SW6120602_HISTORICAL FILE_20120924

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW
DOC TYPE
❑ CURRENT PERMIT
❑ APPROVED PLANS
HISTORICAL FILE
DOC DATE
YYYYMMDD

Geotechnical, Environmental, and Materials Engineers
September 24, 2012
US Army Corps of Engineers
USACE -- SOCOM Resident Office
Fort Bragg, North Carolina
Attention: Mr. Daniel Bradley
Re: Letter of Transmittal and Summary of Testing
Soil Science Report for "Erosion Control and Site Drainage Calculations"
SOTF Entrance Project
Fort Bragg, North Carolina
Building & earth Project No. RD12367
Ladies and Gentlemen:
As requested and authorized by Mr. Daniel Bradley with the US Army Corps of Engineers, Building
& Earth Sciences, LLP is pleased to present the results of the field testing and observations for the
storm water basins at the proposed New SOTF Entrance off Lamont Road at Fort Bragg, North
Carolina.
Scope of Service
The intent of our testing and field work was to observe and document the soil profile and the
groundwater conditions that will affect and influence the drainage rate of the proposed storm water
basins for the new entrance roadway to SOTF. At the time of our site work, the preliminary
"Grading and Drainage Plan" had been provided by Mr. Bradley. We have included a copy of the
provided plan for your reference. Our testing was performed at four (4) locations, as shown on the
attached plan. Our locations are identified as 1, 2, 3 and 4.
The controlling parameters for the design of infiltration basins is the depth to evidence of Seasonal
High Water Table (SHWT), and the saturated (stabilized) permeability of the soils that should be
expected in the floor and berms of the basin. Any restrictive horizons within the soil profile could
substantially affect the drainage capacity of the basin, Mr. Mike Eaker, a North Carolina Licensed
Soil Scientist with Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates, Inc., under contract to Building &
earth Sciences, has assisted with the field work and reporting for this work. Mr. Eaker's report
details the procedures used in his field evaluation, the results of the soil observations, the depth to
seasonal high groundwater and the depth to observed water at each test location. Mr. Faker's
report is included with this report.
The storm water basins for this project may be designed as either wet basins or infiltration basins,
provided the guidelines of the current NC Division of water Quality are observed. As required by
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, North Carolina 28334
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]

Geotechnlcal, Environmental, and Materials Enylneers
DWQ, if the ponds are designed as wet basins, the permanent pool elevation will need to be set
within 6 inches of the SHWT elevation, and the permeability of the soils will need to be less than
0.01 inches per hour. Although it may be more applicable to set the permanent pool elevation at
the existing (observed) groundwater elevation, there is no provision for this by DWQ. Because
neither the SHWT, nor standing groundwater was encountered within 114 inches of the existing
ground surface, it is our opinion that designing the basins as wet basins is not reasonable.
In the event that the ponds are to be designed as infiltration basins, the floor of the basin will need
to be set at an elevation that is 24 inches above the -SHWT, and the soils will need to have an
available saturated drainage rate of at least 0.52 inches per hour.
The results of our testing are summarized below.
Location
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
Ground Elevation ft
325.5
316.7
315.6
310.8
Bottom of Basin ft
323.5
314.2
311.1
308.8
Depth to SHWT in
114
114
114
114
SHWT Elevation ft
316.0
307,2
306.1
301.3
Depth to Water in
NE
NE
NE
NE
Water Elevation ft
>316.0
>307.2
>306.1
>301.3
CHP Test De th (in
36
36
36
36
CCHP Test El. (ft)
322.5
313.7
312.6
307.8
Ksat (in/hour)
>5.0
>5.0
4.3
2.4
• NE Not Encountered
Summary of Observations and Recommendations
Infiltration Basin: We understand that the basins are to be designed as infiltration basins. As such,
the floor elevation of the basins will need to be set to an elevation that is 24 inches above the
recorded SHWT. As currently identified, the soils that are expected at the floor elevation of the
basins have a saturated permeability of at least 0.52 inches per hour.
Statement of Design Method. Test Method and Limitations
The flow of the near surface soils has been approximated using the concepts presented in
Bernoulli's Equation for steady state flow and Darcy's Law for fluid flow through a porous media.
Additionally, our Ksat values were calculated using the Glover solution which is dependant on the
geometry of the bore hole, and the hydraulic head. To develop our recommendations, Building &
Earth has measured/calculated the saturated flow rate (Ksat) for the soils at the site using
accepted test methods and equipment. Ultimately, the drainage of the basins will be a function of
the saturated flow rate of the soils, the surface area of the basin geometry, and the pressure
differential (hydraulic head) induced by the storm water levels in the pond.
In order to determine the appropriate Ksat for the soils in each basin, a small diameter bore hole
was advanced to a pre -determined depth of interest. At this depth, a constant head (pressure) was
SOTF Entrance Road Basins 2 R012388
Fort Bragg, North Carolina

