19991003 Ver 1_Complete File_19990910

Wetlands Tracking
Facility Name Price Holdings I
Project Number 99 1003
Project Type purpose of commercial County la nce
Location Gum Creek I r County?
Received From APP COE ID # s Region Winston-Salem
Received Date September 10, 1999 COE Susp Date Reg. Contact Jennifer Frye
Sent to Region Date 9/22/1999 DCM Susp Date AFB I SE I FO
Rcvd Region Date TIP Number Payment Date 9/10/1999
Last Action Date September 24, 2001 More Info Requested Amount Paid- $475.001'
Last Action Withdraw More Info Received Payor Price Holdings
Latitude (ddmmss) 36° 4' 30" Mitigation ? Y Check # 2395
Longitude (ddmmss) 79° 29' 50" I
Length
(feet)
Appr.
RE: DWQ Project No. 991003
Subject: RE: DWQ Project No. 991003
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 13:08:53 -0500
From: "James R. Linville" <[e-mail]>
Organization: NCWRC
To: "'Gray Hauser- <gray.hauserCncmai1.net.-:? Mike Mickey <mike.mickey(a)ncmail.net>
CC: Danny Smith <Danny.SmithC&ncmail.net>
IF THIS IS THE SITE I REMEMBER:
You need to call John Thomas and Jean Manuel with Corps as well. Think
they were involved with initial review and know the previous site
conditions as well. Some other DWQ folks may have seen site. Some fill
had been permitted previously. Dam was breached. Old stream went thru
area in a different direction. Area stream had bullfrog tadpoles and
bulrush/cattails were abundant. Upstream had a long-term sewer leak that
should have been fixed. Seems someone wants to make this into a commercial
shopping center. Area is very important for WQ, habitat and protecting
downstream creek (very stable and pretty a few years ago) from
stormwater/secondary impacts. There should be some fair sized files on
this one in the WSRO. Might be a photo. Permit was issued for parking
spaces on the edge of this for an insurance (?) company.
James Ronald Linville
NCWRC Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
We shall never achieve harmony with
achieve absolute justice or liberty
aspirations, the important thing is
Leopold
the land, any more than we shall
for people. In these higher
not to achieve, but to strive. Aldo
-----Original Message-----
From: Gray Hauser (SMTP:[e-mail])
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 11:32 AM
To: Mike Mickey
Cc: Danny Smith; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: DWQ Project No. 991003
<< File: gray.hauser.vcf >> Ron Linville (now with WRC) did the initial
field work on this site for
DWQ. If there are any questions about the original condition of this site,
he should have the answers. The last time I looked at the site (2-3 years
ago) it was a solid stand of cattails. The site is dry enough now to drive
on due to the lowering of the water table by the excavation of a channel
through the lake bed. The channel is about 3 feet deep. Fill is now being
placed in the lower end of the old lake bed. Since the sedimentation and
erosion control is under the jurisdiction of the City of Burlington local
program, I need to get a clear direction on what may or may not be allowed
in a erosion control plan for this site. By statue, Land Quality or a
delegated local program cannot approve a plan for wetland ditching that
violates other State or Federal law. Thus, the need for a meeting of all
agencies involved with this site.
Mike Mickey wrote:
> Hi Danny,
> This is to follow-up on our, conversation at WSRO last week. It involved
> a complaint I received concerning the ditching of a stream in Alamance
I of 2 5/6/02 1:07 PN
RE: DWQ P;ojccl No 991003
> County. I visited the site on Monday (2/25) and observed that a stream
> through an old lake bed had been ditched to lower the water table.
> Years ago it was a catt.a.il marsh, now it is dried up Soft Needle Rush.
> Land Quality (Gray Hauser & Aaron Otten) looked at the site yesterday
> and said the stream needs to be stabilized and the water level raised.
> DWQ issued a 401 for this site back in 2000. Per the request of the
> owner, the 401 was rescinded on 9124101. He did not proceed with his
> commercial development, but it appears he waxed the wetlands anyway.
> Their are two streams on the site. I can't tell from the plans if the
> lake bed part that is now disturbed was included in his request for 495
> linear ft of culvert. Jennifer's comments are not clear either.
> So, I'm looking to you for guidance on how to proceed. LQ is going to
> be sending something out to concerning sediment and erosion. Gray
> Hauser (LQ) said it might be helpful to meet at the site with you and
> Bob Patterson (?City of Burlington?) to discuss stream stabilization.
> Directions: take exit #141 at Elon College and go north on Huffman Mill
> Road. Turn left just past O'Charley's Restaurant into the K-mart
> parking lot. The site is located just north of where International
> Drive (aka Smith School Rd) connects with the parking lot.
> Thanks, Mike.
2 of 2 5/6/02 1:07 PM
Re: DWQ Project No. 991003
Subject: Re: DWQ Project No. 991003
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:32:13 -0500
From: Gray Hauser <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR Land Quality
To: Mike Mickey <[e-mail]>
CC: Danny Smith <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
Ron Linville (now with WRC) did the initial field work on this site for
DWQ. If there are any questions about the original condition of this site,
he should have the answers. The last time I looked at the site (2-3 years
ago) it was a solid stand of cattails. The site is dry enough now to drive
on due to the lowering of the water table by the excavation of a channel
through the lake bed. The channel is about 3 feet deep. Fill is now being
placed in the lower end of the old lake bed. Since the sedimentation and
erosion control is under the jurisdiction of the City of Burlington local
program, I need to get a clear direction on what may or may not be allowed
in a erosion control plan for this site. By statue, Land Quality or a
delegated local program cannot approve a plan for wetland ditching that
violates other State or Federal law. Thus, the need for a meeting of all
agencies involved with this site.
Mike Mickey wrote:
> Hi Danny,
> This is to follow-up on our conversation at WSRO last week. It involved
> a complaint I received concerning the ditching of a stream in Alamance
> County. I visited the site on Monday (2125) and observed that a stream
> through an old lake bed had been ditched to lower the water table.
> Years ago it was a cattail marsh, now it is dried up Soft Needle Rush.
> Land Quality (Gray Hauser & Aaron Otten) looked at the site yesterday
> and said the stream needs to be stabilized and the water level raised.
> DWQ issued a 401 for this site back in 2000. Per the request of the
> owner, the 401 was rescinded on 9124101. He did not proceed with his
> commercial development, but it appears he waxed the wetlands anyway.
> Their are two streams on the site. I can't tell from the plans if the
> lake bed part that is now disturbed was included in his request for 495
> linear ft of culvert. Jennifer's comments are not clear either.
> So, I'm looking to you for guidance on how to proceed. LQ is going to
> be sending something out to concerning sediment and erosion. Gray
> Hauser (LQ) said it might be helpful to meet at the site with you and
> Bob Patterson (?City of Burlington?) to discuss stream stabilization.
> Directions: take exit #141 at Elon College and go north on Huffman Mill
> Road. Turn left just past O'Charley's Restaurant into the K-mart
> parking lot. The site is located just north of where International
> Drive (aka Smith School Rd) connects with the parking lot.
> Thanks, Mike.
r-.._
Assistant Regional Engineer
Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
I of 2 5/6/02 1:07 I'M
W A T ?9QG
> r
O 'C
Michael F. Easley
Governor
3-5321
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
Certified Mail-Return Receipt Requested
Mr. Bill Price II
Price Holding Corporation
PO Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Subject:
Dear Mr. Price:
September 24, 2001
Holly Ridge
DWQ Project No. 991003
Alamance County
This Office has received your correspondence dated September 9, 2001 wherein you requested that the Division rescind
the 401 Water Quality Certification issued April 4, 2000 and the addendum dated October 27, 2000. You stated that the
impacts to the 495 feet of stream shall not be conducted as approved in the above Certification. As such, you requested
that you be reimbursed by the Wetlands Restoration Program for the mitigation payment made to them for the referenced
stream impacts.
After reviewing your application and your request, the Division has decided to rescind the 401 Water Quality Certification.
By copy of this letter we are requesting that the Wetlands Restoration Program reimburse you for the full amount of the
stream mitigation payment that was made for this project.
Also, please be advised that if you decide to proceed with developing the site in the future you shall be required to apply
for a new 401 Water Quality Certification if impacts to streams and/or wetlands exceed application thresholds. The current
Certification was approved under General Certification No. 3108. This General Certification is no longer valid and cannot
be issued again. As such, any future applications for a 401 Water Quality Certification would have to be approved under
another General or Individual Certification which may have more extensive requirements.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this project, please contact Mr. John Dorney at [phone].
cc: Ron Ferrell, Wetlands Restoration Program
US Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Winston-Salem Regional Office
File
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
SEP-11-01 11:34 AM tt
3365643156 P.01
PRICE HOLDINGS Corporation $?
POB 2112 Burlington, NC. 27216
PH / FX; 336-584-5156
9/9/01
John Thomas
US Arm Corps of Engineers a V
Wilmington Ds trict
Raleigh , NC 919- 8756- 8441 EXT 25 J
_ l
Todd St. John ?,g1f
NCDENR DWQ
Raleigh , NC
PH; 919-733-1786 FX; 919-733-9959
RE; HOLLY RIDOE
Burlington. NC
ACOE # 199921287
DWQ Project # 991003
Permits to put pipe in 495 L' of ditch.
Gentlemen ,
Apparently, due to the cost and involvement of doing the storm water mitigation and
wet detention basin etc. the prospective buyer has declined to proceed , and no other buyers
seem to be interested at this time, consequently we have decided we will not install the pipe in
the ditch as proposed.
In that direction we would like to discontinue the ACOE permit and the DWQ
certification, in order to get a refund of the mitigation fee paid to the Wetlands Restoration
Fund.
I spoke with Ron Ferrell about this and he said we should contact the ACOE and the
at needs to be done. Please let me know what needs to be done to discontinue
he r? it and ification.
Price Holdings Corporation,
General Partner
'?114J
refw, ?L'
`r,u? 4tiuc
[4 / 41 --L rG f?? H^ mac'
c04 G
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mr. Bill Price
Price Holdings Corporation
POB 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
e??
AMMIIIIMMIIINMMgMV
NCDENR
Division of Water Quality
October 27, 2000
Subject: Addendum 401 Water Quality
Certification of April 4, 2000
Price Holdings/Holly Ridge
DWQ Project No. 991003
Alamance County
The Wetlands Unit staff have reviewed your request to change one sentence of the 401 Water Quality
Certification issued to you for the subject project and dated April 4, 2000. Specifically, you requested that
the sentence that states, "You have six months from the date of this Certification to make this payment." be
changed to allow the payment to be made in February 2001. In response to your request the Division has
decided to replace the above sentence with the following:
"You have until February 15, 2001 or until one week before the impacts specified in this 401 Water Quality
Certification occur, whichever comes first to make this payment."
Please be advised that all language and conditions in the 401 Water Quality Certification issued to
you on April 4, 2000 apply and must be followed except as amended above. Also, please be advised
that the original copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance agreement must be forwarded
to this Office as part of the stormwater management plan.
If you do not accept the amended condition of the referenced Certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. Please be advised that the amended
sentence and its condition are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing. Please note that if you do
request a hearing, the 401 Water Quality Certification issued April 4, 2000 shall apply including the
- original sentence that requires the payment to the Wetlands Restoration Program be made in six months of
the date of the Certification. Please note that no hearing was requested within 60 days of that Certification.
As such, the conditions of the Certification are final and binding.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this project, please contact Mr. John Dorney at (919)
733-1786.
cc: John Dorney, Wetlands/401 Unit
Winston-Salem Regional Office
File
c ly,
t
P I' 7
veI l r
4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX 919-733•
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
I
OCT-06-00 09:50 AM V 1 3365945156 P.01
PRICE HOLDINGS Limited Partnership
POB 2112 Burlington, C, 27216
PH / FX: 336-584- 156
10 / 5 / 2000
& 4?
Mr. John Dorney
DWQ - Non Discharge Branch
1621 Mail Service Center V-
Raleigh, NC 27603 '
PH: 919-733-1786 1 C(
FX: 919-733-9959
RE: HOLLY RIDGE
Burlington, NC
DWQ F?vject Af 991003
Dear Mr Dorney , i
I had communicated with Todd St. John regarding an xtenslon of the mitigation fee due for Holly
Ridge, and met yesterday with Ron Ferrcll and discussed th same issue. He indicated that it would be
OK to hold the payment at least until there had been an oppo unity to consider our request.
I related to Mr. Ferrell that although it is possible to crow the money to pay the mitigation fee,
that it was a lot of money for us, and whereas it looks like the work under the permit would not start
until next spring at the earliest, we would appreciate an extens on in the payment until before the work
actually starts. Mr. Ferrell said that in many instances that people are ready to start as soon as the permit is
issued. 1 said that as the process had taken some time, this ca sed changes which have delayed
development.
I I- y nt, we would appreciate an extension until r xt spring of this mitigation payment.
k yo or your consideration of this request.
1
ally, I
? i
PfiFe Iloldingsbmited Partnership
Price Holdings Corporation, General Partner
Bill Price 11, President
CC: Mr. Ron Ferrell
1619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699
PH: 919-733-5219 FX; 919-733-5321
4991003, Price Holdings, Alamance Co
Subject: #991003, Price Holdings, Alamance Co
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 09:44:03 -0400
From: Ron Ferrell <ron.feirell@ncinaihiet>
To: John Dorsey <[e-mail]>
CC: Danny Smith <[e-mail]>

Bill Price came in yesterday to discuss the payment for the subject
project. Price Holdings owes $61,875 for 495 linear feet of stream
impact. He stated that the due date for the payment was yesterday. He
offered to write a check but asked if the check could be held until
February due to cash flow problems. I told him that was not possible
(state law requires checks to be deposited within 24 hrs of receipt).
Mr. Price stated that the project was on hold until Spring, 2001 and
that the impacts had not occured and would not occur until Spring 2001.
He asked if he could defer payment until 30 days prior to impact. I
told him that I could not make that decision, that he would have to
request an extension from you.
I did tell Mr. Price that I would inform you that he had offered to make
the payment yesterday and that because he had made the effort to pay
that he would not receive a NOV at this time. I also advised him to
submit a written request for an extension of the payment due date to
you. I told him that you would consider his request and that there were
2 possible outcomes: 1) an extension would be granted, or 2) you would
inform him that the payment was due immediately.
Mr. Price said that if he was told that he had to pay immediately he
would do so. I hope I have not caused y'all any problems with what I
have told Mr. Price. I did want y'all to be aware of his efforts to pay
though. Mr. Price said he had tried to contact you and had talked to
Todd but had been told that you were the one that would make the
decision. I believe he may have faxed you a letter concerning this
matter in the past few days.
EX,
OCT-03-00 12:23 PM A 3365845156 r.c?a
L? CG
PRICE HOLDINGS Corporation
POB 2112 Burlington, C. 27216
PH / FX: 336-584- 156
I
10 / 3 / 2000
Todd St. John
DWQ
PH: 919-733-1786 FX; 919-733-9959
RE: HOLLY RIDGE
Burling on, NC
DWQ oject #991003
Dear Todd,
It looks like it will be next spring before the construction of Storm Water Wet Detention Basin and
the piping of the drainage way as per the Approval Letter will be started. In looking at the letter, the
$62,000 mitigation fee is supposed to be due tomorrow, and hat's an aw ul lot of money for a small
business to pay when we're not doing any work yet.
I wonder if the mitigation fce can be delayed until ma be February or so (Certainly, I understand
it should be paid before the impact is made.)
taay, I sure would appreciate some help on this.
nksl i
Bill Pric II, President
Price Ho ngs Corporation,
General Partner
O
l
Ve /0
f
CY
I J !
/9
/?V?
A?4 ? ?f%f I
0?j
OCT-03-00 12:23 PM U 3365845156
PRICE HOLDINGS Corporation
POB 2112 Burlington, C. 27216
PH / FX: 336-584- 156
i
10 / 3 / 2000 I
Todd St. John
DWQ
PH: 919-733-1786 FX: 919-733-9959
RE: HOLL RIDGE
Burling on, NC
Dear Todd,
Attached is a revision of the Operation and Maintenan I e Agreement.
and let me know if this is OK,
r- . U.Z
2
OCT-03-00 12:24 PM U ' 3365045156 V.U't'
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ALAMANCE
DWQ Project # 391003
HOLLY CENTER / Burlington, NC
r
i
STORM WATER WET DETENTION BASIN
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CE AGREEMENT
This agreement in made and entered into this Py of . 20-, by and
between:
Owner: PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERS JP
By PRICE HOLDINGS CORPORATION( General Partner)
POB 2112 Burlington, NC 27215
and
Agency : STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND1ATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY - Non-Discharge Branch
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 2769
WITNESSEfHI
WHEREAS, the Owner owns and controls the property designated as follows:
12.5 acres located on lnternau? jiul Drive, In the City of Burlington,
Alamance County, North Car lina.
as described by Deed recorded 1i n Map Book Page ; and
WHEREAS, the Owner is developing a project on said pr perty named ;
HOLLY RIDGE ; and
WHEREAS, the DWQ has approved the plans for the co struction of a Storm Water Wet Detention
Basin (SWWDB) under the 410 Water Quality Certification esignated DWQ Project # 931003
according to Plans titled :
Storm Water Detention for Holy Ridge / Burlington NC.
Dated : 4/712000
Drawn by : Harold Jensen PE: License: 11933
POB 2245
Jamestown, N'., 27282
(The plans are Ineluded in this agreement by reference); and
WHEREAS, the Water Quality Certification requires that a SWWDB be operated and maintained
according to a stormwater management plan (copy attached)
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual cc- "ants and promises contained in this
agreement, it is hereby agreed by and between the Owner an the DWQ as stipulated below:
1. Owner's Agreement: The storm water wet detentio basin(s) ( SWWDB) will be operated and
maintained in accordance with the Operation and Maintenanc Plan ( copy attached) by Owner,
OCT-03-00 12:24 PM U I 3365845156 t,.U.+
2. Owner's Costs; Owner shall make all arrangemen
costs and expenses associated with construction, maintenani
including, but not limited to, costs for permits, licenses, ta)
indirect ), improvements, equipment agreements and rental
utilities and services used by Owner in operation of said Sv
electricity, security, and trash pickup services, including all
such service.
and shall pay, when due, for any and all
, operations and repair of the SWWDB
3, insurance, labor costs ( whether direct or
cleaning, supplies, maintenance, and for
VDB, including without limitation, water,
enosits and / or charges for the initiation of
Condition of SWWDB. Alterations. Improvements!. Owner has looked at the plans for the
SWWDB and is knowledgeable about the location, size, and eneral arrangement of the property and the
proposed SWWDB. Owner will have the right tc make additions, improvements, and alterations to the
SWWDB and improvements therein, subject to the approval Of DWQ, and subject to the following
conditions:
(a) No addition, improvement or alteration can be made which shall impair the structural soundness or
operational effectiveness of the SWWDB. Any improvement shall be functionally compatible with
existing improvements.
(b) All work must be done in a good and workmanlike mann r, and in compliance with applicable
building, zoning, and other laws, ordinances, orders, rules a d requirements of federal, state and
municipal governments. T
;LLA"a ,
Owner may insure said $WWDB at its own expense under its own policies.
Owner may maintain coverage against claims for personal njury or property damage, under a policy of
general liability insurance but no less than $500,000 V pee occurrence for bodily injury, and
one hundred thousand ( $100,000) for property damage.
Owner shall maintain Workman's Compensation lnsuranc coverage or secure Worker's Compensation
Waivers for all of Owner's employees, contractors, or agents hat may at anytime provide maintenance or
cleaning services, and/ or construction improvements to said WWDB .
All insurance coverages provided shall be underwritten by a reputable, financially responsible
insurance company licensed to do business in North Carolina
5. Damgge_,
In the event the SWWDB shall be damaged, owner, at its expense, must have the damage repaired
according to the original plans ( including approved revision ) for the SWWDB as soon as practical.
6. Assignment by Lease or Sale . Owner may sell, or le ' e the property including the permit to
construct the proposed SWWDB as follows:
(A) In the event Owner sells the property and the permit to construct the proposed SW WDB in advance
of construction, Owner shall notify DWQ of the name and ddress of purchaser of the property on which
the SWWDB is to be located, and Owner trust require in the eed that Purchaser will be the party
i q
OCT-03-00 12:25 PM SL I 336584S1?Ea
responsible for construction of the SWWDB in accordance w th the plans, and the continuing opt
and management of said SWWDB in accordance with the 0d M Plan, and purchaser must assume a
rights, privileges and obligations of Owner under this agreem? nt and the permit, and present owner `
be released of those rights, privileges and obligations under t is agreement and the permit.
(B) In the event Owner sells the property following constriction of the proposed SWWDB, Own
shall notify DWQ of the name and address of purchaser of t c property on which the SWWDB is
located, and Owner must require in the deed that Purchaser 'It be the party responsible for the contin .a
operation, and management of said SWWDB in accordance With the O&M Plan, and purchaser must
assume all rights, privileges and obligations of Owner under this agreement and the permit, and present owner will be released of those rights, privileges and obligati ns under this agreement and the permit,
(C) In the event Owner Leases the property on which the roposed SWWDB is located in advance of
construction, Owner shall notify DWQ of the name and of Lcsscc, and Owner may require in
the lease agreement that Lessee shall be responsible for the construction and continuing operation, and
management of said SWWDB in accordance with the plans aid the 0&M Plan, and that Lessee must
assume all rights, privileges and obligations of Owner under this agreement and the permit so long as the
lease is in effect. I
(D) In the event Owner Leases the property on which the WWDB is located following construction
of the proposed SWWDB, Owner shall notify DWQ of the ame and address of Lcsscc of the property
on which the SWWDB is located, and Owner may require in a lease agreement that the Lessee, shall be
responsible for the continuing operation, and management of aid SWWDB in accordance with the 0&M
Plan, and must assume all rights, privileges and obligations f Owner under this agreement and the
permit so tong as the lease is in effect,
7 Assignment by ! DWO DWQ will notify owner of thefname and address of any successor in
authority to DWQ to regulate the operation of said SWWDB.`
8. Right of Entry & Access The SWWDB will be available for inspection by authorized governmental
authority and/or insurance inspectors at any reasonable hour.
9. Xotice. Notice from one party to the other party to chi Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
deemed to have been sufficiently given if either served personally, or sent by prepaid registered or
certified mail, or national letter delivery service, addressed t the receiving party at the address set forth on
the first page of this Agreement following the designations fo Owner and DWQ, upon receipt. Either
party may change its address by giving Notice of Change of ddress as provided above.
1n Authority Successors and ss'gns. The provisions o this Agreement shall bind and Inure to the
benefit of owner and DWQ, their respective successors, heir, legal representatives and assigns, as their
interests may appear.
11_ Integration and Binding Effect. The entire agreement intent and understandings between the
parties hereto are contained in the provisions of this Agreeme t and the referenced Exhibits, including
22
OCT-03-00 12:26 PM II I 3365845156 r•t+?
additional Exhibits ( if any) referenced in said Exhibits.
The named parties and all pronouns relating thereto shall be deemed to mean and include corporations,
partnerships and individuals as may fit the context, and the masculine gender shall be deemed to include
the feminine and the neuter, and the singular number the plur?l.
Any terin(s) or condition(s) of this Agreement that shall be adjudged invalid by a court of competent
jurisdiction shall not diminish any other term or condition of t is Agreement.
This agreement shall be governed by and construed pursua it to the laws of the State of North Carolina.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have cause this Agreement to be executed as of the
dates hereinafter stated.
Date:
Owner: PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
By PRICE HOLDINGS Corporation ( General Partner)
SEAL By: i -
Title:
Print Name:
Wltness
Date: STATE OF NORTH i ROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVI ONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATE QUALITY - Non-Discharge Branch
SEAL
Print
ATTEST:
Title:
c
OCT-03-00 12:26 PM 8 j 3365045156 V.U
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
I, a Notary Public for the said county and state aforesaid, certify that
personally came before me this day and acknowledged that (s)hc is
secretary of a
corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument
was signed in its name by its President, scaled with its corporate seal, and attested by
as its Secretary.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this dl y of 19
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public i
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY O
1, a Notary Public for the, said county and state aforesaid, certify that
personally came before me this day and acknowledged that (s)he is the authorized
representative of and that the foregoing instrument was signed in
its name by its • i
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this day of 19
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public

OCT-03-00 12:26 PM u 3365t34?1Ob r • ?+?
STORM WATER WET DETENTION BASIN
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
DWQ Project # 991003
HOLLY CENTER / Burlington, NC
Device: Storm Water Wet Detention Basin ( SWWDB
Project: HOLLY RIDGE
International Drive, Burlington, Alamance C unty, North Carolina.
Owner: PRICE HOLDINGS Limited Partnership I
POB 2112, Burlington, NC. 27216 Diu FX: 336-5845156
i
Plan: (A) Vegetation Management: Any vegetation growing ' ithin 15' of the SWWDB on the property
shall be snowed at least 1 time / mo. during the summer.
(B) Debris Check: The stand pipe holes, wet pools, et ergency spillway discharge area, and
surrounding vegetation area will be inspected for litter and debris after every 1" rain, and/ or at least I
time / mo. year round, and any litter and/or debris will be removed. The watershed area draining into the
SWWDB will be inspected for litter and debris at least 1 time'/ mo. year round and cleaned as necessary.
(C) Se"'i An"11, Ipections All parts of the SWWDB will be inspected for structural soundness
and good operation; and the watershed area draining into the SWWDB will be inspected for pollution at
least 2 times each year.
T05p ctions mist address at least the following: Agion If Nccessarv
1) Obstructions of inlets or outlets by debris or litter. Clean as necessary
2) Excessive erosion or sedimentation in or around the basin. Correct condition ( See "D")
3) Cracking or settling of the dam. ! Repair dam.
4) Deterioration of inlet or outlet pipes, i Repair Pipes
5) Condition of emergency spillway. Repair any damage
6) Stability of side slopes. Stabilize slopes
7) Up and down stream channel conditions. Maintain goal condition
8) Woody vegetation in or on the dam or side slopes. Cut woody vegetation.
Any problems with the structure or the operation which reduy?es the effectiveness of the SWWDB in any
promptly repaired. Any significant poMutant sources found in the watershed area
significant way will be will be stopped. Any significant erosion will be stopped by w ing filter screen, erosion matting, and/or
planting grass.
(D) Sediment Clean out Benchmark: The forebay scu, Ilcnt pool wall and the main stilling basin
stand pipe will be marked with elevations. The pools will be spected at each semi annual inspection for
sedimentation. If sediments fill in to over an average elevatio of 635.5` in the forebay, the forebay will
be excavated to original design parameters promptly. If sedi ents fill in to over an average elevation of
635.5` in the main stilling basin, the main stilling basin will bf excavated to original design parameters
promptly.
(E) Materials Dispgsal: Litter, debris, and / or seditt ents removed from the SWWDB or the
adjacent area must be disposed of in an approved land fill or her approved manner.
(0) Repair and Maintenance Easement : After cotnple on of the SWWDB, the Owner will provide
a repair and maintenance casement on the SWWDB and an access area to the SWWDB adequate to provide
access for future repair and maintenance of the SWWDB. Th easement will not allow any construction
in it that would unreasonably restrict repairs and/ or mainten4cc to the SWWDB.
(H) Responsible P rtv : The Owner is the party responsible for implementation of this 0&M Plan,
if the property and the SWWDB is sold / or leased to another party, the Owner must require in the lease
or the deed that the lessee or the purchaser, will be responsib i e for the continuing operation and
management of the SWWDB according to this plan.

