NC0079057_PLAN OF ACTION_19930422

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit: NC0079057
Manteo WWTP '
Document Type: Permit Issuance '
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
Plan of Action '
Instream Assessment (6713)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date: Aril 22, 1993
This document is printed on reuse paper-ignore any
content on the resrerse side

• I =,
r 1f
I � • '.�i� It `..
APR 2 9 1993
t Y
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt,Jr.,Governor A. Preston Howard,Jr., P.E.
Jonathan B. Howes,Secretary Director
April 22, 1993
Ms. Sara E. Winslow, Biologist Supervisor
NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Post Office Box 769
Morehead City, NC 28557-0769 -
Subject: NPDES Permit NCO079057 &
NPDES Permit`NC0025488
Response to Draft Permit Comments
Town of Manteo WWTP
Dare County
Dear Ms. Winslow:
Thank you for your interest in the issuance of the subject NPDES permits for the Town of
Manteo. The Division of Environmental Management would like to offer the following in response
to the issues you have raised.
NPDES Permit NCO025488 is for the renewal of the Town of Manteo's permit for its existing
0.250 MGD wastewater treatment facility. When the town's new facility (NPDES Permit
NC0079057) is built the existing facility will cease discharge as the flow will be diverted to the
new facility. The existing facility was allowed to continue operation under its current permit limits
because the Division feels that it would not be realistic to require the Town of Manteo to upgrade
its existing plant when it is proposing to construct a new treatment facility.
The Division is aware of opposition to the proposed discharge from the Division of Marine
Fisheries due to the proximity to primary nursery areas and SA waters. However, the Town's
environmental assessment has indicated that it currently has no feasible alternatives other than a
direct discharge to the bay. It should be noted that the proposed facility will accept wastewater
Regional Offices
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O.Box 29535,Raleigh,North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page Two
Ms. Winslow
from the existing 0.250 MGD facility, its 0.125 MGD rotary distribution system, and a 0.10 MGD
discharge from Pirates Cove (also known as Roanoke Properties) thus eliminating these three
separate discharges. The proposed facility should be a significant improvement over the treatment
capabilities of the existing treatment facility. In spite of the increase in flow, the overall loadings
for BODS and ammonia will be reduced, the fecal coliform limit has been reduced from 200.0/100
ml to 14.0/100 ml and a daily maximum total residual chlorine limit of 17 µg/1 was added to the
permit. This limit should adequately protect the shrimp and blue crab larvae.
In addition to the reduced loading, extensive instr earn monitoring was assigned to the
proposed facility including sites in Doughs Creek, Scarboro Creek and in Roanoke Sound, to
ensure that the discharge is not causing degradation in these areas that are high quality waters. The
new facility will also be required to incorporate a diffuser into the outfall design and the ultimate
discharge point will be moved out into the bay for better mixing. The final discharge point was
decided upon after consultation with Shellfish Sanitation, the Division of Marine Fisheries and the
Division of Environmental Management's Washington Regional Office. The Division has also
recommended that the outfall pipe be buried deep enough to prevent damage from trawlers and that
the actual outfall be clearly marked based on input from the above agencies.
With regard to the comments concerning the proposed upgrade of Shallowbag Bay to Class
SA waters, in 1986 the Division received a request from the Town of Manteo for reclassification of
Shallowbag Bay from SC to SB waters. In 1988 the town requested that Shallowbag Bay be
reclassified from Class SC to Class SA waters. In 1990 the Division informed the Town of
Manteo that a reclassification was not possible due to the existing discharge into the bay. The town
has indicated that they would pursue a reclassification to SB waters after the new wastewater
treatment facility has been put into operation and the existing plant has been dismantled. However,
at this time there is no pending reclassification request from the current SC waters classification.
The Division hopes that this resolves the concerns that the Division of Marine Fisheries has
expressed and we thank you for your efforts and concerns. Please be assured that the Division of
Environmental Management will take all necessary steps to ensure that the permit conditions are
met and water quality is protected. Again, thank you for expressing your concerns. If you have
further questions or comments please feel free to contact Charles M. Lowe of our Water Quality
Section at telephone number(919) 733-5083.
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
cc: Washington.Regional Office
Environmental Sciences Branch
Technical Support,.BrahcIV
Permits and Engineering
Central Files
Planning

' - e.wsurt
Zn Sl
5 y. a
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor C Ir
4�
�j, �" � On 2��5 Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
&0 �u,4v .
February 23 , 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Charles Lowe
FROM: Greg Thorpe ]
SUBJECT: Review of Division of Marine Fisheries ' Comments and
DEM Response Regarding Town of Manteo ' s NPDES Permits
Nos. NCO079057 and NCO025488
Planning Branch staff have reviewed the subject
correspondence (attached) and offer the following comments. We
recognize that Manteo ' s discharge options are limited and that it
is , therefore, necessary for the Town to continue to discharge to
Shallowbag Bay. We believe that the Division of Marine Fisheries
(DMF) has some valid concerns regarding the resources of
Shallowbag Bay and the permit conditions .need to reflect the
protection of those resources and adjacent High Quality Waters ..
The comments from DMF seem to indicate, for example, that whole
effluent toxicity limits need to be part of the permit. As
Director of DEM, George Everett indicated in his April 16 , 1991
letter to David Lane (attached) that the Town would have an acute
toxicity limit in its new permit. Planning Branch staff believe
that the permit conditions set forth in George Everett ' s letter,
including the acute toxicity limit, are necessary for the
protection of Shallowbag Bay and should be included in the permit
conditions. ( It is difficult to know which of the conditions
described in George ' s letter are or are not included in the
permit, since we have reviewed the correspondence only) . Other
limits , such as the total residual chlorine limit described by
George, are also important for protecting the resources and
should address some of DMF' s concerns. The only other comments
we have are in the. way of questions raised by DMF' s comments.
( 1 ) It was our understanding that this expansion was going to
result in an overall decreased loading to the Bay, based on
meeting advanced treatment requirements . Is this not the case? ;
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] Fax.i 91 9-73 3-051 3
An Equal Opport niry Affinnatve Acton Employer

Charles Lowe
February 23 , 1993
Page Two
( 2 ) Did we waive Environmental Assessment requirements because
of projected water quality improvements from advanced treatment? ;
and ( 3 ) Have all the limits described in George Everett ' s April
16, 1991 memo been incorporated into the permit? If not, which
limits were omitted? We would need to know what the actual
permit conditions are before we could offer any more meaningful
comments. I hope these remarks are helpful. If we can be of
further assistance, please let me know.
GT/kls
Lowe.mem/D-22
Attachments
cc: Steve Tedder, w/attachments
Dennis Ramsey, w/o attachments
Don Safrit, w/o attachments
Coleen Sullins, w/o attachments
Ken Eagleson, w/o attachments
. Trevor Clements, w/o attachments
t•
FEB 2 4 1993
'i
a

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 19, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Charles Lowe
v
THROUGH: Trevor Clement
FROM: Ruth Swanek aC >
SUBJECT: Town of Manteo
NPDES No. NCO025488 and NCO079057
Dare County
I am writing in response to the Division of Marine Fisheries objections to the NPDES permits
issued to the Town of Manteo. NPDES Permit NCO025488 is for the renewal of the Town's
NPDES permit for its existing W WTP. When the Town's new facility (NC0079057) is built this
facility will go off line. Existing permit limits were assigned for the renewal since the Division
cannot expect the Town to upgrade its existing plant when it is building a new W WTP.
DEM was aware of much opposition to the proposed discharge (including opposition from
Marine Fisheries and several DEM staff) due to the proximity to primary nursery areas and SA
waters. However, the Town's environmental assessment indicated that it had no other
alternatives to discharge. In addition, the proposed facility was going to include the flow from
its current 0.25 MGD outfall, its 0.125 MGD rotary distribution system, and the 0.1 MGD Pirates
Cove discharge (a.k.a. Roanoke Properties). In light of the above information, the Division
decided to permit the proposed discharge with state of the art treatment requirements.
The proposed facility should be an improvement over the current discharge. The permitted
loading for BOD and ammonia has been reduced, fecal coliform limit has been reduced from
200 /100 ml to 14/100 ml, and a daily maximum total residual chlori.ae limit of 17 ug/I was
added. This limit will adequately protect the shrimp and blue crab iarvae.
In addition to the reduced loading, extensive instream monitoring was assigned to the proposed
facility including sites in Doughs Creek, Scarbon; Creek and in`Roanokd:Sound'to ensiieeifiat
the discharge is not causing degradation in these areas whicfi are`tiigh'y'uali'ty waters. The ne•n•
facility is also required to have a diffuser and the ultimate discharge point was moved out into
the bay for better mixing. The final dischar_qtpoint was decided upon after consultation with
Shellfish Sanitation, Division of Marine Fisheries, and DEM's Washington Regional Office.
Technical Support also recommended that the outfall pipe be buried deep enough to prevent
damage from trowlers and that the actual outfall be clearly marked based on input from the above
agencies. These recommendations may have not been incorporated into the final permit.
Finally, with regard to Marine Fisheries comment about the proposed upgrade of Shallowbag
Bay to SA, Technical Support was informed in 1990 that the Town of Manteo had requested the
reclassification and understood that it would not be granted with its dischargers in the bay. The
Town had indicated that it was interested in pursuing a reclassification of the bay to SB however.
The Planning Branch should have further information regarding this comment.
If you need further information, please contact me at extension 503.

og�
State of North Carolina
MICHAEL F. EASLEY Department of Justice
All ORNE.Y c.E,NERA1. P.O. BOX 629
RALEIGH
276020629 '^
c-�
nT, 6
Co
MEMORANDUM
TO: Preston Howard, Acting Director
Division of Environmental Management
FROM: Daniel C. Oakley'YO
Special Deputy Attorney General
DATE: 18 February, 1993
RE: County of Dare y. DEHNR, Ct. App. No. 9210SC262
Please be advised that the attempted third-party permit appeal of the
Town of Nlanteo's NPDES Permit No. NCO079057 has been dismissed by the
Court of Appeals oil joint motion of all parties. A similar dismissal will occur
in Superior Court, and this permit will be effective.
/,DoSafrit
vise if you have any questions.
/dw
cc:
:howa
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer

F'IL D
NO. 9210SC262 g; jF.11 23 FFI I* 24
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS OF
c
COUNTY OF DARE, a Body
Polictic and Corporate, Petitioner
V COUNTY: Wake
NUMBER: 91CVS8811
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL
RESOURCES, Respondent
and RECEIVEn
TOWN OF MANTEO, Intervenor-Respondent
*********************************** FEB
0 R D E R �'Ii �•A70RNEYGM.T,
C�:;rts,acnL l i;;;ecti�n Sec:, ,.,
The following Order was entered:
"The motion filed in this cause on the 21st day of January, 1993 and
designated "Joint Motin to Withdraw Appeal and Dismiss Proceeding"
is allowed. By order of the Court this 28th day of January, 1993" .
And it is considered and adjudged further, that the defenant-
appellant, do pay the costs of the appeal in this Court incurred, to
wit, the sum of NINE AND N01100 dollars ($9 . 00) , and execution
issued therefor.
The above order is therefore certified to the Clerk of Superior
Court in Wake County, North Carolina.
Witness my hand and official seal this the 28th day of January,
1993 .
Cle c of the Court of Appeals
Orig CSC /
cc: Elizabeth E. Rouses/
G. Criston Windham
Yvonne C. Bailey
R. Christopher Dillon
John N. Fountain
Carolyn Sprinthall Knaut
Dwight H. Wheless
Daniel D. Koury
Zv .. �

