedge is the concentration at the edge (boundary) of the mixing zone, Cffluent is the
effluent concentration, Cambient is the background concentration, and Sis dilution.
The CoC evaluation objective was to show that the CoC concentrations were less than
the chronic and acute WQSs/criteria at the edges of the RMZ and TDZ, respectively.
Table 4-1 summarizes the results of the CoC evaluation. Refer to Section 2 of this study
for the origins of the maximum effluent and ambient concentrations presented in this
table.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-3 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 4
CONCLUSIONS
Table 4-1 Summary of CoC Evaluation
Assumed Assumed Predicted Predicted
Parameter Effluent Ambient Concentration Concentration
Concentration Concentration at Edge of TDZ at Edge of RMZ
(S=4.4) (S=10)
Un -Ionized 0.0520' 0.0034' 0.0144 0.0083
Ammonia (mg/L, Water Quality Criteria 0.233 (acute)2 0.035 (chronic)2
NH3 as N)
Dissolved 0.00863 0.0014 0.0027 0.0018
Copper (mg/L) WQS 0.0048 (acute)5 0.0031 (chronic)5
Gross Beta 2836 2.07 N/A 30.1
(pCi/L) WQS N/A 506
Notes:
1. 95th percentile value for assumed effluent and ambient concentrations from Tables 2-2
(COJ NPDES Permit compliance data) and 2-8 (historic Wallace Creek data), respectively.
2. EPA's Saltwater Ambient Water Quality Criteria for ammonia.
3. Maximum projected concentrate dissolved copper value based on existing WTP influent
sampling (refer to Table 2-7).
4. The NCDEQ Wallace Creek data included total copper monitoring (16 events). Each event
produced a result below the reporting limit of 0.002; therefore, the ambient total copper
concentration was assumed to be half the reporting limit. Dissolved copper data was not
available; however, the use of total copper for this value is conservative.
5. WQSs per 15A NCAC 02B.0220 and .0222 for dissolved copper.
6. Result of single grab sample collected of COJ NF membrane concentrate multiplied by a
safety factor of five (5). Refer to Section 2.1.2.
7. No ambient data were available for gross beta concentration in Wallace Creek. In general,
gross beta data for surface waters is limited; however, a United States Geologic Survey
(USGS) study conducted in the early 1960s monitored 36 United States rivers (111 total
samples) for various radioactive parameters including gross beta activity. The results of the
study published in Geologic Survey Water -Supply Paper 1535-0 indicated the range of
gross beta in natural waterways ranged from approximately 0.3 to 2.0 pCi/L (Mallory, 1969).
8. Per 15A NCAC 02B .0220 and .0222, the annual average activity level (based on at least
one sample collected per quarter) for gross beta particle activity shall not exceed 50 pCi/L.
Although this study considers the TDZ, the proposed discharge is not expected to be
toxic. Refer to Section 2.1.2.2 for the results of a five -point multi -concentration chronic
toxicity test performed on the COJ concentrate, which is considered representative of
the proposed NF membrane concentrate. None of the dilutions tested (40:1, 20:1, 10:1,
5:1, and 2.5:1) caused a reduction in Survival or Growth greater than or equal to 25
percent (i.e., the IC25 for this sample corresponded to an effluent concentration greater
than 40 percent). Note that the RMZ proposed in this study conservatively achieves
10:1 dilution (effluent concentration equal to 10 percent).
The predicted un -ionized ammonia (NH3 as N) concentration at the edge of the TDZ is
well below the EPA's acute water quality criterion. The concentration at the edge of the
RMZ is also well below the chronic water quality criterion.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-4 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 4
CONCLUSIONS
The predicted total copper concentrations at the edges of the RMZ and TDZ are close
to, but lower than, the chronic and acute WQSs, respectively. An assumption was made
that the ambient copper concentration was equal to half the analytical reporting limit
because no monitoring result was reportable. Use of total copper when the WQSs are
stated as dissolved copper adds another degree of conservatism to this evaluation.
For evaluation of gross beta activity, AH had a single data point for gross beta activity
in the effluent and no data for the receiving water. Therefore, a factor of safety of five
was applied to the effluent value and the maximum value was selected from a nation-
wide dataset of surface water gross beta activity. Using these conservative assump-
tions, the predicted gross beta activity at the edge of the mixing zone was below the
WQS.
Of the three CoCs, copper is the most limiting pollutant expected to be present in the
process wastewater proposed for discharge to Wallace Creek. Comparing the pre-
dicted copper concentration at the edge of the RMZ to the WQS for copper suggests
that a 10:1 RMZ is appropriate for the proposed discharge.
In summary, the proposed diffuser location, preliminary design, and associated pro-
posed mixing zone satisfy the stated objectives of this study.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-5 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
This page left blank intentionally.
SECTION 4
CONCLUSIONS
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 4-6 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK SECTION 5
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE REFERENCES
5. REFERENCES
AH Environmental Engineering, PC. Engineering Alternatives Analysis for Consoli-
dated Drinking Water Treatment Plant Process Wastewater Discharge, Marine
Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Revised Draft Report, November
2017.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC. Pilot Treatability Study for Consolidated Drinking
Water Membrane Filtration Plant, Marine Corps Installations East -Marine Corps
Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Final Report, November 2015.
CH2M Hill, Inc. Meeting Summary: P1043 Hadnot Point WTP Replacement MCB
Camp Lejeune, NC Project Definition Workshop. January 2017.
CH2M Hill, Inc. P1043 Hadnot Point WTP Replacement Supplementary Data in Sup-
port of NPDES Permit Application. August 2017.
CH2M Hill, Inc. Technical Memorandum: Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune Field
Sampling. July 2017.
David and Floyd, Inc. Computer Modeling Analysis of Plant Outfall, Marine Corps Base
Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. Revised Report, June 1995.
Doneker, Robert L. and Jirka, Gerhard H. CORMIX User Manual: A Hydrodynamic
Mixing Zone Model and Decision Support System for Pollutant Discharges into
Surface Waters. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection
Agency. December 2007.
Gunnerson, Charles G. and French, Jonathan A. (eds.). Wastewater Management for
Coastal Cities: The Ocean Disposal Option. Springer. 1996.
Mallin, Michael A. New River Estuary Water Quality Data (1998 to 2009). Personal
Communication (Email) with David Cotnoir, NAVFAC MIDLANT Water Program
Manager. February 2016.
Mallory, Jr., E.C., et. al. Geologic Survey of Water -Supply Paper 1535-0: Water Load
of Uranium, Radium, and Gross Beta Activity at Selected Gaging Stations, Water
Year 1960-61. United States Department of the Interior. 1969.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA Raster Navigational Chart
11542: New River. Office of Coast Survey. August 2014.
North Carolina Administrative Code. 15A NCAC 02B .0220. Tidal Salt Water Quality
Standards for Class SC Waters. January 1, 2015.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 5-1 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

MIXING ZONE STUDY FOR CONSOLIDATED
DRINKING WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS
0 WASTEWATER DISCHARGE TO WALLACE CREEK
MARINE CORPS BASE CAMP LEJEUNE
SECTION 5
REFERENCES
North Carolina Administrative Code. 15A NCAC O2B .0222. Tidal Salt Water Quality
Standards for Class SB Waters. May 1, 2007.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. Surface Water Quality Data at
Station ID 21NCO1WQ-P440O0O0 (2000 to 2002). https://www.epa.gov/wa-
terdata/storage-and-retrieval-and-water-quality-exchange. Accessed February
2016.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Technical Guidance Manual for Per-
forming Waste Load Allocations, Book lll: Estuaries. August 1992.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. Technical Support Document for Wa-
ter Quality -Based Toxics Control. March 1991.
AH Environmental Engineering, PC 5-2 Final, December 2017
119-WE15

APPENDIX A
Laboratory Report for COJ WTP
Concentrate
(2O PAGES
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

LP R I S M Full -Service Analytical &
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC
Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501
Wilmington, NC 28401
NC Certification No. 402
SC Certification No. 99012
NC Drinkinq Water Cert No. 37735
VA Certification No. 460211
DOD ELAP: L -A -B Accredited Certificate No. L2307
ISO/IEC 17025: L -A -B Accredited Certificate No. L2307
Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Project No.: WTP Effluent Discharge
Lab Submittal Date: 03/08/2016
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Case Narrative
03/29/2016
This data package contains the analytical results for the project identified above and includes a Case Narrative, Sample
Results and Chain of Custody. Unless otherwise noted, all samples were received in acceptable condition and processed
according to the referenced methods.
Data qualifiers are flagged individually on each sample. A key reference for the data qualifiers appears at the end of this case
narrative.
Narrative Notes:
This is a Revised Report and supercedes the original laboratory report dated 03/28/2016. The
subcontract data from ETT Environmental, Inc. for toxicity testing has been included with the report.
Please call if you have any questions relating to this analytical report.
Respectfully,
PRISM LABORATORIES, INC.
a,_1
Angela D. Overcash
VP Laboratory Services
Data Qualifiers Key Reference:
Reviewed By Terri W. Cole For Angela D. Overcash
Project Manager
HT Sample received and analyzed outside of the hold time.
BRL Below Reporting Limit
MDL Method Detection Limit
RPD Relative Percent Difference
* Results reported to the reporting limit. All other results are reported to the MDL with values between MDL and
reporting limit indicated with a J.
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone] Page 1 of 20

Sample Receipt Summary
fflyaR I S M Full -Service Analytical R 03/29/2016
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Client Sample ID Lab Sample ID Matrix Date Sampled Date Received
COS WTP #1 6030139-01 Water 03/07/16 03/08/16
Samples were received at 6.5 degrees C. See case narrative for further information.
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone] Page 2 of 20

/P R I S M Full -Service Analytical
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC
Attn: Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501
Wilmington, NC 28401
Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Project No.: WTP Effluent Discharge
Sample Matrix: Water
Laboratory Report
03/29/2016
Client Sample ID: COS WTP #1
Prism Sample ID: 6030139-01
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Time Collected: 03/07/16 09:00
Time Submitted: 03/08/16 14:20
Parameter Result Units Report MDL Dilution Method Analysis Analyst Batch
Limit Factor Date/Time ID
Anions by Ion Chromatography
BRL
mg/L
0.10
0.023
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Chloride
27
mg/L
1.0
0.20
1
*300.0
3/15/16 13:41
CDE
P6CO242
Fluoride
2.3
mg/L
0.10
0.037
1
*300.0
3/15/16 13:41
CDE
P6CO242
Sulfate
BRL
mg/L
1.0
0.24
1
*300.0
3/15/16 13:41
CDE
P6CO242
General Chemistry Parameters
BRL
mg/L
0.010
0.0021
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Total Nitrogen
1.2
mg/L
0.60
0.13
1
*Total Nitrogen
3/11/16 9:50
CLB
[CALC]
Nitrate/Nitrite as N
BRL
mg/L
0.10
0.0012
1
*SM4500-NO3 F
3/10/16 11:44
CLB
P6C0161
pH
7.8 HT
pH Units
0.10
0.010
1
*SM4500-H B
3/8/16 15:31
EGC
P6C0135
Phosphorus -Total
0.43
mg/L
0.050
0.013
1
*SM4500-P F
3/22/16 9:16
CLB
P6C0340
Total Alkalinity to pH 4.5
1000
mg/L
5.0
0.77
1
*SM2320 B
3/18/16 10:00
CLB
P6C0314
Total Dissolved Solids
1200
mg/L
50
1.4
1
*SM2540 C
3/11/16 11:05
EGC
P6C0198
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
1.2
mg/L
0.50
0.13
1
*351.2
3/11/16 9:50
CLB
P6C0173
Total Suspended Solids
BRL
mg/L
3.1
0.80
1
*SM 2540 D
3/10/16 10:15
SLS
P6C0182
Ammonia as N
0.69
mg/L
0.10
0.034
1
*SM4500-NH3 G
3/15/16 9:35
CLB
P6CO234
Carbonate Alkalinity
BRL
mg/L
5.0
0.59
1
*SM2320 B
3/18/16 10:00
CLB
P6C0317
Bicarbonate Alkalinity
1000
mg/L
5.0
0.59
1
*SM2320 B
3/18/16 10:00
CLB
P6C0318
Total Metals
Aluminum
BRL
mg/L
0.10
0.023
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Arsenic
BRL
mg/L
0.010
0.0018
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Barium
BRL
mg/L
0.010
0.0032
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Calcium
200
mg/L
10
3.0
50
*200.7
3/15/16 15:53
bgm
P6C0187
Copper
BRL
mg/L
0.010
0.0021
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Iron
0.58
mg/L
0.10
0.020
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Lead
BRL
mg/L
0.0050
0.00070
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Magnesium
34
mg/L
0.10
0.010
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Manganese
0.043
mg/L
0.010
0.0019
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
Silicon
47
mg/L
25
0.23
50
*200.7
3/15/16 15:53
bgm
P6C0187
Sodium
190
mg/L
25
1.1
50
*200.7
3/15/16 15:53
bgm
P6C0187
Zinc
BRL
mg/L
0.030
0.0073
1
*200.7
3/11/16 20:16
bgm
P6C0187
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone] Page 3 of 20