Project No. DWQ 991003
Project Name: Holly Ridge
SUBA117TED DESIGN:
REQUIRED DESIGN:
elevations status
Bottom of Basin (ft) 633
Permanent Pool (ft) 638 5 ft. depth ok
Temporary Pool (ft) 639.67 1.67 ft. depth ok
areas
Permanent Pool SA (sq ft) 14500 14484 sq. ft. ok
Drainage Area (ac) 12.5 l- l
Impervious Area (ac) 11.25 90.0 17o - / bet
volumes
Permanent Pool (cu ft) 72500 yfp?``
Temporary Pool (cu ft) 36025 39023 cu. ft. check tempt r/ ` c
Forebay (cu ft) 14750 20.3 % ok
other parameters
SA/DA 0 2.66 - (7
Orifice Diameter (in) 3 0.22 efs drawdown -
Design Rainfall (in) 1 1.9 day drawdown check draw(
Linear hnterpolation of Correct SA/DA***
% Impervious
Next Lowest 90
Project Impervious 90.0
Next Highest 90.1
5 ft. Permanent Pool Depth
SA/DA from Table
2.66
2.66
2.67
C?I ov SP4@? ?;ll PrI,ce
e. car1`? cr,,r,?rers? 5 ?,Ivt?f UC,? ?4,u
Pt,
Project No. DWQ (to be provided by DWQ)
L
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY - 401 WET DETENTION BASIN WORIf,SHEET
DWO Stor MV- cr Mnnaaemcnt Plan Review:
A complete stormwutcr management plan submittal includes a wet detention basin worksheet for each basin,
design calculations, plans and specifications showing all basin and outlet structure details, and a fully executed
operation and maintenance agreement. An incomplete submittal package will result in a request for additional
information and will substantially delay final review and approval of the project.
I. PROJECT INFORMATION (please complete the following information):
Project Name : `Zi n e- A, r?y4.4 i,ve7.5.y , e- _
Contact Person: -Mm7F5,t.` .cc- Phone Numbcr: (-111-b) Zel -s/SY?.
For projects with multiple basins, specify which basin this worksheet applies to:,9d q o dtr- aA41A)
Basin Bottom Elevation L 33 ft. (average elevation of the floor of the basin)
Permanent Pool Elevation ? .3 ft. (elevation of the orifice invert out)
Temporary Pool Elevation G K &7 ft. (elevation of the outlet structure invert in)
Permanent Pool Surface Area L4 -5-0 0 sq. ft. (water surface area at permanent pool elevation)
Drainage Area Te) ac.
(on-site and off-site drainage to
Impervious Area i 1. ZS ac. on-site and oft-site the basin)
( drainage to the basin)
Permanent Pool Volume
Temporary Pool Volume
Forebay Volumo
?iA loo cu. ft.
OZS cu. &
S0 cu. ft.
(combined volume of main basin and forebay)
(volume detained on top of the pcmanent pool)
SA/DA used _ 2. Lt Cv
Diameter of Orifice
in.
(surface area to drainage area ratio)
(draw down orifice diameter)
II. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Tho following checklist outlines design requirements per the Stormwater Best Management Practices manual
(N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, November 1995) and Administradvo Code
Section: 15 A NCAC 2H .1008. Initial in the space provided to indicate the following design requirements have
been met and supporting documentation is attached. I fa requirement has not been met, attach an explanation of
why.
A22hmts Initiols
The temporary pool controls runoff from the 1 inch storm event.
A
'-t ar?r-?c CO The basin length to width ratio is greater than 3:1. tom`
_ Tho basin side slopes are no steeper than 3:1.
A submerged and vegetated perimeter shelf at less than 6:1 is provided.
J•1 Vegetation to the permanent pool elevation is specified.
An emergency drain is provided to drain the basin.
The permanent
pool depth is between 3 and d feet {required minimum of 3 fcet).?,?
The temporary pool draws down in 2 to 5 days.
gal -The forebay volume is approximately equal to 20% of the total basin volume.
1 Sediment storage is provided in the permanent pool.
4k- Access is provided for maintenance.
A minimum 30-foot vegetative filter is provided at the outlet.
f A site specific operation and maintenance (O&M) plan is provided.
_A vegetation management/mowing schedule is provided in the O&M plan.
-:? Scmi-annual inspections arc specified in the O&M plan.
A debris check is specified in the O&M plan to by performed after every storm event.
X1...1 A specific sediment clean-out benchmark is listed (elevation or depth) in O&M plan.
(F.- _A responsible party is designated in the O&M plan.
FORM' WO100 09/97 Page 1 of 1
PRICE HOLDINGS Corporation
POB 2112 Burlington, NC. 27216
PH / FX: 336-584-5156
4 / 10 / 2000
Todd St. John
RE: HOLLY RIDGE
Burlington, NC
Dear Todd,
Attached is a revision of the plans that Harold did that answers the questions you asked in your last
letter. Harold also said that we should draw up a Operation and Maintenance Plan and your letter says
that there should be a notarized agreement to do the inspections and operation, so here are an Operation
and Maintenance Plan, and albperation and Maintenance Agreement ( I copied some of the language out
of some old agreements I found. Maybe this is what we need. ) Anyway, I assume that the Agreement
would be done after the basin is finished and after it had all been checked out.
ease loaf this over and let me know what you think.
Bill'Price-H!President
Price Holdings Corporation,
General Partner

\ ,PEER
ARM WATER WET DETENTION BASIN DWQ Project # 991003
ERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN HOLLY CENTER / Burlington, NC
)evice: Storm Water Wet Detention Basin ( SWWDB )
'reject: HOLLY RIDGE
International Drive, Burlington, Alamance County, North Carolina.
Owner: PRICE HOLDINGS Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC. 27216 PH / FX: 336-584-5156
Plan: (A) Vegetation Management: Any vegetation growing within 15' of the SWWDB on the property
shall be mowed at least 1 time / mo. during the summer.
(B) Debris Check: The stand pipe holes, wet pools, emergency spillway discharge area, and
surrounding vegetation area will be inspected for litter and debris after every-l .rain , and/ or at least 1
time / mo. year round, and any litter and/or debris will be removed. The watershed area draining into the
SWWDB will be inspected for litter and debris at least 1 time / mo. year round and-?leaned as necessary.
(C) Semi Annual Inspections: All parts of the SWWDB will be inspected for structural soundness
and good operation; and the watershed area draining into the SWWDB will be ins?ected for pollution at
least 2 times each year. %i ,
Inspections must address at least the following: --,,Action i Necessary
1) Obstructions of inlets or outlets by debris or litter. , .C{r= as necessary
2) Excessive erosion or sedimentation in or around the basin. Correct, condition ( See "D")
3) Cracking or settling of the dam. Repair dam.
4) Deterioration of inlet or outlet pipes. Repair Pipes
5) Condition of emergency spillway. Repair any damage
6) Stability of side slopes. Stabilize slopes
7) Up and down stream channel conditions. Maintain good condition
8) Woody vegetation in or on the dam or side slopes. Cut woody vegetation.
Any problems with the structure or the operation which reduces the effectiveness of the SWWDB in any
significant way will be promptly repaired. Any significant pollutant sources found in the watershed area
will be stopped. Any significant erosion will be stopped by using filter screen, erosion matting, and/or
planting grass.
(D) Sediment Clean out Benchmark: The forebay sediment pool wall and the main stilling basin
stand pipe will be marked with elevations. The pools will be inspected at each semi annual inspection for
sedimentation. If sediments fill in to over an average elevation of 635.5` in the forebay, the forebay will
be excavated to original design parameters promptly. If sediments fill in to over an average elevation of
635.5` in the main stilling basin, the main stilling basin will be excavated to original design parameters
promptly.
(E) Materials Disposal: Litter, debris, and / or sediments removed from the SWWDB or the
adjacent area must be disposed of in an approved land fill or other approved manner.
(G) Repair and Maintenance Easement : After completion of the SWWDB, the Owner will provide
a repair and maintenance easement on the SWWDB and an access area to the SWWDB adequate to provide
access for future repair and maintenance of the SWWDB. The easement will not allow any construction
in it that would unreasonably restrict repairs and/ or maintenance to the SWWDB.
(H) Responsible Part, The Owner is the party responsible for implementation of this O&M Plan.
If the property and the SWWDB is sold / or leased to another party, the Owner must require in the lease
or the deed that the lessee or the purchaser, will be responsible for the continuing operation and
management of the SWWDB according to this plan.
'All
fE OF NORTH CAROLINA DWQ Project # 991003
-jUNTY OF ALAMANCE HOLLY CENTER / Burlington, NC
STORM WATER WET DETENTION BASIN
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
This agreement in made and entered into this day of , 20by and
between:
Owner:
and rt
G -•
Aabency: aU1.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the Owner owns and controls the property designated as follows:
12.5 acres located on International Drive, in the City of Burlington ,
Alamance County, North Carolina.
as described by Deed recorded in Map Book Page ; and
WHEREAS, the Owner is developing a Project named :
HOLLY RIDGE ; and
WHEREAS, a Storm Water Wet Detention Basin ( SWWDB) has been constructed for the project
according to Plans titled :
Storm Water Detention for Holly Ridge / Burlington NC.
Dated : 4/7/2000
Drawn by : Harold Jensen PE: License #: 11933
POB 2245
Jamestown, NC, 27282
( The plans are included in this agreement by reference)
; and
WHEREAS, the DWQ has approved the plans and the construction of the SWWDB required under
the 410 Water Quality Certification for DWQ Project # 991003 ; and
WHEREAS, the Water Quality Certification requires that the SWWDB be operated and maintained
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this
agreement, it is hereby agreed by and between the Owner and the DWQ as stipulated below:
accordir
1. Owner's Agreement: The storm water wet detention basin(s) ( SWWDB) will be operated and
maintained in accordance with the Operation and Maintenance Plan ( copy attached) by Owner.
2. Owner's Costs: Owner shall make all arrangements and shall pay, when due, for any and all
costs and expenses associated with maintenance , operations and repair of the SWWDB including, but
not limited to, costs for permits, licenses, taxes, insurance, labor costs ( whether direct or indirect
improvements, equipment agreements and rentals, cleaning, supplies, maintenance, and for utilities and
services used by Owner in operation of said SWWDB, including without limitation, water, electricity,
security, and trash pickup services, including all deposits and / or charges for the initiation of such service.
3. Condition of SWWDB, Alterations, Improvements. Owner has looked at the plans for the
WDB, the actual SWWDB as constructed and is knowledgeable about the location, size, and general
.rangement of the property and the SWWDB. Owner will have the right to make additions,
improvements, and alterations to the SWWDB and improvements therein, subject to the approval of
DWQ, and subject to the following conditions:
(a) No addition, improvement or alteration can be made which shall impair the structural soundness or
operational effectiveness of the SWWDB. Any improvements shall be functionally compatible with
existing improvements.
(b) All work must be done in a good and workmanlike manner, and in compliance with applicable
building, zoning, and other laws, ordinances, orders, rules and requirements of federal, state and
municipal governments.
4. Insurance:
Owner may insure said SWWDB at its own expense under its own policies.
Owner may maintain coverage against claims for personal injury or property damage, under a policy of
general liability insurance but no less than $500,000 ($500,000 ) per occurrence for bodily injury, and
one hundred thousand ( $100,000) for property damage.
Owner shall maintain Workman's Compensation Insurance coverage or secure Workers Compensation
Waivers for all of Owner's employees, contractors, or agents that may at anytime provide maintenance or
cleaning services, and/ or construction improvements to said SWWDB .
All insurance coverages provided shall be underwritten by a reputable, financially responsible
insurance company licensed to do business in North Carolina.
5. Damage .
In the event the SWWDB shall be damaged, owner, at its expense, must have the damage repaired
according to the original plans for the SWWDB as soon as possible.
Mil
6. Assignment by Lease or Sale. Owner may sell, or lease the property including the SWWDB.
(a) Owner shall notify DWQ of the name and address of any purchaser or lessor of the property on
which said SWWDB is located. In the event the property where the SWWDB is located is sold/ or
leased to another party, Owner must require in the lease agreement or in the deed that the Lessee or
Purchaser, will be the party responsible for the continuing operation, and management of said SWWDB
in accordance with the O&M Plan.
(b) Assignment by DWQ : DWQ will notify owner of the name and address of any successor in
authority to DWQ to regulate the operation of SWWDB.
7. Right of Entry & Access The SWWDB will be available for inspection by authorized governmental
authority and/or insurance inspectors at any reasonable hour.
8. Notice. Notice from one party to the other party to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
deemed to have been sufficiently given if either served personally, or sent by prepaid registered or
certified mail, or national letter delivery service, addressed to the receiving party at the address set forth on
the first page of this Agreement following the designations for Owner and DWQ, upon receipt. Either
party may change its address by giving Notice of Change of Address as provided above.
9. Authority Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the
benefit of Owner and DWQ, their respective successors, heirs, legal representatives and assigns, as their
interests may appear.
10. Integration and Binding Effect. The entire agreement, intent and understandings between the
parties hereto are contained in the provisions of this Agreement and the referenced Exhibits, including
additional Exhibits ( if any) referenced in said Exhibits.
4) The named parties and all pronouns relating thereto shall be deemed to mean and include corporations,
partnerships and individuals as may fit the context, and the masculine gender shall be deemed to include
Q the feminine and the neuter, and the singular number the plural.
Any term(s) or condition(s) of this Agreement that shall be adjudged invalid by a court of competent
jurisdiction shall not diminish any other term or condition of this Agreement.
This agreement shall be governed by and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto, have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the
dates hereinafter stated.
Date:
SEAL
Witness :
Date:
SEAL

ATTEST:
Title:
By:
Title:
Print Name:
By:
Title:
Print Name:
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
I, a Notary Public for the said county and state aforesaid, certify that
personally came before me this day and acknowledged that (s)he is
secretary of , a
corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument
was signed in its name by its President, sealed with its corporate seal, and attested by
as its Secretary.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this day of 19_.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
I, a Notary Public for the said county and state aforesaid, certify that
personally came before me this day and acknowledged that (s)he is
secretary of , a
corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument
was signed in its name by its President, sealed with its corporate seal, and attested by
as its Secretary.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this day of 19_.
My Commission Expires:
Notary Public

i
I f f c? v rl c o,4---7u.,/ of- l ;i7e i3,gs?.r/ 6s ?r-
r
j S ev N ?/G. X12 ?'O /o ?? ?? DG .d.v ?X T??,OF"?

Ida-

c ors` ias?.d T.. yr ?1?L? 5 .QG 4r-,4T r2---2

4-5 dNc-dT 6(?e,'"i 2 . 4S ?LrFSIk T
L67vGT'P lay-= 1 o QvT?? T 15 ?.cr?4T2
2!2 L ??+? ?i(ax,??.w W?an? 7a lit 1tr.?
? 'Ad 4 L J c. q rZ ?o b? ? c1 ? car= - 6 c? ?0/•cct •?T
73 GF-. +?I S ?fJGE?S
A 3 orZ- 2..R . ? ,?
yc?d-
c.?-,,c?O so L. L
T ? ?n00.)
Q s
t
Or?-rzr
4A PtrA I/ AA ap If) 7-
0
?o ???c??iovs 9
4-6-00

.I
l ?Fl 48fc-
r
7Z,,?a®C.r

j..
2.)?35'0
X 750 CF

Eq. (o -7
Lc.e/ (a33
4 5'00 5#4C'
Iii l zS' / , l'o,r
W8T I??s(DtT7a7'?o"?
Fo-
P>. D S ?o . oog 90
/I 15?4C)l Z,
CL o
l
1
Q
- loot Ton ???L
(n3q T!'Mp dal.
I ` J
S 9VA • COL
:. A 6,37 .
iP? 14Nti F2oAT D, JO•v
r
CL- 31
pa 3
/py 2
(-57S d GJ
q. 13
/d," ,N '5709--?
A F4 ' D,751epA-) - J ug 8.O ?a.. 6 2vs?a+W 641MoL 'a
e

-Izl 54 -;2 s?
?? ?10.,Jat.-ro 1,1,5-1 0;c?

sc?d"t? 48 - lZO ws? Go
• • I
1

A0
j ??d Imo, $Z?
f?i"l?+!4 Q.Y.` ?G vJA-T?TLI /?G . ?J' L?
= cSv?GA o?=s?w = Z? ?' 7D..

.? i
i = Cow ?., a- ?? c77v? = O. (o
v ! 577d -

I; Co G C

` z
7--70

i!
Q7
D D 9
?- ZI,s7o 20.47
0.04 0 (???J ¢tg)

Iii - _
rzYS
UC.
LL w
/00 y? S,?Q-?•? .
a..
0,7c(7.9 (/z. S-)
834-?3 c. s
r
.45;o&c. - 84.13 - /3
'-;312,,1,0,0 6iZ? 5rZj b iJ T «2. r- ?.
Q w
? 44,.s
Q = zs 8o c,-?s
?5?
13.
ov
t =o'?

" ?sffr?-a
or
S? = 4 S ?7 4,,K e-rvA-
Z
Fla G
5'q.O.y4,)C-y = , 1 //.93 CF:r *- epz. 4 «l = -= le g47/4-
?-D 4 A.Jc4
to9q??,}?t. ?5v?5s c? 5p.94 ems'
4 ? G
54
i
a 4p K 04PTLU I
7.7/
l _ ,
5791 9

I
a // 11
>>
I
I Z 7 m C- l'
z o
a ?

4
8 o
0
§jjkrTCE AREA=
2 rtb• WEIR
CONC. DIVIDER '
e OL
u
?t z
m
11
v m (ci):?
z n °"
Z moa°w
z r2 El w
;o ? z w
I Z >Z
p ! w
o
"Co -CA o JCA
o ;a
_ I
_ ? FTgiN?.
I Nc `y,?
I
m
m
z ? I I .Npr -o
II
III
0
D 11-0
-0 1 iJ
IW
rn
Ilr
III
II

m o o I " -
D
rn
9
z
0
-=P-- ===========
" 7' X 191 CM BO
9" RIP RAP IN BC
67
Project No. DWQ 991003
Project Name: Holly Ridge
SUBMITTED DESIGN:
elevations
Bottom of Basin (ft)
Permanent Pool (ft)
Temporary Pool (ft)
areas
Permanent Pool SA (sq ft)
Drainage Area (ac)
Impervious Area (ac)
REQUIRED DESIGN:

634 ? status
p? ? 3s?

639 `?[xi, 5 ft. depth ok
641 2 ft. depth ok

14500 14484 sq. ft. ok
12.5
11.25 90.0 % -
volumes
Permanent Pool (cu ft) 0
Temporary Pool (cu ft) 35120
Forebay (cu ft) 0
39023 cu. ft. check tempt
#DIV/0! % 9DIVi0l
other parameters
SA/DA 0 2.66 -
Orifice Diameter (in) 2 0.10 cfs drawdown -
Design Rainfall (in) 1 3.9 day drawdown ok
Linear Interpolation of Correct SAIDA
5 ft. Permanent Pool Depth
O/C impervious SA/DA from Table
Next Lowest 90 2.66
Project Impervious 90.0 2.66
Next Highest 90.1 2.66 5