No. 9210SC262
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF DARE, a Body )
Politic and Corporate, )
Petitioner, )
V. ) From Wake County
No. 91 CvS 8811
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT )
OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND )
NATURAL RESOURCES, )
Respondent, )
and )
TOWN OF MANTEO, )
Intervenor-Respondent. )
M444tii4ii YYY!/!tt!##4t44444i444
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
!l R4tYii4Yi YYtRRttti!lRtt!##44li
This Agreement, made and entered into on the day of January, 1993, by and
between County of Dare, a Body Politic and Corporate (hereinafter "Dare County"), the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (hereinafter "DEHNR"),
and the Town of Mantco, a Municipal Corporation and Body Politic (hereinafter "Mantel').
Whereas, on April 16, 1991, DEHNR issued National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System ("NPDES") permit number NCO079057 (hereinafter 'Permit') to Mantco, authorizing
construction of new wastewater treatment works and allowing the discharge of wastewater into
Shallowbag Bay in the Pasquotank River Basin.
Whereas, on May 15, 1991, Dare County filed a petition for a contested case hearing
pursuant to N.C. General Statute §15013-23, challenging the issuance of permit number
NCO079057 and seeking to have it cancelled. On June 21, 1991, Mantco received permission

to intervene in this proceeding. The case is presently before the North Carolina Court of
Appeals.
Whereas, the parties have resolved all differences between them regarding this matter
and wish to enter into settlement upon the following terms and conditions:
1. Dare County will dismiss the instant proceeding with prejudice, and will take all
actions necessary to effectuate a complete dismissal of its challenge to the permit.
2. Each party will be responsible for its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this
proceeding.
3. Manteo and DEHNR will make no claim against Dare County for money damages
or other redress based upon its institution of this proceeding or its challenge to the issuance of
the permit, so long as Dare County complies with the terms of this agreement.
r
This the day of January, 1993.
Dwight H. Wheless
WHELESS & WHELESS
Post Office Box 500
Manteo, NC 27954
o n o ntaid
YOUNG MOORE HENDERSON & ALVIS
P. O. Box 31627
Raleigh, NC 27622
ATTORNEYS FOR DARE COUNTY
2

ATTORNEY GENERAL MICHAEL F. EASLEY
'By Kath o cs Cooper
Special DepiWAttorney General
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,HEALTH
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Yvo ne C. Bailey, NCSB 9683
WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & CE
P. O. Box 831
Raleigh, NC 27602 /I1' II
L . r"l.S� W l`yi c�ii a
G. Criston Windham, NCSB #7400
WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE
Post Office Drawer 84
Winston-Salem, NC 27102
I )cwt'� i
Daniel D. Khoury
ALDRIDGE SEAWELL & KHOURY
Post Office Box 1584
Kill Devil Hills, NC 27948
ATTORNEYS FOR TOWN OF MANTEO
w#5s822. 3

9210SC262
NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF DARE, a Body Politic
and Corporate,
V. COUNTY: Wake
NUMBER: 91CVS8811
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND
NATURAL RESOURCES,
and
TOWN OF MANTEO,
titttR!ltt,#ltttt„!!!k,!##,#,#tt
JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPEAL AND DISMISS PROCEEDING
NOW COMES Dare County, Petitioner-Appellee, North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Respondent-Appellant, and the Town of Manteo,
Intervenor-Appellant, who jointly move the Court pursuant to Rule 37 of the North Carolina
Rules of Appellate Procedure to dismiss the above-entitled proceeding with prejudice, and
respectfully state:
1. The parties have reached agreement on all matters in controversy between them
involved in the matters presented on appeal and in the underlying proceeding. Further
consideration of this matter would result in a waste of judicial resources and needless expenditure
of public monies.
2. The issues raised by this appeal are also presented in other cases presently being
considered by this Court (see e.g. Citizens for Clean Industry, Inc. and City of Wilmington v.

Cobey, No. 9210SC90). The same panel of judges has been assigned all of these cases. Dismissal
of this proceeding, therefore, will not prevent determination of the legal issues involved.
3. Each party has agreed to bear its own costs in this matter.
WHEREFORE, the parties pray that the Court:
1. Dismiss this matter with prejudice; and
2. Order that each party pay its own costs incurred in this proceeding.
fi
This the day of January, 1993.
G. Criston Windham, NCSB #7400
WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE
Post Office Drawer 84
Winston-Salem, NC 27102
Yv nne C. Bailey, NCSB 9683
W MBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RI_ E
P. O. Box 831
Raleigh, NC 27602
��nADan . h
ALDRIDGE SEAWELL & KHOURY
Post Office Box 1584
Kill Devil Hills, NC 27948
Attorneys for Town of Manteo

MICHAEL F. EASLEY, Attorney General
By: Kathry on s Cooper
Special Dep ttorney General
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
Attorney for the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
Dwight 1- . Wheless
Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 500
Manteo, NC 27954
JOU
. > u ainl/
NG MOORE HENDERSON & ALVIS
P. O. Box 31627
Raleigh, NC 27622
Attorneys for Dare County
W#53213.

DIVISION OF ENVI ONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Date,' �, / Cod 7 9U r�
Permit Number
To: Technical Support Branch
From: Charles Lowe
Permits and Engineering Unit
Please review the attached material and provide comments or recommendations as appropriate.
Thanks,
Charles��
cc: Permit File
�i.
ajB

4 `
jai
State of North Carol
Department of Environment, Health, a . MGMNi
512 North Salisbury Street Raleigh, Not 9} p ICE
U�
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
MEMORANDUM: I R
FEB $ Im
TO: Preston Howard, Jr., Acting Director DEM WATER QUALITY
THROUGH: Mike Street � ) SECTION
FROM: Sara E. Winslow, Biologist Supervisor.
SUBJECT: NPDES Permits No. NCO079057 and NCO025488 - Town of Manteo
DATE: 26 January 1993
The N. C. Division of Marine Fisheries has received the public notice of intent to issue
NPDES permits NCO079057 and NCO025488 to the Town of Manteo. Permit NCO079057 for
the facility proposes a discharge of 1.0 MGD of treated domestic and industrial wastewater from
one outfall into Shallowbag Bay, a class SC stream. Ammonia, BOD and dissolved oxygen are
water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of the immediate
receiving water will be consumed. Permit NCO025488 proposes a discharge of 0.25 MGD of
treated domestic wastewater. No parameters are water quality limited in association with this
discharge. These discharges may affect future water quality based effluent limitations for
additional discharges.
This agency objects to the issuance of the permits based on the following. The objection
to NPDES No. NCO079057 by the Division is a continuation as addressed in a memo dated
March 11, 1991.
Shallowbag Bay serves as a nursery area for spot, croaker, spotted seatrout, weakfish,
shrimp, blue crabs and other commercially and recreationally important species. An oyster
resource exists in the area, but presently cannot be harvested due to the water
classification/closure. These oysters, however, produce spat that may enhance the adjacent
areas. Doughs Creek and Scarborough Creek, tributaries to Shallowbag Bay, are designated
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] Fax M 919733-0513
(� An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Preston Howard, Jr.
26 January 1993
Page Two
Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) and classified as High Quality Waters (HQW). Shallowbag Bay
serves as a "Secondary Nursery Area" (SNA) though not officially designated.
Since 1989, Shallowbag Bay has been pending "SA" upgraded from "SC" and is
dependent solely on the removal of the discharges. The increased diffusion into Shallowbag Bay
may eventually result in future degradation of the adjacent "SA" waters of Roanoke Sound.
According to the permit there are no effluent limitations on total residual chlorine.
Research indicates that levels of chlorine of 1.7ppm and greater are lethal to shrimp larvae, and
probably to blue crab larvae as well. Blue crabs support the most important fishery of the
Roanoke-Croatan sound areas, and Shallowbag Bay is an extremely important producer of blue
crabs, as well as a major nursery area. This agency is also concerned with the dilution effects
of this increased fresh water discharge into the estuarine system. Based on the importance of
the area as a nursery and the sensitivity of the species, the Division feels a toxicity effluent limit
should be applied to the permit.
The issues of the larval mortality caused by chlorine, dilution of estuarine waters by fresh
water and a toxicity effluent limit should be addressed before issuance of any NPDF,S permit.

JAN 21 '92 12.56PM WOMBLE CARLYLE P. 1/7
CLIENT I,D.# 22291,1.0
ATTY.# 1106
FAC5Il1�f£
1•+ WOMBLE C4RLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE
a /� "L-
800 WACHOVL4 BUILDING 9' ,� N ij 8: 4 5
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
TELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE [phone]
TELEX 806498
D , nugry 21 1992
Please deliver the following message to:
NAME: Steve Tedder, Water Quality Section FAX# [phone]
FROM: Yvonne Bailey
NUMBER OF PAGES (including the transmission sheet): 7
OPERATOR: �
Please call us if the message you received was incomplete or not legible. The telephone number
is [phone], ev, 6201,
MESSAGE;
CONFIDENTL4L AND PRIVILEGED
The information contained in this facsimile is privileged and confidential information intended for
the sole use of the addressee. If the reader of this facsimile is not the intended recipient, or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notifwd
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this FAX in error, please immediately notify the person listed above, and return the
original message by mail to the sender at the address listed above.

JRN 21 192 12.57PM WOMBLE CARLYLE P.2/7
WoarmLE CARLYLa SANDRmoB & RICH
900 WACHOViA BUILDING
aAuette mrlCa RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27601 nxatON.uwu 0rrmer
0000 ON,run UNION CENtea 1600 OAR CAIAC uaa
301 AO9tN COLL9OG atAfAt WAILING AGPaoli AWa
Cx ANLerta,Neat"GAa961"A 10202.0023 2400 W49nov1A amwua
r....NNxa(704)SS7-4900 rva vrno aaa SS:
PONT OrrmN
84
r
nLAcon(701) 13119 aeulL NEY 37602 N( 1A CNINOuI.
A 77102
TELEPHONE[phone] (9 ) 7700
Ts"COr7(919)755.2150 OtI rmaemv(919) 21-3660 WACHOVIA tALAOAty(910)721-2f99
tvONNA C. AAIWY
[phone]
January 21, 1992
BY FACSLYME.• 733-9919
George Everett, PILD.
Director, Division of Environmental Management
Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, NC
Re: Roanoke Properties Ltd vs Town of Manteo et al
Dear George:
This letter is to confirm the meeting I set up with representatives of the
Construction Grants Section, Water Quality Section, Black & Veatch, Leo Green &
Associates, Lee Fleming, Town of Manteo and Roanoke Properties on Wednesday, January
22, 1992, at 3;00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the 10th Floor Conference Room of the
Archdale Building, 512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina.
The purposes of the meeting are to discuss settlement options for the various
lawsuits, specifically, (1) whether there are alternatives to the current design submitted by Leo
Green, e.g. minor modifications to the existing design; and (2) whether the Black & Veatch
proposal which was submitted to your office by the Town of Manteo could be a feasible
alternative. Black & Veatch was given copies of your memorandum to me dated January 14,
1992 and the memorandum from Bobby Blowe to you dated January 9, 1992. Black &
Veatch will be prepared to discuss the points raised in the memos.
Attached are copies of materials from Black & Veatch which further explain the
proposal. They were given to the Town of Manteo at the time Roanoke Properties presented
the proposal to the Town. I received these documents last week from Clark Wright of Ward
and Smith who asked me to forward them to you.