,ot P R I S M EService Analytical
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC
Attn: Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501
Wilmington, NC 28401
Total Metals - Quality Control
Analyte
Batch P6CO187 - 200.7
Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Project No: WTP Effluent
Discharge
Level II QC Report
3/29/16
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Time Submitted: 3/8/2016 2:20:OOPM
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Blank (P6C0187-BLK1)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/11/16
Aluminum
BRL
0.10
mg/L
Arsenic
BRL
0.010
mg/L
Barium
BRL
0.010
mg/L
Calcium
BRL
0.20
mg/L
Copper
BRL
0.010
mg/L
Iron
BRL
0.10
mg/L
Lead
BRL
0.0050
mg/L
Magnesium
BRL
0.10
mg/L
Manganese
BRL
0.010
mg/L
Silicon
BRL
0.50
mg/L
Sodium
BRL
0.50
mg/L
Zinc
BRL
0.030
mg/L
LCS (P6C0187-BSI)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/11/16
Aluminum
4.98
0.10
mg/L
5.000 100
85-115
Arsenic
0.253
0.010
mg/L
0.2500 101
85-115
Barium
0.250
0.010
mg/L
0.2500 100
85-115
Calcium
5.06
0.20
mg/L
5.000 101
85-115
Copper
0.247
0.010
mg/L
0.2500 99
85-115
Iron
5.08
0.10
mg/L
5.000 102
85-115
Lead
0.255
0.0050
mg/L
0.2500 102
85-115
Magnesium
5.05
0.10
mg/L
5.000 101
85-115
Manganese
0.252
0.010
mg/L
0.2500 101
85-115
Silicon
5.04
0.50
mg/L
5.000 101
85-115
Sodium
4.96
0.50
mg/L
5.000 99
85-115
Zinc
0.261
0.030
mg/L
0.2500 104
85-115
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone]
Page 4 of 20

/PRISM Full-Service Analytical
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Attn: Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501 Project No: WTP Effluent
Wilmington, NC 28401 Discharge
Anions by Ion Chromatography - Quality Control
Level II QC Report
3/29/16
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Time Submitted: 3/8/2016 2:20:OOPM
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Batch P6CO242 - NO PREP
Blank (P6CO242-BLK1)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/15/16
Chloride
BRL
1.0
mg/L
Fluoride
BRL
0.10
mg/L
Sulfate
BRL
1.0
mg/L
LCS (P6CO242-BSI)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/15/16
Chloride
39.6
1.0
mg/L
40.00 99 90-110
Fluoride
4.06
0.10
mg/L
4.000 102 90-110
Sulfate
39.4
1.0
mg/L
40.20 98 90-110
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone]
Page 5 of 20

/PRISM Full-Service Analytical
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Attn: Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501 Project No: WTP Effluent
Wilmington, NC 28401 Discharge
General Chemistry Parameters - Quality Control
Level II QC Report
3/29/16
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Time Submitted: 3/8/2016 2:20:OOPM
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Batch P6CO135 - NO PREP
LCS (P6C0135-BSI)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/08/16
pH
6.85
pH Units
6.880 100 98.5-101.5
Batch P6UM - NO PREP
Blank (P6C01 61 -BLK1)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/10/16
Nitrate/Nitrite as N
BRL
0.10 mg/L
LCS (P6C0161-BS1)
Prepared & Analyzed: 03/10/16
Nitrate/Nitrite as N
0.960
0.10 mg/L
1.000 96 90-110
Batch P6CO173 - 351.2
Blank (P6C0173-BLK1)
Prepared: 03/10/16 Analyzed: 03/11/16
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
BRL
0.50 mg/L
LCS (P6C0173-BSI)
Prepared: 03/10/16 Analyzed: 03/11/16
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
9.77
2.0 mg/L
10.00 98 90-110
Batch P6CO182 - NO PREP
Blank (P6C0182-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/10/16
Total Suspended Solids BRL 5.0 mg/L
LCS (P6C0182-BS1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/10/16
Total Suspended Solids 460 5.0 mg/L 477.0 96 90-110
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone] Page 6 of 20

/PRISM Full-Service Analytical
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC Project: WTP Effluent Discharge
Attn: Brandon Ashton
201 Front St. Suite 501 Project No: WTP Effluent
Wilmington, NC 28401 Discharge
General Chemistry Parameters - Quality Control
Level II QC Report
3/29/16
Prism Work Order: 6030139
Time Submitted: 3/8/2016 2:20:OOPM
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Batch P6CO198 - NO PREP
Blank (P6C0198-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/11/16
Total Dissolved Solids BRL 50 mg/L
LCS (P6C0198-BS1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/11/16
Total Dissolved Solids 1000 50 mg/L 1000 100 90-110
Batch P6CO234 - NO PREP
Blank (P6CO234-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/15/16
Ammonia as N BRL 0.10 mg/L
LCS (P6CO234-BSI) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/15/16
Ammonia as N 2.45 0.10 mg/L 2.500 98 90-110
Batch P6CO314 - NO PREP
Blank (P6C0314-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/18/16
Total Alkalinity to pH 4.5 BRL 5.0 mg/L
LCS (P6C0314-BSI) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/18/16
Total Alkalinity to pH 4.5 249 5.0 mg/L 250.0 100 90-110
Batch MUM - NO PREP
Blank (P6C0317-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/18/16
Carbonate Alkalinity BRL 5.0 mg/L
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone]
Page 7 of 20

Level II QC Report
PRISMFull -Service Analytical 3/29/16
Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
AH Environmental - Wilmington NC Project: WTP Effluent Discharge Prism Work Order: 6030139
Attn: Brandon Ashton Time Submitted: 3/8/2016 2:20:OOPM
201 Front St. Suite 501 Project No: WTP Effluent
Wilmington, NC 28401 Discharge
General Chemistry Parameters - Quality Control
Reporting Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte Result Limit Units Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Batch P6CO318 - NO PREP
Blank (P6C0318-BLK1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/18/16
Bicarbonate Alkalinity BRL 5.0 mg/L
LCS (P6C0318-BS1) Prepared & Analyzed: 03/18/16
Bicarbonate Alkalinity 249 5.0 mg/L 250.0 100 90-110
Batch P6CO340 - SM4500-PB5
Blank (P6C0340-BLK1)
Phosphorus -Total
LCS (P6C0340-BSI)
Phosphorus -Total
Prep Method: 351.2
Lab Number Batch
BRL
2.04
Initial
Prepared: 03/21/16 Analyzed: 03/22/16
0.050 mg/L
Prepared: 03/21/16 Analyzed: 03/22/16
0.050 mg/L 2.000 102 90-110
Sample Extraction Data
Final Date/Time
6030139-01 P6C0173 25 mL 25 mL 03/10/16 12:00
Prep Method: SM4500-PB5
Lab Number Batch Initial Final Date/Time
6030139-01 P6C0340 50 mL 50 mL 03/21/16 12:53
Prep Method: 200.7
Lab Number Batch Initial Final Date/Time
6030139-01 P6C0187 50 mL 50 mL 03/11/16 7:35
6030139-01 P6C0187 50 mL 50 mL 03/11/16 7:35
Subcontracted Analyses
The following analyses were subcontracted to Florida Radiochemistry Services, Inc.
Lab Number Analysis
6030139-01 Radiological (Sub)
This report should not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written consent of Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Springbrook Road - P.O. Box 240543 - Charlotte, NC 28224-0543
Phone: [phone] - Toll Free Number: 1-800/529-6364 - Fax: [phone] Page 8 of 20

*Lj z 0
z 0 rn
� m
0 c
®®a Cl'
m
-4 Li
0 0 0 T
® 0 N
0
w m A
® 0 o
D z0
II C7
D Z m
3 ®3 ,
C m
0 > n o
A
11 z o
m
C7 m
22
v ® 0
Gjzzo >
0 m
G7 00
v q
� 0 �
m c
c
Z,
N PD
cp
n ® ® ® fn
z
r 0 ® o
I I
O ® cq re
c Pt9
r R
� C
O
® ® 0 C
_0 0
G li
0 Cl)
11
O ® ® 641
0
CD0
O n
N ® ®
D D
0 ®.
r
CD 0 l
l
®
"0
CD n m
CL
(/)
B C/)
0
w
0
MR
Q
Q
O
N
n
3
W
N
3
-0
CL U)
c
�= v
c
�� CD
CD 0
T�
3
TO �
OC
�C
CD c
s0
eD ®. to
N0)
D CL
�® w
T
w
N
,< ® O
CD Cj�
CL
CD
IDI
3
I
RLQ
e
CD N �,
M
ZY
. D)
�1
CD
FLD N
o
N
rt �
t
ChwmmT
M C 3
r r
: m �.
I.
m
X0.
H
U) Sll
IRD
Z
k
C/)
CD
9
m- -W a
m 0,
rn
CA Z m 3 Q2 CDCL f41
mm_.CD v
m M N N CD R�
zp
Pte'"m
".
D I-9 A 9)
m o co p
'.
rn
n 6
Oz w 0
A ® a O N
M 1 N C
Z N CD CD ® (D
f7 n L1 �- co
M4
O> 5—
— N
r- ®Cn y N
Fn -:E N
-i Tm
ro
m N N ��
0
n d
m
�a
m m
c
II
jI
® M
i(
ChwmmT
M C 3
r r
: m �.
I.
m
X0.
H
U) Sll
IRD
Z
k
C/)
CD
9
m- -W a
m 0,
rn
CA Z m 3 Q2 CDCL f41
mm_.CD v
m M N N CD R�
zp
Pte'"m
".
D I-9 A 9)
m o co p
'.
co
n 6
Oz w 0
A ® a O N
M 1 N C
Z N CD CD ® (D
f7 n L1 �- co
O O a X a
O> 5—
— N
r- ®Cn y N
Fn -:E N
-i Tm
ro
m N N ��
0
n d
m
�a
m m
c
ChwmmT
M C 3
r r
: m �.
I.
m
X0.
H
U) Sll
IRD
Z
k
C/)
CD
9
m- -W a
m 0,
rn
CA Z m 3 Q2 CDCL f41
mm_.CD v
m M N N CD R�
N
I- O� .a
w mad m
0 1 T ° N
z A; m 0 0
D I-9 A 9)
m o co p
m W N 6
0 C4
0 ;u
n CD N 6D
n 6
Oz w 0
A ® a O N
M 1 N C
Z N CD CD ® (D
f7 n L1 �- co
O O a X a
O> 5—
— N
r- ®Cn y N
Fn -:E N
Gl CCD 0 A
m N N ��
0
n d
m
r b 2 m7 D
.' oC7 m
j x -M 0 x 70
C' t - =
0 z
m m
�. 3 t=
y m
Ci? fig -_
9of20
o0
. 5
o
c
�
n
v
y
W
e
N
r b 2 m7 D
.' oC7 m
j x -M 0 x 70
C' t - =
0 z
m m
�. 3 t=
y m
Ci? fig -_
9of20
. 5
CD
0
II
jI
IY
i(
m
ID
0
CA
(D
C
O
m
®
c
q�
€
m
i
®
(
M
CS
c
0
CD
D
m
ICD
®rte
z>10
r b 2 m7 D
.' oC7 m
j x -M 0 x 70
C' t - =
0 z
m m
�. 3 t=
y m
Ci? fig -_
9of20
. 5
II
jI
IY
i(
q�
i
0 Mn
CD
r b 2 m7 D
.' oC7 m
j x -M 0 x 70
C' t - =
0 z
m m
�. 3 t=
y m
Ci? fig -_
9of20

Florida Radiochemistry ,
Contact: Michael J. Naumann
5456 Heffner Ave., Suite 201 Orlando, FL 32812
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Certification 1. D. 4 12709
Work 1: d-160311
Report ., 03/24/11
Prism Laboratories, Inc.
449 Sringrook Rd
PO Box 240543
Charlotte, NC 28217
Attention; Angela D. ®vercash
I do hereby affirm that this record contains no willful misrepresentations and that this information given by
me is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further certify that the methods and quality control
measures used to produce these laboratory results were implemented in accordance with the requirements of
this laboratory's certification and NELAC Standards. The test results in this report relate only to the
samples received.
Signe/, C�CCLe Date
ichael . Naumann - President
Page 1 of 3
Page 10 of 20

� Florida IZa.di®cherrlistl-y Services, Inc.
Sample Login
Client: Prism Laboratories, Inc. Date /"Time
Received
03/15/16 12:35
Client Contact:
Angela D. ®vercash
Project I.D.
6030139
Lab Sample I.D.
Client Sample I.D. Sample
Date/Time
1603116-01
6030139-01 03/07/16 09:00
COS WTP #1
Analysis Results
Work order #
1603116
Analysis
Requested
Gb, Ra226, Ra220
Cross Beta
56.6
Error +/-
3.0
MDL
4.6
EPA Method
900.0
Prep Date
03/16/16
Prep Time
00:20
Analysis Date
03/17/16
Analysis Time
06:49
Analyst
MJN
Radium 226
0.6
Radium 220
0.011
Error +/-
0.2
Error +/-
0.5
MDL
0.2
MDL
0.0
EPA Method
903.1
EPA Method
Ra -05
Prep Date
03/16/16
Prep Date
03/16/16
Prep Time
00:17
Prep Time
00:17
Analysis Date
03/23/16
Analysis Date
03/23/16
Analysis Time
11:52
Analysis Time
12:10
Analyst
MJN
Analyst
SN
Units d
pCi/I
Units
pCi/l
A U next to a result indicates analyte not detected at the MDL level Page 2 of 3
Page 11 of 20

Florida Radiochemistry Services, Inc.
Analyte
Sample #
Date
Sample
Amount
Spike
Spike /Dup
Spike
Spike Dup
Analyzed
Result
Spiked
Result
Result
% Rec.
% Rpd
Gross Beta
1602117-01
03/17/16
<1.7
10.1
11,6
11.6
115
0.0
Radium 226
1603112-01
03/23/16
<0.2
25.2
26.2
26,6
104
1,5
Radium 228
1603112-01
03/23/16
<0.8
6.7
7.3
7.4
109
1.4
1; ,
% RPD
% Res.
Gross Beta 17.8
82-125
Radium 226 23.4
78-125
Radium 228 23.9
67-125
Page 3 of 3
Page 12 of 20

re, 1+
Full -Service Analytical & Ne 4
RISM � Environmental Solutions
LABORATORIES, INC.
SUBCONTRACT ORDER
Certification: LAC_ USACE
Pris►n Laboratories, Inc. NC SC Other
6030139 N/A
SENDING LABORATORY: RECEIVING LABORATORY:
Prism Laboratories, Inc. Florida Radiochemistry Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 240543 5456 HoMer Avenue, Suite 201
Charlotte, NC 28224-0543 Orlando, FL 32812
Phone: [phone] Phone :[phone]
Fax: [phone] Fax: -
ProJect Manager. Angela D. Overcash
Analysis Due Expires Laboratory ID Comments��b 1
Sample ID: 6030139-01 Water Sampled:03/07/16 09:00 0_ 5
Radiological (Sub)
Containers .411pp1ieJ.
P7
Released By
09/03/16 09:00
a Particles, Radium 228 & 226
kap 6a__ 3/ //
Y rl
Released By Date Received By Date
Released By Date Received By Date
Nap.
Page 13 of 20