S1Gt?
S?
.
C
z1??Dlj1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mr. Bill Price
Price Holdings Corporation
POB 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
-- 4 0 0?
H Q*C- D I E H I F ??&
Division of Water Quality
March 29, 2000Gtl
o
cS
Subject: Price Holdings/Holly Ridge - '
DWQ Project No. 991003
Alamance County rf
I (Z?' ri
The Wetlands Unit staff reviewed the stormwater management plans for the subject project and determined
that additional information is necessary to complete the technical review process based on the design
parameters provided in the NC DENR Stornnvater Best Nfanagenient Practices Afamial, April 1999. The
required additional information is as follows:
Permanent Water Quality Pool, Temporary Water Quality Pool
Staff were unable to determine from the site plans, sketches and calculations, the elevations and
contours of the proposed wet detention pond. It is recommended that site plans be submitted that
provide pond contours as well as outlet details. Additionally, any retaining walls used should be
clearly located on the site plans and should not be located below the permanent pool surface
elevation. In other words, the side slopes of the submerged portion of the basin must be earthen and
10 foot wide, 6:1, submerged, vegetative side slopes should be provided along the perimeter of the
permanent pool except for along the dam. Also, please provide the permanent pool volume.
Draw Down Orifice Outlet
An orifice installed directly through the outlet structure will experience clogging problems and
increase the maintenance effort required to keep the basin functioning properly. It is recommended
that the orifice structure be fitted with a submerged inlet that will prevent floating debris from
interfering with performance. This is typically accomplished by attaching a downward angled pipe
to the invert so that the inlet remains submerged below the permanent pool.
Forebay
All stormwater wet detention basins are required to have a forebay to facilitate TSS removal. Please
provide plan details and specifications for the forebay, as well as the volume at permanent pool.
4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Fniinl r)nnnrfiinifv Affirmafiva Ar•finn Fmnlnvar cm0A rarvrlarfl in0A nncf_rnnciimar nanar
4. Drainage Area
Wet detention basins must be designed to treat all of the runoff draining to the basin. Please
delineate the drainage area including offsite drainage to the basin. Also, all of the runoff from the
entire site should be delineated treated.
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
A stormwater control structure will not operate as designed without regular maintenance. Typical
requirements for an operation and maintenance plan include the following:
• Vegetation management/mowing schedule
• Semi-annual inspections
• Debris check after every storm event
• Benchmark for sediment removal (specific elevations listed)
• Designation of a responsible party
The operation and maintenance agreement must also be signed by the responsible party and
notarized.
Division wetlands unit staff will strive to complete a final technical review within 10 working days of
receipt of the requested information. Completing the enclosed worksheet will greatly decrease the staff
review time. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this project, please contact me at (919)
733-9584.
SPolit L
T'E
Environmental Engineer
Attachments
cc: John Dorney, Wetlands/401 Unit
Winston-Salem Regional Office
File
Project No. DWQ (to be provided by DIVQ)
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY - 401 WET DETENTION BASIN WORKSHEET
DWQ Stonnwater Management Plan Review:
A complete stonnwater management plan submittal includes a wet detention basin worksheet for each basin,
design calculations, plans and specifications showing all basin and outlet structure details, and a fully executed
operation and maintenance agreement. An incomplete submittal package will result in a request for additional
information and will substantially delay final review and approval of the project.
1. PROJECT INFORMATION (please complete the following information):
Project Name :
Contact Person: Phone Number:
For projects with multiple basins, specify which basin this worksheet applies to:
Basin Bottom Elevation
Permanent Pool Elevation
Temporary Pool Elevation
Permanent Pool Surface Area
Drainage Area
Impervious Area
Permanent Pool Volume
Temporary Pool Volume
Forebay Volume
ft. (average elevation of the floor of the basin)
ft. (elevation of the orifice invert out)
ft. (elevation of the outlet structure invert inn)
sq. ft. (water surface area at permanent pool elevation)
ac. (on-site and off-site drainage to the basin)
ac. (on-site and off-site drainage to the basin)
cu. ft. (combined volume of main basin and forebay)
cu. ft. (volume detained on top of the permanent pool)
cu. ft.
SA/DA used (surface area to drainage area ratio)
Diameter of Orifice in. (draw down orifice diameter)
It. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
17ne following checklist outlines design requirements per the Stonnwater Best Management Practices manual
(N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, November 1995) and Administrative Code
Section: 15 A NCAC 2H .1008. Initial in the space provided to indicate the following design requirements have
been met and supporting documentation is attached. If a requirement has Prot been met, attach an explanation of
tivhy.
Applicants Initials
The temporary pool controls runoff from tine 1 inch storm event.
The basin length to width ratio is greater than 3:1.
The basin side slopes are no steeper than 3:1.
A submerged and vegetated perimeter shelf at less than 6:1 is provided.
Vegetation to the permanent pool elevation is specified.
An emergency drain is provided to drain the basin.
Tlie permanent pool depth is between 3 and 6 feet (required minimum of 3 feet).
The temporary pool draws down in 2 to 5 days.
The forebay volume is approximately equal to 2001'0 of the total basin volume.
Sediment storage is provided in the permanent pool.
Access is provided for maintenance.
A minimum 30-foot vegetative filter is provided at the outlet.
A site specific operation and maintenance (O&M) plan is provided.
A vegetation management/mowing schedule is provided in the O&M plan.
Semi-annual inspections are specified in the O&M plan.
A debris check is specified in the O&M plan to be performed after every storm event.
A specific sediment clean-out benchmark is listed (elevation or depth) in O&M plan.
A responsible party is designated in the O&M plan.
FORM SWGI00 09/97 Page 1 of 1
March 1, 2000
E c
GCO
FAY TO: Yl Z ` 2 _
Mr. John Dorney a
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources j 1'011--MS GROUP
4401 Reedy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 27607/ V!ATER OUALITY SECTION
PH: 919- 733-7015 FX: 919-733-9959
RE: Holly Itidge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Dorney,
Based on your letter dated January 3rd you indicated there were 2 issues regarding our permit
application.
(1) You needed a Letter from Ron Ferrell regarding Mitigation by paying a fee to the Wetlands
Restoration Fund, and
(2) Confirmation that all concerns of Winston Salem Regional Office detailed in October 7, 1999 letter
are sufficiently addressed. ,
Regarding the mitigation payment, as soon as I got your letter I asked Brian Maas with ECS to
speak with Ron Ferrell about getting a letter about the mitigation. Because of all the snows, it took a
while to get the letter. Anyway I delivered the letter from Ron Ferrell saying that the Wetlands
Restoration Program would accept payment for the stream mitigation to Cyndi Bell last Friday. -4 ZS
Regarding the October 7 letter concerns, I addressed all of those questions in my response
letter of 11/4/99 as best I could. As I hadn't heard that there were any other unanswered questions
except about the mitigation, I thought that our responses must have been enough. Anyway, I asked
Brian to call Jennifer Fry about this to make sure there weren't any outstanding questions, and he
spoke with her last Friday. Brian said that they had a good phone conversation, and she said that she
hadn't heard that there were any questions that we hadn't answered, and that she didn't have any
problems with the application.
Based on all of this, it looks like the two issues you mentioned have been properly answered,
a would hope that the permit can be processed soon ( I understand that the snows have backed
everythm , but hopefully the backlog will be clearing up soon.)
Kew, please give Brian or me a call if there are any other questions.
Bill Price II
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156 CEL: 336-214-2676
PS: Please express my apologies to Cyndi Bell and your secretary for coming to the office without an
appointment. I was in Raleigh and simply wanted to drop a copy of Ron Ferrell's letter off at your
office as soon as possible, and I didn't know I needed an appointment.
Fax Copies : Ms. Jennifer Fry. NC DENR DWQ PH: 336-771-4600 FX: 336-771-4630
Mr. John Thomas USACOE PH: 919-876-8441 FX: t?1 •?(D -823
Brian Maas. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 336-85 -7160 v
t-->< ZS
E-11
=CA u
ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD.
Geotechnical - Construction Materials - Environmental
February 24, 2000
Mr. John R. Dorney
State of North Carolina
DWQ/Westlands/401 Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Reference: Holly Ridge Site
Burlington, North Carolina ,
DWQ Project No. 99-1003
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS) is currently in the process of assisting Price
Holdings Limited Partnership with wetlands permitting for the above referenced site.
Attached is a letter dated February 16, 2000 from Mr. Ron Ferrell of the NCDENR,
Wetland Restoration Program (WRP) stating that. they would accept payment into the
WRP for stream impacts to the site. Payment into the WRP is the proposed mitigation
plan for the site. If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD.
Brian E. Maas, REM
Principal Scientist
5-C Dundas Circle, Greensboro, NC 27407 - [phone] - Fax [phone]
Offices: Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; Frederick, MD; Richmond, VA; Norfolk, VA; Fredericksburg, VA; Danville, VA;
Roanoke, VA; Williamsburg, VA; Raleigh/Durham, NC; Wilmington, NC; Charlotte, NC; Greensboro, NC; Greenville, SC; Atlanta, GA
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 16, 2000
'.JAMES 13. HUNT JR. ! Mr. Brian E. Maas, REM
GOVERNOR Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
5-C Dundas Circle
Greensboro, NC 27407
SILL HOLMAN
SECRETARY Dear Mr. Maas:
.I
Subject: Holly Ridge Site
KRRR.7M STGVENS,` +. , ECS, Ltd. Job No. G-3271
DIRECTOR 'Alamance County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North
Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is willing to accept
payment for stream impacts associated with the subject project in
accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the
NCWRP and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Based on information
supplied by you in a letter dated January 18, 2000, 497 linear feet of
stream impacts are requested for the subject project. The NCWRP will
provide mitigation as specified in the 401 Water Quality Certification
and/or Section 404 permit (up to 994 linear feet of stream restoration)
for impacts associated with the subject project in Cataloging Unit
03030002 of the Cape Fear River basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information I can
be reached at 919-733-5219.
Sincerely,
lz?azid E. Ferrell
Program Manager
Wetlands Restoration Program
I
cc: John Dorney, DWQ
John Thomas; USACOE
"1-v?r,Th^_-?
;rx a
. WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
1619 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1619
website: h2o.enr.state.nc.us PHONE 919-733-S208 FAX [phone]
+ AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/109a POST-CONSUMER PAPER
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Bill Price
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
Q o?
0
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 3, 2000
DWQ Project No. 99-1003
Alamance County
Reference is made to your application for the discharge of fill material into 499 feet
of a stream channel located at International Drive in the City of Burlington, Alamance County
for commercial development. We understand that you are discussing the possibility of using the
Wetland Restoration Program in order to mitigate impacts associated with this project. Until we
receive written confirmation from Mr. Ron Ferrell that the WRP is prepared to conduct this
mitigation work, your project will remain on hold. Also, we must be assured that the concerns of
the Winston-Salem Regional Office, detailed in their October 7, 1999 letter to you, are
sufficiently addressed.
Thank you for your attention. Please call Jennifer Frye in our Winston-Salem
Regional Office at 336-771-4600 or Cyndi Bell at 919-733-9721 if you have any
questions.
ncere ,
f!?
to R. Dorne
cc: Central Files
Jennifer Frye, WSRO
Mr. John Dorney
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources ?'"?
4401 Reedy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 27607..__ 7-V ayq,,icFzo Af pLy o w^
919-733-9716
and
Mr. Larry Coble
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Rt'Sburces
585 Waughtown St. Winston Salem, NC 27107
336-771-4600
RE: Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Dorney and Mr. Coble;
On 10 / 5 /99 I met at the Holly Ridge site with Jennifer Frye of the DWQ, Brian Maas an
environmental consultant, and Harold Jensen ail engineer.
I received a letter dated October 7, 1999 frorn Mr. Coble which in effect suminari7ed Jennifer
Fry's comments, put the application oil hold pending additional infornation, and set a 3 week deadline
for a response. Subsequently on 10/25/99 the deadline was extended by Mr. Coble one additional
week ( 11/4/99) due to difficulties in getting information.
The Army Corp of Engineers had indicated the channel which crosses the site are waters of the
US . The DWQ representative found some aquatic life in the channel and indicated that DWQ would
have jurisdiction for piping the channel under 401 Water Quality Certification. She indicated the
following information was needed to proceed.
1. Evaluation of avoidance possibilities of the impact by reducing the pipe or rerouting the channel.
r ( ACOE & DWQ said that reducing the pipe to under 150' would not require a hermit.)
2. Decide on the on-site storm water management / treatment plan.
3. Mitigation of the impact by restoration on site, or restoration of a degraded stream in the same
watershed.
4. The last alternative is to pay $125 per lineal foot to the Wetland Restoration fund.
Following are the responses.
1. As indicated in the site history, a perspective purchaser proposed to pipe the entire length of
the channel, and the ACOI and the DWQ said that. that would require an Individual permit, and we
should consider reducing the pipe to less that 500' - which is what we (lid. This application is to pipe
497 feet of the channel, which is a reduction. In thinking about reducing the pile in the channel to
150 ft., that would result in an open channel through the project. We believe this would present a
human health and safety hazard. ( For instance, if we put up a fence or a wall along the channel, a kid
might climb the wall and fall in the ditch, or there might be snakes and mosquitoes in the channel.) I j
An open channel through a commercial project would probably receive more trash and litter that a
piped channel, where runoff flint a storm water management system could be managed and debris can
be controlled before blowing or washing into the water. Also, a significant economic restriction would
be caused by separating the site into two parts resulting in a barrier to people and cars.
In considering rerouting the channel, the channel crosses the middle of the property in the low
area. Moving it in the low area wouldn't make much difference. If you moved the channel all the
way to the front or to the back of the site, this would result in ditches 10 to 20 ft. deep and four 90
degree bends which, unless you hardened the sides, would potentially create erosion at the turns. By
using the pipe, erosion is not possible along the length of the pipe.
2. We didn't understand that permanent stomi water management / treatment was necessary
for the project , but had proposed to provide either a permanent dry settlement basin or it CUS catch
basin for water quality treatment anyway. Now we understand that permanent storm water
management / treatment is required. As we understand it, the CDS type system is not an approved
system, so we would have to provide permanent detention basins as back up. As the CUS devices are
expensive and we would have to provide settlement basins also, we propose to only provide the
pennanent detention basins.
We have been told that the DWQ requires that storm water management / treatment be done
using wet detention basins according to the provisions of the "Storm Water Best Management
Practices" manual Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins published April 1999 by NCDENR. This revised
plan proposes to use Wet Detention Basins designed according to the manual. ( Of note, the "l.1
Introduction" says that this design concept is the " DWQ's approach to water quality management of
storm water in surface drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties, and areas near
high Quality waters and Outstanding Resource Waters ...." per the rules contained in 11.5A NCAC
2H. 1000. Also, Wet Detention Basins arc assumed to remove 85Io 'I'SS. ) Additionally, the
Proposed Plan provides an underwater shelf which is not required in the Section 1.0 Wet Detention
Basins, but which provides additional water quality treatment .
3. Regarding "On-site stream restoratiop", there really isn't any place to do it on site ( See next
Paragraph re the underwater shelf) Regarding "Off-site stream restoration", enclosed is a letter dated
October 15, 1999 from Brian Mats with ICS Ltd. indicating that according to Mr. Ron ITITC1 With the
NC Wetland Restoration Program, there aren't any known local mitigation possibilities.
Anyway, we would ho that because: (1) we are proposing to provide a wet detention pond
that is assumed to remove 85% TSS ( which is the same level of treatment required for surface
drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties , and arras near high Quality Waters
and Outstanding Resource Waters), and (2) we are proposing to provide an underwater shelf which
goes beyond the requirements of Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins, it can be assumed that this will
improve storm water water quality above that normal to piedmont waters. As a result it is hoped that
this may be considered on-site mitigation, and that any mitigation fee could be reduced. ( In that
direction the present channel is approximately 3' wide and the proposed pipe is 4971'. '['his totals
approximately 1,500 square feet. 'rite Proposed Plan provides an underwater shelf of 3,100 s' or
more in the Wet Detention Basin. Couldn't this be considered double the mitigation?)
I hope the above information and the attached information is helpful, and I would be happy to
discuss all of this at your convenience.
ly,

I re, d6nt, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156 CEL: 336-214-2676
ENCLOSURES:
Revised Site Plan with Calculations.
Maas Letter Dated 10/ 15/99
D
AM
e
ON 'NOIONIIlJn©
yd 's?av??nsuo? _ 831N30 ONIddOHS
?v;vamvor?an3 vaavar 30Uld A11OH
_ Wd us 0r0doud
! ? o
a I?.a?
1 l ? i? ?g ?~? ?R Y! ? bra
2 11KKg ??7 ? ;9?Y
Q$ Y'4i
1
vivo -rdr?oudrra?rrr ' ?,?,,? ??:--?--'----
I
__? aT 11 <a
gg V ;Z; II ¢?IL ' l Z • I 1 I?;
d ,y - ? EEE???¢¢¢pppyyy111,,,0?0?0? ? •5 i i a? m «< f l , ' ? ? ? I ??il ,
ig
r•- _. a Nil 1 I V"', a Nll?
dd _ II ff,?,}III
r' t? I 'j?N
rat it t N d1i1?8 II ?l , , .
'r8 i-=== -'A r- .. - _.-_--im,-.kva 31Yrlrva0_•LSIX3 Ve
r
Vol 0,
1
i
? or ? ?
yp r
47 r
d ?a ??? o' •Q t I
ie ? 1
?'ft $? ,?? it r ? 1
03,
QQp _
OO ? a g
w `
15
„ bb 5? qt BSI {//' ?°?? 44
ON 'NOlONmine
'Y'd 'slae7msaoj Ll31N30 0NIdd0HS
3000 A3lOH
?s7a?aruoeq? a?saa?
_ HYId 3115 0NySD(3
;? T Lr(' ?A'`Y
r. ? icy ,na - W4.
/ Pig,
.1( _ 0.•n(_ a ?, F M on 'C",
1 9Y
' - - 25o NSB 31'36 E s!1 '?. cti?-yT-IIiL'5--='?
7° n
L} . Uo " rrE } p 5? E, J { ?I _ \ y. 51
,,' nt ?n I y 27
?1ry ' ' r ar I I ,?'r
` ?• III I! ? ? ? v"t/ ? '?. °c' • ?j ? • $
V
I
t? ?? ? I 1 1 1 ? q 4.?
N4, I
o- ? y ? ? ZL yt •r??0°?Uy ,}? ?Q-4'oQJ y'j?? ?§ii'?" /'.
h ?jr?' ?: b` Ip YS 'I? i
,'"qM?? i U.? 73x12 . ?o c?
Sir - _ /Z. S -4-cr
// .3 •9Q
•k P612 V 1 o V S Q A&o L), .' T = //, Z S-A- G
X iM 2 ?
d ?/OcJS ?1'C?
?4-?0 = ?- (v to
(?42
(OJ?
l 2. S•4c.N- O. O Z(o(o 5;306-,:2_C
(1
N
o I
ool
I /9FoosF
Lam. tea J
jUp-FA,Gt! 17 tooo 5F
PO
.A
Q'

?o •
M
12 to(?
Z? OHO
? ? Pot Y?.cT.?
9(,
D . SCc{/l Z 5-? 1 9, 07 5 ?- - - r n
?? /? cf'
?7?oo?F

O,rr-e-tr 57 /2 uG-rvrzL5-
3S ?ZOGr1 ? ?o0 SF z o r
rzi:?
Nb??"t. QWC?? Ecc?s/p3C' Sol f
??'? F?oaTA T1 a.J
G q z ?i P vj,5, -

,?? ?o TM•? / ova i

Co. 3 30 rT7 -'?
CL.;z (o 's I-
t
A s
0
4 0 17
-j;),a-r*87,Qn aJ -- Ca o ?-{?-s
Ao 7
i
?jl? ?O. CDC Zd? ?.ZB)
3.79 i?
?ls? q gouas S l'. z-
c. = 4-
J,/ri?T ?rl
P. ,7 _
---------------- -
?1 `?? VN/? eTT
1
LL-
co 4
,? p ? N
a._
II (I
z
?F) @ o i
v?
(fl ,
Lit I"
? II
II
1 ~
W
,99-
CL
b<
fl
r,-
1 1
i? Z ` 1 I
? ;WI ? ? I I I
34
I W ti
V)
a- ,
`',o
`D ,
1 W
I W
LLJ
I. '. ??
41

ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD.
Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental
October 15, 1999
Mr. Bill Price
P.O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Reference: Review of Stream Mitigation Options
Holly Ridge Project
Burlington, North Carolina
Dear Nlr. Price:
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS), we have reviewed some options for stream
mitigation at the above referenced site. As discussed with your site engineer, and a due the size
and complexity of the project, on-site stream mitigation is not an option. As mandated, we
attempted to identity potential stream mitigation sites located within the same drainage basin in
the Burlington area. We contacted Mr. Ron Ferrel of the NC Wetland restoration Program to help
us locate potential stream mitigation sites in the area. According to Mr. Ferrel, there are no
current sites for stream mitigation in the Burlington area. Mr. Ferrel stated that their agency has
been working hard with Burlington and Alamance County Parks and Recreation and other such
agencies to find candidate sites and at this time, there are no such sites available.
At this time, we recommend that you inform the NC Division of Water Quality that we have not
been successful in locating land for stream mitigation and that your proposed mitigation plan is to
pay into the Wetland Restoration Fund.
ECS appreciates the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you any questions or need
additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
Brian E. Maas, REM
Principal Scientist
qIq_ 1 '5-_'7 ,21
5-C Dundas Circle, Greensboro, NC 27407 • [phone] • Fax [phone]
Offices: Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; Frederick, MD; Richmond, VA; Norfolk, VA; Fredericksburg, VA; Danville, VA;
Roanoke, VA; Williamsburg, VA; Raleigh/Durham, NC; Wilmington, NC; Charlotte, NC; Greensboro, NC; Greenville, SC; Atlanta, GA

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATLIZ QUALI'T'Y
October 7, 1999

t

t rw.., ?i
dr 'N . t 1., 1 • , t
.1
Certified Mail 11-536 303 470
Return Receipt Requested
Bill Price
Price Holdings Limned Partnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
SUBJECT: Request for Additional Irtforntation '
DNVQ Project 11119 0373'
Alanlance County
Dear Mr. Price:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your plans for the discharge of fill
material into 499 feel of-a stream channel located at International Drive in the City of
Burlington, Alamance County for commercial development. Insufficient evidence is present in
our files to conclude that your project must be built as planted in waters and/or wetlands in
accordance with 15A NCAC 211 .0506. 't'herefore, unless modifications of (lie proposal are
made as described below, we will have to stove toward denial of you 401 Celdricalion as
required by 15A NCAC 211 .0507(e) and will place this project on hold as incomplele until we
receive this additional information. We are requesting (by copy of this letter) that the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers place your project on administrative hold.
(1) Flease provide us with information supporting your position that stales your project
must be conshIlctcd as planned and that you have no practicable alternative to placing fill in these
waters and/or wellands. Specifically, can you construct your commercial developnlei) l with less than
150 feet of stream impacts or by mininnizing impact to road crossing? Any documentation such as maps
and narrative lhal you can supply to address alternative design for your projecl may be helpful in our
review Of you 401 Certification. --
(2) Since on-site stormwater management will be required as a condition of any DWQ
approval and your,
pplication proposes two options, please notify us as to which system will be
employed. For any system not included in NCUI-'NlZ-I:)W0's Srmmmrater Best Ahmagemc'nr /'rncliccs
manual, a monitoring and economic analysis will be required, as well as a hack-up detention pond site.
The Division strongly recommends we( detention ponds as either primary management or as a hack-up
to the continuous deflective system.
(3) The project will also require connpcnsatory mitigation as described in 15A NCAC 214
.0506(h). In your application you mention contributing to the Wetlands IZestoralion Fund. Please
provide documentation that you have evaluated on-si(e mitigation or local (sub-hasin) channel
restoration as alternatives to contrihuting to WIZP. If on-site or local mitigation is chosen, please
provide a detailed rniligation plan for construction, restoration, and monitoring, as outlined in
Conrpensaln/_t• 14'erlancl Afili,e;arion Gni(le ines, NC1)E'NIZ-DWQ.
('! NP 1"? f"• ?- i S05 WAUGNTOWN STREET, WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA 27107
PlIONE336-771-4600 FAX [phone]
,A ,. ^^•^. •':? AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50". RECYCLFO/10% POST-CONSUMER PAPER

Price Holdings Limited Partnership
Page 2
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending a copy _of this
information to me and one copy to John R. Forney, 1401 IRccdy Crcck Road, Raleigh, NC 27607.
If we do not hear from you in three weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this
project and we will consider the project as withdrawn. If you have any questions regarding this
matter, please contact Mrs. Jennifer Frye or myself at (3:16) 771-4600.
Sincerely,
Larry D. Coble
WQ Regional Supervisor
cc: Raleigh Field Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wetlands/401 Unit Central Office
Central Files
WSRO
- E-)
r
i r
HOLLY RIDGE
? International Drive
Burlington 1`vC
?c?l?-ems
®r- A
Govt' To

8/26/99
Mr. John Thomas
US-ACOE
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
PH: 919-876-8441
FX: 919-876-5823
and
Mr. Danny Smith
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road.
Raleigh, NC 27607
919-733-9716
RE: Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Thomas and Mr. Smith,
Following is a Pre-Construction Notification Application for a US-ALOE 404 Nationwide 26
Permit and a NC-DQW 401 Water Quality Certification to pipe 4951' of a 670 P drainage way for
Holly Ridge, a proposed 12.5 acre commercial development fronting on International Drive in
Burlington. N.C. The property is owned by Price Holdings, Limited Partnership. We understand that
this site does not involve any wetlands. A prospective purchaser has discussed piping the drainage
way for most of the full length of the ditch and pursuing an Individual Permit with ACOE, and DWQ
personnel; however, due to the extensive permitting processes understood to be involved with an
Individual Permit, we have decided to reduce the length of the pipe to less than 5001' and to make the
application for a Nationwide 26 Permit.
( An overview of the history of this site and environmental evaluations is attached.)
PERMIT APPLICATION AND PLANS.
The site development plan presented provides for piping 4951' of the existing +- 6701'
drainage way that would provide bypass transport for off-site storm water draining across the
property. As this exceeds 1501' but is less than 5001' this would fall under the ACOE Nationwide 26
permit, and a NC-DWQ 401 water quality certification. I understood that some mitigation may be
required or payment of a mitigation fee payable to the NC Wetlands Restoration Fund.
The plan also includes temporary storm water erosion control measures consisting of 2
settlement basins, temporary ditches, ditch piping, sediment traps, and silt fencing to be installed and
maintained during the land disturbing phases of development. This would be permitted and monitored
by the City of Burlington.
Although no further mitigation fees or measures are understood to be necessary, we do believe
preservation of water quality is an important objective. To that end, we have proposed to provide one
of two alternatives to improve the water quality of storm water that would fall on and eventually flow
from the site.
Alternative A is to install two Continuous Deflection Separation Catch Basins ( CDS ).
This CDS system is an innovative device that removes suspended solids, gas ,
oil, and grease from storm water. The system has no moving parts, is designed
to be low maintenance, and will not clog. ( See attachment for design and
technical data)
Alternative B is to construct the 2 temporary settlement basins as permanent structures
of standard approved design.
If the CDS system is acceptable, we may consider including the storm water flow from off-site
drainage area No.3 in the CDS system # 2.
We would hope that these WQ treatment alternatives would be considered on-site mitigation,
and that mitigation fee could be reduced.
I hope the above information and the attached overview of the situation is helpful, and I would
-cZdiscuss these plans, and the proposed alternative water quality protective measures at your
C convey ence.
yt
ce II ?
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156
CEL: 336-214-2676
CONTACTS:
Project Engineer. Harold Jensen. Jensen Environmental Engineers PH/FX 336-889-5650
Environmental Consultant. Brian Mass. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 336-856-7160
NC State Historic Preservation Office. Contact 8/26/99. Will receive copy from DWQ.
Renee Early 919-733-7305
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Contact 8/26/99
Dorothy 919-856-4520. Candace Martino, Ext #18

PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
12.5 acres. International Drive, Burlington , NC.
SITE HISTORY 8/26/99
This 12.5 acre property has been in the Price family since the mid 1950's.
In the Summer of 1995, I met on the property with an ACOE field representative and an
environmental engineer. I expressed our desire to drain and till a pond located partially on this property
and partially on adjoining property. The ALOE agent told me that we could breach the dam, and that
typically, after a drying period, that filling of the pond would be allowed. So we breached the dam, and
drained the pond .
Later ACOE visits indicated that the former pond was drryying in most areas, but that there were
some possible wetland areas which further drying would probabl resolve.
In the Fall of `97, as the pond bottom had dried up, I told your environmental engineer that we
wanted to dig a ditch in the former pond bed. The engineer observed the site and said that because we
were going to dig ditches in dry ground, and because there were no regulations about digging in dry
ground, the ditching would be allowable, so we did. This provided a relatively straight drainage way
across the property.
In September of '98 1 met with an ALOE field representative, the architect for a prospective
purchaser, and our environmental engineer on the site. We said we wanted to pipe along the drainage
way ditch and till the old pond area . The ACOE agent indicated that the ditch was probably Water's of
the US. In any event, we could pipe up to 150 1' with no permit. If we had more that 150 1' but less than
5001', the project could be done under a Nationwide 26 permit; however, we would need to mitigate or
pay a mitigation fee to the NC Wetlands Restoration Fund. ( Later on I heard that this lineal footage has
to do with how much is considered to be Water's of the US.) Anyway, if we proposed to pipe over 500
1', that would require an Individual Permit which caused a much more difficult mitigation process. We
also said we wanted to fill a channel that had been scoured in the pond bed but was not carrying any
water then. He indicated that he observed no wetlands on the site and that he (the ACOE) had no interest
in the scoured channel. As there were no wetlands observed and the channel didn't seem to be of
concern to the ACOE, and as we understood that the NCDWQ only required a 401 Certification if the
ACOE said they were dealing with Water's of the US or wetlands, in the Fall of `98, I had the channel
filled.
In April of `99 an ACOE field representative and a DWQ representative met with an
environmental engineer representing the prospective buyer. ( I had understood that the meeting had been
canceled, and I did not attend.) I was told that at that meeting, the representative of the prospective buyer
said that the buyer wished to pipe the drainage way pretty much all the way across the entire site . The
ACOE and DWQ representatives apparently responded that that would probably require an Individual
Permit and confirmed that that sort of permit was very complicated and took a long time. The DWQ
representative referred the buyer to a representative of the DWQ in the Raleigh office .
A little later on, ( Spring 99 ) I attended a meeting at DWQ headquarters in Raleigh with
representatives of the prospective buyer and a DWQ agent at which several development ideas for the
Individual Permit were discussed. From that meeting, it seemed to me that an individual permit would be
very difficult and expensive to get.
In the next week or so, a representative of the prospective purchaser and I spoke with the ACOE
representative by phone to discuss the project. There was some talk about moving the ditch around and
to reduce the length of the pipe . The ACOE representative said that changing a ditch was the same thing
as piping a ditch, and wouldn't help much. ( Sounded like it would probably be more of a problem.)
After that , it seemed to me than the only way that we could do anything would be to reduce the length of
the pipe and go for a Nationwide 26 Permit.
COMMENT - All of the work we have done on the property to this time was after talking with
with an ACOE representative and /or an environmental consultant. We never asked for a permit because
we understood that all the work we were going to do was not restricted by anybody. The ACOE
representative has visited the property a couple of times , and so far as I know, the work we have done
was OK. We do understand that piping over 150 P of a ditch that is considered Water's of the US would
require some permits. As a result, there needs to be some determination of how much of the drainage
way is Water's of the US.