• JRN 21 '92 12:57PM WOMBLE CARLYLE P.3/7
George Everett, Ph.D.
January 21, 1992
Page 2
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call me,
Truly yours,
YCB/ YV no C. Bailey
Enclosures (4)
cc: Gus Granitzki, Mayor Via Facsimile: 473-2135
Kermit Skinner, Town Manager Via Facsimile: 473-2135
Bobby Blowe, Construction Grants Section Via Facsimile: 733-9311
Alan Wahab, Construction Grants Section Via Facsimile: 733-9311
Steve Tedder, Water Quality Section Via Facsimile: 733-9919
Leo Green Via Facsimile: 243-7489
Lee Fleming Via Facsimile: 881-0723
Cris Windham, Esq. Via Facsimile: 721-3599
Daniel Khoury, Esq. Via Facsimile: 441-1798
Dewey Wells, Esq. Via Facsimile: 721-3660
Clark Wright, Esq. Via Facsimile: 636-2121
Rd48205

JAN-.iwN zi- 92 ' 12.58PM WOHBLE 'cf:AYLE__., --,RN FAX NO. 8196362121 P•4/7P. 02
MANTEO
WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS
201 FACILITIES PLAN, MODIFIED FOR WINTER
INFILTRATION AND WINTER
(1990) FLOW 440,862 GPO
WASTEWATER FLOW BASED ON COMPLETE
PRACTICAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN EXISTING
MANTEO LIMITS 517,676 GPD
PROJECTED NEEDS BASED ON
FUTURE GROWTH 400,862 GPD
ESTIMATE OF WASTEWATER NEEDS FOR TOWN
OF MANTEO BASED ON ' POPULATION (DATA
FROM 201 FACILITIES PLAN) 464,808 GPD
PLAN AS RECOMMENDED WITH REDUCED FLOW
REQUIREMENT FOR PIRATES COVE 525,000 GPD
i

JAN-iAN 21 92 '-12 5ePN WOMBLE _CRRLYLE„_„ _ `RN FAX N0, 9196362121 P 5'7 P, 03
RECOMMENDED
MANTEO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
4AINTAIN EXISTING d. 125 MGD WWTP WITH
RAPID INFILTRATION IN OPERATION.
ADD A NEW 0,400 MGD DAVCO MANUFACTURED,
FIELDERECTED WWTP IN CONCRETE BASIN TO
DISCHARGE THROUGH A DIFUSER SYSTEM TO
SHALLOWBAG BAY,
COST OPINION
WWTP-DUAL TRAIN 1420,00
AERATION BASIN
DIFFUSED AERATION SYSTEM
WR BLOWERS
FINAL FILTERS
SLUDGE DIGESTION, AEROBIC
TERTIARY FILTERS 112.00
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION 115,00
FIELD ERECTION 80,000
PAINTING 40,000
SITEWORK 100,000
ELECTRICAL 203,000
STAND-BY GEN, 100,000
� TS OM E 2 l PRQJ�CT BID TAB
INFLUENT PS & PREL. TRT, 225,00
OPER BLDG, 165,000
CHEM, FEED SYSTEM 100000
BELT PRESS BLDG, 142,000
SLUDGE HOLDING LAGOON 950000
EFFLUENT PS 100,000
EFFLUENT OUTFALL/DIFFUSER 256,000
2,253,000
ENGINEERING & CONTINGENCY, 20% 450,000
OV_ _ ERALL TOTAL 12,703,000
COST PER GALLON OF CAPACITY
. : 12 7M Mn/595 000 I �S 1S/GAL ION �r

JAN-JAN721`9B2-12:58PN WOMBLE CRR4Y4E___._ ?RN FA8 N!), 818636212t P.6/7P, 04
7 .
RECOMMENDED
OPERATING SEQUENCE
INFLOW 7
200 .200 .0625 .0625
MGD MGD MGD MGD
(� ) (2) (3) (4)
°4S
`tS 'ti
C� ,7 Yas
OUTFLOW J
SHALLOWBAG INFILTRATION
BAY BEDS
FLOW UNITS IN OPERATION
UP TO 325,000 GPD 2,3&4
325,000-400,000 GPD 1 &2
400,000-462,500 GPD 1 ,2&3
462,500-5251000 GPD 1 ,2,3&4
IT LS RECOMMENDED THAT STATE APPROVAL BE SOUGHT TO DISCHARGE TO THE
INFILTRATION BEDS 125,000 GPD OF EFFLUENT REGARDLESS OF THE OPERATING
rnMRCIIRATION AF THE FYPANM Fora nv

• JAN`JRN_21 ,_92 , 12_59PM WOMBLE CARLYLE,,,,,, .,1RN FAR N0. 8198382121 P•7/7 P, 05
RECOMMENDED
FACILITIES
COST COMPARISON
201 FACILITY ALTERNATIVE FACILITY
600,000 GPD* 25,000
$4,540,400 $2,703,000
$7.56/GALLON $5, 15/GALLON
$1 ,965,993 $951 ,456
(43.3%) PIRATES COVE (35.27c)
$2,574,407 $ 1 ,751 ,544
(56,7%) TOWN (64,8%)
+ BASED UPON PIRATES COVE DMLOPEIENT DENSITY BEING LESSENED SO AS TO REQUIRE
ONLY 185,000 GALLONS PER DAY OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY.
✓Y

AGENDA FOR MEETING
JANUARY 22, 1992
TOPIC: TowN OF MANTEO WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN
AND 201 FActt_r11?S PLAN
1. PURPOSE OF THE MEETING
To discuss alternatives to the wastewater treatment plant currently permitted and
designed by F.T. Green & Associates
II. MAJOR ALTERNATIVES
a. Black & Veatch proposal dated January 6, 1992
b. Modifications to the existing design submitted by F.T. Green & Associates
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Factors to Consider in Discussing Alternatives H. a. and b.
Cost
1. Can costs be cut from the current design?
2. Are the costs set out in the Black & Veatch proposal all inclusive?
• Feasibility of Using the Existing 125,000 gpd plant
1. Will the plant be adequate for the next 20 years?
2. If the plant's adequacy is unknown, what type of study needs to be
done, how long will the study take, and how much will such a
study cost?
3. Will the plant be able to meet its design capacity? (It is currently
at 40% of design flow, and the Town has experienced problems.)
• 201 Funding
1. Will delays result in the loss of funding?
2. Costs of engineering will not be covered if a new
design is submitted. (Who will pay for the extra
costs?)
R#48292

J4-21-92 TUE 15:55 WARD & SMITH NEW BERN FAX NO, 9196362121 P. 01
WARD AND SMI'TIi
TELECOPIER COVER MEMORANI?UM
The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney
privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of
the individual or entity named below. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
wrongful and may subject you to civil liability. If you have
received this communication in error, please immediately notify us
by telephone, and return the original message to us at the below
address via U. S. Postal Service. Thank you.
DATE: January 21, 1992
TO: Steve Tedder, water Quality
ADDRESSEE FIRM:
ADDRESSEE CITY AND STATE:
ADDRESSEE PHONE: [phone]
ADDRESSEE TELECOPIER PHONE: [phone]
TOTAL PAGES TRANSMITTED: C:L' INCLUDING COVER MEMORANDUM
CLIENT FILE NUMBER: 91L0949(A)
FROM: I. Clark Wright, Jr.
120 Went Fire Tower Road X 1001 College Court suite 1602
Poet Office Box 8809 Post Offloe Box 667 One Hannover square
Greenville, NO 27B35-8608 Now Bern, NC 28563-0867 Fayetteville street Mail
Telephone: [phone] Telephenei [phone] Ralolgh, NO 27601
Facsimile: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Telephone: [phone]
FacaMle: [phone]
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE AND ASK FOR THE "TELECOPIER OPERATOR."
sss ssssssssssass # # # # s # # # ssssaa # # #
TELECOPIER OPERATOR: a/1(- -I/� TIME: (1:) "5
TRANSMISSION CONFIRMED: TRANSMISSION NOT CONFIRMED: TIME:
COMMENTS:

JAN-21-92 TUE 15:56 WARD & SMITH NEW BERN FAX NO. 9196362121 P. 02
WARD AND SMITH, P.A. OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Attorneys at Law
TO: George Everett and DATE: January 21, 1992
1/22/92 DEM Meeting
Participants
FROM: Clark Wright CLIENT: Roanoke Properties
COPY To: File MATTER: Manteo WWTP
FILE NO. : 91L0949 (A) SUBJECT: January 22, 1992 Meeting
with DEM Staff
VIA FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
The purpose of this memorandum is to confirm attendance by Joe
Hardee and Max Frazier of Black & Veatch, Glenn Futrell of Roanoke
Properties and myself at the meeting arranged by Yvonne Bailey for 3:00
pm on Wednesday, January 22 , 1992, in the 10th Floor Conference Room of
the Archdale Building, Raleigh, North Carolina. In response to Yvonne
Bailey' s facsimile letter of even date to George Everett, Roanoke
Properties would like to assure DEM that the purpose of this meeting is
not to attempt to utilize State staff and resources to effect settlement
of private litigation. Instead, the goal is to facilitate constructive
dialogue between DEM staff., the engineers from Black & Veatch, and the
engineers from F. T. Green & Associates such that ( 1) the parameters of
the Black & Veatch proposal are clear to all, (2) Black & Veatch has a
fair opportunity to respond to the points raised by George Everett ' s
letter and Bobby Blowe's memorandum, and ( 3) significant progress is
made towards the ultimate goal of implementing the most cost effective
solution for the Town of Manteo's long term sewage treatment needs .
I look forward to discussing this Wjr
h all of you tomorrow.
I . Clark Wrig
Distribution:
Gus Granitzki, Manteo Mayor
Kermit Skinner, Manteo Town Manager
George Everett, Director, DEM
Bobby Blows, Construction Grants
Alan Wahab, Construction Grants
Steve Tedder, Water Quality
Leo Green, F. T. Green & Associates
Lee Fleming
Yvonne Bailey, Esq.
Cris Windham, Esq.
Daniel Khoury, Esq.
91L0949(.\)
11/21192
ICw\r@t
V9MAIN\12998.

Ti�h���
7 ow R E a; E Q V E D
ROAt�M PROPER - J h.N p 1992
* ``EIVED WATH QUAi_ITY SFCT101'
JAN 1 i UPER.ATs ONS
,92
FACILIiIEJ gg$E&,WEINTT UNIT
� '�IfBM:TTAL D
TO:
FROM
Data:
Rat
3 ARE
11
TRa11ml%?ALBpAA(mo 0 p308d
INCLOOIIIO aa�IMILlt
18 "ILI )MBaOE IS U07
CUM' pLBABg (919) 473-3700.
ADDITIONAL INPOPA►TIONr;
Age ap 7
o /ff/
7�' av
P ��� iRXTM a
V . WMXR "It ROAXOM PROpolI68 919
( ) 473-6414.
P.C. Ipp,MaUao,Nw*Castro M34-IVIV)in4no
1.