Tn f2t e f' [phone]. F ( � 13 7 M393
Rid. Bax 1x34146 GteenVffe, SC 29606 4 0raiflsrian QI Greer, SC 296,53
I I;x i Ix J.
Client: AH ENVIRONMENTAL
Facility: C®J WTP #1
NPDES #: N/A
Test Date:
Laboratory ID#: T46593
Test Reviewed and Approved By:
Robert W. Kelley, Ph.D.
QA/QC Officer
Certification #E87819
Test results presented in this report conform to all requirements of
NELAC, conducted under NELAC Certification Number E87819
Florida Dept. of Health. Included results pertain only to provided samples.
08 -Mar -16
Farhad Rostampour
Laboratory Director
SC ITEC Certification #23104
NCDENR Certification # 022
Page 14 of 20

Effluent Toxicity Report Form -Chronic Fathead Minnow Multi -Concentration TeOate:03/28/16
Facility: .4H Environmental NPDES # N000 Pipe #: 001 County:
Laboratory: ETT Environmental
x
Signature of Operator in Responsible Charge
x
nature of La
MAIL ORIGINAL TO: Environmental Sciences Branch
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
1Control fecunditv <50%, thus fecundity not used as 1
Test Initiation DatE 08 -Mar -16 / 1415 Avg WUSurv.
% Eff. Repl. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Control Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity (%)
2.51 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity (%)
0 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity
10 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity %
F7771 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity
40 Surviving #
Original #
Wt/original (mg)
Fecundity
5
4 5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5 5
5
5
5
5
5
1.47
0.97 1.48
1.04
1.53
1.44
1.03
1.78
50%
100%
50%
0%
50%
50%
33%
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1.16
1.46
1.26
1.59
1.42
1.36
1.17
1.38
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
0%
0%
50%
5
3
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
3
5
5
5
3
5
5
1.45
0.84
1.41
1.37
1.55
0.80
1.43
1.54
0%
33%
0%
33%
1 33%
0%
0%
67%
4
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
1.36
1.46
1.40
1.60
1.22
1.36
1.79
1.22
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
25%
25%
100%
Water Quality Data Day
Control 0 1
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
High Concentration
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
8.2 /
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
V4
1.01
1.77
1.47
1.26
0.75
1.51
1.35
1.50
50%
75%
33%
50%
33%
25%
25%
100%
Water Quality Data Day
Control 0 1
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
High Concentration
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
8.2 /
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
7.6
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
F55
3
1.12
1.27
1.30
1.15
1.25
4.8
6.9 /
4.8
6.7 /
5.4
/ 5.1
24.8 I
25.0 /
24.6
24.4 /
Water Quality Data Day
Control 0 1
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
High Concentration
pH (SU) Init/Fin
DO (mg/L) Init/Fi
Salinity (ppt)
Temp (C) Init/Fin
8.2 /
8.3 /
7.8
8.2 /
8.0
8.3 /
8.0
8.1 /
7.6
8.2 /
7.9
8.4 /
8.1
/ 8.2
7.0 /
6.7 /
4.6
7.1 /
4.7
5.8 /
4.6
6.7 /
4.8
6.9 /
4.8
6.7 /
5.4
/ 5.1
24.8 I
25.0 /
24.6
24.4 /
24.5
25.4 /
24.8 1
25.0 /
25.4
25.4 I
25.7
25.9 /
26.0
/ 26.0
25.3 I
25.9 25.5 /
25.7
25.3 /
26.0
25.1 /
25.9
25.3 /
25.9
25.4 I
26.0
25.6 /
26.0
/ 26.0
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
Sample 1 2 _ 3 Survival Growth Result
Collection Start D Normal W 0.84 no 0.98 yes Pass
Grab 3-7-16 3-9-16 3-11-16 Horn. Var. B= no no
Composite (Durati NOEC 40.0% 40.0% ChV= > >40%
Chlorine(mg/L) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 LOEC > 40.0% > 40.0%
Temp at Receipt (°C) 0.1 0.2 2.1 ChV > 40.0% > 40.0%
partially frozen Method Rank Sum Rank Sum
Hardness Crit t/rsum 46 46
Control 50.0 mg/L Conc.
Test Organisms 2.5% 95.00 65.00
Cultured In -Hous 5.0% 95.00 69.00
Outside Supplier X 10.0% 95.00 78.00
20.0%. 95.00 69.00
Hatch Date/Time 3-1-16 / AM 40.0% 72.00 60.00
DWQ Form AT -5 (8/03)
Page 15 of 20
3 /
8.4
7.9 /
8.2
8.2 /
8.4
7.9 /
8.3
8.0 /
8.4
8.2 /
8.5
/
8.4
3 /
4.2
6.4 /
4.1
6.0 /
3.3
6.3 /
4.2
6.5 /
3.7
6.8 /
4.1
/
4.6
E25�0
0 /
d�265.
24.6
24.4 /
24.5
25.4 I
24.8
5
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
% survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
survival
avg wt (mg)
avg fecundity
Sample 1 2 _ 3 Survival Growth Result
Collection Start D Normal W 0.84 no 0.98 yes Pass
Grab 3-7-16 3-9-16 3-11-16 Horn. Var. B= no no
Composite (Durati NOEC 40.0% 40.0% ChV= > >40%
Chlorine(mg/L) <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 LOEC > 40.0% > 40.0%
Temp at Receipt (°C) 0.1 0.2 2.1 ChV > 40.0% > 40.0%
partially frozen Method Rank Sum Rank Sum
Hardness Crit t/rsum 46 46
Control 50.0 mg/L Conc.
Test Organisms 2.5% 95.00 65.00
Cultured In -Hous 5.0% 95.00 69.00
Outside Supplier X 10.0% 95.00 78.00
20.0%. 95.00 69.00
Hatch Date/Time 3-1-16 / AM 40.0% 72.00 60.00
DWQ Form AT -5 (8/03)
Page 15 of 20

CHRONIC DEFINITIVE SURVIVAL , GROWTH AND FECUNDITY TEST
StatisticalAnalyses
Client: All ENVIRONMENTAL
Sample Identification: C®J WTP #1
Test Date: 08 -Mar -2016
for Normality and Heterogeneity of Variance
21.8%
Sample Use
Teter Test Used Result
Effect Control
Sample Date Sample Use
31ity N/A V/A
Sample A
07 -Mar -16 08 -Mar -16 09 -Mar -I6
ice N/A V/A
Sample B
09 -Mar -16 10 -Mar -16 I1 -Mar -16
100.0%
Sample
11 -Mar -16 12 -Mar -16 13 -Mar -16 14 -Mar -16
Tests for Differences in Survival, Groivth and Fecundity
Test Type Used: Linear Interpolation
% Effluent
21.8%
28.0% 8.8%
PMSD: % MSD
Effect Control
1 2.5%
5.0%
10.0%
20.0%
40.0%
Survival 95.0%
100.0%
100.0%
97.4%
100.0%
97.4%
%reduction
1 0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
Growth 0.269
0.270
0.287
0.302
0.277
0.253
% reduction (smoothed)
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
10.4%
Variance 0.0034
0.0009
0.0002
0.0020
0.0024
0.0003
Fecundity 52.4%
42.9%
20.8%
31.3%
49.0%
4.8%
% reduction (smoothed)
18.2%
35.7%
35.7%
35.7%
90.9%
ecevtabilitp Criteria
Value
UDDer Limit
Lower Unit
CV:Coeff. of Variation
21.8%
28.0% 8.8%
PMSD: % MSD
16.6%
37.0% 11.0%
MSD:Min. Sign. Diff.
0.045
Acceptability criteria limits not exceeded
IC25 Point Estimates
Survival IC25=
Growth IC25=
Fecundity IC25=
> 40.0%
> 40.0%
NA
TEST RESULTS
%Reduction per Linear Interpolation
@CTC of 40.0%
Survival effect 1.1%
Growth effect 10.4%
Fecundity effect NA
Hypothesis Testing - Growth
NCEC (Growth)
ChV (Growth) >
40.0%
40.0%
Maximum Effect 10.4%
PASS
Comments
Control fecundity <50%, thus, fecundity not used as an endpoint.
1C�a?F
iP c%
ri
la�rl�r��tt:� rt � tftt�li�ra + c�*R4
0.sa
0aa
G
rim Is E
C, O_13
ro
HS ' 0.12
1J9:
0-04
G
.. Co -&01 ...215 A, 5ja3 c; 10Z"K 2s G4S AG.ri-A
amiss e
0
Q
o -
Concentration -Response, Fecundity
,x'16
Control 2555 .5 -GC% 10_f=.. 2230% 4,na*
i TMrI1 ;t
[e-mail]'rticmflo feeun'Tltl
Page 16 of 20

Lab#
T46593
Day 1
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5
Day 6
Day 7
Weight
Fecundity
3
Survival
Source rep Dead Lost Dead Lost Dead Lost Dead Lost
Dead Lost Dead Lost Dead Lost mg N-Grav Gravid
1415
A
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.47
1 1
5
Units for Conc.
B
0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0.97
0 0
4
25
C
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.48
0 1
5
D
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.04
1 1
5
control
E
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.53
1 0
5
F
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.44
1 1
5
G
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.03
1 1
5
H
1
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 01
01 01
01
01
1.781
1 1 2
4
0
00
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.16
1 1
5
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.46
1 1
5
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.26
1 1
5
VD
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.59
1 1
5
2,5
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.42
1 1
5
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.36
1 0
5
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.17
0 0
5
H
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.38
1 1
5
A
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.45
3 0
5
B
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0
0
0.84
2 1
3
C
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.41
2 0
5
D
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.37
2 1
5
$
E
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.55
2 1
5
F
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 1
0
0
0.8
1 0
3
G
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.43
2 0
5
H
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1,541
1 2
5
A
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.36
2 0
4
B
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.46
1 0
5
C
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.4
1 0
5
D
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.6
0 2
5
10
E
1
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.22
2 0
4
F
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.36
0 2
4
G
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.79
2 2
5
H
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.22
1 0
5
AG
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
0
0
1.01
1 1
4
B
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.77
1 3
5
C
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.47
2 1
5
D
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.26
2 2
5
20
E
R0
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0
0
0.75
2 1
4
F
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.51
3 1
5
0
0 0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.35
3 1
5
H
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
01 01
0
01
1.5
01 1
5
A
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
01 0
0
0
1.23
1 0
5
B
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.12
2 1
4
C
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.27
2 0
5
D
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.3
1 0
5
40
E
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.15
2 0
5
F
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.25
2 0
5
G
0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.14
2 0
5
H
0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
1.36
0 0
4
J
0
JG
fJ
JG
AM
JG
JC
JG
fJ
JG
AM
JG
JQ
Tndateredew
16time
EE1
fed 8 renew
04:35 PM
04:36 PM
02:38 PM
11:03 AM
11:54 AM
25.6
26
02:07 PM
25.6
26
26
AM
New t-p.'C 25.5 25.3 25.5 25.2
oid tem P. -c 25.9 25.7 26 25.9
Lab#
T46593
Client
AH ENVIRONMENT
Sample ID
COJ WTP #1
NPDES#
NC
County
0
Month
3
Start 8 fed Date
08 -Mar -16
Start & fed Time
1415
Started $ fed By
AM
Test organism
Americamysisbahia
Neo, born date
7 DAY
Neo. born time
ABS HATCH 3-1-16
Test Type
NCCD
Dilution Water
INSTANT OCEAN
Units for Conc.
%
%3rd BROOD
Testvessels
400 ml
Testvolume
150 ml
Incubator#
1
Light
161t18dk
Initial Temp °C
25
Artemia
750
Test method
EPA 821-R-02.013:1007
Comments
All reps have 5
organisms unless noted otherwise.
CON TEMP
INITIAL-
25.3
DAY 1 -
25.5
DAY 2 -
25.3
DAY 3-
25.1
DAY 4-
25.3
DAY 5 -
25.4
DAY 6-
25.6
Page 17 of 20

4-
�J
I
I Page 18 of 20
py
ai
5'�
4.
to
0
Almrs
o
Ll
Cy
H
-XliA�ll
tip uo 0
P"H
A
enIlIQUOT qo 4,o(j OI
OT
'agm
rn
LOOT VdE:Pl5AW
bD
OOOTvd2l:p"nqlud
o
ZOOTW2P n2Tqm -C[
ZOOT val:,aiqtlP'D
LOOKva2l:P!5AFq
as
nOOZVd3:Tq96Vk)0tlWA
aa
j :,anST
ZOOMI qum,(j
(ouo 0-ni11vo,ugo CI
t3
tQ
TOO
-CTOIi
Ug N. zs
El
'4OSd IAOIJ- 8jP0dWU;3
o
;h . —'a
jalmqw,72
JBUF&llqno UDIJUS T
-it
D1}sI)ICTUOIL02
OT
luempos
tQ
4k
44
rn
0
A
f2l
77
E-1
02
I Page 18 of 20
5'�
4.
o
Ll
Cy
H
I Page 18 of 20