Georechnlcal, Enrironmenn4 and Materials Engineers
established and maintained. Once our measurements approached a stabilized flow rate, our test
was terminated.
The recommendations in this report are limited by a number of geologic considerations. The
primary limitation is the fact that geologic formations are variable in nature. The soils in
Cumberland County are subject to perched water conditions, artesian conditions, and layers of
undulating low permeability clay seams and layers. All of these geologic conditions have an affect
on the steady state flow of groundwater. To the extent possible we have identified the material
types that will impact the flow of groundwater, and have provided our professional opinion
regarding the depth (elevation) to evidence of SHWT.
Although Bldg & Earth has not provided an exhaustive survey of all of the soil deposits at the site, it
is our opinion that we have properly and adequately characterized the site with regard to flow from
the storm water basins that are planned for this development.
Closing
If you need further information, or if we can provide additional service, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
Building & Earth Sciences, LLP
Kurt A. Miller, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Attachments: Soil Scientist Report for Soil Profile and SHWT
Compact Constant Head Permeability Testing Results
SOTF Entrance Road Basins 3 RD12388
Fort Bragg, North Carolina

Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 9321
Fayetteville, NC 28311
Phone/Fax [phone]
Email mike Osoutheastemsoll.com
September 21, 2012
Mr. Kurt Miller, PE
Building and Earth Sciences, LLP
610 Spring Branch Road
Dunn, NC 28334
Re: Seasonal high water table (SH WT) evaluation for potential stormwater retention
areas, SOTF Access Control Point, McKellars Road, Fort Bragg, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Miller,
An evaluation of soil properties on a portion of the aforementioned property has been
conducted at your request. The purpose of the investigation was to determine soil water
table depths for use in stormwater retention design.
Soils at the test site are most similar to the Lakeland (boring 1) and Wagram soil series
(borings 2, 3 & 4; see attached boring logs). Four borings were advanced to a depth of
9.5 feet. Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) as determined by evidence of colors of
chroma 2 or less exceeded 9.5 feet below the ground surface in all borings. The attached
map shows the approximate location of the sample points (as requested by the design
engineer).
l trust this is the information you require at this time.
Sincerely,
Mike Eaker
President
SOIL/SITE EVALUATION • SOIL PHYSICAL ANALYSIS • LAND USE/SUBDIVISION PLANNING
GROUNDWATER DRAINAGE/MOUNDING • SURFACE/SUBSURFACE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS. EVALUATION 8 DESIGN

Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 9321
Fayetteville, NC 28311
Phone/Fax [phone]
Email [e-mail]
Soil Boring Log (1), SOTF Access Control Point, McKellars Road, Fort Bragg,
North Carolina
This map unit consists of excessively drained soils that formed in sandy deposits on
uplands. Slope ranged from 0 to 2 percent.
C I - 0 to 12 inches; red (2.5YR 4/8) sandy loam; weak granular structure; very friable;
gradual wavy boundary.
C2 - 12 to 40 inches; red (2.5YR 4/8) sand; single grained; very friable; gradual wavy
boundary.
C3 - 40 to 55 inches; red (2.5YR 4/8) sandy loam; about 5 percent uncoated sand grains;
weak granular structure; very friable; clear smooth boundary.
C4 - 55 to 75 inches; red (2.5YR 4/6) loamy sand; weak granular structure; very friable;
clear smooth boundary.
CS - 75 to 93 inches; yellowish brown (IOYR 5/4) loamy sand; weak granular structure;
very friable; gradual wavy boundary.
C6 -- 93 to 114 inches; strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) sandy loam; weak granular structure;
very friable.
SHWT greater than 114 inches
SOIL/SITE EVALUATION • SOIL PHYSICAL ANALYSIS - LAND USE/SUBDIVISION PLANNING
GROUNDWATER DRAINAGE/MOUNDING • SURFACE/SUBSURFACE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS, EVALUATION & DESIGN