1 ��
ROANOiCE PROPERTIES
CIA
December• 5, 1991
Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
Attn, Dr . George Everett, Director
Subject: Manteo Sewer Plant
Gentlemen:
As you know there has been much controversy regarding the
proposed Manteo wastewater treatment plant. This controversy has
involved all aspects of the project from siting to discharge of
effluent and particularly the design of the plant. I am writing
you at this time to express my concern and disappointment on the
way some of your staff has handled the State': role in this
process.
My first contact with you was in August when you spoke at
the public meeting in Manteo and discussed the State's position
on the discharge permit. As I told you immediately after that
meeting, I was extremely impressed with your Presentation. I was
proud of the way you represented the State. I thought You were
very open-minded, knowledgeable on the subject, practical , firm
and direct, and that you clearly and professionally communicated
the State's position on the discharge. It was refreshing. You
also made it clear (and correctly so) that it is not the State's
responsibility to determine atlernative solutions but to approve
or disapprove ■ proposed solution made by the Town and the
Town's Engineer . I believe this same concept applies to the
actual design of the project. It is not the State's
responsibility to design this wastewater treatment plant but
rather it is the responsibility of the Town's Engineer . I
believe it is the State's responsibility to set the level of
treatment for the effluent discharge and to review and approve
the Engineer 's plant design to most the State treatment
requirements. It is in this area of review and approval that I
believe your staff has gone far beyond its appropriate role in
this process for the Manteo project.
I will show and prove with studies currently being done that
the analyses of alternatives for the project design were
Inadequate and misrepresented. Further , we will show when we get
in court, the many design flaws in the plant that have resulted
P.O. Box 1079,MmhMe, North Cwolm V954•[phone]

Page 2
in unnecessary and excessive cost of this project. I do not
blame the State for the improper analysis of these alternatives
nor the over-design of the plant. However , the State has
projected a very biased position that they support all aspects of
the project as currently designed. Furthermore, they projected
to the Mantso Town Commissioners through various letters and in
public town meetings that the plant design, for the most part ,
has been dictated by the State . At the very least, certain Town
officials have repeatedly stated that the specific plant design
was required by the State . Additionally, they state that the
current design cannot be altered because the State forbids it .
This is obviously improper . Although the State certainly
participates in setting the design criteria for certain
components of the plant , it is the primary responsibility of the
Engineer to design the project in accordance with reasonably
accepted standards, in the Profession and to present the most
economical alternatives to the Town.
I will not attempt to go into great detail about the
specifics of design in this letter . However . I would like to
point out an example of the many design aspects that will be
reviewed . On or about August 25, 1991 , I Contacted You by Phone
and expressed my concern about the oversizing and other design
flaws with the plant. You promptly looked into my allegations
and responded with a hand written note dated August 30. 1991 (see
attachment). One of the things I mentioned to you was the
oversizing of the filters . The project design criteria states
the filters are to be designed based on an overflow rate of 2
gal/min/ft squared. In your note, you said that the 2 gal/min/ft
squared was used for a total filter area of 216 ft squared giving
a capacity of 622,080 gal . However , you will note from the plans
that each filter has an area of 216 ft squared giving a total
capacity of 1 ,244,160. Subsequently , a letter written by John
Blowe ( see attachment) said that a design criteria of 1 .0 to 1 .5
gpm/ft was required . The inconsistency between the project
design criteria, your letter and Mr . Slow's letter are obvious.
Furthermore , it is obvious from Mr . Blow's letter dated October
10, 19910 that he was picking a design number to try and justify
the size of the filters for a supposedly 600,000 gal capacity •
These kinds of things, and many more, will come out when our
lawsuit is tried in court.
As you know, Pirate's Cove is paying for 43.3% of the
capital cost of the plant. In addition, the many citizens of the
Town of Manteo living in Pirate's Cove will also be affected by
the high user rates resulting from the excessive and unnecessary
high cost of this plant. Because of Pirate's Cove role in this

Pape 3
project and as state tax payers, we believe our state government
has the same obligation to us, the Town of Manteo. We simply
believe that the project has been poorly analyzed and designed
from an engineering standpoint , resulting in excessive cost to us
and the citizens of Menteo. Our only request all along has been
that this project be reviewed by an independent engineering firm
before construction takes place. We have offered to pay for this
review. There is no urgency to start construction .
The disagreements in this situation are between the Town and
Pirate's Cove. I might add that many local citizens also agree
with my position. Unfortunately, the State appears to have taken
aides and inappropriately supported many aspects of the project
that should be left to the Town and those paying for the project .
The local Town Commissioners are greatly influenced by any
comments and positions taken by the State. It is , therefore ,
prudent that the State be extremely careful about how they
participate and the role they project in this process.
Although this letter is long, my request is simple . I
request that you review the State's proper role in this project
and so instruct your staff to refrain from overstepping their
responsibility and appropriate role in this project as it goes
forward.
very truly yours,
01dfTn`g." tr 1�
Managing Partner , Pirate's Cove
Registered Engineer , NC 4678
Attachments

6 - 9 2 M O•N 1 5 : 1 4
R . 02
-.J.. FuJbry�
ROANOKE PROPERTIES
January b , 1992
i
To The Mayor , Commissioners and Taxpayers of the Town of Manteos
The design conospt and the unusually high cost estimate for
the .wastewater treatment facility proposed by F .T . Green and
Associates , P.A . , coupled with the proposed abandonment of a
of9serrious000 econcernttoatment RoanokelProperties in tand the taxpayers of me a theTown of Mantoo ( the "Town" ) . In response to this concern ,
Roanoke Properties employed Black & Veatch to evaluate the
wastewater treatment needs for the Town and to recommend more
cost-efficient treatment facilities to meet those needs ,
The Initial Engineering Report of Black & Veatch sets forth
A facility plan alternative that will most all actual
requirements of the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Management ( "Department " ) , All expanded requirements that the
Department indicates will be required in coastal areass and all
Pro,leoted needs of the Town of Mantoo at a savings of $1 ,837 ,400
over the contract and bid cost for the facility proposed under
the 201 Facilities plan .
Roanoke Properties recognizes that this alternative , like
the currently accepted alternative , continues discharging into
Shallowbag Bay. The reasons for this are ( 1 ) that the Town of
Manteo has decided that land application is too costly , and ( 2 )
that the Department of Environmental Management of the State of
North Carolina has indicated that is will not allow addition to
the rapid sand infiltration system used in Manteo . These
decisions are out of the hands of Roanoke Properties and our
anginoaring consultants ,
The opinion
Town could adopt pthe id"expanded aBowsertownch alternative indicates ttotmeet
the needs of the Town of Mantoo with a maximum permitted effluent
volume increase of only 276 ,000 gallons per day ( S2S,000 gallon
total capacity minus 260 ,0o0 gallons currently disoharood) . The
effluent discharged from this expanded facility would have
tertiary treatment , and would be significantly "cleaner • than the
current Shallowbag Bay facility effluent .
All indications , based on very vaneroue estimates , show that
the needs of the Town of Manteo Can be more than met for the next
20 years with a S251000 gallon per day total capacity wastewater
treatment system. The Town has invested a994 ,000 in a five year
P.O, Box 1879, MoMeo, North Carolina 27954•(919 473.3700

a. - 92 MON 1 S : 13 'P P . ® $
Page 2
old wastewater treatment Plant that could handle 125 ,000 gallons
Of that Capacity , This Plant could be expanded, meeting the
highest State specifications , for g2 ,703 ,000. Final design would
Probably result in a slightly lower cost figure .
The Protected cost of this new Proposal includes all
engineering and design fees , as well as all construction and
materials cost . This proposal would result in a cost of
approximately $5 .12 per gallon , only 12 cents per gallon more
than the anticipated cost in the Agreement between Roanoke
Properties and the Town of Manteo ,
The Citizens of the Town of Mantso and Roanoke Properties
can get everything they need in terms of high quality ,
environmentally sound wastewater treatment for a fraction of the
cost of the currently proposed facility . How can we Justify
anything else?
01lann E. Futr
Managing Partner
Roanoke Properties
Limited Partnership
,,u .-P�, s,.1, � N..c� dD dLiZ�. �y�.,e.,� -y ".✓�" � �.C.�•-P
Alt
y,u." lie

J fi•N -•9 2 M O H 1 3 Z 1 a P . 04
Engineering Report
TOWN OF MANTEO
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
EVALUATION AND EXPANSION
Prepared For
Roanoke Properties Limited Partnership
Manteo, North Carolina
Black & Veatch
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prolect No, 18587

J A•N. 6 - 92 MOM 1 H : 16 P . ® s
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER
MY DIRECT SUPERVISION.
91ONEDo SEALED, AND DATED THIS 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1992 .
lay
W. Max Ftas er, .E.
syl
ose� r ®e, P.E ai .
ssl
���tHCARp��y �pQ`� •p��sip ��y9�g
�i 4 BEAD Y
SEAL 2271
4079 t
GINE
640,00601,
m NY
wuosao�A�
sanoial
aoe�ce ,
we�ulw�sooea,

JA.N C =92 MON IS ; 17 P . 06
CONTENTS
Introduction
The Currently Proposed Wastewater Treatment Facility
Relevant Statistical Information
The Best Alternative For Manteo
Modifications Indicated By The Engineering Review
Shallowbag Bay
Exhibit A - Manteo WWTP Comparisons
Exhibit B - Flow Projection Data From Town of Manteo
Exhibit C - Tabulation of Costs of Recommended Alternative
Exhibit D - Conclusions and Recommendations From Rusanow, Kane &
Andrews, Inc. Report

J R•N.- 6 - 92 MON 15 : 17 P 07
INTRODUCTION
In 1990, a Wastewater Facilities (201) plan was
completed for the Town of Manteo on Roanoke Island. The
resulting recommendation was to abandon the secondary
treatment plant and the five year old, tertiary treatment
plant that currently serve Manteo and to build a new
wastewater treatment plant with a capacity of 600,000 gallons
per day. The recommended alternative, as contracted, would
cost approximately $466,000 in enginedring and design fee■ and
$4 ,079,400 in construction costs; total cost to the Town of
Manteo is estimated at $4,840,400.00. The existing Bowsertown
Facility, that was completed in 1988 and is scheduled for
abandonment, coat $994#900 and presently has an anticipated
useful life of at least 20 more years ,
Roanoke properties Limited Partnership ( "Roanoke
Properties") is a real estate development firm involved in the
development of the residential community known as Pirates
Cove. This development is located on the east side of Roanoke
Island, near the Highway 64-264 bridge which leads to Nags
Head. Roanoke Properties initially had planned to construct
and operate its own wastewater treatment facility to serve
Pirates Cove, and had obtained a permit from the Division of
Environmental Management for the discharges of that facility.
However, the Town of Manteo was conducting a study of
wastewater treatment alternatives available to the Town, and
indicated that Roanoke Properties could be currently served by
the Town's available systems and adequately served in the
future by whatever wastewater treatment alternative was
selected. Based on that information, Roanoke properties
allowed its permit for a wastewater treatment plant to expire
and agzeed to provide a percentage of the funding for the
Manteo wastewater treatment plant improvements.
The design of the selected alternative from. the
201 study, the "Proposed Facility, " was completed in May of
1991. Construction bids were received in June of 1991 . The
contracts and bids for the Proposed Facility reflect a total
cost of $7 . 56 per gallon available volume, The actual
1 '