'I
Tc�l
P"",Iuv
PQ
—"p
O
v
O
0
bqq
Eq
10
—Aluw
0 'a,
Al
no
O Vd
16
10 ci
o
Ch
I)TOIVSI-IKVCI OT
to
Aajj-glL
r"v
14
tool vda:pv,�n
ooGTvda:plDnqlua
10 so
ZoojVaj:Daiq- -a
LOOKvda:prAIAI
-4
—ZO—OKVI-A -,,alq.. -Cl
t -A
zoozVda
So o
74
24
*19TO
U
21
luoul!Pas
Oo.,
id
O
o
&m4
'I
Tc�l
o
PQ
O
O
0
bqq
Eq
'I
Tc�l
o
O
0
Eq
Page 19 of 20

C(I olvsgolraeuromvl-
�
e
---
aur OND Iunpi"m
v5—
snwouosrgpdnaDl
v: viailu�IihnQ OT _
Qco
LDOTKd3 Ps�Ud °`
J 0001 FiJH T"aulud
+✓ rlij Z00 Hdd:nn2lgwn •o --
n ; ZOOTHdl:ulgnp•D
W b F' LOOWd$:PPKYI
+ in OOO9Vdd:nl96PuatTlu:I —
� � OOOZyd"T�nT8bnnaii4ro3
ZOOZvd'd :nal.qum -a
rA
a Z00Z Vdg : a[gnp p
``� (auop-11InI�'u9aCI
Tl ep"d
V q-0 d.
R •dosdawry-allsodurop
'14 � H •dordn�oT,d-ailsodwoa
. anrsa}uet
S � a�at170
V) ,qq jgnnqunlpt2 §
l � ssU1'0 Sa1Tj 1
� w
o aaulvlcgno uojpS I
- E, � nilsnlduoTlv2l
a �) or}5niduolln�
9r) � drolu�a�-uojq
�uawlpag
�, fel � o Sazuniturols
aayaa{ro[[�uvalp
0 H
jp
W
.w o
TO
N
yyro
i2;4
0
J�
O
V
725
0.l
U
a
a
O
Rl
i
S
o �
W
P4 A
k a
sa
Q
M
'
Page 20 of 20

APPENDIX B
Laboratory Report for Existing
WTP Influent
(12 PAGES
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

2�SENCO L
9g
Accurate. Timely. Respousive. luuavative.
102-A Woodwinds Industrial Court
Cary NC, 27511
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Monday, October 23, 2017
AH Environmental Consultants (AH002)
Attn: David Lee
201 N. Front Street, Suite 501
Wilmington, NC 28401
RE: Laboratory Results for
Project Number: [none], Project Name/Desc: Camp Lejeune
ENCO Workorder(s): CA15950
Dear David Lee,
Enclosed is a copy of your laboratory report for test samples received by our laboratory on
Monday, October 16, 2017.
Unless otherwise noted in an attached project narrative, all samples were received in
acceptable condition and processed in accordance with the referenced methods/procedures.
Results for these procedures apply only to the samples as submitted.
The analytical results contained in this report are in compliance with NELAC standards, except
as noted in the project narrative. This report shall not be reproduced except in full, without
the written approval of the Laboratory.
This report contains only those analyses performed by Environmental Conservation
Laboratories. Unless otherwise noted, all analyses were performed at ENCO Cary. Data from
outside organizations will be reported under separate cover.
If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Bill Scott
Project Manager
Enclosure(s)
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 1 of Z

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
SAMPLE SUMMARY/ LABORATORY CHRONICLE
Client ID: 670A
Lab ID:
CA15950-01 Sampled: 10/09/17 09:45 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/07/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/17/17 10:57 10/20/17 12:02
Client ID: 6708
Lab ID:
CA15950-02 Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/09/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/17/17 10:57 10/20/17 12:06
Client ID: 670C
Lab ID:
CA15950-03 Sampled: 10/13/17 09:00 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/11/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/17/17 10:57 10/20/17 12:10
Client ID: 20A
Lab ID:
CA15950-04 Sampled: 10/09/17 10:05 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/07/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/17/17 10:57 10/20/17 12:13
Client ID: 20B
Lab ID:
CA15950-05 Sampled: 10/11/17 09:30 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/09/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/17/17 10:57 10/20/17 12:44
Client ID: 670A -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-06 Sampled: 10/09/17 09:45 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/07/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/18/17 08:10 10/18/17 14:26
Client ID: 67013 -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-07 Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/09/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/18/17 08:10 10/18/17 14:49
Client ID: 670C -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-08 Sampled: 10/13/17 09:00 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/11/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/18/17 08:10 10/18/17 14:52
Client ID: 20A -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-09 Sampled: 10/09/17 10:05 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/07/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/18/17 08:10 10/18/17 14:56
Client ID: 2011 -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-30 Sampled: 10/11/17 09:30 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Parameter
EPA 200.8
Hold Date/Time(s)
04/09/18
Prep Date/Time(s) Analysis Date/Time(s)
10/18/17 08:10 10/18/17 15:13
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 2 Of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
Zinc - Dissolved 2.56 1 1.10 5.00 ug/L EPA 200.8
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 3 Of 12
SAMPLE DETECTION SUMMARY
Client ID: 670A
Lab ID:
CA15950-01
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper- Total
1.61
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Total
11.5
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 670B
Lab ID:
CA15950-02
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper- Total
1.73
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Total
11.6
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 670C
Lab ID:
CA15950-03
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper- Total
0.74
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Total
8.39
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 20A
Lab ID:
CA15950-04
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper- Total
0.45
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Total
6.06
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 20B
Lab ID:
CA15950-05
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper- Total
0.29
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Lead - Total
0.13
1
0.13
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Total
3.33
1
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 670A -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-06
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper - Dissolved
0.52
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Dissolved
6.64
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 670B -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-07
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper - Dissolved
1.07
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Dissolved
9.62
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 670C -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-08
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper - Dissolved
0.41
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Dissolved
6.08
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 20A -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-09
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper - Dissolved
0.50
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Dissolved
5.49
1.10
5.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Client ID: 20111 -Dissolved
Lab ID:
CA15950-10
Anala
Results
Flag
MDL
4
Units
Method
Notes
Copper - Dissolved
0.20
1
0.10
1.00
ug/L
EPA 200.8
Zinc - Dissolved 2.56 1 1.10 5.00 ug/L EPA 200.8
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 3 Of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Description: 670A Lab Sample ID:CA15950-01 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/09/17 09:45 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Description: 670B Lab Sample ID:CA15950-02 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results
Flag Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results
Flag Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-8]^ 1.61
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:02
]DH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:02
]DH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:02
]DH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 11.5
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:02
]DH
Description: 670B Lab Sample ID:CA15950-02 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Description: 670C Lab Sample ID:CA15950-03 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/13/17 09:00 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 5911
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results
Flag Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results
Flag Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-8]^ 1.73
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:06
]DH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:06
]DH
Nickel [7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:06
]DH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 11.6
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:06
]DH
Description: 670C Lab Sample ID:CA15950-03 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/13/17 09:00 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 4 of 12
Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results
Flag Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper [7440-50-8]^
0.74
J ug/L
1 0.10 1.00 7117020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:10
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^
ND
ug/L
1 0.13 1.00 7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:10
JDH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^
ND
ug/L
1 0.220 1.00 7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:10
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^
8.39
ug/L
1 1.10 5.00 7117020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:10
JDH
Description: 20A
1.00
7317020
Lab Sample ID:CA15950-04
10/20/17 12:13
Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water
ug/L
1
Sampled: 10/09/17 10:05
5.00
Work Order: CA15950
EPA 200.8
Project: Camp Lejeune
JDH
Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 4 of 12
(Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results
Flag Units
DF
MDL
PQL
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper [7440-50-8]^ 0.45
J ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7117020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:13
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:13
JDH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:13
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 6.06
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7117020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:13
JDH
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 4 of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Description: 20B Lab Sample ID:CA15950-05 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:30 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Description: 670A -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-06 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/09/17 09:45 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results Flag
Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results Flag
Units
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results
Flag
Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-8]^ 0.29
J
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:44
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ 0.13
J
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:44
JDH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^ ND
EPA 200.8
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:44
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 3.33
J
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7317020
EPA 200.8
10/20/17 12:44
JDH
Description: 670A -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-06 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/09/17 09:45 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Description: 670B -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-07 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results Flag
Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results Flag
Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-8]^ 0.52 J
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:26
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:26
JDH
Nickel [7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:26
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 6.64
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:26
JDH
Description: 670B -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-07 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:10 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Pager) of 12
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl
Results Flag
Units
DF MDL PQL Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper [7440-50-8]^
1.07
ug/L
1 0.10 1.00 7118007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:49
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^
ND
ug/L
1 0.13 1.00 7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:49
JDH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^
ND
ug/L
1 0.220 1.00 7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:49
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^
9.62
ug/L
1 1.10 5.00 7118007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:49
JDH
Description: 670C -Dissolved
1.00
7318007
Lab Sample ID:CA15950-08
10/18/17 14:52
Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water
ug/L
1
Sampled: 10/13/17 09:00
5.00
Work Order: CA15950
EPA 200.8
Project: Camp Lejeune
JDH
Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Pager) of 12
(Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte rCAS Numberl Results Flag
Units
DF
MDL
PQL
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper [7440-50-8]^ 0.41 J
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7118007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:52
JDH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:52
JDH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:52
JDH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 6.08
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7118007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:52
JDH
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Pager) of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Description: 20A -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-09 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/09/17 10:05 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Description: 20B -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-10 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:30 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte fCAS Numberl Results Flag
Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-B]^ 0.50 1
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:56
]DH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:56
]DH
Nickel[7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:56
]DH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 5.49
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 14:56
]DH
Description: 20B -Dissolved Lab Sample ID:CA15950-10 Received: 10/16/17 09:30
Matrix: Ground Water Sampled: 10/11/17 09:30 Work Order: CA15950
Project: Camp Lejeune Sampled By: Brandon Ashton
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 6 of Z
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
^ - ENCO Cary certified analyte [NC 591]
Analyte fCAS Numberl Results Flag
Units
DF
MDL
P L
Batch
Method
Analyzed
By Notes
Copper[7440-50-B]^ 0.20 J
ug/L
1
0.10
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 15:13
]DH
Lead [7439-92-1]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.13
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 15:13
]DH
Nickel [7440-02-0]^ ND
ug/L
1
0.220
1.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 15:13
]DH
Zinc [7440-66-6]^ 2.56 J
ug/L
1
1.10
5.00
7318007
EPA 200.8
10/18/17 15:13
]DH
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 6 of Z

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
Metals by EPA 200 Series Methods - Quality Control
Batch 7117020 - EPA 3005A
Blank (7117020-BLK3) Prepared: 10/17/2017 10:57 Analyzed: 10/20/2017 10:51
Batch 7118007 - EPA 3005A
Blank (7318007-BLK3)
Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Copper
0.10
U
1.00
ug/L
Result
Lead
0.13
U
1.00
ug/L
209
Nickel
0.220
U
1.00
ug/L
105
Zinc
1.10
U
5.00
ug/L
Nickel
LCS (7717020 -BSI)
ug/L
200
ug/L
97
Prepared: 10/17/2017 10:57 Analyzed: 10/20/2017 11:02
Batch 7118007 - EPA 3005A
Blank (7318007-BLK3)
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analyte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC
Limits RPD
Limit
Notes
Copper
209
0.10
1.00
ug/L
200
105
85-115
U
1.00
Lead
194
Nickel
1.00
ug/L
200
ug/L
97
85-115
1.10
U
Nickel
204
1.00
ug/L
200
102
85-115
Zinc
219
5.00
ug/L
200
109
85-115
Matrix Spike (7317020-MS1)
Prepared: 10/17/2017 10:57 Analyzed: 10/20/2017 11:06
Source: CA15072-03
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analvte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC
Limits RPD
Limit
Notes
Copper
206
1.00
ug/L
200
3.28
101
70-130
Lead
189
1.00
ug/L
200
1.10
94
70-130
Nickel
198
1.00
ug/L
200
1.46
98
70-130
Zinc
221
5.00
ug/L
200
7.68
107
70-130
Matrix Spike Dup (7117020-MSDI)
Prepared: 10/17/2017 10:57 Analyzed: 10/20/2017 11:10
Source: CA15072-03
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analyte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC
Limits RPD
Limit
Notes
Copper
203
1.00
ug/L
200
3.28
100
70-130 1
30
Lead
186
1.00
ug/L
200
1.10
92
70-130 2
30
Nickel
195
1.00
ug/L
200
1.46
97
70-130 2
30
Zinc
217
5.00
ug/L
200
7.68
104
70-130 2
30
Post Spike (7717020-PS3)
Prepared: 10/17/2017 10:57 Analyzed: 10/20/2017 11:14
Source: CAI5072-03
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analyte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC
Limits RPD
Limit
Notes
Copper
0.20
0.001
mg/L
0.200
0.003
100
75-125
Lead
0.18
0.001
mg/L
0.200
0.001
91
75-125
Nickel
0.193
0.001
mg/L
0.200
0.001
96
75-125
Zinc
0.21
0.005
mg/L
0.200
0.008
103
75-125
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods
- Quality Control
Batch 7118007 - EPA 3005A
Blank (7318007-BLK3)
Prepared: 10/18/2017 08:10 Analyzed: 10/18/2017 14:23
Spike Source %REC RPD
Analyte
Result
Flaq
POL
Units
Level Result %REC Limits RPD Limit Notes
Copper
0.10
U
1.00
ug/L
Lead
0.13
U
1.00
ug/L
Nickel
0.220
U
1.00
ug/L
Zinc
1.10
U
5.00
ug/L
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 7 Of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
QUALITY CONTROL DATA
Metals (Dissolved) by EPA 200 Series Methods - Quality Control
Batch 7718007 - EPA 3005A - Continued
LCS (7118007-BS3) Prepared: 10/18/2017 08:10 Analyzed: 10/18/2017 14:30
Source: CA15950-06
Analyte
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Result Flao POL
0.19
0.001
0.18
0.001
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analyte
Result Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC Limits RPD
Limit Notes
Copper
214
1.00
ug/L
200
0.200
107 85-115
93
Lead
206
1.00
ug/L
200
75-125
103 85-115
Nickel
202
1.00
ug/L
200
101 85-115
Zinc
217
5.00
ug/L
200
108 85-115
Matrix Spike (7718007 -MSI)
Prepared:
10/18/2017
08:10 Analyzed: 10/18/2017 14:34
Source: CA15950-06
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analyte
Result Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC Limits RPD
Limit Notes
Copper
193
1.00
ug/L
200
0.52
96 70-130
Lead
179
1.00
ug/L
200
0.13 U
89 70-130
Nickel
193
1.00
ug/L
200
0.220 U
96 70-130
Zinc
219
5.00
ug/L
200
6.64
106 70-130
Matrix Spike Dup (7318007-MSDI)
Prepared:
10/18/2017
08:10 Analyzed: 10/18/2017 14:38
Source: CA15950-06
Spike
Source
%REC
RPD
Analvte
Result Flaq
POL
Units
Level
Result
%REC Limits RPD
Limit Notes
Copper
195
1.00
ug/L
200
0.52
97 70-130 1
30
Lead
183
1.00
ug/L
200
0.13 U
92 70-130 3
30
Nickel
194
1.00
ug/L
200
0.220 U
97 70-130 0.6
30
Zinc
215
5.00
ug/L
200
6.64
104 70-130 2
30
Post Spike (7]18007-PS3)
Prepared:
10/18/2017
08:10 Analyzed: 10/18/2017 14:41
Source: CA15950-06
Analyte
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Result Flao POL
0.19
0.001
0.18
0.001
0.186
0.001
0.21
0.005
RPD
Limit Notes
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 8 Of 12
Spike
Source
%REC
Units
Level
Result
%REC
Limits RPD
mg/L
0.200
0.0005
92
75-125
mg/L
0.200
-0.000005
90
75-125
mg/L
0.200
0.00007
93
75-125
mg/L
0.200
0.007
100
75-125
RPD
Limit Notes
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 8 Of 12