Southeastern Soil & Environmental Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 9321
Fayetteville, NC 28311
Phone/Fax [phone]
Email mike® southeastemsoil.com
Typical Soil Boring Log (2, 3 & 4), SOTF Access Control Point, McKellars Road,
Fort Bragg, North Carolina
This map unit consists of well drained soils that formed in loamy sediment on uplands.
Slope ranged from 0 to 2 percent.
A - 0 to 6 inches; black (1 OYR 2/2) loamy sand; single grained; loose; very friable;
common fine and medium roots; abrupt smooth boundary.
E - 6 to 25 inches; yellowish brown (I OYR 5/6) loamy sand; single grained; loose; very
friable; few fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bt - 25 to 50 inches; yellowish red (5YR 4/6) sandy clay loam; weak fine and medium
subanbular blocky structure; friable; gradual wavy boundary.
BC - 50 to 57 inches; yellowish red (5YR 5/8) loamy sand; about 10 percent clean sand;
loose; very friable; clear smooth boundary.
C1 - 57 to 70 inches; yellowish red (5YR 4/6) sandy loam; weak granular structure; very
friable; gradual wavy boundary.
C2 — 70 to 114 inches; yellowish red (5YR 4/6) sandy clay loam; massive structure;
friable.
S11WT greater than 114 inches
SOIUSITE EVALUATION • SOIL PHYSICAL ANALYSIS • LAND USE/SUBDIVISION PLANNING
GROUNDWATER DRAINAGEIMOUNDING • SURFACE/SUBSURFACE WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEMS, EVALUATION 8 DESIGN

_iIll
TBM #1
510461.03
1975890.70
293.48
A
TBM #2
510191.21
1976003.16
309.90
h
TBM #3
508947.06
1976384.55
348.42
A
TBM #4
508630.10
1976539.17
358.19
A
I
y 1 ' /
i¢; \`I HORIZONTAL DATUM. NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE CC
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD 88
Nf
IIIII-/ / I J
III // '+ `� I \ ! 1
ly
llll�l/%f / II ! I
i
f ICI `ice"f� •P,' / y �1 � �\ \ � � _
t4 509,892.59
E ,9ZgJ21.76 1 i `4 _N 510.032.9
!r 1 (• � � =rc_ - `�w �___�-•.-_�z;-='-'_ "_=�'=_-mow "•r4- __--==_'-�_-z`�----�^��__1�` �.�� �.Z.. _ `" -- "_' _---•
' 1 L_ 1-_�L�., :.�-_� �� �- - _- ��_ ----N ------- -------1---------��-----------------
1 JJ i - -- - -�=-s'r== ---` - ---7- �--�-r-� _•_�:--_-���--�a.� --'fir---'----Y- ---- ` ---"-__� _'--_---'---
, ♦ /)�/.-ice: '/ / // f'
76,524.04
N 509. 76.25 1 1 @
15 1,976, 24.82-
y
74 C.C"S Cb-j 7-r!G L
ZocA-r,au1
- Lf
TEST LOCATION POINTS

Genrcchnical. Environmental, and Materials Engineers
Project Name: SOTF New Access Roac Project Number: 12-388
Client Name: USACF Report Number: I
Technician: Q. Carlson [late: 9/18/2012
Tes7 Cottstrutts
Liquid Used: tap kvater
"Pest Location: 1-1
Depth of WalerTable: >120" 1 Water Temp ( °F):
Constants:
Ca acity
Lic uid Containers
settin
Rate Cm'/cm
Sight Tube
11,
1 On
20.000
Storage Tube
51-
2 On
105.000
Data
o1' 4
Total Negative Constant Hcad
Flow rate used: 105 Hole Diameter:
Slar't Saturation: 9:45 Walcr Head:
Hole Radius: 1,200 Hole Depth:
70 OF
NA inches
2A inches
4.25 inches
36 inches
F-
Date
Time
Flapsed
Time (hrs)
A 'Total
1710%v Readings
How Rate
in'/hr
'Saturated
Conductivity
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.
Rcadin g.
Tube
1 1m
Flow
cm'
Kam, inlhr
1
S
9/18
9 :46
0.02
0.02
43.3
105
892.5
3267.82
35.16
I
9/18
947
34.8
2
S
9/18
9 :47
0.02
0,03
34.8
105
882
3229.38
34.74
E
9/ 18
9 : 48
26.4
3
S
9/18
9 :48
0.02
0.05
26.4
105
840
3075.60
33.09
E
9/18
9 : 49
18.4
4
S
9/18
9 :49
0.02
0.07
18.4
105
840
3075.60
33,09
l
9/18
9:50
10.4
5
S
9/18
9 : 50
0.02
0.08
10.4
103
840
3075.60
33.09
G
9/19
9:51
2.4
6
S
7
S.
G
8
S
L'•
9
S
F
l0
S
11
la
12
S
1?
13
S
E:
14
S
E:
15
S
E
Stabilized K..,,in/h,
>5
CCUIP-1