J A N 6 — 9 m M O N 1 5 s 1 8 P 8 8
construction bids reflect an increase of 28% over anticipated
costs according to correspondence from the Manteo Town
Attorney to the attorney for Roanoke Properties dated July 18,
1991.
Roanoke Properties employed Black a Veatch to
reevaluate the future wastewater treatment needs of the Town
of Manteo. Roanoke Properties' goal was to identify whether
there was a more cost efficient alternative to meet the
wastewater treatment needs of the Town. After appropriate
study, Black 6 Veatch recommends the following alternatives
Maintain the relatively new Boweertown plant,
expanding it with a new facility at the same site. The
Black 3 Veatch preliminary cost opinion for this approach is
Two Million Seven Hundred Three Thousand Dollars ($21703,000) ,
Consisting of $00 ,000 in engineering and contingency costs
and $2,253,000 in construction cost.
THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
It is our opinion that several of the equipment
specifications for the Proposed Facility have been written in
a manner that effectively requires purchase of equipment from
a single source, and therefore a limitation on the competitive
bid process . The use of a single equipment source, rather
than the more common competitive bid approach, can be expected
to produce significantly higher cost. Additionally, the
design and layout produced for the Proposed Facility fails to
take advantage of common wall construction, increasing wall
construction costs and increasing the piping required between
units . The proposed site work grading does not appear to take
advantage of natural drainage patterns, and results in
increased needs for drain inlets and storm water piping. The
aeration basin is designed for installation below the ground
surface, resulting in a need for extensive excavation with no
benefit to the system, other aspects of the design result in
higher cost, decreased efficiency, and in some cases are
unnecessary (see Exhibit A attached) .
2

6 - 3 2 M O N 1 9 . 1 9 P 0 9
The total cost of the Proposed Facility, including
design and engineering fees, is estimated at $41540,400, or
$7,56 per gallon Volume. Although the State of North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management has indicated that it
intends to require a very strict design approach
( "oversizing" ) of wastewater treatment plants in
environmentally sensitive coastal areas, and some aspects of
the high cost of the Proposed Facility may be attributed to
this recommendation, the needs of the Town of Mantso can be
readily met, within these state guidelines, with a more cost
efficient design,
RELEVANT STATUTICAL INFORMATION
The following tables reflect the proposed wastewater
treatment needs for the Town of Manteo. The estimated
wastewater flows found in the charts were based on winter
rainwater/ groundwater infiltration rates (when infiltration
is at its highest) and winter flow rates , This is the time
when actual, total effluent into the system is at its highest
point. Estimated future flow rates were determined based on
the State of North Carolina estimate standards, and reflect an
estimated 400 gallons per single-family household per day flow
(actual daily flow per household is more in the range of 200
to 250 gallons per day) ,
3

.,JFa•N 6 - 92 MON 15 . 19 P .
1, 201 Facilities plan, Modified for Winter Infiltration
and Winter Flow - 1990 (Winter)
Existing Maximum Winter
Wastewater Flow: 109,000 gallons per day
Existing Maximum Winter
Infiltrations 1420000*
Total Maximum Existing
Wastewater Flow, Winter
(maximum summer flow 206,000
gallons per days
Future Permanent Residents
0 73 gallons each (from 201
plant 13,248
Future Flow from Increases in
Tourism ( from 201 plan) : 13,938
Pirates Cove, Additional Flow
From Estimated Full
Developments 146,976**
Future Industrial Flows 15,700
TOTAL 440,862
*Measured prior to rehabilitation/inflow corrections ,
**Total flow from full development minus flow from existing
homes that is included in the existing flow figures above, all
flows based upon State of North Carolina estimate standards .
2 , Wastewater flow based on complete practical development
within existing Manteo limits
Maximum Winter Existing Flow,
Wastewater 9
Inflow/Infiltrationt 251,000 gallons per day
*Additional Flow from Maximum
Practical Complete
Developments 104,000
Future Development at Pirates
Covet 1146,976
Future Commercial and
Industrial Flow Increase 13,70Q
TOTAL 317,676 - winter
*Flow compiled by planner for Town of Manteo. (See Exhibit B
attached, )
4

6 - 9 2 M O N 1 '5 : 2 0 P 1 1
r
3. projected Needs Based on Future Growth:
Peak Usage Measured Subsequent
to Inflow Corrections -
Augutet, 19911 211,000 gallons per day
*Future Projected Needs from
201 Facilities Plan,
Including Industrial Needs,
8-11-901 42,806
• Future Build Out of Pirate' s
Covet 146 97
TOTAL 400,862
*Taken from 201 Facilities Plan, 6-11-90-
4 , Estimation of Sewer Needs for Town of Manteo
Based on populations (data from 201 FaoWties Plan)
Permanent Residentat 72 gal/day/cap
Visitors: 50 gal/day/cap
Existing Permanent Residentss 1,205
10 Year Populations 1,389
Current Visitor Populations 2, 360
10 Year Populations 21636
Current Pirate's Coves 300
10 Year Populations 11500
Total Needst
Manteot 1,389 x 72 a 100,000
Visitcrat 2 ,636 x 50 0 131,800
Pirate's Cove 11500 x 72 = 108,000
Estimated Total Commercial 8
Industrials 50,000
Infiltrationt (201 Study 75,000
Infiltration Reduced by 464,808
Inflow Corrections)
5

6 - 9 2 M O N 1 M : 2 0 P . 12
5 . Projected Actual Usages
(Peak
Pirate's Cove Actual 14 #250 Au ust m . 38
(based on 1991 records) Al ocation 37,226
Total Projected Additional Actual 146,976 x .38 = 35,650
for Pirate's Cove
Existing Flows (August 1991) l 211,000 gallons per day
Future Growth, Including
Industrial Growth: 42 ,886
Future-Actual (Pirate's Coveys +- 3
TOTAL 309,735
Note: All estimates could be further reduced by
implementation of a water conservation program.
THE $EST ALTERNATIVE FOR MANTEO: A NEW 400,000 GALLON
FACILITY AND CONTINUED USE OF THE FIVE YEAR OLD ROWSERTOWN
FACILITY.
The current SOWsertown facility was completed in
1986 at a cost of Nine Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Nine
Hundred Dollars ($994 ,900) ($793,380 facility cost, $201,520
land cost) , This 123,000 gallon per day facility is
functioning as designed and meets all North Carolina
Department of Environmental Management specifications and
requirements . Using a 25 year life span estimate, abandoning
this facility now would cast approximately $634,704 in lost
functional value, Replacement of this facility at today's
costs would require approximately $1,000,000 .
Black 6 Veatch recommends, based on the proposed
wastewater needs as reflected is the charts above, that a new
400, 000 gallon facility expansion be added to the existing
eowsertown facility. This recommended alternative takes into
account the "overaiaing" requirements that, it appears, will
be required by the State of North Carolina for coastal area
discharges , This alternative is consistent with the Town's
requirements as set out in the 201 Facilities Plan, and would
meet the HOD, total suspended solids, ammonia, coliform, and
dissolved oxygen specifications set out in the current
6 ,

.TAN = 6 - 92 MON 15 : 21 P 3 E
professional Services Contract. . The total projected cost
opinion for this alternative is Two Million Seven Hundred
Three Thousand Dollars ($21703,000) , or $5 . 15 per gallon of
total capacity (see Exhibit C attached) .
This cost opinion includes a facility installed
within a concrete structure. Facilities of the type
recommended have been successfully used at the one and one-
half trillion gallon per day plant in the City of Havelock,
Craven County, North Carolina, since 1967, which plant has met
advanced waste treatment standards for past ' 12 years. This
type facility has a functional life span of 30 years plus .
This proposed combined facility, including the
existing sowsertown plant, should meet the wastewater
treatment needs for the Town of Manteo for the next 20 years
plus. Additionally, the Town will not lose the use of the
$994,000 facility that was built in 1986 ,
MODIFICATIONS INDICATED BY THE ENGINEERING REVIEW
We do not recommend proceeding with the Proposed
Facility. However, in our review we made note of the
following modifications that could be implemented to reduce
costs
(1) Revise specifications to encourage more
competitive equipment bids (on items such as
aeration basins and the control system) .
(3 ) Revise plant layout to reduce piping distances
and take advantage of common wall
construction.
(3) Revise the site work to allow for more natural
drainage patterns and to reduce the need for
•installing drain inlets and storm water
piping.
(4) Raise the elevation of certain aeration basins
to reduce excavation costs and provide gravity
flow of sludge stream. (There are no
functional advantages associated with locating
aeration basins below the ground surfacs.)
7

M O N 1 5 t 2 2 P . 14
� f
(5) Improve the plant's hydraulics by modifying
the piping, distribution boxes, weirs, and
flumes.
(6) Revise the followings
• Head/Works - Use less costly and more
efficient pumps and screens to reduce
cost.
• Influent Pump Station - Consider
elimination of this pump station as all
influent is pumped to the plant,
+ Chlorine Contact Basin - Eliminate, as
the same treatment effect can be provided
in the pipeline through which the
effluent must already flow.
Effluent Pumping Station - Use a less
costly and more efficient pump type.
• Control System - Use components more
suited to this type and size plant,
reducing excessive electrical costs.
The preliminary opinion of costs saved in
construction, based on the above recommendations, is
approximately One Million Dollars ($11000,000) .
SHALLOWBAO BAY
This initial report was completed under the
assumption, based on the 201 Facilities Plan, that there is
only one effluent discharge method availablet discharge into
Shallowbag Bay. Under the Black & Veatch "expanded
Bowsertown" alternative, the Town of Manteo can meet its needs
for wastewater treatment with a maximum permitted effluent
discharge volume increase to Shallowbag Bay of only 60%
( 150,000 gallons per days 525,000 gallon total capacity minus
125, 000 gallon rapid sand treated effluent minus 250,000
gallons currently discharged) . Based on relative design
criteria, the Black & Veatch alternative will provide
significant improvements in the treatment levels for all
effluent and will result in a traction of the environmental
impact on phallowbag Bay that is currently imposed by the

J A N - 6 - 9 2 M O N IS 1 2 3 P 1 6
existing plant (e.g, , BOD loading by the new Black & Veatch
facility at 400,000 gallons full capacity based upon permit
limits would be only 26 .7% of the current permitted BOD
discharge by the existing facility at 250, 000 gallons) .
Black & Veatch also has developed a proposed cost
opinion for an expanded Bowsertown facility that would utilize
rapid sand infiltration for all effluent discharges . This
would involve construction of additional rapid infiltration
fields similar to the existing field at the Bowsertown site.
This option would eliminate completely any discharge into
Shallowbag Bay and would cost a total of $2,843,000 or $5 . 42
per gal, of available volume. Various studies 'previously have
been conducted to investigate the suitability of the soils at
the Bowsertown site for onsite distribution of the facility' s
effluent. The most extensive study dated March 1990 and
entitled "Hydrogeologic Site Investigation" was conducted by
the firm of Russnow, Kano and Andrews, Inc. , Raleigh, North
Carolina and the portion of their report entitled "Conclusion
and Recommendations" is included as Exhibit D to this report.
The Russnow, Kane and Andrews, Inc. report documents that the
site can accommodate up to 11000,000 gallons per day but
indicates that a line sink (ditch) would be required around
the plant area that would eventually drain to Croatan Bound.
The waters in Croatan Sound are classified as BA. It is our
understanding that the State has indicated that it considers
suah a line sink (ditch) as a point discharge into SA waters
P and, therefore, would not approve of this discharge solution.
Thus, we cannot affirmatively may at this time that this
disposal solution would be approved by the State, The
analysis that would be required to further pursue this
solution was not authorized in this study, Factors that could
be taken into account that might result in reconsideration by
the State area
1) The total design volume of discharge (based on our
study) would be 525,000 gallons and not 600,000 or
11000,000 . The actual discharge for several years
could be less than 300,000 and may not actually
exceed 400,000 based on current Town limits .
a