(� �Eo
www.encolabs.com
FLAGS/NOTES AND DEFINITIONS
B The analyte was detected in the associated method blank.
D The sample was analyzed at dilution.
J The reported value is between the laboratory method detection limit (MDL) and the laboratory method
reporting limit (MRL), adjusted for actual sample preparation data and moisture content, where applicable.
U The analyte was analyzed for but not detected to the level shown, adjusted for actual sample preparation
data and moisture content, where applicable.
E The concentration indicated for this analyte is an estimated value above the calibration range of the
instrument. This value is considered an estimate.
MRL Method Reporting Limit. The MRL is roughly equivalent to the practical quantitation limit (PQL) and is
based on the low point of the calibration curve, when applicable, sample preparation factor, dilution
factor, and, in the case of soil samples, moisture content.
PQL PQL: Practical Quantitation Limit.
N The analysis indicates the presence of an analyte for which there is presumptive evidence (85% or greater
confidence) to make a "tentative identification".
P Greater than 25% concentration difference was observed between the primary and secondary GC column.
The lower concentration is reported.
FINAL This report relates only to the sample as received by the laboratory, and may only be reproduced in full. I Page 9 of Z

-O 0
r
m
3
3
m
v
V� N
p �
m
z
�
3
m
?)
m
y
�
a
a
m
3,
a
-o-
v c m CD
m
O
�m
\ m c
m
0
m
0
X
o
m 3 � Q
3
a
0
Q
C
8
�
3
S
�
N
�0
c
S
a
c
S
a
c,
S
a
m
a)
c
m
3
a
N
0
<
Q
T
d
En
Paae 10 of 12
0
o
A o
3
3
W 3
Q
31
�
m
fD
31
m
tD
a
' D
m
m
(D
n
a
O
D 0
CD m
d m
Q
m
a
3
3
3
C
M
w
n
w
CD
m d d� r� a n
< V a
a 0
v to e m y
1 m N z
�� � j
3 N. z
a p -moi _,.i
m�
C�>� � om �SE-
o � o .
d
ra� a s 3
n �
� A o
Rj
a a
0 0 0 0 on
Oj d V
0 N
cn r
w m
w
O N O
ao
P 0 o��
d
o
n
ET
(P
O
P -
O
3 O A
�cC► c+'CC�
(° o
eu A
c
ro o m
a - O
N K
�1 of m m.
.. r
KN
m
0 r rn 0
�1 t1 U � 01 sy A6�
u
y
ti
:7
� a
7 �
D
O z
� D
(nm C7
0
m .0 o v a
n C t0 N f
O 0 O
a N p
N A m N
CL x
n D a
O m N
O N W
N �
r
m
�
w
o
CMD
cn
(`\
-o-
v c m CD
_0
O
\ m c
m
0
m
X
C/)
m 3 � Q
3
CD
Q
C
�N
m
7
Q
d
En
Paae 10 of 12

Sample Preservation Verification
ENCO Cary
0
Work Order:
CA15950
Project:
Camp Lejeune
Client:
AH Environmental Consultants (AH001)
Project #:
[none]
Logged In:
16 -Oct -17 09:53
Logged By:
John C King
CA15950-01
Cont
Type
Pres (pH) ,
Requirement
pH Checked /
, In Control
pH Adjusted Date/Time
Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
A
250mLP+HNO3
<2
`P' / N / NA
Y / / NA
L,
CAI 5950-02
Cont
T e
yP
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked/
In Control
Date/Time
PH Adjusted Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
A
250mLP+HNO3
<2
)/ N / NA
"Y / / NA
CAI 5950-03
Cont
T e
yP
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked/
In Control
Date/Tirne
PH Adjusted Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
A
250mLP+HNO3
<2
Y / N / NA
Y /Uq / NA
CAI 5950-04
Cont
T e
yP
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked/
In Control
Date/Time
PH Adjusted Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
A
250mLP+HNO3
<2
J / N / NA
Y NA
CAI 5950-05
Cont
Type
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked/
In Control
pH Adjusted Date/Time
Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
A
250mLP+HNO3
<2
/ N / NA
Y / to / NA
CAI 5950-06
Cont
T e
yP
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked/
In Control
Date/Time
PH Adjusted Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
B
250mLP+HNO3 [F]
<2
Y / N / NA
Y / N / M.
CAI 5950-07
Cont
Type
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked /
In Control
pH Adjusted Date/Time
Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
B
250mLP+HNO3 [F]
<2
Y / N / �14
Y / N / A
CA15950-08
Cont
yP
Type
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked !
In Control
Date/Time
PH Adjusted Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
B
250mLP+HNO3 [F]
<2
Y / N / A
Y / N / Nr
CAI 5950-09
Cont
Type
Pres (pH)
Requirement
pH Checked /
In Control
pH Adjusted Date/Time
Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
B
250mLP+HNO3 [F]
<2
Y / N / bA
Y / N /
Page 11 of 12
age 1 0

Sample Preservation Verification
ENCO Cary
ENCO-�
Work Order: CA15950 Project: Camp Lejeune
Client: AH Environmental Consultants (AH001) Project #: [none]
Logged In: 16 -Oct -17 09:53
CA15950-10
Logged By: John C King
Cont
Type
Pres (pH) ,
Requirement
pH Checked /
. In Control
pH Adjusted Date/Time
Adjusted
Reagent Used/Comments
B
250mLP+HNO3 [F]
<2
Y/ N/ A
Y/ N/ A
Reagent Name ID
1
2
Rea ent Name ID
3
4
Reaclent Name ID
5
6
Page 12 of :;a 2 c

APPENDIX C
Critical CORMIX Model Prediction Files and
Session Reports
(15 PAGES
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

APPENDIX C.1
Location No. 1 CORM IX Model Reports
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

CORMIX2 PREDICTION FILE:
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
Subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDRO2 Version 10.0.2.0 April 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE DESCRIPTION
Site name/label: Wallace Creek
Design case: Locl_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady _CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\...7\Loci_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady_CORMIX2.prd
Time stamp: 10/24/2017--16:09:29
ENVIRONMENT PARAMETERS (metric units)
Bounded section
BS = 579.12 AS =
1235.61
QA = 29.16
ICHREG=
1
HA = 2.13 HD =
2.74
Tidal Simulation at TIME =
0.800
h
PERIOD= 12.40 h UAmax =
0.091
dUa/dt= 0.030
(m/s)/h
UA = 0.024 F =
0.040
USTAR =0.1669E-02
UW = 0.000 UWSTAR=0.0000E+00
Uniform density environment
STRCND= U RHOAM =
1016.5100
DIFFUSER DISCHARGE PARAMETERS
(metric
units)
Diffuser type: DITYPE=
unidirectional -parallel
BANK = RIGHT DISTB =
213.36
YB1 = 213.36
YB2 =
213.36
LD = 27.43 NOPEN =
10
NRISER= 10
SPAC =
3.05 NPPERR = 1
DO = 0.063 AO =
0.003
HO = 0.61
SUBO
2.13
DOINP = 0.067 CRO =
0.900
Nozzle/port arrangement:
unidirectional_without_fanning
GAMMA = 0.00 THETA =
0.00
SIGMA = 90.00
BETA =
90.00
UO = 3.324 QO =
0.105
QOA =0.1051E+00
RH00 = 999.1000 DRHO0 =0.1741E+02
GPO =0.1680E+00
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS=
ppb
IPOLL = 1 KS =0.0000E+00
KD =0.0000E+00
FLUX VARIABLES - PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH (metric units)
q0 =0.3833E-02 m0 =0.1147E-01
j0 =0.5794E-03
SIGNJO=
1.0
Associated 2-d length scales
(meters)
1Q=B = 0.001 1M =
1.65
lm = 22.87
lmp = 99999.00 lbp =
99999.00
la = 99999.00
FLUX VARIABLES - ENTIRE DIFFUSER
(metric
units)
QO =0.1051E+00 MO =0.3145E+00
JO =0.1589E-01
Associated 3-d length scales
(meters)
LQ = 0.06 LM =
3.33
Lm = 25.05
Lb =
1343.63
Imp = 99999.00
Lbp =
99999.00
Tidal: Tu =
0.5736 h
Lu = 34.937
Lmin =
6.464
NON -DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 140.84
PL =
79.57
(slot) (port/nozzle)
RECOMPUTED SOURCE CONDITIONS
FOR RISER
GROUPS:
Properties of riser group with
1 ports/nozzles each:
UO 3.324 DO =
0.063
AO = 0.003
THETA
0.00
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 140.84
(slot) (riser group)
FLOW CLASSIFICATION
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2 Flow class (CORMIX2) = MU4 2
2 Applicable layer depth HS = 2.74 2
2 Limiting Dilution S=QA/Q0= 278.32 2
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION / REGION OF INTEREST PARAMETERS
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS= ppb
NTOX = 0
NSTD = 1 CSTD =0.1000E+O1
REGMZ = 0
XINT = 5792.00 XMAX = 5792.00
X -Y -Z COORDINATE SYSTEM:
ORIGIN is located at the bottom and the diffuser mid -point:
213.36 m from the RIGHT bank/shore.
X-axis points downstream, Y-axis points to left, Z-axis points upward.
NSTEP = 50 display intervals per module
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
Due to complex near -field motions: EQUIVALENT SLOT DIFFUSER (2-D) GEOMETRY
Profile definitions:
BV = Gaussian 1/e (370) half -width, in vertical plane normal to trajectory
BH top -hat half -width, in horizontal plane normal to trajectory
S hydrodynamic centerline dilution

C = centerline concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
Uc = Local centerline excess velocity (above ambient)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH UC IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 3.324 .00000E+00
END OF MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS-FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
Because of the strong ambient current the diffuser plume of this crossflowing
discharge gets RAPIDLY DEFLECTED.
A near-field zone is formed that is VERTICALLY FULLY MIXED over the entire
layer depth. Full mixing is achieved at a downstream distance of about
five (5) layer depths.
Profile definitions:
BV layer depth (vertically mixed)
BH = top-hat half-width, measured horizontally in Y-direction
S = hydrodynamic average (bulk) dilution
C = average (bulk) concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 .00000E+00
0.55 2.29 0.64 4.6 0.216E+01 0.11 13.88 .23247E+02
1.10 4.57 0.67 6.0 0.166E+01 0.22 14.05 .46495E+02
1.65 6.86 0.70 7.1 0.142E+01 0.33 14.22 .69742E+02
2.19 9.15 0.73 7.9 0.127E+01 0.44 14.39 .92990E+02
2.74 11.44 0.76 8.6 0.117E+01 0.55 14.56 .11624E+03
3.29 13.72 0.79 9.2 0.109E+01 0.66 14.73 .13948E+03
3.84 16.01 0.82 9.7 0.103E+01 0.77 14.90 .16273E+03
** WATER QUALITY STANDARD OR CCC HAS BEEN FOUND **
The pollutant concentration in the plume falls below water quality standard
or CCC value of 0.100E+01 in the current prediction interval.
This is the spatial extent of concentrations exceeding the water quality
standard or CCC value.
4.39 18.30 0.85 10.2 0.985E+00 0.88 15.06 .18598E+03
4.94 20.59 0.88 10.6 0.945E+00 0.99 15.23 .20923E+03
5.49 22.87 0.91 11.0 0.911E+00 1.10 15.40 .23247E+03
6.04 25.16 0.94 11.3 0.882E+00 1.21 15.57 .25572E+03
6.58 27.45 0.98 11.7 0.857E+00 1.32 15.74 .27897E+03
7.13 29.74 1.01 12.0 0.835E+00 1.43 15.91 .30222E+03
7.68 32.02 1.04 12.3 0.815E+00 1.54 16.08 .32546E+03
8.23 34.31 1.07 12.5 0.797E+00 1.65 16.24 .34871E+03
8.78 36.60 1.10 12.8 0.781E+00 1.76 16.41 .37196E+03
9.33 38.89 1.13 13.1 0.766E+00 1.87 16.58 .39521E+03
9.88 41.17 1.16 13.3 0.752E+00 1.98 16.75 .41845E+03
10.42 43.46 1.19 13.5 0.740E+00 2.09 16.92 .44170E+03
10.82 45.10 1.21 13.7 0.731E+00 2.16 17.04
Cumulative travel time = 458.3663 sec ( 0.13 hrs)
CORMIX prediction has been TERMINATED at last prediction interval.
Limiting time due to TIDAL REVERSAL has been reached.
END OF MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS-FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** End of NEAR-FIELD REGION (NFR) **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORMIX2: Multipart Diffuser Discharges End of Prediction File
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222