DWQ ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #) _
26
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFCATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES MUST BE SENT TO, THE NC DIVISION OF WATER
QUALITY. ATTN: JOHN DORNEY. 4401 REEDY CREEK ROAD.
RALEIGH. NC 27607. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE.
1. OWNER'S NAMME: Price Holdings Limited Partnershi
2. MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
CITY: Burlington
SUBDIVISIONNAME Holly Ridge
STATE: NC
ZIP CODE: 27216
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE): International Drive
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER: (HOME) 336-584-5156 (WORK)
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS.
PHONE NUMBER: Bill Price
(Same)
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Alamance _NEAR.ESTTOWN: Burlington

SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ECT.)
International Drive
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Gunn Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER, (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURSE WATERS (ORW), WATER
SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES ( ) NO ( X) IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIROMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES ( ) NO (X )
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST OF
COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION? N/?1
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROJECT? YES ( ) NO ( X) IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES ( ) NO (X ) IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBERS OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: 12.5
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
0
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0
FLOODING: 0
DRAINAGE : 0
EXCAVATION: 0
OTHER: 0
TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED:
0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROTECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION:
LENGTH BEFORE: 499 FT AFTER: 495
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): 3 - 4 FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: 1 3 Ft AFTER: 1" - 3" I'T
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL:
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: COONSTRUCTION OF A DAMIFLOODING:
OTHER: Diverting flow into new pipe next to existing channel
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND? NSA WHAT IS THE EXPECTED
POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DISCTIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED? (ATTACH PLANS; 81/2 BY 11 DRAWINGS ONLY)
Trench with trackhoe for installation of 7' diameter CMP
beside existing channel to divert flow, construct headwalls,
and fill in existing channel and over,diversion pipe to final
grade.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Construction of culvert to pass water
under planned parking lot.
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT IN
WETLANDS (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS)
No wetlands
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND/OR
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERIVE REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALY
LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR
CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED
PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: Concurrent
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA
WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED
Concurrent
17. DOES THE PROJECT 24VOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OT THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND? YES ( ) NO (X ) (IF NO, GO TO 16)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPERATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT? YES( ) NO ( )
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REFIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADM 4ISTRATION-STATE CLEARINGHOUSE YES ( ) NO ( )
IF ANSWER 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATIONFROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OF FILL MATERIAL INTO
WETLANDS: NSA
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES, AND
PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAM (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY
MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET
OF 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OF THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE IMPACTED
BY PRODUCT.
c. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPOERTY?
f. IF APPLICABLE. WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL? -
Municipal
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WTLANDS OR WATERS OF THE US MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
Z) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
AR DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
WTTH THE NORTH OLINACOASTA'ROPOSED
A
MA AGEMENT PROGRAM,
/ l sL
'S AGENT'S SIGNATURE eW
CIO
DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED).
n n n n R ??
1 / •%,?: e
I ? N
j ( Ig /i A , ?a ¢ N
1 // Q
/i •b
\ r
5LI
06- F
.?4 . / •?-x. "'?? r - I C•][ VOS DRAINACE?R"ISl'
19'/cm BOX CV T I II
11 )II ?•' ;.W 9 RI RA,? IN BOTT II - z
1.111 I,,, I IIA O 'r:'II b Ii? V y . _
o I >??o m g
c=is53'
I ?> Vii' •' ?1?n xt _ ? x
.-4, RCP
?
d >

gag
Y??
? ©
? f?
?
ky
? zqz
?i
z3

m PROPOSED SITE PUN
HOLLY RIDGE
t ' ? SHOPPING CENTER
g
BURLINGTON, NC
SS2? :
4!22k? 2
0 0
den s n En rlronm en tal
Consultants, P.A.
1 1
i ?

\)OL- JtAg- or

I i

`??? -- ,4013
S?=

Z

4 7 -
G?J

-1-1z
n ?

Or7
Z2.O J' CAS
42 IL

f'_
I?
I'I
?i
,.s
I,
itl
I
I?[
i
E,
III
I '
1
I?
Q
?/GL (: 12(p ?NGy ??,'?%''U,?L? ? '7 /? l)? i Y??; .??J.J? = i :ACT(,.-.

-,-_? -
J
I S ?^
i
' i
i1
i
ii
271 ' ?T70 S

,l
;i
i?
I' !
i?
I:
?I
ii
li
!il
i
u
II;
i.
i
III
II'
,I.
I1
?.I
?? s
(R)
Bill Price - Holly Ridge Shopping Center
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation
Comment: CMP Culvert Under Parking Lot
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 6.85 ft
Slope.......... 0.0100 ft/ft
Manning's n.... 0.024
Discharge...... 326.00 cfs
Depth.......... 6.85 ft
=82.2 in
Use 84" CMP
Velocity...... 8.86 fps
Flow Area..... 36.80 sf
Critical Slope 0.0143 ft/ft
Critical Depth 4.79 ft
Percent Full.. 100.00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 326.00 cfs
QMAX @.94D.... 350.68 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
10
i
i ?

?' . Q04L
14,4C 7

? ?c,o OVA C(?f 9,

0?
IQ

i.,
.I
r
i
l
i
?Dr GUr ; r' TG
;r

?i
?a
9

Bill Price - Holly Ridge Shopping Center
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation - 84" CMP OUTLET PROTECTION
Comment: OUTLET DESIGN
Solve For...... Actual Depth
Diameter....... 7.00 ft
Slope.......... 0.0100 ft/ft
Manning's n.... 0.024
Discharge...... 346.00 cfs
Depth.......... 5.74 ft
Velocity...... 10.25 fps
Flow Area..... 33.76 sf
Critical Slope 0.0142 ft/ft
Critical Depth 4.90 ft
Percent Full.. 81.95%
Froude Number. 0.72
Full Capacity. 346.03 cfs
QMAX @.94D.... 372.23 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
1

TE?

' 'LVLC?v2 ? ?J?
f
i?
i

n

A" I

I `mo' (_? La - .,
?,?J •- -
?

•i'

Circular Channel: Manning's Equation -
HOLLY RIDGE SC
Comment: CULVERT NO 1 OFFSITE DRAINAGE NORTH
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 1.91 ft Velocity...... 8.36 fps
Slope.......... 0.0143 ft/ft Flow Area..... 2.87 sf
Manning's n.... 0.013 Critical Slope 0.012 6 ft/ft
Discharge...... 24.00 cfs Critical Depth 1.73 ft
Depth.......... 1.91 ft Percent Full.. 100.00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 24.00 cfs
AMAX @.94D.... 25.82 cfs
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation - HOLLY RIDGE SC 11
Comment: CULVERT NO 2 ONSITE DRAINAGE WEST
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 1.68 ft
Slope.......... 0.0143 ft/ft
Manning's n.... 0.013
Discharge...... 17.00 cfs
Depth.......... 1.68 ft
Velocity...... 7.67 fps
Flow Area..... 2.22 sf
Critical Slope 0.0126 ft/ft
Critical Depth 1.51 ft
Percent Full.. 100,00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 17.00 cfs
AMAX @.94D.... 18.29 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
?:?
i
;.;
'.
??
? ?,, ??
... . _
_' -, - ,
i
'' - _..
.;
?. ? ? f.
C,vl P y; ?nJ ? ?r

A
CD,f)
CapiTLtj U OUS
,5> Y S;Y ffi-4K\
D?.FC-?T?uz:? S?eA?T•lo?
CDS Technologies, Inc. provides products and services to municipalities,
public agencies and industry, based on the unique solids/liquids separation
technology known as Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS). The parent
company, CDS Technologies Ltd. - which is headquartered in Australia -
has developed and owns this non-blocking screening technology, which is
protected by US, Australian and international patent applications.
Continuous deflective separation (CDS) technology is an innovative and highly
effective new solution to address wet weather stormwater pollution problems.
CDS technology offers an effective method of preventing pollutants -such as
street litter trash and debris, vegetation and coarse sediments and the attached
pollutants -nutrients and heavy metals - from entering our waterways.
As with most great technological breakthroughs, simplicity prevails: The
CDS system controls the water to enable a natur sT eparation of solids from
the water carrying them. The first non-blocking and non-mechanical s sy tem,
CDS uses fine-screening to prove e a much more e ioef3"' nt and cost-effective
alternative to previous generations of technology. The CDS technology is
an essential first component of a "treatment train" to protect and enhance
the performance of other filtration systems and biological systems.
The major application for the technology is currently to clean gross pollution
from stormwater before it enters natural waterways, but through continuing
IS research, the company has extended its product range for use in removing ,•
oil and grease from stormwater flows, industrial and food processing indus-
tries and to separate floatables and remove solids from combined sewer
overflows (CSO).
CDS: Non-blocking and Non-Mechanical
"AAeffective eoarator of cross pollutants wiihni,t
the separation screen becoming blocked."
" No conditions could be created which produced
any signi scant oc ing o t e screen.
rpm summary of resits of an independent sruoy by Monash Unmersl y,
Melbourne, Austraha or Tony if F Wong, Department of Civil Eny,n eenn9,
February 1995

.t.rY
(YJ(.?44?v t' ? t•?' .Y -?` rye.
CDs technology uses indirect screening to capture even the small materials
Pollutant particles remain within the unit white the water passes through the
separation screen.
Safe Pollutant Removal Removing debris caught by CDS units is
ow-cost. safe and easy Captured materials can be removed simply and
mechan raliv by basket, base flow take off (pump), ciam-shell bucket, or
u,.anac the need for human handhnq of Ianae,ous m.aterial,.
CDS Technology Key Features
Efficient
• Captures greater than 95 percent of water-borne
litter and aeons.
• Effective in removing particles as small as coarse
sedimenu. ?
• Retains trapped pollutants when CDS processing
capaaty is ex eo during nirequent io s riC'
Large Flow Range
t to 300 cubic feet per second (CFS).
Non-Blocking and Non-Mechanical
Separation screen does not clog-and requires no power
or supporting infrastructure.
Low-Cost, Safe and Easy Pollutant Removal
Low maintenance by mechanical rather than human
methods.
Cost-Effective
Lowest overall cost per pound of gross pollutants
remove .
Unobtrusive and Easy to Install
Coma act and below ground. Limited space require-
ent. Ideal or retrotit and redevelopment applications
Applications
• Stormwater
• Free oil and areese controls with sorters >k
• cbu
• Pretreatment Water
• Industrial
• Pretreatment for O/W Sep/Sand filters media
• Biofiltration ponds and infiltration basins

,.Zy,rl. 11 'R
(
J t
^ ? t
f J? kti l
The CDS unit can be placed in line
with an existing stormwater system.
Its remarkably small footprint takes
little space and requires no support
infrastructure.

How the CDS System Works:
Pollutants are captured inside the
separation chamber, while the water
passes through the separation
screen.
7 H ;,
r '
r I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division'of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mr. Bill Price
PRICE Holdings
® ?.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 4, 2000
Alamance County
DWQ Project ## 991003
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, WRP
PO Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
i
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place till
material in 495 linear feet of streams for the purpose of developing a commercial site at Holly Ridge site on
International Drive at Burlington and Alamance County, as you described in your application dated August 26,
1999, 2000, revised dated November 4, 1999 with a subsequent letter dated February 24, 2000. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3108. This
certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition,
you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not
limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed
regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise
specified in the General Certification. This Certification replaces one issued to you on March 9, 2000.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given it copy of this Certification
and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and
any additional conditions listed below.
1. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with remaining jurisdictional wetlands and waters to notify the
state in order to assure compliance for future wetland and/or water impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place within 30 days
of the date of this letter or the issuance of the 304 Permit (whichever is later).
2. An additional condition is that a final, written stoomwater management plan shall be approved by this
Office before the impacts specified in this Certification occur. The stormwater management plan
must include plans and specifications for stormwater management facilities designed to remove 8C,TSS according to the most recent version of the NC DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual. Also, before any permanent building is occupied at the subject site, the stromwater
management facilities, as approved by this Office, must be constructed and operational, and the
stormwater plan, as approved by this Office, shall be implemented.
We understand that you have chosen to contribute to the Wetland Restoration Program in order to compensate
for these impacts to wetlands and/or streams. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2R .0402, this contribution will
satisfy our compensatory mitigation requirements under 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h). According to 15A NCAC 2H
.0506(h), feet of restoration will be required. Until the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your check
(made payable to: DENR - Wetland Restoration Program), wetland or stream fill shall not occur. i'vIr. Ron Ferrell
should be contacted at 919-733-5083 ext. 358 if you have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration
Program. You have six months from the date of this Certification to make this payment. For accounting
purposes, this Certification authorizes the till of 495 feet of streams, in 030603 river and subbasin and 495
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27669-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX n 733-9959
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 501.o recycled/l tJ°b post consumer paper

linear feet of stream restoration are required. Please be aware that the Wetland Restoration Program
(WRP) rules require rounding of acreage amounts to one-quarter acre increments (15A 2R.0503(b)).
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-9646.
Su rel ,
rr . Stevens
Attachment
cc: Corps of Engineers Winston-Salem Field Office
Winton-Salem DWQ Regional Office
File copy
Central Files
Ron Ferrell; Wetland Restoration Program
Todd St. John
Brian Maas', Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
NORTH CAROLINA-DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION

SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2 H.0500, Price Holdings Corp. in Alamance County has permission as
outline below for the purpose(s) of proposed commercial development. All activities associated with these
authorized impacts must be conducted with the conditions listed in the attached cetification transmitttal letter. THIS
CERTIFICATION IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE ATTACHMENTS.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REQUIREMENT WETLAND RESTORATION PROGRAM
LOCATION Holy Ridge Site
COUNTY: Alamance
BASIN/SUBBASIN 030603
As required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506, and the conditions of this certification, you are required to compensate
for the above impacts through the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of wetlands and surface waters
as outlined below prior to conducting any activities that impact or degrade the waters of the state.
Note: Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the wetland Restoration Programs must be rounded
to one-quarter acre increments according to 15 2r.0503(b)
acres of Class WL wetlands
acres of riparian wetland
acres of non-riparian wetlands
acres of Class SWL wetlands
495 linear feet of stream channel
(other) None
One of the options you have available to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements is through the
payment of a fee to the Wetlands Restoration Fund per NCAC 2R .0503. If you choose this option, please sign this
form and mail it to the Wetlands Restoration Fund at the address listed below. An invoice for the appropriate
amount of payment will be sent to you upon receipt of this form. PLEASE NOTE, THE ABOVE IMPACTS ARE
NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL YOU RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR PAYMENT HAS BEEN
PROCESSED BY THE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM.
Signature
Date
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
1619 Mail Service Center
RALEIGH, N.C. 27669-1619
[phone]

i??
??
?,
i
I?
\"
??
?\?'
Vii,
? I ? ? ?:?,l?i ? ? ?
? `? ? ? ?
G
i ? `?
i ?
i \ ? D,l I ?U'
wDIVI'Si 11 Of Water QuaC1ty .
MEMO From: D te: 3 ?? ?v
To: n Subject:
c
A,!?(M .gym y?`•v5 (?N.'?L_

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
PO Box 2(9535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 / Phone: [phone]
y
tadp,G ??cu1 1 re V ', Lvc' C ?/
•, . 1
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mr. Bill Price
PRICE Holidays Corp.
40
UX?
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
March 9, 2000
Alamance County
DWQ Project # 991003
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, WRP
PO Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
material in 495 linear feet of streams for the purpose of developing a commercial site at Holly Ridge site on
International Drive at Burlington and Alamance County, as you described in your application dated August 26,
1999, 2000 with a subsequent letter dated February 24, 2000. After reviewing your application, we have decided
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3108. This certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number 26 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition, you should get any other federal,
state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire
when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification
and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and
any additional conditions listed below.
1. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with remaining jurisdictional wetlands and waters to notify the
state in order to assure compliance for future wetland and/or water impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place within 30 days
of the date of this letter or the issuance of the 404 Permit (whichever is later).
2. An additional condition is that a final, written stormwater management plan shall be approved by this
Office before the impacts specified in this Certification occur. The stormwater management plan
must include plans and specifications for stormwater management facilities designed to remove 85°o
TSS according to the most recent version of the NC DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual. Also, before any permanent building is occupied at the subject site, the stromwater
management facilities, as approved by this Office, must be constructed and operational, and the
stormwater plan, as approved by this Office, shall be implemented.
We understand that you have chosen to contribute to the Wetland Restoration Program in order to compensate
for these impacts to wetlands and/or streams. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2R.0402, this contribution will
satisfy our compensatory mitigation requirements under 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h). According to 15A NCAC 2H
.0506(h), feet of restoration will be required. Until the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your check
(made payable to: DENR - Wetland Restoration Program), wetland or stream 611 shall not occur. Mr. Ron Ferrell
should be contacted at 919-733-5083 ext. 358 if you have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration
Program. You have one month from the date of this Certification to make this payment. For accounting purposes,
this Certification authorizes the fill of 495 feet of streams, in 030603 river and subbasin and 495 linear feet of
Division of Water Quality - Non-Discharge Branch
1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27669-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPA S AND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2 H .0500, Al ance County has permission as outline below for the
purpose(s) of proposed commercial development. A 1 activities associated with these authorized impacts must be
conducted with the conditions listed in the attached cetification transmitttal letter. THIS CERTIFICATION IS NOT
VALID WITHOUT THE ATTACHMENTS.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REQUIREMENT WETLAND RESTORATION PROGRAM
LOCATION Holy Ridge Site
COUNTY: Alamance
BASIN/SUBBASIN 030603
As required by 15A NCAC 2H.0506, and the conditions of this certification, you are required to compensate
for the above impacts through the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of wetlands and surface waters
as outlined below prior to conducting any activities that impact or degrade the waters of the state.
Note: Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the wetland Restoration Programs must be rounded
to one-quarter acre increments according to 15 2r.0503(b)
acres of Class WL wetlands
acres of riparian wetland
acres of non-riparian wetlands
acres of Class SWL wetlands
495 linear feet of stream channel
(other) None
One of the options you have available to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements is through the
payment of a fee to the Wetlands Restoration Fund per NCAC 2R.0503. If you choose this option, please sign this
form and mail it to the Wetlands Restoration Fund at the address listed below. An invoice for the appropriate
amount of payment will be sent to you upon receipt of this form. PLEASE NOTE, THE ABOVE IMPACTS ARE
NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL YOU RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR PAYMENT HAS BEEN
PROCESSED BY THE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM.
Signature Date
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
1619 Mail Service Center
RALEIGH, N.C. 27669-1619
[phone]

stream restoration are required. Please be aware that the Wetland Restoration Program (WRP) rules
require rounding of acreage amounts to one-quarter acre increments (15A 2R.0503(b)).
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-9646.
T
MIYI 4' A ' 11
T. Ste ns
Attachment
cc: Corps of Engineers Winston-Salem Field Office
Winton-Salem DWQ Regional Office
File copy
Central Files
Ron Ferrell; Wetland Restoration Program
Todd St. John
Brian Maas', Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
NORTH CAROLINA-DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
MAR-02-00 11:49 AM U 3365945156 P.01
March 1, 2000
FAX T():
Mr. John Vorney
NC Dept.of Environrnent & Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 27607
PH: 919- 733-7015 FX: 919-733-9959
?b DIiG? ?liv
RE: 11013- Ridge, Burlington) NC
Dear Mr. Dorncy,
Based on your letter dated January 3rd you indicated there were 2 issues regarding our permit
app lic4ttion.
(if You needed a Letter from Ron T'crreil regarding Mitigation by paying a fee to the wetlands
Restoration Fund, and
(2) Confirmation that all concerns of Winston Salem Regional Office detailed in October 7, 1999 letter
are sufficient] y addressed.
Regarding the mitigation paynicnt, as soon as I got your letter I asked Brian Maas with ECS to
speak with Ron Ferrell about getting a letter about the mitigation. Because of all the snows, it took a
while to get the letter. Anyway 1 delivered the letter from Ron Ferrell saying that the Wetlands
Restoration Program would accept payment for the stream mitigation to Cyndi Bell last Friday.
Regarding the (ktober. 7 letter concerns, I addressed all of those questions in my response
letter of 11/4/99 as best I could. As I hadn't heard that there were any other unanswered questions
except about the mitigation, I thought that otlr responses must have been enough. Anyway, I asked
Brian to call Jennifer Fry about this to make sure there weren't any outstanding questions, and he
spoke with her last Friday. Brian said that they had a good phone conversation, and she said that she
hadn't heard that there were any questions that we hadn't answered, and that she didn't have any
problems with the application.
Based on all of this, it looks like the two issues you mentioned have been properly answered,
would hope that the permit can be processed soon ( I understand that the snows have backed
everythtn ,but hopefully the backlog will be clearing up soon.)
??tv please give Brian or me a call if there are any other questions.
Bill Price 11
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Berlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156 CET.: 336-214.2676
PS: Please express my apologies to Cyndi Bell and your secretary for coming to the office without an
appointment. I was in Raleigh and simply wanted to drop a copy of Ron Ferrell's letter off at your
officc as soon as possible, and I didn't know I needed an appointment.
Fax Copies : Ms. Jennifer Fry. NC DF.NR DWQ PH: 336-771-4600 FX: 336-771-4630
Mr. John Thomas USACOF. PH: 919-876-8441 FX:
Brian Maas. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 336-856-7160
MAR-14-00 03:55 PM
DATE 3114/00
FAX TO: 919-733-9959
Mr. Derr T. Stevens
NC Dept-of Environment & Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 27607
PH: 919 - 733 - 7015
RE:
3365045156 P.01

401 Water Quality Certification
Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Stevens;
We received the 401 Water Quality Certification dated 3/9/00 today, and there are a couple of
points that it may be helpful to clarify.
1) The letter is addressed to Pricc Ffolidavs Corp, Should that be Price Holdings Limited b
Partnership (tlic Owner) or Price Holdings Corp. ( the Gcncral Partner of the owner) ?
2) The SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPACTS ,,,in the 1st. line indicates "... Ajaman?& rw
County leas permission ,. " Shouldn't that be the owner, price Holdings Limited Partnership.?
3) At line 4 of the 1st PaWaph, reference is made to our original Application dated August 26,
1999, but our Reviscd-12-crntit-AppRotion dated 11/4/99 is not included. (See 1/ 4 following.)
-Tire -wading about, "... additional conditions... wires submission of a final storm
wit management plan.
w w What happened was that we didn't understand that we had to have a storm water plan in rd two
;et the 401 Water Quality Certification, Notwithstanding, we thought storm water management was
rmpomant, so our original August 26,1999 Application provided for 2 alternatives, either a CDS device *o
a "dry detention basin" to handle storm water. Subwqucnlly we were told that in order to get a 401
Certification we had to have an "approved" wet detention system designed according to the BMP manual
for storm water management. So we provided the en4inecred plans for the wet detention with our 11/4/99
Revised Permit Application. We asked a couple of times, but never had any indication that there was
anything amiss with those wet detention plans. Anyway, as this Approval Letter omits tic reference our
1114/99 Revised Application, does that mean that the CDS devices or the dry detention provided)' to
migimi ation was what was approved? Or was it the 11/4/99 wet de' ndon t halwaspproved?
lse necessary to a " 1~inal Flan" beyond whichever was apV?xed-.
p royal Letter, down at next to the last line_on-the-first-e, says that we have one
ate o firativrrt?pay fhe mitigation fee to the Weand Fund. The SUMMARY
IMPACTS ... letter, m the last paragraph, says we have to r uest an invoice from the
tion Fund by sending in the form, and that no impacts can be adc until the fee is paid.
Anyway, w e understood from someone in the Division of Water Quality that th fcc had to be paid before
making any impacts, but not that it had to be paid within 30 days. We unders d that the money for a
113472ftf)-15ought to be paid before any impacts, but, as it could be a little wh le before work on ale
pro t woul , and that's a lot of money for a small business to pay up fron , we wonder if there is
so w v that fee paid before the impact starts instead of right a way,
Thant o for your response, and if there are any questions, please give Brian or me a call.
Cordiall
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156 CEL:336-214-2676
Ps
:,w ` 0 1? S n e)
PS: I faxed Mr. Dorney on 3/1 about the Certification, and your letter was written on the 9th. That
certainly is a prompt response. Thanks.
Fax Copy : Brian Maas. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 336-S-56-7160
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
o o
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
-U'O 21 , X000
PT (C? ?ounty nGi 16Q
(
(fly( ,? I DWQ Project # "-ll
APPROVAL of 301 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, WRP
b a 0
C_ P- 47
2?' ? '- tx ir ^?QQ '
Dear Mr. 1r / C e--- do `d 1
You have our approval, in accorda'n(?ce with the attached onditions and t ose liste below, to place fill
ma e 'al in _ 'tlinear feet of strean for the purposof at^
in ?ounty, as you described in your application dated , 39@0. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General W ter Quality Certification Number 3 (D? . ??
This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number WO when the Corps of Engineers issues it. In
addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including
(but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply
Watershed regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. ff you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification
and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and
any additional conditions listed below.
1. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with remaining jurisdictional wetlands and waters to notify the
state in order to assure compliance for future wetland and/or water impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place within 30 days
of the date of this letter or the issuance of the 404 Permit (whichever is later).
2. An additional condition is that a final, written stormwater management plan shall be approved by this
Office before the impacts specified in this Certification occur. The stormwater management plan
must include plans and specifications for stormwater management facilities designed to remove 85%
TSS according to the most recent version of the NC DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual. Also, before any permanent building is occupied at the subject site, the stromwater
management facilities, as approved by this Office, must be constructed and operational, and the
stormwater plan, as approved by this Office, shall be implemented.
We understand that you have chosen to contribute to the Wetland Restoration Program in order to compensate
for these impacts to wetlands and/or streams. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2R .0402, this contribution will
satisfy our compensatory mitigation requirements under 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h). According to 15A NCAC 2H
.0506(h), feet of restoration will be required. Until the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your check
(made payable to: DENR - Wetland Restoration Program), wetland or stream till shall not occur. hlr. Ron Ferrell
should be contacted at 919-733-5083 ext. 358 if you have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration
Program. You have one month from the date of this Certification to make this payment. For accounting purposes,
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27669-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
t
E this Certification authq •zes the fill of aces-ef-?+(x?rair-?votlfln res
.ripcujan-wetl=ror _ feet of streams, in Q1-t615'!5 river and subbasin and aeres?or
ac toFat' n and tfjjL linear feet of stream
restoration are required. Please be aware that the Wetland Restoration Program (WRP) rules require
rounding of acreage amounts to one-quarter acre increments (15A 2R.0503(b)).
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-9646.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
Attachment
cc: Corps of Engineers Field Office
DWQ Regional Office
File copy
Central Files
Ron Ferrell; Wetland Restoration Program
Todd St. John
.Itr /
?'{1C'ZJJ??QQS J 'YlR9.??
ow,
V?
CP
NORTH CAROLINA-DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In ac ordance with 15A NCAC 2 H.0500, has permission as outline below for the purpose(s)
of proposed . All activities associated with these authorized impacts must be conducted with the
conditions listed in the attached cetification transmitttal letter. THIS CERTIFICATION IS NOT VALID
WITHOUT THE ATTACHMENTS.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REQUIREMENT WETLAND RESTORATION PROGRAM
LOCATION
COUNTY:
BASIN/SUBBASIN 0 a CG 03
As required by 15A NCAC 2H.0506, and the conditions of this certification, you are required to compensate
for the above impacts through the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of wetlands and surface waters
as outlined below prior to conducting any activities that impact or degrade the waters of the state.
Note: Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the wetland Restoration Programs must be rounded
to one-quarter acre increments according to 15 2r .0503(b)
acres of Class WL wetlands
acres of riparian wetland
acres of non-riparian wetlands

acres of Class SWL wetlands
linear feet of stream channel
(other)
One of the options you have available to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements is through the
payment of a fee to the Wetlands Restoration Fund per NCAC 2R .0503. If you choose this option, please sign this
form and mail it to the Wetlands Restoration Fund at the address listed below. An invoice for the appropriate
amount of payment'will be sent to you upon receipt of this form. PLEASE NOTE, THE ABOVE IMPACTS ARE
NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL YOU RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR PAYMENT HAS BEEN
PROCESSED BY THE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM.
Signature
Date
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY
1619 Mail Service Center
RALEIGH, N.C. 27669-1619
[phone]
MEMO
TO:
DATE: ?) ')5'0
SUBJECT:
x?- ? car E /'-ea?