J fqN -� 6 = 92 MON 15224 P 17

J,p N a - 9 2 M ON 1 9 : 2 a P 1 6
2) The various methods Of land disposal could be
reviewed further to determine the feasibility of
not having line minks because of the reduced
volumes .
s) If line minks are required, additional study should
review the feasibility or directing these line
sinks away from Croatan sound and thereby eliminate
the State's concern for discharging into SA waters .
4) Further study, including modeling, could be
conducted to determine the quality of the
groundwater at the line sinks , This was not done
in the previous studies. 2f such a study should
indicate that the quality of the groundwater at the
line sinks or compliance boundaries is of
acceptable levels then this should satisfy the
State's concerns.
In our professional opinion, an acceptable
environmental and technical solution of discharge on the
Bowsertown site could be designed, However, we cannot predict
at this time the probability of obtaining state approval for
this solution,
CONCLUSION
The wastewater treatment needs for the Town of
Manteo can be met for the next 20 years with a 525,000 gallon
per day total capacity wastewater treatment system, This
system can be provided by expanding the capacity of the
existing Boweertown facility by 400,000 gallons per day. This
expansion could be completed, meeting the highest State
specifications, for $2, 703,000.00, or $9 , 15 per gallon of
available volume.
ouo9ee�,,�
1s�aoiel
MCYJSY\9016. '

4
.- D
Z
Bxhibit A A
a
MAN= WTP CIMARISCWS N
DESIGN AND XQUIPMMrSP&CIFICATIGN.4 DSSa IK BIDS AND COO ZSTIMATRS 3
0
z
SPEI`S. USED TO CaXCWXM
COST M5233MMM
PBDC= GME8 PAC.. 201 Pl" P'UM P'liW Bw COMMOM 'b• TZONECOM "M
0-6 "M 10) P60l. 201 PLS3 PLAW
0.12S li60 I P%AW 0-4 MW m
Preliminary Treatment 1/2" screen aerated Projected costs caL las utilizing the A aurae effiCiswnt screen can
Screening chit system same design tecbsology/eclaipment as used be provided bor
Grit Removal Pamehall flees in the 201 fact ;ties plan approximately half the cast
vim Measurement of that specified for the
facilities Plan plant-
influent Ysmp Statfo ID60 Spa 2 gacpe Projected costs calculated utilizing the consider elimination of
variable speed same design tac mol.ogy/egaipment as used either the RAS Or influent
in the 201 £a=Mti i.es plan. pump station.
An.=ti,m Basin 24-bour detention 24-hour detention 24-Lour detention Facilities plan spates is
time time utilizing tin patented and sole-emace.
existing equIpatenttins was elind_+ &*ed.
FirwT clarifiers 2, 36--dia., 12* 2-216 sq. ft., 142 2-500 sq. ft., 150 the greater depth in
SCE) plow type, 295 SFD bopper-type, SRD plosrtyps, 400 alternative clarifiers would
am 289 CWR CM wrowide efficiency.
6ln47ge Raciacolatian 2 recirculation Airlift pump Airlift pump -MS Or influent p®ping can
Pumps pmnps a 500 9FW Zscirc.. 90 gpa recirc. 300 gpm be eliminated £cam the
variable speed facilities plan plant with
site modification.
Filters 2 0 215 sq. ft., 2 0 38.5 sq. ft., 2 6 212 sq. ft-, Alternative filters meet D=
]la of media, 1 36" of media, 1.23 12n of media, 1.25 criteria and be" deeper
ft.= gpo/ft.= gla/ft.= filtration wedia.
Disinfecti,on/ Chlox!ffi- Chlorination; Chlorinatimap Chlorine Oontact/reaeration
Tumbratinn denhlorination dechlcainatiaa� dechlorinatim- basin can be eliminated from
basin mechanical cascade aecati n at cascade asrntinn the facilities plan plant by �
aerator the diffuser system utilizing point of discharge
eration/dealwinatlOn at r
the diffuser system. 0

D
SPECS. OSl® TO CATACOEATB
COST ffiT-EM3MM .
N
PBOCi;ss.811M FW— 201 PLRK PMW ffiIIIC PfaWr )i4V CO�ffiINA22MM TM
( f an) PEW. Anurrim 3
0.6 11CA 0.125 NGO PLxlrr O_4 "M 201 Pf P PLMr 0
Z
Slndga D tion Aerobic digeetionp Aerobia digestion; aerobic digested., Aerobic digestion is
1.4 ca. ft./100 1.3 cu. ft./10O 2.0 cu. ft./100 generally the most costly
gal- of capseft gal- of capacity gal. of capacity method of sludge
mechanical aeration diffused aeration diffused aeration ..teyiliz.ti..n_ Lima 0
stabilin.tinn would be moue ••
economical. Facilities plan N
plant and the alternative 0
eosld each be readily
converted.
8ladge Storage aerated basin. Projected casts calcvulated sf•il� i� the 8o recommended changes.
44,1B6 cu. ft.; same design technology/equipment as used
land application in the 201 facilities plan
Sludge Dewateriag Belt press, Projected costs calculated utilising the This eyaEem eI Id be
chemical System, same design techoologyl/equipment as used reevaluated. It is Fly
her haildi+an in the 2O1 farilities plan unnecessary mince a liquid
system is usually mane -
econnnirsl to operate.
Effluent PuWiag 2 pumps, variable Projected costs calculated ast lazing the The facilities plan system
Station speed, 1050 gpm same design tschatiy/equipment as used uses solids-handling pangs.
each in the 201 facilities plea Following danced tteabmixt
and filtration, propeller
Psalm would be less costly
and moha efficient.
Effluent Outfall and 12-inc. Diameter Projected costa calcmlated utilizing the Polyethylene pipe with
Dlfluser with 15 1-3/4z same design techrahogy/equipment as used aoenczate collars would be
pone in the 201 facilities plan lean costly for underwater
piping and diffuser.
General Administration Projected costs calculated utilizing the Can be scaled down to better
building chmical acme design techwlOgy/egaipmeat se used meet the needs of the plant
feed system standby in the 201 facilities plan and decrease costs.
gem
Y
L4

JA N - 6 - ® 2 M O N 1 9 . 2 7
P . 20
a
Nry
M
d
e
oa 1

J A N = 4 = 99 2 M O N 1 9 : 2 T
P . 2 1
EXHIBIT 3
cTiltutt of filaten
October 17, 1991
Mr. Glenn E, Putrall
Roanoke Properties, Inc,
P. 0. Box 1819
Manteo; N. C. 27984
Dear -Glenn:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Information that you
requested on undeveloped properties within Manteols current
Corporate limits. Please note that the extensive number of
Into these
Properties with intense redevelopment potential were not factored
could much figures. Conservatively apaaking, those properties
as as double these projections.
I apologize tax the ' delay in getting you these figures as
the research requireQ. was quite intensive and time ,consuming.
Should you have any further questions or if I may be able ,to
assist in any fashion, please do not hesitate to call,
Sincerely, ;
.�
Kermit W. skinner, Jr.
Town Manager
KWS;RHW
Enclosures
P.O. Box 246, MonMo, North Corollno 27PS4
Telephone PISL473.2133 a pox 819.473.2133

J A N = 6 = 9 2 M O N 1 8 9 2 9
. - .. P . 2 a
(gown of 9811tgo
MEMORANDUM
Tot Kermit W. Skinner, Jr,, Town Manager QQ
Fromt Fred C, Featherstone, Code Enforcement Officer nt! �-
Rat Sewer Capacity of Undeveloped Lots ' in the
Town of Manteo Excluding Pirate 's Cove
Dater October 17, 1901
As per your, request, I have compiled a list of undeveloped
lots in the Town of Manteo, To get an accurate count, I used
data supplied by the Dare County Tax Office ,
For properties in 9-1, I calculated building size as total
lot size, because in 9-1 you can cover 100% of the lot. However,
I did not consider the possibility of multi-floor structures ,
In 8-21 i used one half the total square footage of lots to
determine building size, as per 9-2 lot coverage which with
parking cannot exceed 83% . As in 9-11 I did not calculate any
possible building being multi-story,
In summation, i feel that these projected uses and building
sizes are very conservative and reflect the minimum capacity that
would be required to service all remaining unimproved properties
In the Town of Manteo, excluding pirate 's Cove .
The gallons per day were calculated by Frank Stacho, Water
and Sewect9 upervisor .
act Frank Stacho
Attachment
AO- Box 246, MMW, North Carolhta 27934
Telephone [phone]lJ 6 rox 919.47l.2lis

J A.N - 6 - 92 MON 10 . 29
SUMMARY OF "UNDEVELOPED" PARCELS;
IN THE TOWN OF MANTEO
EXCLUDING PIRATE'S COVE
RARCEG 1 LAT SIZE (SO . FT- 1 BUILDING (50, F1.1, GPD*x
IZONEi 2-21
4057 52, 500 26, 250 3, 150
0652 31, 800 15,900 11900
5786 28, 500 14, 250 11710
4413 44,500 22,250 21670
T268 67,730 33, 865 41064
9928 19 ,314 91657 1,159
9164 77, 220 380610 4, 633
4764 26, 731 13, 375 1, 605
2389 12, 330 61165 740
1395 6,150 31075 369
7887 22,892 11,446 11374
6629 14, 400 7, 200 864
else 7,950 31975 477
7507 680100 34, 050 4, 086
3601 11, 745 5, 872 705
0384 215,190 107, 595 12, 912
1471 24, 000 12, 000 1, 440
3273 109, 420 54, 710 61565
3676 29,920 141960 1, 795
7313 14,140 7,070 649
6143 5, 248 2,624 315
0121 61480 3 A 389
12ONE: 8-11 I /
T470 26,695 26, 645 31197
$176 41800 41800 576
9911 '22,050 22, 050 2, 646
3513 10,320 10, 320 11238
6648 61080 61080 730
5379 1, 360 11360 163
5230 61300 6, 300 755
6397 81164 81164 980
0583 4,920 4,920 590
9392 22,645 *Phase 2
Waterfront 22, 6 2, 717
8-2 Potential usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 779
8-1 Potential Usage 13j,587
Town Docks . aaaa . . aa . a . . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500
Reai6ential Single Family ( 91 lots ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 . 400
GRAND TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104,266
**OPD Gallons Per Day

6 - 9 2 M O N 10 C 2 9
P 2 4
EXHIBIT C '
Tabulation of Costs
WWTP-Dual Train 4 420,000
Aeration Basin
Diffused Aeration System
with Blowers
Final Filters
Sludge Digestion, Aerobic
Tertiary Filters
Concrete Construction 112,000
Field Erection 115,000
Painting 60,000
Sitework 40,000
Electrical 100,0o0
Stand-by Gen, 203,000
1001000
Costs From the 201 aroject Bid Tabulation
Influent PS and Preliminary Treatment 225,000
Operations Building
Chemical Feed System 1630000
Salt Press Building 1000000
Sludge holding lagoon 142,000
Effluent PS 95,000
Effluent Outfall/Diffusion 1001000
256 .000
2,253,000
Engineering - Contingency (20%)
50 000
TOTAL 2#7031000
Cost per gallon of capacity
2,7031000 + 325,000 ; 5 . 15
fuaa�ppl ,
11/30/p3
O'ie\AI
NYNA3p\9033.