CORMIX SESSION REPORT:
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDR02:Version-10.0.2.0 April,2017
SITE NAME/LABEL: Wallace Creek
DESIGN CASE: Locl PosBuoy 2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\119-WE15 Camp Lejeune Membrane WTP Discharge Permitting\CORMIX\October 2017\LOCI POSBUoy
2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2.prd
Using subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
Start of session: 10/24/2017--16:06:17
SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA:
AMBIENT PARAMETERS:
Cross-section
= bounded
Width
BS
= 579.12 m
Channel regularity
ICHREG
= 1
Ambient flowrate
QA
= 29.16 m^3/s
Average depth
HA
= 2.13 m
Depth at discharge
HD
= 2.74 m
Darcy -Weisbach friction factor
F
= 0.04
Wind velocity
UW
= 0 m/s
TIDAL SIMULATION at time
Tsim
= 0.8 hours
Instantaneous ambient velocity
UA
= 0.0236 m/s
Maximum tidal velocity
UaMAX
= 0.0915 m/s
Rate of tidal reversal
dUA/dt =
0.0295 (m/s)/hour
Period of reversal
T
= 12.4 hours
Stratification Type
STRCND
= U
Surface density
RHOAS
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
Bottom density
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RHOAB
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
DISCHARGE PARAMETERS:
Submerged Multiport Diffuser Discharge
Diffuser type
DITYPE
= unidirectional parallel
Diffuser length
LD
= 27.43 m
Nearest bank
= right
Diffuser endpoints
YB1
= 213.36 m; YB2 = 213.36 m
Number of openings
NOPEN
= 10
Number of Risers
NRISER
= 10
Ports/Nozzles per Riser
NPPERR
= 1
Spacing between risers/openings SPAC
= 3.05 m
Port/Nozzle diameter
DO
= 0.0635 m
with contraction ratio
= 0.9
Equivalent slot width
BO
= 0.0010 m
Total area of openings
TAO
= 0.0316 m^2
Discharge velocity
UO
= 3.32 m/s
Total discharge flowrate
QO
= 0.10515 m^3/s
Discharge port height
HO
= 0.61 m
Nozzle arrangement
RETYPE
= unidirectional without fanning
Diffuser alignment angle
GAMMA
= 0 deg
Vertical discharge angle
THETA
= 0 deg
Actual Vertical discharge
angle THEAC
= 0 deg
Horizontal discharge angle
SIGMA
= 90 deg
Relative orientation angle
BETA
= 90 deg
Discharge density
RHOO
= 999.1000 kg/m^3
Density difference
DRHO
= 17.4100 kg/m^3
Buoyant acceleration
GPO
= 0.168 m/s^2
Discharge concentration
CO
= 10 ppb
Surface heat exchange coeff.
KS
= 0 m/s
Coefficient of decay
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
KD
= 0 /s
FLUX VARIABLES PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH:
Discharge (volume flux)
qO
= 0.003833 m^2/s
Momentum flux
m0
= 0.012740 m^3/s^2
Buoyancy flux
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
j0
= 0.000644 m^3/s^3
DISCHARGE/ENVIRONMENT LENGTH
SCALES:
LQ 0.00 m Lm =
22.87 m
LM 1.65 m
lm' = 99999 m Lb'
= 99999 m
La = 99999 m
UNSTEADY TIDAL SCALES:
To = 0.5736 hours Lu
= 34.94 m
Lmin= 6.46 m
(These refer to the actual
discharge/environment length scales.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NON-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS:
Slot Froude number
FRO =
251.73
Port/nozzle Froude number
FRDO
= 32.19
Velocity ratio
R
= 140.84
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION ZONE / AREA OF INTEREST PARAMETERS:
Toxic discharge = no
Water quality standard specified = yes
Water quality standard CSTD = 1 ppb
Regulatory mixing zone = no
Region of interest = 5792 m downstream
HYDRODYNAMIC CLASSIFICATION:
--------------------------
I FLOW CLASS = MU4 I
------------------------
This flow configuration applies to a layer corresponding to the full water

depth at the discharge site.
Applicable layer depth = water depth = 2.74 m
Limiting Dilution S = (QA/QO)+ 1.0 = 278.3
MIXING ZONE EVALUATION (hydrodynamic and regulatory summary):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Y-Z Coordinate system:
Origin is located at the BOTTOM below the port/diffuser center:
213.36 m from the right bank/shore.
Number of display steps NSTEP = 50 per module.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEAR-FIELD REGION (NFR) CONDITIONS :
Note: The NFR is the zone of strong initial mixing. It has no regulatory
implication. However, this information may be useful for the discharge
designer because the mixing in the NFR is usually sensitive to the
discharge design conditions.
Pollutant concentration at NFR edge c = 0.7278 ppb
Dilution at edge of NFR s = 13.7
NFR Location: x = 27.43 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 114.37 m
z = 2.74 m
NFR plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 22.14 m
thickness (bv) = 2.74 m
Cumulative travel time: 458.3663 sec.
WARNING:
The LIMITING DILUTION (given by ambient flow/discharge ratio) is = 0
This value is below the computed dilution of 13.74 at the end of the
Near Field Region (NFR). Mixing for this discharge configuration is
constrained by the ambient flow.
Please carefully review the prediction file for additional warnings and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buoyancy assessment:
The effluent density is less than the surrounding ambient water
density at the discharge level.
Therefore, the effluent is POSITIVELY BUOYANT and will tend to rise towards
the surface.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Near-field instability behavior:
The diffuser flow will experience instabilities with full vertical mixing
in the near -field.
There may be benthic impact of high pollutant concentrations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR-FIELD MIXING SUMMARY:
Plume becomes vertically fully mixed ALREADY IN NEAR -FIELD at 0 m
downstream and continues as vertically mixed into the far -field.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLUME BANK CONTACT SUMMARY:
Plume in bounded section does not contact bank.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNSTEADY TIDAL ASSESSMENT:
Because of the unsteadiness of the ambient current during the tidal
reversal, CORMIX predictions have been TERMINATED at:
x = 10.82 m
y = 45.10 m
z = 1.21 m.
For this condition AFTER TIDAL REVERSAL, mixed water from the previous
half -cycle becomes re -entrained into the near field of the discharge,
increasing pollutant concentrations compared to steady-state predictions.
A pool of mixed water formed at slack tide will be advected downstream
in this phase.
************************ TOXIC DILUTION ZONE SUMMARY ************************
No TDZ was specified for this simulation.
REGULATORY MIXING ZONE SUMMARY *****•*+*+*+*+*+*+**.*+
No RMZ has been specified.
However:
The ambient water quality standard was encountered at the following
plume position:
Water quality standard = 1 ppb
Corresponding dilution s = 10.0
Plume location: x = 4.21 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 17.56 m
z = 0.84 m
Plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 15.01 m
thickness (bv) = 0.84 m
********************* FINAL DESIGN ADVICE AND COMMENTS **********************
CORMIX2 uses the TWO-DIMENSIONAL SLOT DIFFUSER CONCEPT to represent
the actual three-dimensional diffuser geometry. Thus, it approximates
the details of the merging process of the individual jets from each
port/nozzle.
In the present design, the spacing between adjacent ports/nozzles
(or riser assemblies) is of the order of, or less than, the local
water depth so that the slot diffuser approximation holds well.
Nevertheless, if this is a final design, the user is advised to use a
final CORMIXI (single port discharge) analysis, with discharge data
for an individual diffuser jet/plume, in order to compare to

the present near -field prediction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMINDER: The user must take note that HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING by any known
technique is NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE.
Extensive comparison with field and laboratory data has shown that the
CORMIX predictions on dilutions and concentrations (with associated
plume geometries) are reliable for the majority of cases and are accurate
to within about +-50o (standard deviation).
As a further safeguard, CORMIX will not give predictions whenever it judges
the design configuration as highly complex and uncertain for prediction.

APPENDIX C.2
Location No. 2 CORM IX Model Reports
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

CORMIX2 PREDICTION FILE:
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
Subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDRO2 Version 10.0.2.0 April 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE DESCRIPTION
Site name/label: Wallace Creek
Design case: Loc2_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady _CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\...7\Loc2_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady_CORMIX2.prd
Time stamp: 10/24/2017--16:09:06
ENVIRONMENT PARAMETERS (metric units)
Bounded section
BS = 335.28 AS =
613.16
QA = 16.28
ICHREG=
1
HA = 1.83 HD =
2.13
Tidal Simulation at TIME =
0.900
h
PERIOD= 12.40 h UAmax =
0.091
dUa/dt= 0.030
(m/s)/h
UA = 0.027 F =
0.040
USTAR =0.1877E-02
UW = 0.000 UWSTAR=0.0000E+00
Uniform density environment
STRCND= U RHOAM =
1016.5100
DIFFUSER DISCHARGE PARAMETERS
(metric
units)
Diffuser type: DITYPE=
unidirectional -parallel
BANK = RIGHT DISTB =
91.44
YB1 = 91.44
YB2 =
91.44
LD = 27.43 NOPEN =
10
NRISER= 10
SPAC =
3.05 NPPERR = 1
DO = 0.063 AO =
0.003
HO = 0.61
SUBO
1.52
DOINP = 0.067 CRO =
0.900
Nozzle/port arrangement:
unidirectional_without_fanning
GAMMA = 0.00 THETA =
0.00
SIGMA = 90.00
BETA =
90.00
UO = 3.324 QO =
0.105
QOA =0.1051E+00
RH00 = 999.1000 DRHO0 =0.1741E+02
GPO =0.1680E+00
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS=
ppb
IPOLL = 1 KS =0.0000E+00
KD =0.0000E+00
FLUX VARIABLES - PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH (metric units)
q0 =0.3833E-02 m0 =0.1147E-01
j0 =0.5794E-03
SIGNJO=
1.0
Associated 2-d length scales
(meters)
1Q=B = 0.001 1M =
1.65
lm = 18.07
lmp = 99999.00 lbp =
99999.00
la = 99999.00
FLUX VARIABLES - ENTIRE DIFFUSER
(metric
units)
QO =0.1051E+00 MO =0.3145E+00
JO =0.1589E-01
Associated 3-d length scales
(meters)
LQ = 0.06 LM =
3.33
Lm = 22.27
Lb =
943.68
Imp = 99999.00
Lbp =
99999.00
Tidal: Tu =
0.5736 h
Lu = 34.937
Lmin =
6.464
NON -DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 125.19
PL =
79.57
(slot) (port/nozzle)
RECOMPUTED SOURCE CONDITIONS
FOR RISER
GROUPS:
Properties of riser group with
1 ports/nozzles each:
UO 3.324 DO =
0.063
AO = 0.003
THETA
0.00
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 125.19
(slot) (riser group)
FLOW CLASSIFICATION
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2 Flow class (CORMIX2) = MU4 2
2 Applicable layer depth HS = 2.13 2
2 Limiting Dilution S=QA/Q0= 155.82 2
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION / REGION OF INTEREST PARAMETERS
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS= ppb
NTOX = 0
NSTD = 1 CSTD =0.1000E+O1
REGMZ = 0
XINT = 3353.00 XMAX = 3353.00
X -Y -Z COORDINATE SYSTEM:
ORIGIN is located at the bottom and the diffuser mid -point:
91.44 m from the RIGHT bank/shore.
X-axis points downstream, Y-axis points to left, Z-axis points upward.
NSTEP = 50 display intervals per module
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
Due to complex near -field motions: EQUIVALENT SLOT DIFFUSER (2-D) GEOMETRY
Profile definitions:
BV = Gaussian 1/e (370) half -width, in vertical plane normal to trajectory
BH top -hat half -width, in horizontal plane normal to trajectory
S hydrodynamic centerline dilution