From: ?L 4'10
?„a STA1F o
+3a North Carolina Department of Environment
Health, and Natural Resources ?? Printed on Recycled Paper
ENGINEERING CON_SULTING_ SERVICES, LTD. C
Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental i
ec-'
February 24, 2000
Mr. John R. Dorney
State of North Carolina
DWQ/Westlands/401 Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Reference: Holly Ridge Site
Burlington, North Carolina
DWQ Project No. 99-1003
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS) is currently in the process of assisting Price
Holdings Limited Partnership with wetlands permitting for the above referenced site.
Attached is a letter dated February 16, 2000 from Mr. Ron Ferrell of the NCDENR,
Wetland Restoration Program (WRP) stating that they would accept payment into the
WRP for stream impacts to the site. Payment into the WRP is the proposed mitigation
plan for the site. If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD.
Brian E. Maas, REM
Principal Scientist
5-C Dundas Circle, Greensboro, NC 27407 • [phone] • Fax [phone]
Offices: Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; Frederick, MD; Richmond, VA; Norfolk, VA; Fredericksburg, VA; Danville, VA;
Roanoke, VA; Williamsburg, VA; Raleigh/Durham, NC; Wilmington, NC; Charlotte, NC; Greensboro, NC; Greenville, SC; Atlanta, GA
f i
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
W®IrNR DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 16, 2000
JAMES B. HUNT JR. Mr. Brian E. Maas, REM
GOVERNOR Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
5-C Dundas Circle
Greensboro, NC 27407
BILL HOLMAN
SECRETARY
Dear Mr. Maas:
Subject: Holly Ridge Site
KERR-T.. STEVENS '. ECS, Ltd. Job No. G-3271
DIRECTOR -
Alamance County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North
Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is willing to accept
payment for stream impacts associated with the subject project in
accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the
NCWRP and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Based on information
supplied by you in a letter dated January 18, 2000, 497 linear feet of
stream impacts are requested for the subject project. The NCWRP will
provide mitigation as specified in the 401 Water Quality Certification
and/or Section 404 permit (up to 994 linear feet of stream restoration)
for impacts associated with the subject project in Cataloging Unit
03030002 of the Cape Fear River basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information I can
be reached at 919-733-5219.
Sincerely,
4 onald E. Ferrell
Program Manager
Wetlands Restoration Program
- cc: John Dorney, DWQ
John Thomas, USACOE
r r e ?
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
1619 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27G99-1619
1
• _ websit©: h2o.enr.state.nc.us PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO % RECYCLED/10°,o POST-CONSUMER PAPER
FED-24-00 04:16 PM U 3365845156 P.02
I
• ? I
8/26/99
Mr, John Thomas
US-ACOE
6508 Falls of the Neuse
Raleigh, NC 27615
PH: 919-876-8441
FX: 919-876-5823
and
Road, Suite 120
Mr. Danny Smith
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road.
Raleigh, NC 27607
919-733-9716
RE': Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Thomas and Mr. Smith,
Following is a Pre-Construction Notification Application for a tJS-AC,OE 404 Nationwide 26
Permit and a NC-DQW 401 Water Quality Certification to pipe 4951' of a 6701' drainage way for
Holly Ridge, a proposed 12.5 acre commercial development froatitlg on International Drive in
Burlington. N.C. 'rhe property is owned by Price Holdings, Limited Partnership. We understand that
this site does not involve any wetlands. A proslxetive ptirchaser has discussed piping the drainage
way for most of the full length of the ditch and pursuing an Individual Permit with ACOE and DWQ
personnel; however, due to the extensive permitting processes understood to be involved with an
Individual Permit, we have decided to reduce the length of the pipe to less than 500 I' and to make the
a lieation for a Nationwide 26 Permit.
( An overview of the history of this site and environmental evaluations is attached.)
PERMI"1' API'L1CA'rm AND PLANS.
The site development plan presented provides for piping 4951' of the existing +- 6701'
drainage way that would provide bypass transport for off site stonn water draining across the
property. As this exceeds 1501' but is less than 500 P this would fall under the ACOE Nationwide 26
permit, and a NC-DWQ 401 water quality certification. 1 understood that sonic miligation may be
requirud or payment of a mitigation fee payable to the NC Wetlands Restoration Fund.
The plan also includes tcmporaryy storm water erosion control measures consisting of 2
settlement basins, temporary ditches, ditch piping, sediment traps, and silt fencing to be installed and
maintained during the land disturbing phases of development. This would be permitted and monitored
by the City of Burlington.
Although no further mitigation tees or teasures are understood to be necessary, we do believe
preservation of water quality is an important objective. To that end, we have proposed to provide one
of two alternatives to improve the water quality of storm water that, would fall on and eventually flow
from lire site.
FED724-00 04:16 PM U 3365845156 P.03
Alternative A is to install two Continuous Deflection Separation Catch Basins ( CUS ),
'fills CDS system is an innovative device that removes suspended solids, gas,
oil, and grease from storm water. The system has no moving parts, is designed
to be low maintenance, and will not clog. ( Sec attachment for design and
technical data.)
Alternative 13 is to construct the 2 temporary settlement basins as permanent structures
of standard approved design.
If the CUS system is acceptable, we may consider including the storm water now from off-site
drainage area Nu.3 in the CUS system # 2.
We would hope that these WQ treatment alternatives would be considered oil-site mitigation,
and that mitigation fm could be reduced.
I hope the above information and the attached overview of the situation is helpful, and I would
r-t?discuss these plans, and the proposed alte i mtive water quality protective measures at your
l-1-
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POD 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156
CEL: 336-214-2676
CONTACTS:
Project Engineer. Harold Jensen. Jensen Environmental Engineers PH/FX :336-889-5650
Envirwnmentat Consultant. Brian Mass. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 3:36-856-7160
NC State Historic Preservation Office. Contact 8/26/99. Will receive copy from DWQ.
Renee Early 919.733-7305
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Contact 8/26/99
Dorothy 919-856-4520. Candace Martino, Ext #18
2i
FED-24-00
y
`;.
3365845156
P. 04
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
5NVIRONMENT AND NATURAL. RaSOURCES
WINSTON-5ALCM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATU,It QUALITY
October 7, 1999
04:17 PM U

Certified Mail 11-536 308 470
Return Revulul Requested
Bill Price
Price iktltlings i.imilcd I'artnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 21216
SUBJr,("I': Itequc:rl for Addilional Iftforntalimt
DWQ Prgiert It 99 0873A
Alanttunce Counly
Dear I& Price:
The Divisiam ot• Watcr Quality ham rMwed your pons for dw disc h,ugr of All
material into 499 feet ol'a stream channel locnled at Intern;tlilmal 1)live ill the City of
Burlington, Alaunance County I'or cortlttlcrcial developnlcnl. insuflicicnt cvidcncc is present in
our lilcl to c1lnCludc Ihatl your 1110jecl must be built as planned in water:5 and/or mh"Ws ill
accordance with 15A MAC 211 MM Thcrcfure, unless nuulifitsIl .tns ol'Ihc prrposal are
made as described below, we will have to nlot•c Iuwalcl denial of you 401 C•crtilicadon as
required by 15A NC'A(. 211 .1151)7(c) and will place this lalojrrl on hold as incollylele until we
receive this adthtional iltflinuali011. We are requesting (by copy of this Ictlct) that the U.S.
entry Curbs of fin hovers place your find al on Udnainisu•alivc hold,
(1) Maw provide us wilh inl'nnoatinn suppnrtinp your position that sl;des your pnycel
musl he conslrucled as planned and that you have nn prnclieahle allcrn;Ui('e to placing fill in these
waters Mir wmNn&. Specifically, can you ennsi ucl your rurtulicrcial development with less than
ISb feet Itf aU'eam imparts ur by ntinimizin}; impart to runtl classing? Atq_da+cunarnlalitut such as maps
and narrative that you ran supply MOM Micrumivc design lbrynur lw jcil nt;ty he helpful in out
review ol'pu 401 Cerlilicalion.
(2) S;oCc un-sitc slnaruwaW ttranagentent will he MlUircd ns a COM1411.311 ofatly L)WQ
approval and your application proposes Iwo options, hh:nsc notify us as to which system will he
employed. For any sysican not included in NC'I)1:Nl? DWG's Sturunrrue?' Be.1f hlcrtlagelnc•rrt Practiers
11:1110A. a nlauituring and economic analysis will be required, as well as a back-up delenthm punt) site.
The Division strongly rerununendi wet delenlion ponds us cillacr priniary ntanagcntc w nr as o back up
lit the C01111nuntts (I17410.0ive Sysrrnt.
(d) The projccl will also rcquirc cllmpcnMMMY ntilit.13001) as described in 15A NC'AC: 211
.0500(h). lu ynur application you nwMiun cunlribuling in the WclLuuls Rcstumdun l'und. Maw
pnwWc dMLMWrtl;diun MM YOU hove CMIUMCd cat site mitigation or hwnl (sub hnsin) channel
rCSluraticln as allt'ruatlves lu ronuihuling Io 1VK1'. If on site or local ntitil;ntit in is cht+sen. please
pruvidt. a deroilctd ntidg;dion plan for cotMiuclion, restoration. and nionhorine.. as outlined in
Cninpenswory It'viland Mitigation Guidelines. N(J)IiNl4-1)WQ,
505 WAUCHTOWN 57n EET. WINSTON• SALLM. NOnTII CAnoj.eNA X7107
PIION[ 770 771-4R00 FAX [phone]
AN F"OUAL OPronTIMOV / ArrIn MATIVE ACTION FMr+,nrrn . 50% nrcrci rn/ln% rn AT.r.ONAVMER PAPER
FEB-24-00 04:18 PM U
3365845156 P.05
Pricc IlAllltbs I,intilcd Partnership
Page 2
Picasc respond within thre.c, weeks of tilc d:alc ul' Ibis lcrtcr by sending a copy of Ihi.s
information to file and one con to Jnhrt It. INii-iicy, X1,101 Itcctly CIt`rk ltOaci, Raleigh, NC: 27607.
If we do not hear from you in Ihrco w 6s, we will assume that you nu longer. want to pursue this
projccl and we will consider the prcijecl as willnlfawn. If You have any questions regarding this
matter, please contact N11s. Jcunifcr I;ryc or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
L.c-
harry D. Coble
WQ Rcgional Supervisor
cc: Raleigh Field Office, US Army Qmps of Enginccrs
Wihning(un Officc. US Army Carps of Enginecl:s
Wellands/401 Unit Central Office
Ccn(rd Filk:s
W.SRO
FEB;-24-00 04:18 P11 U
Mr. John Durney
NC Vept,of Environment & Natural Itesources
44011tecdy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 2,7607,,
919-733.9716
and
Mr. Larry Coble
NC Dept.of Environment & Nattiral Husiiurces
535 Waughtown St. Winston Salem, NC 27107
336-771-4600
3365845156 P.06
It E: Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Dorney and Mr. Coble;
On 10 / 5 /99 t rnct at the Holly Ridge site with Jennifer Frye of the DWQ, Brian Was an
environmental consultant, and Harold Jensen at,1 engillcer.
1 received a letter dated October 7, 1999 from Mr. Coble which in effect stimmari-red.lennifer
Fry's comments, pat the application on hold pending additional information, and seta 3 week deadline
for a response. Subsequently on 10/25/99 the deadline was extended by Mr. Coble one additional
week ( 11/4/99) due to difficulties in getting information.
The Army Corp of I•;ngincers had indicated the channel which crosses the site are waters of the
US. The DWQ representative found sonic aquatic life in the channel and indicated that DWQ would
have jurisdiction for piping the channel under 401 Water Quality Certification. She indicated the
following information was needed to proceed.
1. Evaluation of avoidance possibilities of the impact by reducing the pipe or rerouting the channel.
( ACOE' & DWQ mid that reducing the pipe to under 1:50' would not require a pernUl.)
r 2. Decide nn the on-site storm water ntanagenient / treatment plan.
3. Mitigation of the impact by resloral.ion on site, or restoration of a degraded strcann in the sannc
watershed.
4. The last alternative is to pay $125 per lineal foot to the Wetland Restoration fund.
Following are the responses.
1. As indicated in the site history, a perspective purchaser proposed to pipe the entire length of
the cliamncl, and the ACME and the DWQ said that that would require an I1ndiv lual lkrinh. and we
should consider reducing the pipe to less that 500' - which is what we did. This application is to pipe
497 feet of the channel, which is a reduction. In thinking about reducing the pipe iii the channel to
150 ft., that would result in an open channel Through the project. We believe this Would present a
human health and safety hazard. (For instance, if we put up a fence or a wall along the channel, a kid
might climb the wall and fall in the ditch, or (here might be snakes and mosquitoes in the channel.)
An oinn channel through a commercial project would probably receive more trash and litter that a
piped channel, where ntnoff thru a storm water nianagenient system could be managed and debris can
be controlled before blowing or washing into the water. Also, ;A significant economic restriction would
he caused by separating the site into two parts resulting in a barrier to people and cars.
In considering rerouting the channel, the channel crosses (lie nniddlc of the property in the low
area. Moving it in the low area wouldn't make much difference. If you moved the channel all the
way to the front or to the back of the site, this would result in ditches 10 tai 20 ft. deep and four 90
degree bends which, unicss you hardened the sides, would potentially create erosion at the turns. By
using the pipe, erosion is not possible along the length of the pipe,
FEB-24-00 04:19 PPr U
3365545156 P.07
2. We didn't understand that permanent storm water management / treatment was necessary
for the prtrject , but had proposecl to provide either a p?7•manent dry scnlerncnt basin or a CDS catch
basin for water quality treatment anyway. Now we understand that permanent storm water
management / treatment is required. As we understand it, the CDS type system is not an approved
system, so we would have to provide permanent detention basins as back up. As the CUS devices are
expensive and we would have to provide settlement basins also, we propose to only provide: the
permanent detention basins.
We have been told that the DWQ requires that storm water managernent / treatment be clone
using wet detention basins according to the provisions of the "Storm Water Best Management
Practices" manual Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins published April 1999 by NCDE'NR. This revised
plan proposes to use Wet Detention Basins designed according to I.tte manual. ( Of note, the "1.1
Introduction" says that this design concept is the " DWG's approach to water quality management of
storm water in surface drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties, and areas near
high (pralityy waters and Outstanding 1(00017CC Waters...." per the rules contained in 115A NCAC:
2H.I(M. Also, Wet Detention Basins are assunred to remove 85°x, TSS. ) Additionally, the
Proposed Plan provides an underwater shelf which is not required in the Section 1.0 Wet Detention
Basins, but which provides additional water quality treat.rnenl.
3. Regarding "On-site stream resturaliop", there; really isn't jury place to clo it on site ( See next
Paragraph re the underwater shelf; Regarding "Oft=site stream restoration", enclosed is a letter dated
October 15, 1999 from Brian Kdis with ECS Ltd. indicating that according to Mr. Ron Ferrel with the
NC Wetland Restoration Program, there aren't any known local mitigation possibilities.
Anyway, we would h(W Iltat because: (1) we are pro rstttg to provide a wet detention pond
that is assumed to remove 85% 't*SS ( which is the same level of treatment required for surfacer
drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties , and areas near high Quality Waters
and Outstanding Resource Waters), anti (2) we are proposing to provide an underwater shelf which
goes beyond the requirements of Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins, it can be assumed that this will
improve storm water water quality above that normal to piedmont waters. As a result it is huped that
this may be considered on site mitigation, and that any mitigation fee could be reduced. ( In that
direction the: present channel is approximately 3' wide and the proposed pipe is 4971'. This to(ills
approximately 1,5W sc(uare feet. The I'rolx)scd Plan provides an underwater shelf of 3.100 s' or
nture in the Wet Delenl.ion Basin, Couldn't this be considered double the mitigation?)
1 hope the above information and the attached information is helpful, and 1 would be happy to
discuss all of this at your convenience.
11/Vla)
Holdings Cor)xrration
of Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX:336.584-5156 CEL: 336-214-2676
ENCLOSURES:
Revised Site Plan with Calculations.
Mims Utter Dated 10/15/99
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WO Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Price Holdings
Project Number 99 1003
Recvd From APP
Received Date 9/10/99
Recvd By Region 9/27/99
Project Type commercial
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp.
26 F- O YO N F- 16-19-7 I `' NSW
F- O Y O N F- F- r_r_
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
County Alamance
County2
Region Winston-Salem
Acres Feet
Basin Req. Req.
30,603. F__
WRP Stream ?- 497.00
Stream Impacts (ft.)
BE_
497.00 F-
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? O Y (ON Did you request more Info? O Y (ON
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? O Y 00 N
Is Mitigation required? Q Y O N Recommendation: O Issue O Issue/Cond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 360413011 Longitude (ddmmss) 79° 29' 50"
Comments:
ON HOLD Letter sent by region on 10/7/99
RESPONSE TO HOLD I FTTFR received on 11/4/99
Rased on the information received on 11/4/99, it does not appear that they have thoroughly
inye 'gated alternative options.. no alternative maps, cost analvy ses, etc, were provided. All that.
was provided was a statement that an open channel would he a safety and health hazard and an
economic barrier
Also, in regards to mitigaflon, the WSRO does not feel that they have sufficiently investigated off-site
mffigation The extent of their investigation was to contact Ron Ferrell at WRP.
C:ONTINUFD --------------
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name Price Holdings County Alamance
Project Number 99 1003 Regional Contact: Jennifer Frye
Date: 11/8/99
Comments (continued from page 1):
As an additional note: it was mentioned by the developer (site visit on 10/5/99) that future
downstream impacts may occur, He was made aware of the cumulative impacts policy.
They say that they have reduced the linear footage of „pipe" from 670 feet to 497 feet. However,
unclear where the unimpa .ted section of the stream is located, since their plan is showing ping
across the extent of the property. Have they reduced the amount of pipe but not the length of channel
impacts?
The WSRO recommends denial of this 401 WO Gertification.
cc: Regional Office Page Number 2
Central Office
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Bill Price
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Dear Mr. Price:
1 ? •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 3, 2000
DWQ Project No. 99-1003
Alamance County
Reference is made to your applicatidn for the discharge of fill material into 499 feet
of a stream channel located at International Drive in the City of Burlington, Alamance County
for commercial development. We understand that you are discussing the possibility of using the
Wetland Restoration Program in order to mitigate impacts associated with this project. Until we
receive written confirmation from Mr. Ron Ferrell that the WRP is prepared to conduct this
mitigation work, your project will remain on hold. Also, we must be assured that the concerns of
the Winston-Salem Regional Office, detailed in their October 7, 1999 letter to you, are
sufficiently addressed.
Thank you for your attention. Please call Jennifer Frye in our Winston-Salem
Regional Office at 336-771-4600 or Cyndi Bell at 919-733-9721 if you have any
questions.
cc: Central Files
Jennifer Frye, WSRO
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

Re. Bill Price
Subject: Re: Bill Price
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 17:22:05 -0500
From: Ron Ferrell <Ron.Ferrell a)ncmail.net>
Organization: NCDWQ-Wetlands Restoration Program
To: Cyndi 13c11 <cyncil.liell(()ncmail.net>
Cyndi,
Brian called me again yesterday and asked the same question as before - Do
you have any sites t could use? Is there something that makes consultants
"dumber than the average bear" to paraphrase Yogi Bear. He did not ask if
he could pay and I'm not sure he is even aware that it is an option. We do
have a lot of commitments in that CU and I do not guess another 497 feet
will kill us, so it it y'all would prefer that he be allowed to pay, then we
will probably accept. instead of giving him a definite answer I would
prefer that he request in writing that he be allowed to pay and include
information on location of stream, etc. basically the info included with an
application. 497 Lcet - someone trying to avoid a COE permit??
Let me know if he wants to pay and please tell him that if he calls before I
receive the letter the only thing I will tell him is that he has to send in
a written request.
Thanks
Cyndi Bell wrote:
> Hi Ron. I forgot to mention this when I was talking to you the other
> day. I know that the consultant asked you Co provide a site he could do
> a mitigation plan for (gee, how come you don't want to do his work for
> him?). As far a.; I can tell, neither the applicant nor the consultant
> (Brian Maas) has ictually formally proposed to pay into the WRP as
> mitigation for this project. If they were to make such a proposal,
> would your group he prepared to do so? I'm asking you in advance,
> because we'll need to meat with the applicant about the 401 and I can't
> and don't want to make any corrunitments on your part without your prior
> concurrence. He's proposing to impact 497 feet of streams. If you guys
> can't accept this; work, lie ain't got nothing right now. His tuff luck.
> Thanks a bunch.
-?4 t
? J
'k,
I of I 12/3/99 10:18 AM
Bill Price
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
SUBJECT: Request for Additional Information
DWQ Project # 991003
Alamance County
Dear Mr. Price:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your plans for. Insufficient evidence is
present in our files to conclude that your project must be built as planned in waters and/or
wetlands in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506. Therefore, unless modifications of the
proposal are made as described below, we will have to move toward denial of you 401
Certification as required by 15A NCAC 2H.0507(e) and will place this project on hold as
incomplete until we receive this additional information. We are requesting (by copy of this
letter) that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers place your project on administrative hold.
(1) Please provide us with information supporting your position that states your project
must be constructed as planned and that you have no practicable alternative to placing fill in these
waters and/or wetlands. Specifically, can you construct your commercial development with less than
150 feet of stream impacts or by minimizing impact to road crossing? Any documentation such as
maps and narrative that you can supply to address alternative design for your project may be helpful in
our review of you 401 Certification.
(2) Since on-site stormwater management will be required as a condition of any DWQ
approval and your application proposes two options, please notify us as to which system will be
employed. For any system not included in NCDENR-DWQ's Stormwater Best Management Practices
manual, a monitoring and economic analysis will be required, as well as a back-up detention pond site.
The Division strongly recommends wet detention ponds as either primary management or as a back-up
to the continuous deflective system.
(3) The project will also require compensatory mitigation as described in 15A NCAC 2H
.0506(h). In your application you mention contributing to the Wetlands Restoration Fund. Please
provide documentation that you have evaluated on-site mitigation or local (sub-basin) channel
restoration as alternatives to contributing to WRP. If on-site or local mitigation is chosen, please
provide a detailed mitigation plan for construction, restoration, and monitoring, as outlined in
Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Guidelines, NCDENR-DWQ.
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
Page 2
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending a copy of this
information to me and one copy to John R. Dorney, 4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607.
If we do not hear from you in three weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this
project and we will consider the project as withdrawn. If you have any questions regarding this
matter, please contact Mrs. Jennifer Frye or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,
Larry D. Coble
WQ Regional Supervisor
cc: Raleigh Field Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wetlands/401 Unit Central Office
Central Files
WSRO
99 1003, Price Holding,,
Subject: 991003, Price Holdin s
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 14.48;' A?amance Co.
From: Jennifer Frye 21 -0400
Organization: NC DENR <jennifer•[e-mail]>
To: C water Quality
yndi Bell <Cyndi-Bell @ncmail.net>
John Dorney <John.Dorney@ncmai
Please put 1•net>, Larry Coble <Larry
the project 99 .C'[e-mail]>
1• They need to choose1003 on hold for the folowing mana In their application thehod of stormwaterlmana e reasons;
Bement, (detention basins or y prOpOSed Bement.
system). After l a continuous two °pt ions or
tormwater
professional opinion over the madeflective s
eparation told the developer on ththat wet detention would Provided, it seems ,,anion C?
out if the detenti he said that he be the bette
Division's on ibas sin and plans and ?^'ould contact choice.
r e.
2• Even equirements, specs originally submittdedtO find
thou met
the
from over Bht they have y(",'ro
o ht decreased t
documentation/ hft.
ation/ -495 ft., I told he linear foota Q ~?
alternati. shoved them that age of
ves impact
B that they they have need to submit
other
3 I_ r
Since &V
submit mitigation
a miti is required (found
piping) or lookingnfoplan". We talked about t.' they need V
look both mitigation es relocating the c thannel o (no
to tell us why the of those options, nearby.
would l They agree they other options ?7On. If they do chose WRP, they need '4
^
(piping it note, this stream is ?relocate t might not be a HUGE pretty degraded
not on site. T loss') Chanand channelized ?? ?? "' I
that he topographY es are they WOn'
Jennifer large' Give me a call is all c t be able
you have any wrong
'snd the tract
if of land°
Thanks,
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: Jennifer Frye
Non-Discharge Branch WO Supervisor: I arry Coble
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Price Holdings County Alamance
Project Number 99 1003 County2
Recvd From APP Region Winston-Salem
Received Date 9/10/99 Recvd By Region 9/27/99
Project Type commercial
Certificates Stream Stream Impacts (ft.)
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req. BE
r 26 I [5-Y @)N 16 19-7 rF-c 7 NSW 30,603. 497.00 ?-
Mitigation Wetland / C ?- '
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
WRP Stream ?- 497.00
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? 0 Y 0 N Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? 0 Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y 0 N Recommendation: 0 Issue 0 Issue/fond QQ Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 36° 4' 30" Longitude (ddmmss) 79° 29' 50"
Comments:
ON Hnl_n I ettPr sent by region on 10/7/99
RFSPONsE TO HOLD LETTER received on 11/4/99

cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name Price Holdings County Alamance

Project Number 99 1003 Regional Contact: Jennifer Frye
Date: 11/8/99
Comments (continued from page 1):
As an additional note: it was mentioned by the developer (site visit on 10/5/99) that future
downstream impacts may occur. He was made aware of the cumulative impacts_ policy.
They say that they have reduce d the linear footage of "pi ne" from 670 feet to 497 feet. However, it is
unclear where the unimpacted s ection of the stream is lo cated, since their plan is showing pining
across the extent of the propert y. Have they reduced the amount of pipe but not the length of channel
impacts?