J A N 6 - 9 2 M O N 1 3 2 9 P . Z S
4 �
EXHIBIT D
0Q$SNQW4 KANE 8. AN REWS lNQ,
�,�, CONC US I O178 ��, o b�Q�M �NbAT 10N6 e
9. 1 CONCLUSIONSt
The net result of this investigation is to document that
the site can hydraulically accommodate up to i , 00o,000
gallons per day assuming that sufficient fill is . plaoed
beneath the discharges into the permeable water table
aquifer . There is one significant limitation with this
process . This limitation is that a continuous high volume
discharge of treated effluent will ultimately move off of the
site in the water table aquifer or will have to ro-enter the
surface water system. Considering the quality constraints
for ground water under 15 NCAC 2L recollection to surface
water is neoeesary .
The effluent quality necessary to meet ground water
standards at a property boundary are ■o strict that
interception of the discharge prior to crossing the
Compliance boundary is essential . All waste water disposed
of using lend application wiII . resuIt in migration off of
site unless It is redirected into the Surface environment.
The models that wo have run was line sinks to control
the hydrology of the site . ,These line sinka will

6 - 92 MON 16 : 3a1 P 26
I NO
' significantly protect the complianca boundary provided that
the water that enters the ditch is moved off of the $its to
either $A Waters or ghO lowbag Bay . The movement of this
collected water should be classified as either recovered
ground water or storm water , with water quality
characteristics considerably better than that of the effluent
upon disposal to the ground , Furthar improvement can be made
by reducing the loading rate and using a low rate discharge
on the natural .johns soils , thus creating man made wetlands.
The alternatives for disposal on the bowsertown Road
site include the followings
1 : construct additional rotary distributor systems in a
manner similar to the existing site, ranging from
200, 000 to 300 ,000 gallons per day (5 gallons per day
er square
to a using sufficientf daccomdo themoundheightan $hapef hedesire
flow, and raplacing all of the soil immediately beneath
the disposal portion into the permeable sands forming
the water table aquifer . The effluent quality will
either have to meet 15 NOAC 2L limits or the water
should be contained on site and diverted into the
surface water system,
2. Using aimiIar constraints construct elevated
infiltration basins at the game loading rate , of 5
gallons per day per square foot , The difference would
be the a imination of the maehanical distributors,
which may not prove effective during winter operation ,
31 Design for the loading mound at 5 gallons per day per ,
square toot , by filling the site flanks , However , the
disposal area would be excavated leaving a pond in the
water table. This would aave the costs of the ,'fill and
reworking the fill into the water table ., The bottom 'of
6 - 2

6 — 9 2 M O N Its 7 E 1 .. .. .
FO
Rt�B�'_D.,�, KAN�B AN�flEIhL;i..►..Lti�C+.
the excavation will hays to bo beneath the restrictive
horizon. othir
HCAO 2L andints line sinksiwillostillnd water
apply -
41
inf filtration basin slopedleand Lfilled gperonthermouynd
height constraints . Based on the loading rate being
lase than 10% of the vertical parmaabIiity of the
restrictive laYar , sits excavation would not be needed,
Line sinks will still be needed to accommodate the waste
water volume and to protect ground water quality at the
compliance boundary . Care should be made to design the
permeability of the fill to lessen the contrast with the
natural surface soil . The advantage of this disposal
method , is that additional nitrogen, metals , phosphorous
and TOX removal tan be expected in the loamy and organic
soil , The drawback is the likelihood of localized
hydraulic failure. The lower application rates may
affect the separation to the line sinks based on 13 NCAO
2H.
5 , Using low head aprinklars install a low rate
infiltration system on the natural high land and
creating wetlands with a controlled mound growth . The
advantages will be the additional treatment , without
using any fill and providing for additional development
of wetland habitats and eubsequant avapotranopiration ,
The drawback will be localized wet spots , that may
appear to be hydraulic failure . With the underlying
high parmeability, line sinks will be helpful in
maintgining a hydrologic balance while protecting ground
water qu4tity from an upset or inadvertent spill through
the system. At a loading rate of 0 . 5 gallons per day
per aquare foot, approximately 30 wetted acres will bs
needed.
The Bowsertown quad Site is suitable for any of these
alternatives , due to the underlying water table aquifer and
due to the availability of approximately 40 acres of upland
area available for use, The sits is not suitable for

M O W 1 S : Z 2
P . 20
�, 'gBF�w �eu,�1� pN R Way INCH
standard spray irrigation, which is typically used as a
treatment method at the maximum hydraulic loading rates
allowed for in the Coastal Regulations of 1 . 16 inches a week ,
, due to area limitations ( 1 ,75 inches per week translates to
0 . 16 gallons per day per square foot) , If spray irrigation
is considered acceptable for tertiary treated effluent at a
higher loading rate , the safe loading rate could be
determined as a function of ground water flow determinations ,
Standard design using a water balance equation and agronomio
uptake calculations would not provide satisfactory assurances
that ground water and surrounding surface water will be
protected .
One other possibility would be to use a combination of
high rate infiltration basins and low rate low head spray
disposal in the 200 foot buffers to the line ■inks . The low
rate system would utilize the upper soils and fill , wheraae ,
the high rate would move directly into the water table
aquifer prior to lateral flow,
6. 2 RE0OMMENDATION9 : •
If it is determined that land application is the to be
used on the site, the infiltration pond would be the least
expansive to construct and' maintain . However, - such a system

.. •, r. � o = 9a MON 16 : i2
P 2 9
has never been proposed in North Carolina and the concept tray
be considered to be injection into the water table, If a
pond is considered to be injection the concept would not be
permissible , The second recommended alternative would be to
consider using low head sprinklers and subsequently create
man made wet lands on portions of the site.
Any of the land application systems will merit the
construction of sufficient lengths of line sinks ocnstructed
into the water table aquifer to offset the volume of
discharged water and redirect the movement back into the
surface water system.

• / I� e"STA�f
1
State of North Carolina 9I SEP AH it: 0 1
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Northeastern Region
1424 Carolina Avenue, Washington, North Carolina 27889
James G. Martin, Governor Lorraine G. Shinn
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
September 18. 1991 ; ��,
f k�`4i'�iYC¢)♦ 1 of
' a�f�� �"vet
Mr. Harry Schiffman SEP 20 1991
Salty Dawg Marina
Post Office Box 489 �/A E .
Manteo. North Carolina 27954 QUALITY
SECTION
SUBJECT: Wastewater Flow '
Manteo. North Carolina
Dare County
Dear Mr. Schiffman:
As requested. I have compiled some recent flow figures for the Town
of Manteo which are enclosed. I have hand transferred the flow figures
`• for the nondischarge system (Permit 410905--the Bowsertown Road
Wastewater Treatment Plant) onto the computer printout for the discharge
system. Since you are also interested in making flow projections. I
have enclosed a copy of my February 29, 1988, memorandum to the Director
on this subject. It may provide some assistance in demonstrating the
methods used to roughly approximate needs. The figures in my memorandum
are dated and pertain to a specific site and a specific treatment scheme
and are, therefore. not directly transferable in all respects, but may
offer some indication of factors that are considered when projections
are made.
i
If further information or clarification is required, please advise.
Sincerely,
1
J m Mulligan
gicnal Supervisor
` JM/awh
z cc: Town of Manteo
r. _. ✓Steve Tedder
George Everett
P.O. Box 1507, Washington, North Carolina 27889-1507 Telephone [phone] FAX: [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
t-

^
/
/> -
yFr2882 12 : 29 : 51 TERMINAL CONNECTED TO IM%/V% IM%
89/i7/9|
GKEX78/MY
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT
PERMIT--NCO825488 PIPE--80i REPORT PERIOD : 9888 -9187 LOC---E
i FACILITY~~MANTEO WWTP , TOWN OF DESIGN FLOW-- ^2588 CLAJ%--3
LOCATION~~MANTEO REGION/COUNTY-^87 DARE
� 58858 88310 88538 8808 31616 5886O
( MONTH Q/MGD BOD RE%/T%% NH3+NH4- FEC COLT CHLORINE
�
` 90/88 ^ 1371 i1 ^ 17 i8^ i 3. i8 5^3 ^236
L
48
� 98/89 . 1156 i8.76 8.8 5117 4 ^4 ^631
�dY
98/iO .8989 11 ^67 11 ^4 1 .84 2^5 1 ^238
! i i827 9 47 7 8 3 .69
3 .628
' 98/ii ^ ^ ' ^
98/12 ^8952 13^88 13^8 ^87 3^ 6 ^694
h��7
9i /8i ^ 1578 12.28 9 .8 i ^54 8^ 7 ^533
i ^3 8 59 6 2 i i5 1 95� � D�0
' 2 , i3O2 ^ ^ . ^
� 91 /83 . 056 8^54 4 ^ 3 1 . 12 2,7 ^576
87 8 5 i 5 i ^i 757
/ 9i /84 . i42i 7^ i4 ^ ^ ^
� � ��
^ iO49 9. 13 6. 1 2^28 3^5 1 ^818 ^ (\_' ��
!
91 /06 ^0963 9^ 77 9^ 1 ^95 1 . 7 2,640
` Jd
^i i 89 444 i 4 i 44 23 9 i ^679
9i /87 ^ i ^ ^ ^ ^ u
`
| - - - -
AVERAGE ^ ii84 9^76 8^5 2^82 5^8 1 ^847 /J |
88 34 O 9 88 28808O 588
' MAXIMUM ,2558 28^ ^ ^ ^8 3^ � v J
� MINIMUM ^8388 LE%%THAN LE%%THAN ^ 28 LE%%THAN LE%%THAN V
UNIT MGD MG/L MG/L MG/L 4088ML MG/L |
�m�

OMSWrv�
�•v�s
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Smeet • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
R. Paul Wilms
James G. Martin, Governor Director
S. Thomas Rhodes' Secretary February 29, 1988
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: R. Paul Wilms
Director
FROM: Jim Mulligan
Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Of ce
SUBJECT: Recommendation re Application of "Coastal Regulation"
(15 NCAC 2H .0400)
Town of Manteo
Dare County
i'
As requested by you during the February 16, 1988 conference in your
office with the Town of Manteo, I have made further investigation regarding
the application of the regulation on Coastal Waste Treatment and Disposal
(15 NCAC 2H .0400) to the town's situation. This included a visit to the
lant site and a meeting with town officials
proposed wastewater treatment p
on February 18, 1988.
The town has claimed that in view of the lack of specific definition
for "area-wide collection and treatment" systems referred to in 15 NCAC
.0401, .0404(e) and (g) that they are "area-wide' and therefore exempt from
` ain concerns which resulted in the adoption
its requirements. Two of the m
` of the regulation are clearly applicable to the Manteo situation. The need
for extraordinary care when transporting and treating sanitary waste in
close proximity to SA classified waters was recognized. The site under
4 consideration is immediately adjacent to open shellfish waters of Croatan
Sound. The regulations were also needed in order to prevent the
i proliferation of high density development using septic tanks as the means of
treatment where the sole source of drinking water was from shallow aquifers
1 without continuous aquitards to protect them from the direct impact of
t surface activities. The Dare County well field is less than 3 miles from
the proposed WTP site and there are many shallow private wells between the
two.
I,
After conferring with the original authors of the "area-wide"
terminology of the regulation, some additional definition can be offered: if
the area to be served included locations where the need for the regulation
v
q� -•. Pollution Pnvmtion Pays
C
Notd+ uolina 776n-7697 Telephone [phone]
:. Po. Box 17687,Raleigh,
An Equal OppoTsmip'Affirmative Action FJnpbyer