C = centerline concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
Uc = Local centerline excess velocity (above ambient)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH Uc IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 3.324 .00000E+00
END OF MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS -FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
Because of the strong ambient current the diffuser plume of this crossflowing
discharge gets RAPIDLY DEFLECTED.
A near -field zone is formed that is VERTICALLY FULLY MIXED over the entire
layer depth. Full mixing is achieved at a downstream distance of about
five (5) layer depths.
Profile definitions:
BV layer depth (vertically mixed)
BH = top -hat half -width, measured horizontally in Y -direction
S = hydrodynamic average (bulk) dilution
C = average (bulk) concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 .00000E+00
0.49 2.32 0.63 4.2 0.239E+01 0.10 13.89 .18368E+02
0.98 4.65 0.65 5.4 0.184E+01 0.20 14.06 .36737E+02
1.46 6.97 0.67 6.3 0.158E+01 0.29 14.24 .55105E+02
1.95 9.30 0.69 7.0 0.142E+01 0.39 14.41 .73473E+02
2.44 11.62 0.71 7.6 0.131E+01 0.49 14.58 .91842E+02
2.93 13.94 0.74 8.2 0.122E+01 0.59 14.76 .11021E+03
3.41 16.27 0.76 8.6 0.116E+01 0.68 14.93 .12858E+03
3.90 18.59 0.78 9.0 0.111E+01 0.78 15.10 .14695E+03
4.39 20.91 0.80 9.4 0.106E+01 0.88 15.28 .16532E+03
4.88 23.24 0.82 9.8 0.103E+01 0.98 15.45 .18368E+03
** WATER QUALITY STANDARD OR OCT HAS BEEN FOUND **
The pollutant concentration in the plume falls below water quality standard
or CCC value of 0.100E+01 in the current prediction interval.
This is the spatial extent of concentrations exceeding the water quality
standard or CCC value.
5.36 25.56 0.84 10.1 0.994E+00 1.07 15.62 .20205E+03
5.85 27.89 0.86 10.4 0.966E+00 1.17 15.80 .22042E+03
6.34 30.21 0.88 10.6 0.941E+00 1.27 15.97 .23879E+03
6.83 32.53 0.90 10.9 0.919E+00 1.37 16.14 .25716E+03
7.32 34.86 0.92 11.1 0.899E+00 1.46 16.32 .27553E+03
7.80 37.18 0.94 11.4 0.881E+00 1.56 16.49 .29389E+03
8.29 39.50 0.96 11.6 0.864E+00 1.66 16.66 .31226E+03
8.78 41.83 0.99 11.8 0.849E+00 1.76 16.84 .33063E+03
9.27 44.15 1.01 12.0 0.835E+00 1.85 17.01 .34900E+03
9.75 46.48 1.03 12.2 0.822E+00 1.95 17.18 .36737E+03
10.24 48.80 1.05 12.4 0.810E+00 2.05 17.36 .38574E+03
10.73 51.12 1.07 12.5 0.798E+00 2.13 17.53 .40410E+03
11.22 53.45 1.07 12.7 0.787E+00 2.13 17.70 .42247E+03
11.70 55.77 1.07 12.9 0.777E+00 2.13 17.88 .44084E+03
12.19 58.09 1.07 13.0 0.767E+00 2.13 18.05 .45921E+03
12.68 60.42 1.07 13.2 0.758E+00 2.13 18.22 .47758E+03
13.17 62.74 1.07 13.3 0.749E+00 2.13 18.40 .49595E+03
13.66 65.07 1.07 13.5 0.741E+00 2.13 18.57 .51431E+03
13.69 65.24 1.07 13.5 0.740E+00 2.13 18.58
Cumulative travel time = 515.6620 sec ( 0.14 hrs)
CORMIX prediction has been TERMINATED at last prediction interval.
Limiting time due to TIDAL REVERSAL has been reached.
END OF MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS -FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** End of NEAR -FIELD REGION (NFR) **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORMIX2: Multipart Diffuser Discharges End of Prediction File
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222

CORMIX SESSION REPORT:
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDRO2:Version-10.0.2.0 April,2017
SITE NAME/LABEL: Wallace Creek
DESIGN CASE: Loc2 PosBuoy 2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\119-WE15 Camp Lejeune Membrane WTP Discharge Permitting\CORMIX\October 2017\Loc2 POSBUoy
2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2.prd
Using subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
Start of session: 10/24/2017--16:07:09
SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA:
AMBIENT PARAMETERS:
Cross-section
= bounded
Width
BS
= 335.28 m
Channel regularity
ICHREG
= 1
Ambient flowrate
QA
= 16.28 m^3/s
Average depth
HA
= 1.83 m
Depth at discharge
HD
= 2.13 m
Darcy -Weisbach friction factor
F
= 0.04
Wind velocity
UW
= 0 m/s
TIDAL SIMULATION at time
Tsim
= 0.9 hours
Instantaneous ambient velocity
UA
= 0.0266 m/s
Maximum tidal velocity
UaMAX
= 0.0915 m/s
Rate of tidal reversal
dUA/dt =
0.0295 (m/s)/hour
Period of reversal
T
= 12.4 hours
Stratification Type
STRCND
= U
Surface density
RHOAS
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
Bottom density
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RHOAB
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
DISCHARGE PARAMETERS:
Submerged Multiport Diffuser Discharge
Diffuser type
DITYPE
= unidirectional parallel
Diffuser length
LD
= 27.43 m
Nearest bank
= right
Diffuser endpoints
YB1
= 91.44 m; YB2 = 91.44 m
Number of openings
NOPEN
= 10
Number of Risers
NRISER
= 10
Ports/Nozzles per Riser
NPPERR
= 1
Spacing between risers/openings SPAC
= 3.05 m
Port/Nozzle diameter
DO
= 0.0635 m
with contraction ratio
= 0.9
Equivalent slot width
BO
= 0.0010 m
Total area of openings
TAO
= 0.0316 m^2
Discharge velocity
UO
= 3.32 m/s
Total discharge flowrate
QO
= 0.10515 m^3/s
Discharge port height
HO
= 0.61 m
Nozzle arrangement
RETYPE
= unidirectional without fanning
Diffuser alignment angle
GAMMA
= 0 deg
Vertical discharge angle
THETA
= 0 deg
Actual Vertical discharge
angle THEAC
= 0 deg
Horizontal discharge angle
SIGMA
= 90 deg
Relative orientation angle
BETA
= 90 deg
Discharge density
RHOO
= 999.1000 kg/m^3
Density difference
DRHO
= 17.4100 kg/m^3
Buoyant acceleration
GPO
= 0.168 m/s^2
Discharge concentration
CO
= 10 ppb
Surface heat exchange coeff.
KS
= 0 m/s
Coefficient of decay
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
KD
= 0 /s
FLUX VARIABLES PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH:
Discharge (volume flux)
q0
= 0.003833 m^2/s
Momentum flux
m0
= 0.012740 m^3/s^2
Buoyancy flux
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
j0
= 0.000644 m^3/s^3
DISCHARGE/ENVIRONMENT LENGTH
SCALES:
LQ 0.00 m Lm =
18.07 m
LM 1.65 m
lm' = 99999 m Lb'
= 99999 m
La = 99999 m
UNSTEADY TIDAL SCALES:
To = 0.5736 hours Lu
= 34.94 m
Lmin= 6.46 m
(These refer to the actual
discharge/environment length scales.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NON-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS:
Slot Froude number
FRO =
251.73
Port/nozzle Froude number
FRDO
= 32.19
Velocity ratio
R
= 125.19
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION ZONE / AREA OF INTEREST PARAMETERS:
Toxic discharge = no
Water quality standard specified = yes
Water quality standard CSTD = 1 ppb
Regulatory mixing zone = no
Region of interest = 3353 m downstream
HYDRODYNAMIC CLASSIFICATION:
--------------------------
I FLOW CLASS = MU4 I
------------------------
This flow configuration applies to a layer corresponding to the full water

depth at the discharge site.
Applicable layer depth = water depth = 2.13 m
Limiting Dilution S = (QA/QO)+ 1.0 = 155.8
MIXING ZONE EVALUATION (hydrodynamic and regulatory summary):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Y-Z Coordinate system:
Origin is located at the BOTTOM below the port/diffuser center:
91.44 m from the right bank/shore.
Number of display steps NSTEP = 50 per module.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEAR-FIELD REGION (NFR) CONDITIONS :
Note: The NFR is the zone of strong initial mixing. It has no regulatory
implication. However, this information may be useful for the discharge
designer because the mixing in the NFR is usually sensitive to the
discharge design conditions.
Pollutant concentration at NFR edge c = 0.7327 ppb
Dilution at edge of NFR s = 13.6
NFR Location: x = 24.38 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 116.19 m
z = 2.13 m
NFR plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 22.38 m
thickness (bv) = 2.13 m
Cumulative travel time: 515.6620 sec.
WARNING:
The LIMITING DILUTION (given by ambient flow/discharge ratio) is = 0
This value is below the computed dilution of 13.65 at the end of the
Near Field Region (NFR). Mixing for this discharge configuration is
constrained by the ambient flow.
Please carefully review the prediction file for additional warnings and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buoyancy assessment:
The effluent density is less than the surrounding ambient water
density at the discharge level.
Therefore, the effluent is POSITIVELY BUOYANT and will tend to rise towards
the surface.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Near-field instability behavior:
The diffuser flow will experience instabilities with full vertical mixing
in the near -field.
There may be benthic impact of high pollutant concentrations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR-FIELD MIXING SUMMARY:
Plume becomes vertically fully mixed ALREADY IN NEAR -FIELD at 0 m
downstream and continues as vertically mixed into the far -field.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLUME BANK CONTACT SUMMARY:
Plume in bounded section does not contact bank.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNSTEADY TIDAL ASSESSMENT:
Because of the unsteadiness of the ambient current during the tidal
reversal, CORMIX predictions have been TERMINATED at:
x = 13.69 m
y = 65.24 m
z = 1.07 m.
For this condition AFTER TIDAL REVERSAL, mixed water from the previous
half -cycle becomes re -entrained into the near field of the discharge,
increasing pollutant concentrations compared to steady-state predictions.
A pool of mixed water formed at slack tide will be advected downstream
in this phase.
************************ TOXIC DILUTION ZONE SUMMARY ************************
No TDZ was specified for this simulation.
REGULATORY MIXING ZONE SUMMARY *****•*+*+*+*+*+*+**.*+
No RMZ has been specified.
However:
The ambient water quality standard was encountered at the following
plume position:
Water quality standard = 1 ppb
Corresponding dilution s = 10.0
Plume location: x = 5.27 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 25.10 m
z = 0.84 m
Plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 15.59 m
thickness (bv) = 1.05 m
********************* FINAL DESIGN ADVICE AND COMMENTS **********************
CORMIX2 uses the TWO-DIMENSIONAL SLOT DIFFUSER CONCEPT to represent
the actual three-dimensional diffuser geometry. Thus, it approximates
the details of the merging process of the individual jets from each
port/nozzle.
In the present design, the spacing between adjacent ports/nozzles
(or riser assemblies) is of the order of, or less than, the local
water depth so that the slot diffuser approximation holds well.
Nevertheless, if this is a final design, the user is advised to use a
final CORMIXI (single port discharge) analysis, with discharge data
for an individual diffuser jet/plume, in order to compare to

the present near -field prediction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMINDER: The user must take note that HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING by any known
technique is NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE.
Extensive comparison with field and laboratory data has shown that the
CORMIX predictions on dilutions and concentrations (with associated
plume geometries) are reliable for the majority of cases and are accurate
to within about +-50o (standard deviation).
As a further safeguard, CORMIX will not give predictions whenever it judges
the design configuration as highly complex and uncertain for prediction.

APPENDIX C.3
Location No. 3 CORM IX Model Reports
AH Environmental Engineering, PC

CORMIX2 PREDICTION FILE:
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
Subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDRO2 Version 10.0.2.0 April 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE DESCRIPTION
Site name/label: Wallace Creek
Design case: Loc3_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady _CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\...7\Loc3_PosBuoy_2.4MGD_10port_Unsteady_CORMIX2.prd
Time stamp: 10/24/2017--16:08:32
ENVIRONMENT PARAMETERS (metric units)
Bounded section
BS = 304.80 AS =
464.52
QA = 12.33
ICHREG=
1
HA = 1.52 HD =
1.83
Tidal Simulation at TIME =
0.900
h
PERIOD= 12.40 h UAmax =
0.091
dUa/dt= 0.030
(m/s)/h
UA = 0.027 F =
0.040
USTAR =0.1877E-02
UW = 0.000 UWSTAR=0.0000E+00
Uniform density environment
STRCND= U RHOAM =
1016.5100
DIFFUSER DISCHARGE PARAMETERS
(metric
units)
Diffuser type: DITYPE=
unidirectional -parallel
BANK = RIGHT DISTB =
54.86
YB1 = 54.86
YB2 =
54.86
LD = 27.43 NOPEN =
10
NRISER= 10
SPAC =
3.05 NPPERR = 1
DO = 0.063 AO =
0.003
HO = 0.61
SUBO
1.22
DOINP = 0.067 CRO =
0.900
Nozzle/port arrangement:
unidirectional_without_fanning
GAMMA = 0.00 THETA =
0.00
SIGMA = 90.00
BETA =
90.00
UO = 3.324 QO =
0.105
QOA =0.1051E+00
RH00 = 999.1000 DRHO0 =0.1741E+02
GPO =0.1680E+00
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS=
ppb
IPOLL = 1 KS =0.0000E+00
KD =0.0000E+00
FLUX VARIABLES - PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH (metric units)
q0 =0.3833E-02 m0 =0.1147E-01
j0 =0.5794E-03
SIGNJO=
1.0
Associated 2-d length scales
(meters)
1Q=B = 0.001 1M =
1.65
lm = 18.07
lmp = 99999.00 lbp =
99999.00
la = 99999.00
FLUX VARIABLES - ENTIRE DIFFUSER
(metric
units)
QO =0.1051E+00 MO =0.3145E+00
JO =0.1589E-01
Associated 3-d length scales
(meters)
LQ = 0.06 LM =
3.33
Lm = 22.27
Lb =
943.68
Imp = 99999.00
Lbp =
99999.00
Tidal: Tu =
0.5736 h
Lu = 34.937
Lmin =
6.464
NON -DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 125.19
PL =
79.57
(slot) (port/nozzle)
RECOMPUTED SOURCE CONDITIONS
FOR RISER
GROUPS:
Properties of riser group with
1 ports/nozzles each:
UO 3.324 DO =
0.063
AO = 0.003
THETA
0.00
FRO = 251.73 FRDO =
32.19
R = 125.19
(slot) (riser group)
FLOW CLASSIFICATION
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2 Flow class (CORMIX2) = MU4 2
2 Applicable layer depth HS = 1.83 2
2 Limiting Dilution S=QA/Q0= 118.29 2
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION / REGION OF INTEREST PARAMETERS
CO =0.1000E+02 CUNITS= ppb
NTOX = 0
NSTD = 1 CSTD =0.1000E+O1
REGMZ = 0
XINT = 3050.00 XMAX = 3050.00
X -Y -Z COORDINATE SYSTEM:
ORIGIN is located at the bottom and the diffuser mid -point:
54.86 m from the RIGHT bank/shore.
X-axis points downstream, Y-axis points to left, Z-axis points upward.
NSTEP = 50 display intervals per module
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
Due to complex near -field motions: EQUIVALENT SLOT DIFFUSER (2-D) GEOMETRY
Profile definitions:
BV = Gaussian 1/e (370) half -width, in vertical plane normal to trajectory
BH top -hat half -width, in horizontal plane normal to trajectory
S hydrodynamic centerline dilution