Geotechnical, Environmental, and Materials Engineers
Project Name: SOTF New Access Roac
Client Name: USACE
'Technician: B. Carlson
Project Dumber:
Report Number:
[date:
12-3 8 8
2 of 4
9/18/2012
Test Constrrrllc
Liquid Used: tap water Depth ol' Watcr'1'able: > 120" Water Temp ( "{'): 70 OF
Test Location: 1-2 'total Negative Constant Head: NA inches
Coitstarrtc:
Capacity
Liquid Containers,.
settin T
Rate cni'/cm
Sight Tube
I
loll
20.000
Storage Tube
51,
2 On
105.000
]'low rate used:
105
1 lolc Diameter:
2.4
Inches
Start Saturation:
9:20
Water Head;
4
inches
Hole Radius: 1.200 ]-Tole Depth: 36 inches
Test Data
�c
Lt
Date
Time
I lapsed
Time (hrs),,
A 'Total :
1.1 Nv Readings
Flow Rate
in'/hr
Saturate
CondtletiV'
t
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.
ReadingFlow
" tube
Flow-
cm'
Kam, inlhr
I
S
9/18
9:21
0.02
0.02
45.0
105
892.5
3267.82
38.21
171
9/18 1
9:22
30.5
2
y
S1
9/18 1
9 :22
0.02
0,03
36.5
105
735
2691.15
31,47
1- 1
9/18 1
9:23
29.5
3
S1
9/18
9 :23
0.02
0.05
29.5
105
735
2691.15
31.47
1-
1 9/19
9:24
22.5
4
S
9/18
9 :24
0.02
0.07
22.5
105
630
2306.70
26,97
1; 1
9/18
9:25
16.5
5
S1
9/18
9 :25
0.02
0.08
16.5
105
630
2306.70
26.97
I
9/18
9:26
10.5
6
S1
9/18
9 : 26
0.02
0.10
10.5
105
630
2306.70
26.97
1:
9/18
1 9:27
4.5
7
S
1-1
1
E
xs
t�
9s
i
1 {l
S
I
11
S
I:
12
S
I-
,,
S
1;
14
S
I:
15
1-,
Stabilized KSdt'n/hr
>5
CCHP-2

Gaote[hnlGal. Fnvironmancal, and Materials Engineers
Project Name:
SOTF New Access Roae
Client Name:
USAGE
Technician:
B. Carlson
Project Number
Report Number:
Date:
12-3 88
3 of 4
9/19/2012
Test Constants
Liquid Used: tap Nvatcr Dcpth of Water Table: > 120" Water "Temp ("F): 70 OF
'Test Location: 1-3 Total Negative Constant Head: NA inches
Constants:
Capacity
Li uid Containers
setting.
Rate cm'/cm
Si ght 'I'uhe
IL
I it
20.000
Storage "Tube
51,
2 On
105.000
Flow rate used:
105
Hole Diameter:
2.4
inches
Start Saturation:
10:04
Water I -lead:
8.25
inclies
Hole Radius: 1.200 Hole Depth: 36 inches
Tew Data
[-
Date
"Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
A I "Total
How Rea din s
Flow Rate
in'/hr
Saturate
Conductivity
Remarks: Weather conditions, etc.
Readin
']TubC
flow,
Flaw
cm,
K�, inlhr
S
9/18
10 :05
0.02
0.02
41•7
105
336 1
1230.24
5.07
Ii 1
9/18
10:06
38.0
2
S1
9/18 1
10 :06
0.02
0,03
38.0
105
294
1076.46
4.44
17
9/18 1lO
: 07
35.2
3
S1
9/18 1
10 :07
0.02
0.05
35.2
105
294
1076.46
4.44
Ell
9/18 1
10:08
32.4
4
S1
9/18 1
10 :08
0.02
0.07
32.4
105
283.5
1038.01
4.28
1v
9/18 1
to : 09
29.7
5
S
9/18
10 :09
0.02
0.09
29.7
105
283.5
1039.01
4,28
17
1 9/18
10 ; 10
27.0
S1
9/18
1 10 : 10
0.02
0.10
27.0
105
283.5
103 8.0 1
4.28
L
9/18
1] 0 : 1 l
24.3
7
S
9/18
to : 110.02
0.12
24.3
105
283.5
1038.01
4.28
I
9/18
10 : 12
21.6
8
S
I:
9
S
I:
10
S
I:
II
S
1?
12
S
E;
13
S
I�
14
S
E
IS
ti
la
Stabilized K.11nlhr
4.3
CCHP-3