R. Paul Wilms
Page Two
February 29, 1988
was clearly inappropriate, such as areas outside the coastal waters, not
bounded by SA waters or where the surficial aquifer is not GA, then other
performance and reliability criteria would be sufficient. The current
Manteo proposal does not include an area wide enough to avoid the
environmental problems which are the target of the regulations. The
proposal does fall under the requirements of new, publicly owned facilities
as specified in .0406(b) and should comply with the regulation's
requirements. Section .0407 allows no exception until approval is granted
by the Environmental Management Commission.
It is therefore recommended that the Town of Manteo be notified that
their request will require EMC favorable consideration before the permitting
process can proceed.
Attached are a WTP Needs Summary, the Sizing Requirements for a 1
MGD Site, and the Sizin& Requirements for a 0.75 MGD Site. These
analyses are only for the site near the Manteo airport and pertain to
treatment at the level and with the reliability specified by the
regulation. In particular, the buffer zone calculations are for an effluent
disposal bed, flow distributed by pipes laid in sand such that no ponding
occurs.
j JM:dm
cc: Walter Taft
Charles Wakild
rRoger Thorpe
Joe Slate
i
i
f
i
iV
�Fzw
r

Manteo WTP Needs Summary
Average present flow (based on past 12 months of self-monitoring data):
Bay discharge plant 108,500 gpd
Rotary distributor plant 60,000 gpd
total 168,500 gpd
Flow Need from Population Projection (based on figures supplied in the
March, 1987 land use plan)
An increase from 1985 to 2000 is expected to be 60%. Assuming this
trend continues and using 2010 as a target date, the 1985 population
of 1000 is anticipated to double, and therefore so would the flow:
168,500 gpd x 2 = 337,000 gpd in 2010
(excludes discrepancy between 1985
and 1988 flow)
rFlow Peaking (based on land use plan) Since Manteo experiences a
considerable seasonability to its flow pattern, a peaking factor was
estimated:
: peak use in '85 - 220,000 gpd
actual flow - 168,500 gpd
estimated present peak - 51,500 gpd
t or 30%
} Accommodating the additional 30% requires:
337,000gpd x 30% = 10100 gpd
,100 gpd
438,100 gpd
Pirate's Cove Although present permit is for 100,000 gpd the final
build-out will require 260,000 gpd. Total flow needed is therefore
698,100 gpd or 750,000 gpd for design estimates.
h
I
i
F
f
q.

Maneto Sizing Requirements for a 1 MGD Site
Although my estimates do not project a 1 MGD need at Manteo, the town's
request was for a WTP of this size.
Green Area (as required by the regulation, not considering any buffers)
(1,000,000 gpd) (2,500 ft2/1000 gal)
2 = 57.4 ac
43560 ft /ac
Green Area Adjustment If credit is fully provided in regard to "green
area" for the permitted flow which could be discharged (350,000 gpd total),
then 20 acres could be subtracted from the total.
57.4 ac - 20 ac = 37.4 ac need without buffer consideration
Buffer Area If the 37.4 acre site is twice as long as it is wide (902.5'
x 1805') and a 50 ft. buffer is taken along 3 sides (due to proximity to
public right of way) and 100 ft along the other (due to proximity to SA
waters), the site becomes:
(1002.5' x (1955' ) = 1959887.5 ft2
or 45 acres
Of the 45 acres, 7.6 acres is buffer.
i
t
i
i
i
i
r
Cbg;
E _
s:

Manteo Sizing Requirements for a 750,000 gpd Site
Green Area (As required by the regulation, not considering any buffers)
(750,000 gpd) (2,500ft2/1000ga1)
43 acres
43,560 ft2/ac
Green Area Adjustment Of the proposed 750,000 gpd, some flow is now
permitted to be discharged for which no "green area" could be required
except that now the Town wishes to cease these discharges and upgrade the
waters.
City is Bay discharge - 250,000 gpd permitted
Pirate's Cove discharge - 100.000 gpd permitted
Total flow proposed for elimination 350,000 gpd
If "full credit" is granted for the flow to be eliminated as it pertains to
the "green area" requirement, a substantial area would be subtracted out:
(350,000 gpd)( 2500 ft3/1000 gal)
= 20 acres
43,560 ft2/ac
Of the original 43 acres, only 23 would remain as needed.
Buffer Area For a 23 acre site which is twice as long as it is wide
(which is the approximate s)hpe), the 23 acres (or 1,001,880 ft ) would be
C" 1,415.5 ft long and 707.7 ft. wide. There are no specific requirements for
the bed proposed for effluent disposal, but if the soil at the top becomes
wet, it would be analogous to the 50' set back to a public right of way for
surface application. On one side, SA waters are encountered, requiring a
100' set back for a total site need of: (807.7' ) x (1515..5) = 1, 110,542 ft
or 28. 1 acres total of the total, 5. 1 acres is for buffer.
r
i
i
i
1
}
r, ,a:

17
mGMNT f
Div. Q'r "'.V
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE OFFICE OF
COUNTY OF DARE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
COUNTY OF DARE, a body MOTION TO INTERVENE
politic and corporate (NCGS 150B-23(d) and
Petitioner NCGS IA-1, Rule 24) MAY 17 1991
RE: ISSUANCE OF
VS. PERMIT NO. NCO079057 WATER QUALITY
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF SECTION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Respondent
The County of Dare, a body politic and corporate, through Counsel,
moves the Office of Administrative Hearings and the assigned Administra-
tive Law Judge, to allow this Movant to intervene in the designated
contested case by right, or in the alternative, by permission and sets
forth in support of this Motion:
1. The Movant claims an interest relating to the trans-
action and is so situated that the disposition of
the contested case may as a practical matter impair
or impede Movant's ability to protect its interest
2. The Movant's claim and the subject of this contested
case have a .question of law or fact in common and
intervention will not unduly delay or prejudice the
adjudication of the rights of the original parties;
3. The Movant attaches a pleading setting forth :the
claim for which intervention is sought.
This the 10th day of May, 1991.
COUNTY OF DARE
BY: Esquire
County Attorney I
P. 0. Box 500 RECEIVED
Manteo, NC 27943
(919) 473-5500 MAY 2 0 1991
DARE COUNTY
Legal Department PERMITS & ENGINEERING
Manim, North Cuolin2
27954

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Dwight of Wheless, attorney for the Petitioner, do hereby certify
that I have served the foregoing Motion on the following by depositing
a copy thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed
as follows:
1. William W. Cobey, Jr. , Secretary
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
2. Honorable Luther Daniels, Mayor
Town of Manteo
Budleigh Street
Manteo, NC 27954
3. Daniel D. Khoury, Esquire
Manteo Town Attorney
P. 0. Box 1584
Kill Devil Hills, NC 27948
4. Dr. George T. Everett, Director
Division of Environmental Management
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
This the lien, day of M•fY 1991.
Dwight H. Wheless
DARE COUNTY
Legal Department
hwn ,,, North C.wlmla '
27954

h+.Al' 17 1991 MAY 17 1991
r`;!'ii 'nG1tdT Y'll11QUALITY
�I�.
SECTION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINAI AN THE OFFICE OF
COUNTY OF DARE kDMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
CEIV9
COUNTY OF DARE, a body MAY*2 0 1991
politic and corporate
Petitioner PERMITS*EWGINEERING
Vs. d * PETIfON FOR A CONTESTED CASE
* (NCGS 150B-23 et seq)
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Respondent
*
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Petitioner, County of Dare, through its duly elected Board
of Commissioners hereby petitions for a contested case hearing regarding
the issuance by Respondent to the Town of Manteo of a "Permit To
Discharge Wastewater Under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System", said Permit bearing "No. NC0079057" and effective date of
"April 16, 1991".
The Petitioner, in support of its Petition, shows the following
facts:
i
1. That the Petitioner is a body politic and corporate under
the laws of North Carolina as one of the State's one hundred counties;
l 2. That the Petitioner's boundaries include all or portions of
Pamlico Sound, Roanoke Sound, Albemarle Sound, Currituck Sound,
Shallowbag Bay- and other bodies of connected waters;
i
I 3. That the Petitioner is charged with the responsibility of
protecting the general health and welfare of its citizens ;
4. That the Petitioner is a "Person" as defined in NCGS 150B-2(7)
and alleges that it is a "Party" as defined in NCGS 150B-2(5) or is
a "Person Aggrieved" as defined in NCGS 150B-2(6) and has standing
to file this Petition.
5. That the Respondent has caused to be issued Permit No. NC
0079057 which would allow the discharge of wastewater from a facility
located at "Town of Manteo Wastewater Treatment Plant off U. S. Highway
64/264 - Manteo - Dare County" into ". . . receiving waters designated
as Shallowbag Bay in the Pasquotank River Basin. .".
- COUNTY
Department
North Carolina
3795t
I�

6. That the' Respondent's issuance of Permit No. 0079057 allowing
wastewater discharge into Shallowbag Bay has substantially prejudiced
the Petitioner's rights and duties to assure its citizens ' health and
welfare;
7. That the Respondent exceeded its authority, acted erroneously,
failed to use proper procedures and failed to act as required by law
or rule in that, among other things:
a. the Respondent failed to require sufficient evidence
to determine. that wastewater discharge into Shallowbag 'Bay
has the least adverse impact on the environment of all
practicable alternatives;
b. the Respondent failed to give required Notice to Petitioner
of its intent to issue Permit No. NC 0079057;
C. the Respondent failed to recognize the significant public
interest in the subject of a Permit which would allow 1 million
gallons per day of wastewater to be discharged into a primary
recreation and fishing area, and failed to hold a public
meeting to obtain comments, exhibits and documents prior
to granting the permit.
WHEREFORE the Petitioner requests that:
1. the Respondent's action be reversed;
2. Permit #NCO07957 be cancelled;
3. appropriate other relief should be granted.
This the 10th day of May, 1991.
COUNTY OF DARE 11 ^
Dwight H. Wheless, Esquire
County Attorney
State Bar # 4673
P. 0. Box 500
Manteo, NC 27954
(919) 473-5500
DARE COUNTY
Lcg21 Department
Kamm, North Carolina
27954

VERIFICATION
Louise Dollard, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that
she is Chairman of the Dare County Board of Commissioners, Petitioner
in the above entitled action, that she has read the foregoing Petition
and that the same is true to her own knowledge and belief except as
to those matters and things stated on information and belief, .and as
to those matters, she believes them to be true.
Louise Dollard, Chairman
Dare County Board of Commissioners
o�at��ny�
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED f\� STq� �
BEFORE ME THIS THE 13 £ V 0
DAY OF 1991. %01ARY
_ rrt
NOT Y PUBLIC
My Commission Expires: O94FCOUNtV,,.;p
1 b - l is 4 5 �nnum 0
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Dwight of Wheless, attorney for the Petitioner, do hereby certify
that I have served the foregoing Petition on the following by depositing
a copy thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed
as follows:
1. William W. Cobey, Jr. , Secretary
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
2. Honorable Luther Daniels, Mayor
Town of Manteo
Budleigh Street -
Manteo, NC 27954
3. Daniel D. Khoury, Esquire
Manteo Town Attorney
P. 0. Box 1584
Kill Devil Hills, NC 27948
4, Dr. George T. Everett, Director
Division of Environmental Management
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
This the /6"-4 day of —�Y 1991.
DARE COUNTY
Legal Department
M=m, North Carolim Dwight H. Wheless
27954