C = centerline concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
Uc = Local centerline excess velocity (above ambient)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH UC IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 3.324 .00000E+00
END OF MOD201: DIFFUSER DISCHARGE MODULE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BEGIN MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS -FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
Because of the strong ambient current the diffuser plume of this crossflowing
discharge gets RAPIDLY DEFLECTED.
A near -field zone is formed that is VERTICALLY FULLY MIXED over the entire
layer depth. Full mixing is achieved at a downstream distance of about
five (5) layer depths.
Profile definitions:
BV layer depth (vertically mixed)
BH = top -hat half -width, measured horizontally in Y -direction
S = hydrodynamic average (bulk) dilution
C = average (bulk) concentration (includes reaction effects, if any)
TT = Cumulative travel time
X Y Z S C BV BH IT
0.00 0.00 0.61 1.0 0.100E+02 0.00 13.72 .00000E+00
0.46 2.71 0.62 4.0 0.249E+01 0.09 13.94 .17220E+02
0.91 5.42 0.64 5.2 0.193E+01 0.18 14.16 .34441E+02
1.37 8.13 0.66 6.0 0.167E+01 0.28 14.38 .51661E+02
1.83 10.84 0.67 6.7 0.150E+01 0.37 14.61 .68881E+02
2.29 13.56 0.69 7.2 0.139E+01 0.46 14.83 .86102E+02
2.74 16.27 0.70 7.7 0.130E+01 0.55 15.05 .10332E+03
3.20 18.98 0.72 8.1 0.123E+01 0.64 15.27 .12054E+03
3.66 21.69 0.73 8.5 0.118E+01 0.73 15.50 .13776E+03
4.11 24.40 0.75 8.8 0.113E+01 0.82 15.72 .15498E+03
4.57 27.11 0.76 9.1 0.110E+01 0.91 15.94 .17220E+03
5.03 29.82 0.78 9.4 0.106E+01 1.01 16.16 .18942E+03
5.49 32.53 0.79 9.7 0.103E+01 1.10 16.39 .20664E+03
5.94 35.24 0.81 9.9 0.101E+01 1.19 16.61 .22386E+03
** WATER QUALITY STANDARD OR CCC HAS BEEN FOUND **
The pollutant concentration in the plume falls below water quality standard
or CCC value of 0.100E+01 in the current prediction interval.
This is the spatial extent of concentrations exceeding the water quality
standard or CCC value.
6.40 37.95 0.82 10.2 0.985E+00 1.28 16.83 .24108E+03
6.86 40.67 0.84 10.4 0.964E+00 1.37 17.05 .25831E+03
7.32 43.38 0.85 10.6 0.945E+00 1.46 17.28 .27553E+03
7.77 46.09 0.87 10.8 0.928E+00 1.55 17.50 .29275E+03
8.23 48.80 0.88 11.0 0.912E+00 1.65 17.72 .30997E+03
8.69 51.51 0.90 11.1 0.897E+00 1.74 17.95 .32719E+03
9.14 54.22 0.91 11.3 0.883E+00 1.83 18.17 .34441E+03
9.60 56.93 0.91 11.5 0.870E+00 1.83 18.39 .36163E+03
10.06 59.64 0.91 11.7 0.858E+00 1.83 18.61 .37885E+03
10.52 62.35 0.91 11.8 0.847E+00 1.83 18.84 .39607E+03
10.97 65.07 0.91 12.0 0.836E+00 1.83 19.06 .41329E+03
11.43 67.78 0.91 12.1 0.825E+00 1.83 19.28 .43051E+03
11.89 70.49 0.91 12.3 0.815E+00 1.83 19.50 .44773E+03
12.34 73.20 0.91 12.4 0.806E+00 1.83 19.73 .46495E+03
12.80 75.91 0.91 12.6 0.796E+00 1.83 19.95 .48217E+03
13.26 78.62 0.91 12.7 0.787E+00 1.83 20.17 .49939E+03
13.69 81.18 0.91 12.8 0.779E+00 1.83 20.38
Cumulative travel time = 515.6620 sec ( 0.14 hrs)
CORMIX prediction has been TERMINATED at last prediction interval.
Limiting time due to TIDAL REVERSAL has been reached.
END OF MOD273: UNIDIRECTIONAL CROSS -FLOWING DIFFUSER (TEE) IN STRONG CURRENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** End of NEAR -FIELD REGION (NFR) **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORMIX2: Multipart Diffuser Discharges End of Prediction File
22222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222

CORMIX SESSION REPORT:
CORMIX MIXING ZONE EXPERT SYSTEM
CORMIX Version 10.OGT
HYDRO2:Version-10.0.2.0 April,2017
SITE NAME/LABEL: Wallace Creek
DESIGN CASE: Loc3 PosBuoy 2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2
FILE NAME: X:\119-WE15 Camp Lejeune Membrane WTP Discharge Permitting\CORMIX\October 2017\Loc3 POSBUoy
2.4MGD 10port Unsteady CORMIX2.prd
Using subsystem CORMIX2: Multiport Diffuser Discharges
Start of session: 10/24/2017--16:07:43
SUMMARY OF INPUT DATA:
AMBIENT PARAMETERS:
Cross-section
= bounded
Width
BS
= 304.80 m
Channel regularity
ICHREG
= 1
Ambient flowrate
QA
= 12.33 m^3/s
Average depth
HA
= 1.52 m
Depth at discharge
HD
= 1.83 m
Darcy -Weisbach friction factor
F
= 0.04
Wind velocity
UW
= 0 m/s
TIDAL SIMULATION at time
Tsim
= 0.9 hours
Instantaneous ambient velocity
UA
= 0.0266 m/s
Maximum tidal velocity
UaMAX
= 0.0915 m/s
Rate of tidal reversal
dUA/dt =
0.0295 (m/s)/hour
Period of reversal
T
= 12.4 hours
Stratification Type
STRCND
= U
Surface density
RHOAS
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
Bottom density
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RHOAB
= 1016.51 kg/m^3
DISCHARGE PARAMETERS:
Submerged Multiport Diffuser Discharge
Diffuser type
DITYPE
= unidirectional parallel
Diffuser length
LD
= 27.43 m
Nearest bank
= right
Diffuser endpoints
YB1
= 54.86 m; YB2 = 54.86 m
Number of openings
NOPEN
= 10
Number of Risers
NRISER
= 10
Ports/Nozzles per Riser
NPPERR
= 1
Spacing between risers/openings SPAC
= 3.05 m
Port/Nozzle diameter
DO
= 0.0635 m
with contraction ratio
= 0.9
Equivalent slot width
BO
= 0.0010 m
Total area of openings
TAO
= 0.0316 m^2
Discharge velocity
UO
= 3.32 m/s
Total discharge flowrate
QO
= 0.10515 m^3/s
Discharge port height
HO
= 0.61 m
Nozzle arrangement
RETYPE
= unidirectional without fanning
Diffuser alignment angle
GAMMA
= 0 deg
Vertical discharge angle
THETA
= 0 deg
Actual Vertical discharge
angle THEAC
= 0 deg
Horizontal discharge angle
SIGMA
= 90 deg
Relative orientation angle
BETA
= 90 deg
Discharge density
RHOO
= 999.1000 kg/m^3
Density difference
DRHO
= 17.4100 kg/m^3
Buoyant acceleration
GPO
= 0.168 m/s^2
Discharge concentration
CO
= 10 ppb
Surface heat exchange coeff.
KS
= 0 m/s
Coefficient of decay
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
KD
= 0 /s
FLUX VARIABLES PER UNIT DIFFUSER
LENGTH:
Discharge (volume flux)
q0
= 0.003833 m^2/s
Momentum flux
m0
= 0.012740 m^3/s^2
Buoyancy flux
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
j0
= 0.000644 m^3/s^3
DISCHARGE/ENVIRONMENT LENGTH
SCALES:
LQ 0.00 m Lm =
18.07 m
LM 1.65 m
lm' = 99999 m Lb'
= 99999 m
La = 99999 m
UNSTEADY TIDAL SCALES:
To = 0.5736 hours Lu
= 34.94 m
Lmin= 6.46 m
(These refer to the actual
discharge/environment length scales.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NON-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS:
Slot Froude number
FRO =
251.73
Port/nozzle Froude number
FRDO
= 32.19
Velocity ratio
R
= 125.19
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIXING ZONE / TOXIC DILUTION ZONE / AREA OF INTEREST PARAMETERS:
Toxic discharge = no
Water quality standard specified = yes
Water quality standard CSTD = 1 ppb
Regulatory mixing zone = no
Region of interest = 3050 m downstream
HYDRODYNAMIC CLASSIFICATION:
--------------------------
I FLOW CLASS = MU4 I
------------------------
This flow configuration applies to a layer corresponding to the full water

depth at the discharge site.
Applicable layer depth = water depth = 1.83 m
Limiting Dilution S = (QA/QO)+ 1.0 = 118.3
MIXING ZONE EVALUATION (hydrodynamic and regulatory summary):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
X-Y-Z Coordinate system:
Origin is located at the BOTTOM below the port/diffuser center:
54.86 m from the right bank/shore.
Number of display steps NSTEP = 50 per module.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEAR-FIELD REGION (NFR) CONDITIONS :
Note: The NFR is the zone of strong initial mixing. It has no regulatory
implication. However, this information may be useful for the discharge
designer because the mixing in the NFR is usually sensitive to the
discharge design conditions.
Pollutant concentration at NFR edge c = 0.7789 ppb
Dilution at edge of NFR s = 12.8
NFR Location: x = 22.86 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 135.55 m
z = 1.83 m
NFR plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 24.85 m
thickness (bv) = 1.83 m
Cumulative travel time: 515.6620 sec.
WARNING:
The LIMITING DILUTION (given by ambient flow/discharge ratio) is = 0
This value is below the computed dilution of 12.84 at the end of the
Near Field Region (NFR). Mixing for this discharge configuration is
constrained by the ambient flow.
Please carefully review the prediction file for additional warnings and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buoyancy assessment:
The effluent density is less than the surrounding ambient water
density at the discharge level.
Therefore, the effluent is POSITIVELY BUOYANT and will tend to rise towards
the surface.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Near-field instability behavior:
The diffuser flow will experience instabilities with full vertical mixing
in the near -field.
There may be benthic impact of high pollutant concentrations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAR-FIELD MIXING SUMMARY:
Plume becomes vertically fully mixed ALREADY IN NEAR -FIELD at 0 m
downstream and continues as vertically mixed into the far -field.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLUME BANK CONTACT SUMMARY:
Plume in bounded section does not contact bank.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNSTEADY TIDAL ASSESSMENT:
Because of the unsteadiness of the ambient current during the tidal
reversal, CORMIX predictions have been TERMINATED at:
x = 13.69 m
y = 81.18 m
z = 0.91 m.
For this condition AFTER TIDAL REVERSAL, mixed water from the previous
half -cycle becomes re -entrained into the near field of the discharge,
increasing pollutant concentrations compared to steady-state predictions.
A pool of mixed water formed at slack tide will be advected downstream
in this phase.
************************ TOXIC DILUTION ZONE SUMMARY ************************
No TDZ was specified for this simulation.
REGULATORY MIXING ZONE SUMMARY *****•*+*+*+*+*+*+**.*+
No RMZ has been specified.
However:
The ambient water quality standard was encountered at the following
plume position:
Water quality standard = 1 ppb
Corresponding dilution s = 10.0
Plume location: x = 6.10 m
(centerline coordinates) y = 36.18 m
z = 0.81 m
Plume dimensions: half -width (bh) = 16.69 m
thickness (bv) = 1.22 m
********************* FINAL DESIGN ADVICE AND COMMENTS **********************
CORMIX2 uses the TWO-DIMENSIONAL SLOT DIFFUSER CONCEPT to represent
the actual three-dimensional diffuser geometry. Thus, it approximates
the details of the merging process of the individual jets from each
port/nozzle.
In the present design, the spacing between adjacent ports/nozzles
(or riser assemblies) is of the order of, or less than, the local
water depth so that the slot diffuser approximation holds well.
Nevertheless, if this is a final design, the user is advised to use a
final CORMIXI (single port discharge) analysis, with discharge data
for an individual diffuser jet/plume, in order to compare to

the present near -field prediction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMINDER: The user must take note that HYDRODYNAMIC MODELING by any known
technique is NOT AN EXACT SCIENCE.
Extensive comparison with field and laboratory data has shown that the
CORMIX predictions on dilutions and concentrations (with associated
plume geometries) are reliable for the majority of cases and are accurate
to within about +-50o (standard deviation).
As a further safeguard, CORMIX will not give predictions whenever it judges
the design configuration as highly complex and uncertain for prediction.