The WSRO recommends denia l of this 401 WO Certificat ion.

cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 2
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 01
.NORTH CAROLINA -
DEPARTMFENT OF 4 ° °
ENVIRONMENT AND
:NATURAL RESOURCES R"'.?-
WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
FAX TRANSMITTAL
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107

Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
TO:
FAX NUM.DER: f 5 3 `? 59
FROM:., R--
DATE:
lllI slC?
Number of pages (including cover page): .
CONEMENTS:. Gov , 14
.1 ?tl
+-L ,?

11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY
Mr. Jobn Dorney
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources
4401 Remy Creek Road. Raleigh, NC 27607
919-733-9716
and
Mr. Larry Coble
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources
585 Waughtown St. Winston Salem, NC 27107
336-771-4600
PAGE 02
p4" 1R
I;ECEI EC
unit 1, 41adt
it ..
RE: Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Dorney and Mr. Coble;
On 10 / 5199 I met at the Holly Ridge site with Jennifer Frye of the DWQ, Brian Maas an
environmental consultant, and Harold Jensen an engin=.
I received a letter dated October 7, 1999 from Mr. Coble which in effect summarized Jennifer
Fry's comments, put the application on hold pending additional information, and set a 3 week deadline
for a response. Subsequently on 10/25/99 the deadline was extended by Mr. Coble one additional
week ( 1114/99) due to difficulties in getting information.
The Army Corp of Engineers had indicated the channel which crosses the site are waters of the
US, 'The DWQ repmsentative found some aquatic life in the channel and indicated that DWQ would
have jurisdiction for piping the channel under 401 Water Quality Certification. She indicated the
following information was needed to proceed :
1. Evaluation of avoidance possibillties of the impact by reducing the pipe or rerouting the channel.
( ACOE & DWQ said that reducing the pipe to under 150' would not require a permit)
2. Decide on the on-site storm water management / treatment plan.
3. Mitigation of the impact by restoration on site, or restoration of a degraded stream in the same
watershed
4. The last alternative is to pay $125 per lineal foot to the Wetland Restoration fund.
Following are the responses.
1. As indicated in the site hist , a perspective purchaser proposed to pipe the entire length of
the channel, and the ACOE and the DW said that that would require an Individual ptrrnit, and we
should consider reducing the pipe to less that 500' - which is what we did This application is to pipe
497 feet of the channel, which is a reduction. In thinking about reducing the p* in the channel to
150 ft., that would result in an open channel through the project. We believe this would present a
human, health and safety hazard ( For instance, if we put up a fence or a wall along. the channel, a lid
might climb the wall and fall in the ditch, or them Might be snakes and mo?.quitoes m the channel. )
An open channel through a commercial project woulcFprobably receive more trash and litter that a
a channel, where runoff thru a storm water management system could be managed and debris can
controlled before blowing or washing into the water. Also, a significant economic restriction would
be caused by separating the site into two parts resulting in a barrier to lc and cars.
In considering rerouting the channel, the channel crosses the middle of the property in the low
area. Moving it in the low area wouldn't make much difference. If you moved the channel all the
way to the front or to the back of the site, this would result in ditches 10 to 20 ft. d--.-p and four 90
degree bends which, unless you hardened the sides, would potentially create erosion at the turns. By
using the pipe, erosion is not possible along the ten„ th of the pipe.
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 03
2. We didn't understand that permanent storm water management / treatment was necessary
for the project, but had proposed to provide ether a permanent dry settlement basin or a CDS catch
basin for water quality treatment anyway. Now we understand that permanent storm water
management / treatment is required As we understand it, the CDS type system is not an approved
system, so we would have to provide permanent detention basins as back up. As the CDS eviices are
expensive and we would have to provide settlement basins also, we propose to only provide the
permanent detention basins.
We have been told that the DWQ requires that storm water management / treatment be done
using wet detention basins according to the provisions of the "Storm Water Best Management
Practices" manual Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins published April 1999 by NCDENR. This revised
Ian proposes to use Wet Detention Basins designed according to the manual. ( Of note, the "1.1
ntroducaon" says that this design concept is the " DWQ's approach to water quality management of
storm water in surface drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties, and areas near
hi Quality waters and Outstanding Resource Waters...." per the rules contained in 115A NCAC
214. 1000. Also, Wet Detention Basins are assumed to remove 85% TS S. ) Additionally, the
Proposed Plan provides an underwater shelf which is not required in the Section 1.0 Wet Detention
Basins, but which provides additional water quality treatment.
3. Regarding "on-site stream restoration", there really isn't any place to do it on site ( See next
Paragraph re the underwater shelf Regarding "Off-site stream restoration", enclosed is a letter dated
October 15, 1999 from Brian Maas with FCS Ltd. indicating that according to Mr. Ron Ferrel with the
NC Wetland Restoration Program, there aren't any known local mitigation possibilities.
Anyway, we would hope that because: (1) we are proposing to provide a wet detention pond
that is assumed to remove 85% TSS ( which is the same level of treatment required for surface
drinking water supply watersheds, the twenty coastal counties , and areas near high Quality Waters
and Outstanding Resource Waters), and (2) we are proposing to provide an und?-rwater shelf which
does beyond the requirements of Section 1.0 Wet Detention Basins, it can be assumed that this will
improve storm water water quality above that normal to piedmont waters. As a result it is hoped that
this may be considered on-site mitigation, and that any mitigation fee could be reduced. ( In that
direction the present channel is approximately 3' wide and the proposed pipe is 4971'. This totals
approximately 1,500 s luare feet. The Proposed Plan provides an underwater shelf of 3,100 s' or
more in the Wet Detention Basin. Couldn't this be considered double the mitigation?) '
information and the attached information is helpful, and I would be happy to
convenience.

Bill Price lI
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of Price Holdings Limited Partnm-hip
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-:5-156 CEL: 336-214-2676
ENCLOSURES:
Revised Site Plan with Calculations.
Maas Letts' Dated 1011509
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 04
'. ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES, LTD. _
Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmdntal
Ems,- -
October 15, 1999
Mr. Bill Price
P.O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
Reference: Review of Stream Mitigation Options
Holly Ridge Project
Burlington, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Price:
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd. (ECS), we have reviewed some options for stream
mitigation at the above referenced site. As discussed with your site engineer, and a due the size
and complexity of the project, on-site stream mitigation is not an option. As mandated, we
attempted to identify potential streard mitigation sites located within the same drainage basin in
the Burlington area. We contacted Mr. Ron Ferrel of the NC Wetland restoration Program to help
us locate potential stream mitigation sites in the area. According to Mr. Ferrel, there are no
current sites for stream mitigation in the Burlington area. Mr. Ferrel stated that their agency has
been working hard with Burlington and Alamance County Parks and Recreation and other such
agencies to find candidate sites and at this time, there are no such sites available.
At this time, we recommend that you inform the NC Division of Water Quality that we have not
been successful in locating land for stream mitigation and that your proposed mitigation plan is to
pay into the Wetland Restoration Fund.
ECS appreciates the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you any questions or need
additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Engineering Consulting Services, Ltd.
Brian E. Maas, REM
Principal Scientist
5-C Dundas Circle, Greensboro, NC 27407 • [phone] • Pax [phone]
Offices; Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; Frederick. MD; Richmond. VA; Norfolk VA; Fredericksburg, VA; Danville, VA;
Roanoke. VA; Williamsburg, VA; Ralei&lVDurham, NC; Wilmington, NC; Charlotte, NC; Greensboro, NC; Greenville, SC. Atlanta. GA
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 05
ON 'NMONlnuno
UMN30 0Nldd0H5
Ta zoom A noH 1 z -
Ilia C tik
t
y G 9
1-_ - ?A till
06
I;
/?+,+ - - / ??? `l 1•' yam''' [?: ?. ??\ ??
1
? ? ?• \ 1 ... ••? •,? ?¢. ` X3,1 , ?? ??? ` ?
? , ? -. _ 4 `, •?` ••,` .? t X1.1'' ,? 511
GGd'' ` `+d I ,
/
?? Q? ??? ?•./ ? ? . < %:j`-? / / ? yet 5?g 7
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 06
r
ua E,-• --?.,-?-,vr?o.? Div :?v?ssiv.cl
1??4srq,rra-N i Ups- 7' If•2-- oo U
I,?,?Pd2VloJ5 d.u.ocJ?•7- ? //.ZS?A-G
0/0
(f4 L G v >-C- o c!/Zr4G d..v& A C? La- l
-a-770 = "06
64z,
12 5-4 caE• fJ . O Zlo(v -= Q. 5 S ac.
41

403 -I

1 GM? rO?J i7 ? ?
4,UA = 17i &W ?? 1
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 07
IF Z

= 0.05 -to•oo4(QD>
r
d _ SCGt ?? Z ?aG) 9R' j277 57 ax / rt
LL ,
?? /•? ? 3??-'1 ? 2oG??7 Cooc? Ste' = 2 ? Q
pjTc.t T S7-2 c;G-rV2
64l amu
,_ 3 8 IV,0,14A-
4 ek H? -
Not C? ?. G38' s jDv +ae4l,v
Awn?t,4-r T4.0vt oa? 4.J,eA, T ?tei,v ?a6„? 24 5 9 t
3 s /ZV CF x¢??????/C?SF?/•. ?.? j C5
U ?? l 2. ?vv iJ 1?• S C44,4.ed b" =- / 3 C-
i?.?i v?G6 ,emu' = 3S'/ZO?. ?3 r `? ? ?S
'11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 08
ipa 3
1 ?. s 4c-
? = s'? ??. ,? icy 2
r
1
1' ? I
5 g../.3 5

,q,2.2g?- D:lo,v ;uf .O7a.. C'v.J CAL M•orl
?aj 3,? v Q Zo,
-?2c set Ud iI&? - 7?ozc S . d7?
us. 4$ " s a-K-
00
?G,4o
?? 54 ?? sd rz
7
Gr- Gd 4 B - /zoo WK-4 a,5d 60
11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 09
40 T l zoo I.za
44) = -70,?
'
A cam
S0&;==At.6
440A OF-
*rd"I'J ' /7 C-? 72( ?

Ao = l7 (vo© L?
r 13.79 in
?s? 4oc?s c3, 4S %01- e4
lot
44-
??
g
•11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 10
?r A t-
a2 arch ou r- D?
sPit,t, w
ioo yo, Sm?.?n
7.9 l a / 0. `ic,, C , .9 C1z. E-)
34.1 -5 - 59. /3 = ZS

G'jGAl /S-
L.-Q 4r.5
?? .= zs• 8c? c,?s
0.75
l=p..
1---- 1,3 3I, ----I
.11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630
DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 11
?6 G
i
AV77 - fw?-Arrv.?
rI'r'
SLOG ?-
1/?v,?r?
i
7
13 ? A 0 i 4111X, 4Z. 4 16ILi= =, X4714
r
Is-o /6rl-c-?
?ge4 74*1. ?t5,o/6 ?lr 5©,94 cp?,
499 5
n ?
t ?4 ?f
j--;-??4R,- -----{
~ Oonv
T/4)
It ?,. $¢ ?.
X
9 ?/ Save-rug / Z
.11/15/1999 10:23 3367714630 DIV OF WATER QUALITY PAGE 12
634
r
? S
il \ /N/d
ll ?
l o ?' •-
(1 l
TO
9
1
w
I T
LLJ
ti 1 i ? !
,'
16
ti \ %N
w
w ?9 ?.
Ni /( A? ?(I' 9
le ffe?s. ,? Ise -r?
p??CesS.
T?S?USS I
0
CASEY NURSERY
GOLDSBORO, N.C. • 1-800-891-
Il l?
Cam`
3j-
U,j?1? ?n II NS
f o vv,l
TZO
ZJ
4-t?-
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Discharge Branch WO Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Price Holdings
Project Number 99 1003
Recvd From APP
County Alamance
County2
Region Winston-Salem
Received Date 9/10/99 Recvd By Region 9/27/99
Project Type commercial
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
26 F--O YO N 16-19-7 NSW 30,603. ?
O Y O N F-I-- F-F-F-Ir- F-
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
WRP Stream 497.00
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? O Y ON Did you request more info? O Y ON
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? O Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? O Y O N Recommendation: O Issue O Issue/fond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) 36'4'3011 Longitude (ddmmss) 79° 29' 50"
Comments:
ON HOLD Letter sent by region on 10/7/99
RESPONSE TO HOLD LETTER received on 11/4/99
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name Price Holdings County Alamance

Project Number 99 1003 Regional Contact: Jennifer Frye
Date: 11/8/99
Comments (continued from page 1):
As an additional note@ it was mentioned by the developer (site visit on 10/5/99) that future
downstream impacts may occur. He was made aware of the cumulative impacts policy.
They say that they have reduced the linear footage of "pipe" from 670 feet to 497 feet. However, it is
unclear where the unimpacted section of the stream is to .at .d, since their plan is showing piping
across the extent of the propeerty. Have they reduced the amount of pine but not the length of channel
inlnacts?
The WSRO recommends denial of this 401 WO Gertification.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 2
0 `
rrl :T

?e
NCDENR
Certified Mail P-536 308 470
Return Receipt Requested
JAMES B. HUNTJR. .
GOVERNOR
Bill Price
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
P. O. Box 2112
Burlington, NC 27216
WAYNE MCDEVITT
SECRETARY

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WINSTON-SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVI ON OF WATER QUALITY
October 7, 1999
i
rr__L;1_1'.... .
Request for Additional Information
DWQ Project 3 If ?p?3
Alamance County

The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your plans for the discharge of fill
material into 499 feet of a stream channel located at International Drive in the City of
Burlington, Alamance County for commercial development. Insufficient evidence is present in
our files to conclude that your project must be built as planned in waters and/or wetlands in
accordance with 15A NCAI- 2H .0506. Therefore, unless modifications of the proposal are
made as described below, we will have to move toward denial of you 401 Certification as
required by 15A NCAC 2H .0507(e) and will place this project on hold as incomplete until we
receive this additional information. We are requesting (by copy of this letter) that the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers place your project on administrative hold.
(1) Please provide us with information supporting your position that states your project
must be constructed as planned and that you have no practicable alternative to placing fill in these
waters and/or wetlands. Specifically, can you construct your commercial development with less than
150 feet of stream impacts or by minimizing impact to road crossing? Any documentation such as maps
and narrative that you can supply to address alternative design for your project may be helpful in our
review of you 401 Certification.
(2) Since on-site s,ormwater management will be required as a condition of any DWQ
approval and your application proposes two options, please notify us as to which system will be
employed. For any system not in-luded in NCDENR-DWQ's Stormwater Best Management Practices
manual, a monitoring and economic analysis will be required, as well as a back-up detention pond site.
The Division strongly recommends wet detention ponds as either primary management or as a back-up
t' to the continuous deflective systein.
(3) The project will also require compensatory mitigation as described in 15A NCAC 2H
tH .0506(h). In your application you mention contributing to the Wetlands Restoration Fund. Please
provide documentation that you have evaluated on-site mitigation or local (sub-basin) channel
restoration as alternatives to contributing to WRP. If on-site or local mitigation is chosen, please
IIy`?';i provide a detailed mitigation plan for construction, restoration, and monitoring, as outlined in
« Ao Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Guidelines, NCDENR-DWQ.

SUBJECT: Dear Mr. Price:
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
585 WAUG HTOWN STREET, WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA 27107
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O'Yo POST-CONSUMER PAPER

Price Holdings Limited Partnership
Page 2
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending a copy of this
information to me and one copy to John R. Dorney, 4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607.
If we do not hear from you in three weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this
project and we will consider the project as withdrawn. If you have any questions regarding this
matter, please contact Mrs. Jennifer Frye or myself at [phone].
Sincerely,

Larry D. Coble
WQ Regional Supervisor
cc: Raleigh Field Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Office, US Army Corps of Engineers
Wetlands/401 Unit Central Office
Central Files
WSRO
HOLLY RIDGE
International Drive
Burlington NC
PAYMENT
? i `? RECEIVED
r
8/26/99
Mr. John Thomas
US-ACOE
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
PH: 919-876-8441
FX: 919-876-5823
and
Mr. Danny Smith
NC Dept.of Environment & Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road.
Raleigh, NC 27607
919-733-9716
RE: Holly Ridge, Burlington, NC
Dear Mr. Thomas and Mr. Smith,
Following is a Pre-Construction Notification Application for a US-ACOE 404 Nationwide 26
Permit and a NC-DQW 401 Water Quality Certification to pipe 4951' of a 6701' drainage way for
Holly Ridge, a proposed 12.5 acre commercial development fronting on International Drive in
Burlington. N.C. The property is owned by Price Holdings, Limited Partnership. We understand that
this site does not involve any wetlands. A prospective purchaser has discussed piping the drainage
way for most of the full length of the ditch and pursuing an Individual Permit with ACOE, and DWQ
personnel; however, due to the extensive permitting processes understood to be involved with an
Individual Permit, we have decided to reduce the length of the pipe to less than 5001' and to make the
application for a Nationwide 26 Permit.
( An overview of the history of this site and environmental evaluations is attached.)
PERMIT APPLICATION AND PLANS.
The site development plan presented provides for piping 4951' of the existing +- 6701'
drainage way that would provide bypass transport for off-site storm water draining across the
property. As this exceeds 1501' but is less than 5001' this would fall under the ACOE Nationwide 26
permit, and a NC-DWQ 401 water quality certification. I understood that some mitigation may be
required or payment of a mitigation fee payable to the NC Wetlands Restoration Fund.
The plan also includes temporary storm water erosion control measures consisting of 2
settlement basins, temporary ditches, ditch piping, sediment traps, and silt fencing to be installed and
maintained during the land sturbing phases of development. This would be permitted and monitored
by the City of Burlington.
Although no further mitigation fees or measures are understood to be necessary, we do believe
preservation of water quality is an important objective. To that end, we have proposed to provide one
of two alternatives to improve the water quality of storm water that would fall on and eventually flow
from the site.
Alternative A is to install two Continuous Deflection Separation Catch Basins ( CDS ).
This CDS system is an innovative device that removes suspended solids, gas,
oil, and grease from storm water. The system has no moving parts, is designed
to be low maintenance, and will not clog. ( See attachment for design and
technical data)
Alternative B is to construct the 2 temporary settlement basins as permanent structures
of standard approved design.
If the CDS system is acceptable, we may consider including the storm water flow from off-site
drainage area No.3 in the CDS system # 2.
We would hope that these WQ treatment alternatives would be considered on-site mitigation,
and that mitigation fee could be reduced.
I hope the above information and the attached overview of the situation is helpful, and I would
cuss these plans, and the proposed alternative water quality protective measures at your
President, Price Holdings Corporation
General Partner of
Price Holdings Limited Partnership
POB 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
PH/FX: 336-584-5156
CEL: 336-214-2676
CONTACTS:
Project Engineer. Harold Jensen. Jensen Environmental Engineers PH/FX 336-889-5650
Environmental Consultant. Brian Mass. ECS PH: 336-856-7150 FX: 336-856-7160
NC State Historic Preservation Office. Contact 8126199. Will receive copy from DWQ.
Renee Early 919-733-7305
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Contact 8/26/99
Dorothy 919-856-4520. Candace Martino, Ext # 18
Z_
PRICE HOLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
12.5 acres. International Drive, Burlington , NC.
SITE HISTORY 8/26/99
This 12.5 acre property has been in the Price family since the mid 1950's.
In the Summer of 1995, I met on the property with an ACOE field representative and an
environmental engineer. I expressed our desire to drain and fill a pond located partially on this property
and partially on adjoining property. The ACOE agent told me that we could breach the dam, and that
typically, after a drying period, that tilling of the pond would be allowed. So we breached the dam, and
drained the pond .
Later ACOE visits indicated that the former pond was drryying in most areas, but that there were
some possible wetland areas which further drying would probabl resolve.
In the Fall of `97, as the pond bottom had dried up, I told p our environmental engineer that we
wanted to dig a ditch in the former pond bed. The engineer observed the site and said that because we
were going to dig ditches in dry ground, and because there were no regulations about digging in dry
ground, the ditching would be allowable, so we did. This provided a relatively straight drainage way
across the property.
In September of `98 1 met with an ACOE field representative, the architect for a prospective
purchaser, and our environmental engineer on the site. We said we wanted to pipe along the drainage
way ditch and till the old pond area . The ACOE agent indicated that the ditch was probably Water's of
the US. In any event, we could pipe up to 150 1' with no permit. If we had more that 150 1' but less than
5001', the project could be done under a Nationwide 26 permit, however, we would need to mitigate or
pay a mitigation fee to the NC Wetlands Restoration Fund. ( Later on I heard that this lineal footage has
to do with how much is considered to be Water's of the US.) Anyway, if we proposed to pipe over 500
1', that would require an Individual Permit which caused a much more difficult mitigation process. We
also said we wanted to fill a channel that had been scoured in the pond bed but was not carrying any
water then. He indicated that he observed no wetlands on the site and that he (the ACOE) had no interest
in the scoured channel. As there were no wetlands observed and the channel didn't seem to be of
concern to the ACOE, and as we understood that the NCDWQ only required a 401 Certification if the
ACOE said they were dealing with Water's of the US or wetlands, in the Fall of '98, I had the channel
filled.
In April of `99 an ACOE field representative and a DWQ representative met with an
environmental engineer representing the prospective buyer. ( I had understood that the meeting had been
canceled, and I did not attend.) I was told that at that meeting, the representative of the prospective buyer
said that the buyer wished to pipe the drainage way prett y much all the way across the entire site . The
ACOE and DWQ representatives apparently responded that that would probably require an Individual
Permit and confirmed that th at sort of permit was very complicated and took a long time. The DWQ
representative referred the buyer to representative of the DWQ in the Raleigh office .
A little later on, ( Spring 99a) I attended a meeting at DWQ headquarters in Raleigh with
representatives of the prospective buyer and a DWQ agent at which several development ideas for the
Individual Permit were discussed. From that meeting, it seemed to me that an individual permit would be
very difficult and expensive to get.
In the next week or so, a representative of the prospective purchaser and I spoke with the ACOE
representative by phone to discuss the project. There was some talk about moving the ditch around and
to reduce the length of the pipe . The ACOE representative said that changing a ditch was the same thing
as piping a ditch, and wouldn't help much. ( Sounded like it would probably be more of a problem.)
After that , it seemed to me than the only way that we could do anything would be to reduce the length of
the pipe and go for a Nationwide 26 Permit.
COMMENT - All of the work we have done on the pmperty to this time was after talking with
with an ACOE representative and /or an environmental consultant. We never asked for a permit because
we understood that all the work we were going to do was not restricted by anybody. The ACOE
representative has visited the property a couple of times , and so far as I know, the work we have done
was OK. We do understand that piping over 150 1' of a ditch that is considered Water's of the US would
require some permits. As a result, there needs to be some determination of how much of the drainage
way is Water's of the US.

DWQ ID:
CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #)
26
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFCATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES MUST BE SENT TO THE NC DIVISION OF WATER
QUALITY ATTN• JOHN DORNEY 4401 REEDY CREEK ROAD.
RALEIGH. NC 27607. PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE.
1. OWNER'S NAME: Price Holdings Limited Partnershi
MAILINGADDRESS: PO Box 2112, Burlington, NC 27216
SUBDNISION NAME Holly Ridge
Burlington STATE: NC
CITY:
21P CODE:
27216
PROTECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE): International Drive
(WORK)
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER: (HOME) 336-584-5156
IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER: Bill Price
(Same)
LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Alamance _ NEAREST TOWN: Bur ; ng -on
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ECT.)
International Drive
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RJVER: Gunn Creek
RIVER BASIN: Cape Fear
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER, (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURSE WATERS (ORW), WATER
SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES ( ) NO ( X) IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF EiNV ROMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES ( ) NO (X )
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST OF
COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION? N/A
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROJECT? YES ( ) NO ( X) IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS
PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES ( ) NO (X ) IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBERS OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: 12-S
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
0 -
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0 EXCAVATION: 0
FLOODING: 0 OTHER :
0
DRAINAGE : 0 TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: 0
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION:
LENGTH BEFORE: 499 FT AFTER: 495
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): 3 - 4 FT
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: 111 - 311 1?t AVER: 1" - 3" 17T
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL:
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: COONSTRUCTION OF A DAMIFLOODING:
OTHER: Diverting flow into new pipe next to existing channel
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND? N12\
POND SURFACE AREA?
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED
12. DISCTIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED? (ATTACH PLANS; 81/2 BY 11 DRAWINGS ONLY)
Trench with trackhoe for installation of 7' diameter CMP
beside existing channel to divert flow, construct headwalls,
and fill in existing channel and over,diversion pipe to final
grade.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: Construction of culvert to pass water
under planned parking lot.
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT IN
WETLANDS (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MDUIv ZE WETLAND IMPACTS)
No wetlands
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND/OR
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERIVE REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALY
LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR
CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED
PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: Concurrent
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA
WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED
Concurrent
17. DOES THE PROJECT LWOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OT THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND? YES ( ) NO (X ) (IF NO, GO TO 16)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPERATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT? YES( ) NO( )
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REFIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE YES ( ) NO ( )
IF ANSWER 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATIONFROM THE STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OF FILL MATERIAL INTO
WETLANDS: NSA
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES, AND
PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAM (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY
MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET
OF 1 INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OF THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE IMPACTED
BY PRODUCT.
c. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA
SHEETS RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPOERTY?
IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
Municipal
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WTLANDS OR WATERS OF THE US MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
CERTIFMCATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED
CTTVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
AGEMENT PROGRAM,
?? ?, s CoL .
S SIGNATURE DATE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED).
ON 'NOiDNmine
?d eao 2131N3O JNIddOHS
•T•d ls7asarn p 30018 AI1OH 1 1 - d .
?a?aacaaorFaa3 aasaa?
NY1d 316 ONLLSDC3
wig
I 7 v'T" (/1
t,j ? 3`Y 911("'.? ,_. - -0 ?,,rtP yuM .-,., ,.?F-s1,,?.,'° ?_ I-
ik - ew rE u? O ?YE3
.RO. 1 - r i}
?qEFL'f fit. _ i •. 1 H? _..e. 1'f 1 ?. j' e f OS
i r 1
av I \ ,
yd
1 i dd
? d' ? ?C7 M ay?so c ?^ za/ g
'Ip L OJ y Hy ? r x y
"4, gO _ J ?? asp' °J?d
?Ly ?U ? .- \ a,y .. - fQ?Od? ?`? ? ?•.ee t: / P 1''?``t yp` ?? f-e' r F?.
i
ON 'N010NI1jn9
831N30 0NIdd0HS
vd 's7?imsao? 30418 A-110H ?? -
rv3aaarao?sgy aasaa?
NYId 316 0350dONd
1?g p z
? a8p, g 3 i Ig °? `? '
? ° ? a ? a31N1 I - ? ??_
F t U
$495 ? ? i ?„ I c??l•t
g bo IW?
d = II I u
_ U tL?II 91?. 1i' ?" III ZI ? I
•d. / II ??jj? d 1 ?i 11 ?II'
z II 1 (1J X08 Y B
q .6
"AYM 3?VN1V214C7
15O
_ `? loyJ I I
-? .
.. .. - • v.....v..r?.a ... . a Iry?y \i . I
Z = -' Wry " ' \
/
IL
•I
e•
,aa r/ 1' ,DID`. ?ga
?: ,• ? ? ?? ?. ? Z? \ I as
Z
?' \a w i ? $495 ?`
m?
J / aaa aaa, % v ? 1f 1
b .? as ? /i z }
/ ^-..._ ..•^-., as aa, ,?, ?7 ? ?l I .
? 8 ` jy ` aaa aaa ? /i/ ? ? •`
y . - as aaa // , 1
d ? }f aaa aa,a ? /i .? ? al ? I ,
q< r ? 44444 a /i// I <a i? ?? ?
ii - -• aaaa y a, I '?/ ? ? j I
' °J°a spa,, / 1 I
?•><Z aae aaaa /i '?? ,i .
Sao ? ,.
a 41
M-95
Solo
b ?•{K ° - n n• n d /?1? JaJ
I1?P SbC ?qR? i i i z i < '? ?O?.. b? •_` ' ??a
!
?C

r-A
fl
r,
1,671
s
40/0
1
l.0 cl Sly
l
-5?7 /
1`D
Z
-? 11 •! ?!.'' ,? I``_ . I ,, / _ _
t ?.

6 ?'i
5 z
Ua Z j

cv,
l ? .J

t. J..
1 ? C
,
j
is
i
I,.
1..
L.
i'.

7o
t
1
i?
i.
i!

10-
Bill Price - Holly Ridge Shopping Center
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation
Comment: CMP Culvert Under Parking Lot
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 6.85 ft
Slope.......... 0.0100 ft/ft
Manning's n .... 0.024
Discharge... ... 326.00 cfs
Depth.......... 6.85 ft
=82.2 in
Use 84" CMP
Velocity...... 8.86 fps
Flow Area..... 36.80 sf
Critical Slope 0.0143 ft/ft
Critical Depth 4.79 ft
Percent Full.. 100.00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 326.00 cfs
QMAX @.94D.... 350.68 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
:i
Du r Le,- ! `T 407-6LI 70,4
??C lS S •O?

ZG -
r'
J?
7-a c5Z--/TL i

/Zi vc,,
Bill Price - Holly Ridge Shopping Center
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation - 84" CMP OUTLET PROTECTION
Comment: OUTLET DESIGN
Solve For...... Actual Depth
Diameter....... 7.00 ft
Slope.......... 0.0100 ft/ft
Manning's n.... 0.024
Discharge...... 346.00 cfs
Depth.......... 5.74 ft
Velocity...... 10.25 fps
Flow Area..... 33.76 sf
Critical Slope 0.0142 ft/ft
Critical Depth 4.90 ft
Percent Full.. 81.95%
Froude Number. 0.72
Full Capacity. 346.03 cfs
AMAX @.94D.... 372.23 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
?:
L-(J? (?cS ??.7-
?? ? c
'? c?"

,^
??,
,-, --? .

?:? / ? ? ? ?
?
? ?
.. ?. ;a ? _. C
J ? 11 -
,

.._ .. r r .. .
?_
? - ..
// ? _ /
_.
` ?f ?^.? ?'-? ?? /?f? ? yam.. ?Gy <??>=-? ?15? 2. ? ? ??'?
;,.
%Q ? ? ? ? ?.
? ?, ?
3r? -; ?o v

,._ ??_ C!?. ? ? ?,?,- ?

:..
??
? .
?
yr ?
; ?.

i' ? ,.
?. ,
?- _---
?_
:?_??>?
?- ? ??
___.___??__._ _ a

Circular Channel: Manning's Equation -
HOLLY RIDGE SC
Comment: CULVERT NO 1 OFFSITE DRAINAGE NORTH
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 1.91 ft Velocity...... 8.36 fps
Slope.......... 0.0143 ft/ft Flow Area..... 2.87 sf
Manning's n.... 0.013 Critical Slope 0.0126 ft/ft
Discharge...... 24.00 cfs Critical Depth 1.73 ft
Depth.......... 1.91 ft Percent Full.. 100.00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 24.00 cfs,
AMAX @.94D.... 25.82 cfs
Circular Channel: Manning's Equation - HOLLY RIDGE SC
Comment: CULVERT NO 2 ONSITE DRAINAGE WEST
Solve For...... Full Flow Diameter
Diameter....... 1.68 ft
Slope.......... 0.0143 ft/ft
Manning's n.... 0.013
Discharge...... 17.00 cfs
Depth.......... 1.68 ft
Velocity...... 7.67 fps
Flow Area..... 2.22 sf
Critical Slope 0.0126 ft/ft
Critical Depth 1.51 ft
Percent Full.. 100.00%
Froude Number. FULL
Full Capacity. 17.00 cfs
AMAX @.94D.... 18.29 cfs
Haestad Methods FlowMaster I version 3.15
1-Y
( 16-?o 0

t
r
CD,ts
GoA'T L,%J u ouS
PEFILracTium S iFEAARAlrlo^.)
CDS Technologies, Inc. provides products and services to municipalities,
public agencies and industry, based on the unique solids/liquids separation
technology known as Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS). The parent
company, CDS Technologies Ltd. - which is headquartered in Australia -
has developed and owns this non-blocking screening technology, which is
protected by US, Australian and international patent applications.
Continuous deflective separation (CDs) technology is an innovative and highly
effective new solution to address wet weather stormwater pollution problems.
CDS technology offers an effective method of preventing pollutants - such as
street litter, trash and debris, vegetation and coarse sediments and the attached
pollutants -nutrients and heavy metals - from entering our waterways.
As with most great technological breakthroughs, simp?liciq prevails: The
CDS system controls the water to enable a naturaa sseparation of solids from
the water carrying them. The first non-blocking and non-mechanical s s m,
CDS uses fine-screening to prove e a muc more efficient and cost-effective
alternative to previous generations of technology. The CDS technology is
an essential first component of a "treatment train" to protect and enhance
the performance of other filtration systems and biological systems.
The major application for the technology is currently to clean gross pollution
from stormwater before it enters natural waterways, but through continuing
research, the company has extended its product range for use in removing
oil and grease from stormwater flows, industrial and food processing indus-
tries and to separate floatables and remove solids from combined sewer
overflows (CSO).
CDS: Non-blocking and Non-Mechanical
Ac --effective Separator of gross pollutants withmUt
the separation screen becoming blocked."
" No conditions could be created which produced
r ' any signs Icant oc ing o t e screen.
rom summary of results of an ,ndependent study by Monash Un,versrty
Melbourne, Australia Dr. Tony H. F. Wong, Department of Civil Engineering,
February 1995

Safe Pollutant Removal Removing debris caught by CDS units is
low-cost, safe and easy. Captured materials can be removed simply and
mechanically by basket, base flow take off (pump), clam-shell bucket, or
suction - eliminating the need for human handling of dangerous materials.
CDS Technology Key Features
3 e
Efficient
• Caetures greater than 95 percent of water-borne
litter ana aeons.
• Effective in removing particles as small as coarse
se imen .
• etains all trapped pollutants when CDS rocessing
capacity is ex a unn m requent i ucjvlap? /?
Large Flow Range
t to 300 cubic feet per second (CFS).
Non-Blocking and Non-Mechanical
Separation screen does not clog'and requires no power
or supporting infrastructure.
Low-Cost, Safe and Easy Pollutant Removal
Low maintenance b mechanical rather than human
met o s.
Cost-Effective
Lowest overall cost per pound of gross pollutants
removed.
Unobtrusive and Easy to Install
Com act and below round. limited space require-
ent. Ideal or retro it an redevelopment appucations.
Applications
• Stormwater
• Free oil and_arease controls with sorbers
• CSO
• Pretreatment Water
• Industrial
• Pretreatment for O/W Sep/Sand filters media
• Biofiltration ponds and infiltration basins
The CDs unit can be placed in line
with an existing stormwater system,
Its remarkably small footprint takes
little space and requires no support
the COS System Works:
ants are captured inside the
ation chamber, while the water
s through the separation

CDs technology uses indirect screening to capture even the small materials
Pollutant particles remain within the unit while the water passes through the
separation screen.
`Key Features of the CDS Technology
• Eliminates need for treatment at multiple storm drain inlets
• Centralizes maintenance effort
• Small footprint
• Underground, unobtrusive and easy to install
• Non-blocking and non-mechanical
• low maintenance cost with safe and easy cleanout of pollutants
• Eliminates need for frequent cleanout of catch basins
• Capture oil spills.
CDS Technology Pollutant Removal Capability
• Captures all parking lot litter greater than 0.048 inches
• Effective when combined with sorbents in the capture of 80-90% of the oil and
grease found in parking lot run-off'
• Effective in capture of fine sand and larger particles
• Provides essential first step of treatment train (absorption, filtration and infiltration)
when regulations require removal of dissolved metals and other pollutants attached
to very fine particles.
' Studies conducted by Professor Michael Stenstrom, PhD., at the UCLA found that
"the addition of sorbents material within the separation chamber of CDS units
can remove 80 to 90% of the oil and grease at concentrations typically found
in stormwoter." Levels of used motor oil were reduced to less than 1 mg/L
during this study. Copies of Professor Stenstrom's report ore available from
CDS Technologies to assist in the selection of the optimum sorbent material.
Design Considerations
• Impervious drainage area served
• Design flow of pipe
• Design treatment flow
• Head loss
• Grated inlet covers
• Traffic loading.
Capacity and Physical Features
Current Clients (Partial List)
• Orlando, Florida
• Brevard County, Florida
• City and County of San Francisco
• United States Navy
• City of Anaheim
• City of Santa Monica
• Ventura County Flood Control District.

Capacities"
Manufacture
Material Model'
Designation Treated
Impervious Runoff
Flows Sump
Storage Oil
Storage Design
Head Loss Depth Below
Pipe Invert Foot Print
Diameter
Area (acres) cfs yd3 gals (ft) (ft) (ft)
{
Fiberglass
FSW20 20
2.0
1.1
0.7
24
0.31
4.5
4.5
FSW30 28 6.0 3.0 1.8 53 0.43 5.3- 6.0
Precast Concrete PSW30 28 6.0 3.0 1.8 101 0.43 7.0 6.5
PSW50 50 22 11 1.9 318 0.78 9.6 9.5
'CDS Fibreglass (F), Precast (P), Stormwater (SW).
"Flow capacities and sump sizes may be customized to meet your site specific needs.

Minimal Construction
Effort to Install
FSW30-28
1. Preassemble Diversion Weir Box
and CDS unit above ground.
2. No crane required.
Assembled unit is light-weight.
3. CDS unit is off the pipeline alignment.
Small diameter foot print.
4. Gravel or sand backfill speeds
installation and reduces compaction
effort.

"M m"

Maintenance Requirements
• Annual inspection and power wash
screen
• Inspection of unit after first major
seasonal storm
• Removal of captured pollutants when
sump two thirds to three quarters full
• Remove and replace oil and grease
sorbents when fully discolored/coated
with oil.
1

i

SUMP
Standard Unit Capacities
& Physical Features
OPTIONAL SUMP BASKET
COS technology uses fluid flows and a
perforated screen in a balanced system
to cause a natural separation of solids
from fluids. The continuous circulating
flow over the separation screen, with
the very low velocity, keeps the screen
from blocking.
Manufacture
M
i
l Model* Treatment Capacity Design
H
d L Sump Depth Below Foot Print
ater
a Designation cfs MGD ea
oss
(ft) Capacity
(yd') Pipe Invert
(ft) Diameter
(ft)
Fiberglass FSW207 20 1.1 0.7 0.31 0.7 4.5 4.5
_
FSW30_2& 3.0 2.0 0.43 1.8 5.3 6.0
PSW30_28 3.0 2.0 0.43 1.8 7.0 6.5
Precast"
Concret PSW50 50' 11 7.3 0.78 1.9 9.6 9.5
i
e PSW70_70 26 17.3 1.10 3.9 14.0 12,5
PSW100_100 62 41.3 1.55 8.6 16.0 17.5

Cast in Pl CSW150_134 148 98.7 2.11 Varies Varies 25.5
ace
Concrete
CSW200_164
270
180.0
2.60
Varies
Varies
34.5
CSW240_150 300 200.0 2.60 Varies Varies 41.0
"COS Fiber lass (F Precast P an in PI rmw r
9 ), (), and Cast Place (C), Sto ate (SW)
*CDS Technologies can customize units to meet specific design flows and sump

As part of developing design guidelines for first flush devices, continuous simulation
using 100 years of recorded rainfall data for Melbourne, Australia was carried out to
investigate the diversion efficiencies associated with different design standards for the
height of the diversion weir. Diversion efficiency is defined as the percentage volume of
stormwater which has been diverted into the separation chamber over the 100 year
simulation period. Simulations were carried out for catchments with critical storm
durations of 0.5, 1, 3 and 6 hours and the results for each of these cases were jound to
be similar as illustrated in Figure 5. Diversion efficiencies in excess of 93% for.design
bypass frequency as high as once in 0.25 years were found, suggesting that the height
of the diversion weir need not be set excessively high to gain significant benefits in the
overall proportion of stormwater diverted to the CDS system. An optimal retrofit of
existing stormwater system based on a 0.25 years or 0.5 years bypass frequency would
facilitate effective gross pollutant entrapment without unduly affecting the discharge
capacity of the drainage system.
Currently there are 15 installations of CDS stormwater gross pollutant traps in Australia,
two in New Zealand and one in the United States of America. Jago (1997) reported
trapped annual quantities of 20 tonnes of litter by such systems in a number of
installations in Australia. Typical composition of solids trapped in these installations
consisted of approximately 60% organic material, 30% silt and sediment and 10% litter
but varys widely with the nature of the catchment.
Pre-screening for Fine Solids Treatment Facilities
Settleable solids are those solids with specific gravities greater than unity and which will
sink to the bottom of the separation chamber into the sump. They will include silts and
sands as well as saturated organic material. CDS units could be utilised to provide
primary treatment of stormwater and wastewater before their discharge to more
elaborate treatment facilities such as wetlands and ultra-violet disinfection systems.
Solids of sizes less than the aperture size of the separation screen may pass through
the screen or may be trapped. Tests were carried out by Wong et al. (1995) to
determine the efficiency of the trap for these types of solids. A range of graded mineral
sands was obtained and further graded by sieving. Six groups of sand grades were
determined with mean diameters ranging from 200 microns to 780 microns. Tests were
carried out with each grade of sand for pipe full inflow velocities ranging from 0.5 m/s to
1.4 m/s. The aperture of the separation screen used in the test was 2.4 mm by 7 mm.
The results of the tests are presented in Figure 6 and clearly show the unit to be very
effective (ie. >90% separation) for solids as small as 900 micron or 38% of the minimum
aperture size of the separation screen. For solids up to 500 micron (ie. 1/5th of the
screen aperture size), the trapping efficiency was found to be approximately 5G%. The
tests suggest that separation efficiencies were largely independent of inflow velocities
for the range tested.
3
9 ofl5
-E
Figure 6
100
90
u so
0 70
C3 60
a
c 50
-t0
C-
30
C -)0
C4
10
0
Sand Trapping Efficiency of COS Unit with Aperture Size of 2.4 mm

i O Single Outlet; vel = 0.5 m/s; 2.117.0 (Wong et al., 1996)
S Single Outlet; vel - 1.0 rr s; 2.1/7.0 (Wong et al.. 1996)
1/7
? Sin
le Outlet; vel = 1
1 rrvs: 2
0 (Won
et al
1996)
.
.
.
g
g
..
Fitted Curve
' ' ' ' ' 'Separation Screcn aperture Size

s j

o j

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 1000
Solid Size (,Microns)
Dual Outlet System
In industrial applications and in treating CSO, it may be necessary to adopt a system
which would allow separate discharge of filtered fluid and concentrated fluid, a similar
approach to that adopted in current application of hydrodynamic separators for CSO
management. Figure 7 shows a schematic representation of the COS unit fitted with a
return flow system. Inflow enters the separation chamber at a level above the
separation screen. The floating solids and oil would thus be expected to be contained
and kept in a circular motion at a level higher than the screen and consequently
prevented from passing through the screen. Flow exits the separation chamber through
the separation screen and the sump outlet with all settleable particulates larger than the
size of the screen aperture being conveyed out of the separation chamber via the sump
outlet. A significant proportion of smaller particles will also be trapped and discharged
through the sump outlet. The proportion of the total inflow discharged via the sump
outlet is dependent on the hydraulic configuration of the system.
.-s

10 of 15

Figure 7 Schematic Diagram of a Dual Outlet CDS Unit
I

Laboratory tests have been carried out to define the significance of the second outlet on
the performance of the CDS unit in trapping fine solids smaller than the aperture size of
the separation screen. The tests conducted were similar to tests conducted with the
single outlet system (Wong et al., 1995) using graded sand as the tracer. Two screen
sizes were used in the tests, one with an aperture size of 2.4 mm by 7.0 mm and the
second of 4.7 mm by 18.0 mm. The latter screen size is that normally adopted for
stormwater applications in the field.
In addition to running the test with no discharge from the sump outlet, tests were also
conducted with sump discharges equivalent to 10% and 24% of the total inflow. The
results of the tests conducted are compared with the results for a single outlet system in
Figure 8. Tests with zero discharge from the sump outlet for the screen aperture size of
2.4 mm by 7.0 mm were conducted to provide a basis for comparing the consistency of
the results of previous tests for a single outlet system (presented in Figure 6) to the
present tests. Two runs were conducted using particle size of 260 microns and 750
microns. The results are plotted in Figure 8 and show general consistency with the
results of previous tests with the single outlet system with a separation screen aperture
of 2.4 mm and 7.0 mm.
The results of tests with the dual outlet in operation are also plotted in Figure 8. The
results show the general slopes of the trapping efficiency lines to be significantly flatter
than the corresponding slope for the screen aperture size of 2.4 mm by 7.0 mm. The
effect of the aperture size of the separation screen was accounted for by nor`Malising
the particle size according to the screen aperture size. The result of this normalisation
of sediment sizes is shown in Figure 9 with normalised x-axis representing the particle
size expressed as a ratio of the width of the separation screen aperture.
s
11 of 15
_-t
Az-
Figure 8 Sediment Trapping Efficiencies of CDS Units

100

90

30

70
Single Outlet vd - 0.3 ms: 1.18 .0

v
60
e 1.1 2 0 screcn:
Qt-0
4 Single Out= rcl - 1.1 nvs: 11!7.0
Fi
d
50 ne

7
Dual Oudcc Qr10!:, 1.;713.0

730

'
0

10

0.
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 3000
Solid Size (Microns)
Figure 9 Normalised Sediment Trapping Efficiency Curves
100,

90

So

C
n i0
c 60 Single Outlcc vel .0.3 Mr. 1.1R.0

50 Qr-O
N
7 40 Fitted Curve • Single Outlet

0 30
20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.9 1
Solid Size as proportion of minimum aperrure size
L
fE:

I '
Dual Outlet with
I
i
•
Single Outlet vel - 1.0 nvs: 1L7 .0
?

-C
Si

` I urve -
ngle Outlet
---~- Dual Outlet System QtrJ 1.;/1 8.0
1
;!19
"¦" Dual Outlet System Qt-24%
0

'

i .
.
.
Dual Outlet Q
ry): .
¦ .+/7D

i
i

I ?

¦
I Dual Outlet
with 1.18.0 ? ? Single Oudec vcl ? 1.0 ttvs: '_.1R.0
1 saern: .
? I I i o Single Outltt vd ? 1.4 Ms; 1.L7 0
.
¦
i
i -•" Dual Outlet System Qr?: 1.7118.0

i¦ I i
?'
Dual Outlet QT- 10%: 1.7118.0

? DualOudecQr-'_a% 1.7118.0
r
I

? I i i i Dual Outlet Qr-0: :.117.0
•

12 of 15
I
The normalised curves of trapping efficiencies are not expected to collapse into a single
curve due to the fact that screen aperture size is not the only factor influencing the
performance of the CDS unit. Normalising against screen aperture size has
nevertheless established the characteristics of the sediment trapping efficiency curves
in terms of their general shape and gradient. The experimental results indicate that the
reduction in trapping efficiency of a given size particle due to an increase in the
aperture size of the separation screen in not linear.
When operating under dual outlet, a vortex was observed to have developed at the
center of the separation chamber. The development of this vortex was found to be
evident even for a small amount of return flow. The region of influence of the vortex at
the water surface can be significant and has the effect of drawing floatables towards the
middle of the separation chamber but not necessarily of sufficient energy to discharge
these floatables out of the separation chamber. The extent of this region of influence is
dependent on the proportion of the flow leaving the separation chamber via the sump
outlet, ie. proportion of return flow.
Velocity measurements within the separation chamber indicated a significant alteration
to the velocity profile which can be attributed to the characteristics of the sump outlet.
As expected, the velocities in the vicinity of the center of the separation chamber are
most affected with near zero velocity for a no return system to velocities up to twice that
at the separation screen for a 24% return flow system. However, it is noteworthy that
the velocities in the vicinity of the separation screen were largely unaffected. This
observation has important implications in that the non-blocking function of the CDS
mechanism, which relies on the dominance of velocity vectors parallel to the separation
screen and validated in earlier laboratory and field studies, is essentially unaffected by
the dual outlet system.
The results of the investigation clearly show improved performance with higher
proportion of return flow. This improvement is attributed to the combined effect of fluid
and solid removal via the sump outlet and the vortex action induced by the second
outlet. An increase in return flow from 0% to 10% led to an average increase in
sediment capture of approximately 23%. A further increase from 10% to 24% return
flow led to an increase in sediment trapping efficiency of approximately 57% over the
case of a single outlet system. The improvement in performance appears to be
reasonably constant throughout the sediment size range.
CONCLUSION
A new approach has been developed for separating gross solids from stormwater and
wastewater discharges under rapid flow conditions. This technology, based on the
continuous deflective separation mechanism, overcomes many of the current problems
encountered in conventional gross pollutant traps using trash racks where significant
blockage of the trap can occur leading to a reduction in trapping efficiency and
hydraulic performance of the drainage system. The innovation in this technology is the

13 of 15

prevention of blockage. of the separation screen during rapid flow filtration operation,.
The mechanism by which solid separation occurs involves the deflection of solids away
from a filter screen with the energy required for solid deflection being derived from the
energy associated with the incoming flow. The fundamental basis for ensuring the non-
blocking function of the technology is the maintenance of a suitably high ratio of
tangential velocity to radial velocity along the surface of the separation screen. The
configuration of the inlet to the separation chamber, the dimension of the sep&lation
chamber, the form of the separation screen and the form of the outlet volute chanrigj all
have a direct influence on this velocity ratio.
In addition to being an efficient device for separating gross solids which are larger than
the aperture size of the separation screen, the device was also found to be capable of
effectively separating finer solids which would normally pass through the separation
screen under a direct filtration mechanism. Tests have indicated near 100% trapping
efficiency for solids sizes down to 40% of the minimum aperture size of the separation
screen. The introduction of a second outlet was found to further improve separation
efficiency of fine solids.
Potential applications of the technology encompass a wide range of operation which
are not necessarily related to stormwater and wastewater management. Many
operation requiring efficient and reliable separation of solids from fluid are expected to
benefit from the technology. The selection of the aperture size of the separation screen
can be matched to the minimum solid size required to be separated. Current
experience with stormwater and CSO applications have highlighted the significant
benefit of the technology in environmental "`ianagement of public drainage
infrastructure.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to thank CDS Technologies for permission to publish the paper.
REFERENCES
Allison, R, Wong, T H F and McMahon, T A. (1996), "Field Trials of the Pollutec Gross
Pollutant Trap", Water, Vol. 23, No. 5, pp 29-33.
Huebner, M and Geiger, W.F. (1996), "Influencing Factors on Hydrodynamic Separator
Performance", proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Urban Stormwater
Drainage, Hannover, Germany, 9-13 September 1996, pp. 899-904.
?.
Jago, R.A. (1997), "CDS - A New Screening Technology for the Environment", Water,
Vol.24 No. 1, May/June 1997, pp. 47-49.
Pisano, W.C., (1988), "Swirl Concentrators Revisited - The American Experience and
New German Technology", Proceedings of an ASCE Engineering Foundation

14 of 15

Conference on Current Practice and Design Criteria for Urban Quality Control, Missouri,
USA, 10-15 July, 1988.
Wong, T H F and Wootton, R M. (1995a), "An Innovative Gross Pollutant Trap for
Stormwater Treatment", Proceedings of the Institution of Engineers, Australia, 2nd
International Symposium on Urban Stormwater Management, Melbourne, Australia, pp.
407-412, July 1995
Wong, T H F and Wootton, R M (1995b), "Investigation of the Hydraulic and Functional
Performance of the Pollutec Continuous Deflective Separation Gross Pollutant Trap -
Stage 1 Report on Functionality", Monash University, April 1995
Wong, T H F, Wootton, R M and Fabian, D. (1996), "A Solid Separator using a
Continuous Deflective System", proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Urban Stormwater Drainage, Hannover, Germany, 9-13 September 1996, pp. 881-886.

15 of 15
I I
21
OIL AND GREASE REMOVAL BY
FLOATING SORBENT IN A
by
CDS DEVICE
Michael K. Stenstrom
Sim-Lin Lau
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department
University of California, Los Angeles
4173 Engineering I
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1593
July 2, 1998

Executive Summary
A series of experiments were performed in a small but full-scale CDS device to determine its
ability to remove free oil and grease from polluted waters using sorbents. Nine experiments
were performed using five different sorbents. One control experiment was performed without a
sorbent. The sorbents were allowed to float on the surface of the separation chamber of the CDS
device. The CDS unit was not modified to accept the sorbents. Different amount of each
sorbent were used because of the varying properties of the sorbents (density and surface area).
Tests were performed using a 2400-micron screen over 30 minutes at 125 GPNI (approximately
50% of the CDS unit's nominal flow capacity). Used motor oil was introduced into the feed of
the CDS at approximately 25 mg/L, which is generally the upper limit of oil and grease
concentrations found in stormwaters. Oil and grease was measured at various times to determine
the removal efficiency. Background oil and grease was measured as well as oil and grease
released from the sorbents after the influent oil and grease was reduced to zero. Removal
efficiencies for most sorbents varied from 63 to 967a depending upon conditions. One sorbent
removed only 13171. Sorbent saturation was not achieved in any of the experiments. Very little
oil and grease (generally less than 1 to 2 mg/L) was released from sorbents when the influent oil
and grease was reduced to zero.
Without a sorbent, the CDS unit removed 80% of the influent oil and grease, but released it after
the oil and grease in the influent was reduced to zero. This suggests that the CDS unit might be
effective in capturing a spill, if the unit could be isolated after the spill to allow oil and grease
recovery.
-4;-.

Introduction
Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Psomas and UCLA (Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department) performed a catch basin insert study for a group of Southern California Cities and
the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (the project was lead by the City of Santa Monica).
As an amendment of this study, a CDS unit (which is not a catch basin insert - see references 1 to
3) was evaluated. The unit was assembled in a laboratory at UCLA using tap water to emulate
storm water, and evaluated for its ability to remove trash and suspended solids. This setug,was
used in a further study, not associated with catch basin insert study. to evaluate the unit's ability
to remove oil and crease.
CDS contracted with the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at UCLA to perform
this work. Professor Michael K. Stenstrom directed the work.
Oil and grease removal by various sorbents was evaluated. Free oil and grease was introduced at
approximately 35 m--/L into the feed of the CDS unit. The sorbents were allowed to float in the
top of the CDS unit. No modifications were made to the CDS unit to accommodate the sorbents.
Most experiments were conducted at 135 gallons per minute (135 GPM), which is approximately
507o of the test CDS unit's nominal capacity (for the particular size unit evaluated - CDS units
are produced in a range of sizes). Oil and grease was measured at various times in the effluent to
determine removal efficiency.
This report describes the research and results.

2
Experimental Methods
Sorbents. A Beat deal of research has been performed previously at UCLA on oil and pease in
stormwaters and its removal. Sorbents have been evaluated for this purpose. They have been
proposed for this application for many years, but very few studies by independent investigators
have been performed. This study builds upon earlier work and uses many of the previously
developed concepts and techniques (Lau and Stenstrom, 1995, 1997).
These materials are called "sorbents" as opposed to "adsorbers" or "absorbers" because both
absorption and adsorption mechanism are present. It is sometimes difficult to know which
mechanisms are important.
Five sorbents were evaluated. They were obtained from the manufacturers or from dealers in the
Los Angeles area. Most are marketed for oil spill clean up. Table 1 shows the size analysis for
all sorbents except the Nanofiber (mesh size is not applicable to this sorbent). The numbers in
the table are percent of the sorbent, by weight, that is retained on an ASTM standard wire screen
for the mesh size or opening size shown. Table 2 shows the bulk sorber density. This was
determined by filling a tarred container of known volume with sorbent and measuring its weight.
This density is not the particle density, which excludes void spaces.
1. OARS. OARSTM (AbTech Industries, 4110 N. Scottsdale Rd., Suite 235, Scottsdale, AZ
85251) is a "rubber" type of sorbent. It can be manufactured in any desired size fraction.
The material is sintered into larger panicles from smaller particles. The material used in
this study was originally intended for use in catch basin inserts, and is somewhat larger
than optimal for this application. The manufacturer generally believes that the removal
mechanism is absorption. Of the sorbents evaluated in this study. the AbTech sorbent is
most similar to the Rubberizer sorbent. The material is denser than the other sorbents and
tends to wet better in the separation chamber of the CDS device.
2. Rubberizer. RubberizerT`' is a sorbent that is marketed by Haz-.1lat Response
Technologies, Inc (4626 Santa Fe Street, San Diego, CA 92109) as a clean up sorbent for
various types of solvents, oils and fuels. It is composed of a mixture of hydrocarbon
polymers and and additives. It can be purchased in as a particle (used in this test) or water
gel or assembled into pillows and booms. It is similar to the touch as the OARS sorbent.
3. Aluminum Silicate. Aluminum silicate is a popular material for oil and grease sorption. It
is lightweight and hydrophobic. It is also used to add bulk to soil. Two types were used in
this study: the first product is marketed as XsorbT't (Impact Absorbent Technologies, P.O.
Box 1131, Atascadero, CA 93423) and is sold for stormwater applications; 2) the second
type is Sponge RokTM type 23 (Paramount Perlite Co., Paramount, CA, 90723) and our
understanding it is that is primarily sold as a soil bulking agent. Xsorb is appro?knately 8
mesh and the particles have sharp edges, as if they were recently fractured. Sponge Rok is
larger, with a mesh size of 3.5, and has rounded edges. Both materials easily abrade to
create a fine powder.

3
4. Nanofiber. Nanofiber' (Nanofiber Technology Inc, 205 Artillery Road, NC, 29837) is a
polypropylene fiber adsorbent. It is similar to fibers made by 3NI for uses in pillows, pads
and sausage sorbers for oil spill control. Nanofiber and other similar materials were used
extensively in a previous study by the authors (Lau and Stenstrom, 1995).
The sorbers all have different bulk densities, specific surface areas and costs. It was not possible
to create an equivalent mass of each sorbent on any common basis. Therefore the expements
were conducted with sufficient sorbent to cover the top of the CDS unit. When these sorbents
are used to clean up oil spills they are exposed to either pure oil and very concentrated mixtures
of oil and water. Under these circumstances, they will sorb many times their weight.
Table 1. Sorbent sizes (numbers are percent retained on each screen size)
Screen size
(mm) Screen flesh Rubberizer OARS Xsorb Sponge Rok
26.7 0.0 39.7 0.0 0.0
13.3 - 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0
5.7 3.5 0.4 9.9 11.1 37.1
4.7 4 0.2 0.2 12.6 5.4
2.4 3 99? 0? 73.3 3.3
<14 < 3 0.2 0.1 2.4 3.7
Table 2. Bulk sorbent density.
Sorbent Density 1'g/ml)
Rubberizer 0.26
OARS 0.22
Xsorb 0.13
Sponge Rok 0.10
For the applications investigated in this report, they sorb much less because they are only
exposed to very dilute mixtures of oil and water.
Oil and Grease Analysis. Oil and grease was measured using a solid phase extraction (SPE)
technique developed earlier by the authors (Lau and Stenstrom, 1997). This technique uses a
known volume of sample (generally 500 ml for this study) which is pumped through an SPE
column at a constant but low rate (e.g., 5 mllmin). The oil and grease in the sample is sorbed on
the SPE column. After the sample is pumped through the column, it is eluted with a small
volume of solvent (5 ml): methylene chloride and hexane. The sample bottle is also washed with
a small volume of solvent (isopropanol). The two solvent volumes are combined and placed in a
tarred container. The solvents are allowed to dry at 50°C using a gentle nitrogen purge. The
residue is weighed. The results are reported as ms/L based upon the original sample volume.
This method is not yet a standard method, but is being developed by the US EPA and others as a
standard method. It has the advantages of higher recovery, especially for the more volatile
components in oil and grease, and using less solvent (the solvents used for traditional oil and
grease analyses are usually flammable, toxic and either green house gases or ozone depleting
gases). By using different sample volumes is it possible to have low detection limits, and the

4
-i.
limit with 500-m1 sample volume is typically 0.25 mg/L. This method does not quantitatively
measure oil and grease adsorbed to solids and an alternate technique must be used for particle-
bound oil and grease. However, this is not important for this study because no particles were
added to the tap water used for testing.
CDS Unit. Figure 1 shows the CDS unit. This is a schematic diagram and not to scale. The
manufacturer should be consulted for manufactured sizes and exact dimensions. The reen was
23.375 inches in internal diameter by 24.5 inches tall. The screen size was 2400 microns (1200
and 600 micron screens were used in the previous study to test solids removal but were not used
in this study). The screen openings are elliptical.
The unit was connected to a high-pressure tap water line in the Engineering I building at UCLA
through a cut off valve (not shown) and a metering valve. Small amounts of air were introduced
into the pipeline to allow an ultrasonic (Doppler effect) velocity meter to be used. The meter
was used in a three-inch diameter section of pipe that was flowing full under all test conditions.
Figure 2 is a schematic of the piping.
Oil was introduced at a reducing tee, which allowed the pipe size to increase from 3 inches to 6
inches ("trade" sizes used for all pipe dimensions). A Masterflex peristaltic pump was used to
deliver the oil to the 6-inch line. Flow rate was determined by pumping from a graduate cylinder
and noting the reduction in volume over time. The oil flow rate was set to deliver the desired
concentration (25 mg/L) for each flow rate. The oil specific gravity was measured as 0.86 g/cm'.
The 6-inch pipe was flanged to the CDS unit. The 6-inch pipe did not flow full at all flow rates.
The effluent pipe was also six inches in diameter and discharged into a plywood box that
contained the turbulence and splash. The effluent was then sent to a sanitary sewer.
Influent samples were collected from the surface of the CDS unit by dipping a sample container
below the surface in the influent water jet. Effluent samples were collected at the end of the
discharge pipe (a free waterfall).
Prior to the beginning of each test, the freeboard of the CDS unit was wiped clean and a small
amount of new sorbent was used to remove any oil that remained from the previous test. This
sorbent was removed prior to the beginning of the test. A weighed amount of test sorbent was
then dumped into the separation chamber of the CDS unit. Sorbents were removed using a large
fine mesh sieve.
Test Sequence. Tests were begun by collecting a background sample prior to the introduction of
any oil to the influent. Next the oil-metering pump was turned on. Effluent samples were
collected approximately every 5 minutes for the test duration, which was usually 30 minutes. At
the end of the test, the oil-metering pump was turned off and the influent was allowed to
continue for another 30 minutes. Two influent samples were collected at approximate 10 and
20 minutes. At the end of the second 30 minutes (total elapsed time of 60 minutes), a sample
was collected to determine if any oil was desorbing. After collecting the sample the influent
water was turned off and the used sorbent was recovered and disposed. The CDS unit was then
drained and prepared for the next test. Oil and greases samples were generally analyzed within
16 hours after the tests were completed. Tap water temperature during the test was 15'± 2 °C .

5

Influent (6 in.)
2in elevation
Difference '

Effluent (6 in)
Screed Inside
Large Cylincer
Nominal screen dimension
23.375 in ID by 24.5 tall j
Sludge `-
Outlet (2in.)
Figure 1. Schematic of the CDS unit (not to scale). Nominal screen dimensions are 23.373'by
24.5 inches. The screen is in the middle section and is installed or removed from the top.
Influent and effluent pipes were six in diameter with flanges. Unit sits on three leas and is
approximately 60 inches tall.

6
Metering Pump
3 in. Tap water line. Air Injection
Point
0

6 ?i pipe
Control Valve
Doppler Effect
Flow Meter
CDS Unit
Effluent
Sample
Point
Figure 2. Process flow diaPram.

Influent
Sample
Point

Results and Discussion
A total of 9 tests were performed using various tvpes of sorbents. One test was performed
without a sorbent to determine the efficiency of the CDS unit to remove oil and grease by itself.
Table 3 shows the final, averaged results of all tests.
The tests are sorted by sorbent name, in alphabetical order with the test without sorbent 1:1?. The
second column shows the amount of sorbent used during the test. The next two columns-show
the average influent and effluent oil and grease concentrations. The percent removal column was
calculated based upon the average influent and effluent concentrations. The flow column shows
the flow rate used during the tests. All were conducted at 125 GRYI except for two tests with
OARS sorbent, which were conducted at 75 and 190 GP.M. These tests were conducted to show
the impact of flow rate on removal rates. Test 5 was conducted for 125 minutes to saturate the
sorbent (unsuccessful - the sorbent was not saturated).
Table 3. Test results
Test Sorbent Type Sorbent Inf. Eff. Percent Flow mass (mg) Q (mg/g) Residual
No. Mass (g) (mg/L) (mg/L) Removal (gpm) (mg/L)
1 Nanofter 570 29.3 3.3 37 1_5 3.62 E+05 635 0.03
3 OARS 2600 19.6 2.7 36 125 3.39 E45 92 0.5
3 OARS 2_600 24.0 4.3 3^_ 190 4.25 E-05 164 0.3-1
4 OARS 2600 30.7 1.7 94 75 2.47 E-05 95 0.63
3 OARS (12-5) 2600 31.0 3.5 33 1^_5 1.02 E-06 392 -
6 Rubberizer 1030 27.2 3.9 36 125 3.30 E45 321 1.96
7 Sponge Rok 660 41.1 7.2 41 125 431 E-04 729 0.74
3 Xsorb 661 13.6 2.9 79 125 1.53 E-05 331 0.74
9 No Sorbent 0 19.7 4.5 77 135 - 3.35
The more dense sorbents (OARS and Rubberizer) generally have greater efficiencies that the
lighter sorbents such as Xsorb and Sponge Rok. This is because the lighter sorbents float on top
of the water and have less contact with influent water and oil and grease. In some cases, there
was poor mixing of the sorbents with the influent. The OARS and Rubberizer sorbents floated
just below the fluid surface and had much better circulation patterns.
The column Q represents the mass of removed oil and grease per unit mass of sorbent. The units
are mg per -ram (or gram per kilogram). A sorbent with a Q of 1,000 would remove oil and
grease equal to its weight. In oil spill control, these same sorbents may remove many times their
weight. The reduced Q in these experiments results because of the low concentrations oil and
grease in simulated stormwater, as compared to oil spill conditions. Since none of the orbents
in these tests were saturated, higher Q's should be anticipated. Generally sorbents will produce
lower effluent concentrations at lower Q's. As saturation occurs, the Q is maximized but
effluent quality suffers.

3
The sorbents generally retained the sorbed oil and grease. Effluent concentrations were less than
1.0 mg/L except for the Rubberizer which as almost 2 mg1L. This may have resulted because of
its high Q.
The test with no sorbent is interesting. The CDS unit by itself removed approximately 77% of
the incoming oil and grease. The effluent concentration after oil and grease injection ended was
still high (4.3 m--[L), and the unit without a sorbent would probably have lost all the remained oil
and grease to the effluent.
This behavior suggests a removal mechanism for the CDS/sorbent combination. The CDS unit is
functioning as a gravity oil/water separator. The free oil and grease rises to the surface due to
the influence of gravity. Once at the surface the oil is captured by a sorbent which retains it.
The tests conducted at different flow rates show the impact of flow rate or retention time on
removal efficiency. The efficiency at the low flow rate was 94171 as compared to 82 and 837o at
the hither flow rates.
The CDS unit retained the sorbents and released none into the effluent, with the exception of the
Nanofiber. Fine fibers could be seen in the effluent when using Nanofiber.
Figures 3 to 9 show the results of the various tests. The spikes in concentration are mostly likely
due to poor mixing and are more common with the light sorbents. Figure 10 shows a progression
of oil sorption on the OARS sorbent. Figure 11 shows an electron micrograph of the Nanofiber
sorbent.
?9-.

9
Uy/GUJ ltil, 11: G4 1_L1. 1 J I J ,?•,U 4JjV 1 ..? 1•.1L 1 •11.
-., .
ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES AND FEDERAL
SPECIES OF CONCERN, BY COUNTY, IN NORTH CAROLINA
This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's County Species List. It is a listing
of North Carolina's federally listed and proposed endangered, threatened, and candidate species and Federal
species of concern (for a complete list of rare species in the state, please contact the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Proe*ram). The information in this list is compiled from a variety of sources, including field
surveys, museums and herbariums, literature, and personal communications. The North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program's database is dynamic, with new records being added and old records being revised as new
information is received. Please note that this list cannot be considered a definitive record of listed species
and Federal species of concern, and it should not be considered a substitute for field surveys.
Critical habitat: Critical habitat is noted, with a description, for the counties where it is designated.
Aquatic species: Fishes and aquatic invertebrates are noted for counties where they are lalown to occur.
However, projects may have effects on downstream aquatic systems in adjacent counties.
Sea turtles: Sea turtles occur in coastal waters and nest along beaches. This list includes sea turtles
in the counties where they are known to nest. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
jurisdiction over sea turtle issues on terrestrial systems; the National Marine Fisheries
Service has authority over sea turtles in coastal waters.
Manatees: Manatees occur throughout Norih Carolina's coastal waters; this list includes manatees
in counties where there are known concentrations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
consultation and recovery responsibility for manatees.
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME S'T'ATUS
ALAMANCE COUNTY
Vertebrates
Carolina darter
Carolina redhorse
Invertebrates
Yellow lampmussel
Vascular Plants
Sweet pinesah
ALEXANDER COUNTY
Vertebrates
Bog turtle
Rafinesque's big-eared bat
Nonvascular Plants
Keever's bristle-moss
Etheostoma collis lepidinion FSC
Morostoma sp. FSC
Lan:psilis cariosa FSC
Monotropsis odorata FSC*
Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A)'
Co?ynorhinus (=Plecotus) rafinesquii FSC*
Orthotricluan keeverae FSC
May 14, 1999 Page 1 of 51
?OF WATF9Q Michael F. Easley
/ ?O G Governor
l V r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
I Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIPT
March 13, 2001
Mr. Bill Price
Price Holdings
Post Office Box 2112
Burlington, North Carolina 27216
Subject: DWQ #: 991003
County: Alamance
The Wetlands Restoration Program has received a check in the amount of
$ 61,875.00 check number 70937557 as payment for the compensatory mitigation
requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certification issued for the subject project.
This receipt serves as notification that the compensatory mitigation requirements
for this project have been satisfied. Please note that you must also comply with all
other conditions of this certification and any other state, federal or local
government permits or authorization associated with this activity.
The NCWRP, by acceptance of this payment, acknowledges that the
NCWRP is responsible for the compensatory mitigation requirements associated
with this project and agrees to provide the compensatory mitigation as specified.
As specified, the NCWRP will restore 495 linear feet of stream in subbasin 030603
of the Cape Fear River basin.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at
[phone].
Sincerely,
A-4 - -
Ronald E. errell,
Program Manager
REF/cvb
cc:
V ??
-1
vCUEha!
Customer Service
Rob Ridings, DWQ
file
Division of Water Quality 1619 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Wetlands Restoration Program [phone] Fax: [phone]
1 800 623-7748
/ M ~1~~ I ~ ~y 1
i` ~ , ~
4 ~ r• \ ~ y ~ \ S
74 ~ ~ r C; ` • f 1 y I C'+ ~ ` k I
~V ~ 1 F ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~ 1 ~
~ ~p f 1 x
~ ~ 1 ~ ~ I ~ ~
- ~ ~ ~ s~' ~ ~ ~ t 4
i - 5F t s . R / ) ~ ~ l
~ ~ t r~ ~ I ti ~ 1 f ~ ~ ~
~ ~ _ ',M ~ ~ : 1 1 1 ~R 1
~ ~t ~ • ~r1
- ~ . ! ~ G I I r ~ ~ ~
~ R r 1 ~ ~ ` ~ l ~ ~ o~ ~ ca ~
~ - ~ ~ ih ! S. ~ ~ I ~ ~ CSC Q ra OC
~ ~ F~ ; ~ V ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , ~ 4 U ~ '
~o ~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ' , ~ h t ~ ~ f4tV
~ ~ 2.~ ~ r 1 ~ e' 1. p~ j ~ , l ~ ~ , 0 4
~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ y N
'P4 ~ ~ ~ ' ~ Y ' 0 ~ ~ i yl I + ~ ,
B~Rf ~~E t,,~p +f} r ~ ~ ~ EtEv = 555.04 ~ r ~ ~ ~ I 1 ` ~ ~ C`) r ~ ~ ~
f I ti 1 4 I S ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0~ ~ ; ~ ao ro
f ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~ I t , ~
- ~ ~ J r 1 ! ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ r f ~ , , ~
1 , f r I ~ 1 s ~ ~ ; ~ 1 4~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ d I `1 ~ n ~ k N
- f - ~ ~ 85 ~ f~ I I ~ ~ ~ I~. 10
s ~ r ~ ~ { ~ r E ' . ~ I ~ V + ~ l~f! N ~ ~
i ----.~i~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~ ! r , 1 t NVfD
~ ~ . r ~ ,~1 N r ~ ~ ap ~:t„ i x I q
C 1 l - ^M N m k ~ ~ ~y o, r~ I ~ rr ~ H 0 . ep
~`v \ ~ l f ~ ~ i ' i j k y ~ ~ SD Q m
i j i v i k ' `S , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i , k ^I m
i ! , ABRI~OFI~ MOIE ' ~ . ~ I ~ i ' ~ ' n~jR ~ ~ i ~ ` , 1~'" _~E I E ~ 4 d, ~ tw
I ' V ( ~ f ~ \ i i ~ ~t 1
' _ ~ 1 ~ S F. a E. s ~ ~
~ ti ~ ~4 E ss ~ ~ W
j ~ ~ I V ~ U V II
1 =2400 , ~ i r ,a ~ ~ _ . 4 ~ 1~-_ h 1. ~ ~ ' I _ . -~F 4 - 'A1`
I f ; ~ ~ ~ ~1 'r ~ W I G
I .~.1-,
'z ~ - GV ti j ' ~1 ~ .a 3 i y 1 U
4 ~ MAtOd~ED POLE . _ 0 1~ ~ ti O ~r ' - ~ , t ~ ~ , a.
~ fix' n ! ~ f ~ ~ l i j d ~ ~ ` ~ F e
f 1 _ - ~ 'r' r/ _ i ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ .~k
ti ~ I ,.~p~~~ps; } } E m a _ F I ~
' f - ~ I 1 r ~ ~ I ~ (_t ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ - ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~
- ~ ~
AV
11111111111,klllllll