Geotechnical, Environmental, and Materla9s Engineers
Project Name:
SOTF New Access Roac
Client Name:
U S A C EH
Technician:
B. Carlson
Project Number
Report Number:
Date:
12-388
4 of 4
9/ 18/2012
Test Cunshults
Liquid Used: tap water Depth of Water fable: >120" Water Temp (' ): 70 OF
Test Location: 1-4 Total Negative Constant I -lead: NA inches
Constants:
Capacity
Lic uid Containers
setting
Efate cm'/em
Sight 17ubc
l L
1 On
20.000
Storage "tube
51,
2 On
105-000
Plow rate used:
105
Hole Diamcleri
2.4
inches
Start Saturation:
10:35
Water Hcad:
10.5
inclics
Hole Radius: 1.200 ! lolc Dcptlt: 36 inches
Tec1 Data
E-
Date
Time
Elapsed
Time (hrs)
A Total,
Fs low Reading's
Flcn%, Rate
in'/hr
Saturated
CondlletiN'
Remarks: ]Feather conditkms. etc.
Reading,.
Tube
Flow
I'Iow
cln,
K�„ in/hr
l
S
9/18
10 :36
0.02
0.02
39.0
105
399
1460.91
4.16
1
T18
10:37
35.2
2
S1
9/18
1 i 0 : 37
0.02
0.03
35.2
105
315
1153.35
3.29
G 1
9/18
1 10:39
32.2
3
S1
9/18
10 :38
0.02
1
0.05
32.2
105
262.5
961.12
2.74
I:
9/18
10:39
29.7
4
S1
9/18
10 :39
0.02
0.07
29.7
105
231
845.79
2.41
L' 1
9/18
10:40
27.5
5
S
9/18
10 : 40
0.02
0.08
27.5
IN
231
845.79
2,41
IS
1 9/18
1 10 : 41
25.3
6
S1
9/18
1 10:41
0.02
0.10
25.3
105
231
845.79
2.41
1
9/18
10:42
23.1
7
S1
9/19
10 ; 42
0.02
0.12
23.1
105
231
845.79
2,41
L
9/18
1] 0 : 43
20.9
8
S
I�
9
S
Ii
10
5
I1
S
121
S
E
13
S
1?
la
S
I
15
ti
I?
Stabilized K,,,tin/h,.
2.4
CCHP-4

Lock, Jared
Subject: FW: Ft Bragg SOF ACP Permit
From: Morgan, Martha [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:17 PM
To: Lock, Jared
Subject: RE: Ft Bragg SOF ACP Permit
Hey there,
I just heard back from Jason Adcock at Ft. Bragg DPW that there are no environmental issues is this location that would
cause any concern for use of the infiltration basins. Thanks for checking with us.
Marti Morgan

N001
Mason&Hanger
A Day&Zimmermanm Company
October 2nd, 2012
Robert Q Patterson
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Stormwater Project No. SW6120602
Ft Bragg SOF Access Control Point
greatly appreciate you taking the time to review our plans. Enclosed you should find the updated plan sheets,
the infiltration test report, updated sheet from SWU-101 showing the total site information, updated
supplemental information sheets on the basins and the updated calculations for the basins/storage. The
following is a quick summary of the revisions to address your comments dated August 22nd, 2012.
1. Please refer to the calculation sheets in this submittal for the updated stage -storage tables, treatment
volume calculation using the simple method and the basin draw down calculations.
2. Please refer to the calculation sheets in this submittal for the requested table showing the BUA
information for each drainage area.
3. Please refer to the report included in this submittal providing the CCHP test information and Ksat for
each infiltration basin location.
4. Please refer to the calculation sheets in this submittal for the treatment volume calculations. Basins
are sized to store slightly over 250% of the required quantity to waive the offline bypass and VFS
requirements.
5. Have revised SWU-101 to show the project totals. Please refer to the calculation sheets provided in
this submittal for the individual drainage area BUA information.
6. Have updated the basin designs based upon the Infiltration results and the 2.5 factor applied to the
required volume. Supplement and plans have been coordinated.
7. Have coordinated all the supplement and plan information.
Thank You,
Jared Lock
Civil Engineer
Mason & Hanger
OCT -- 3 2012
The Mason & Hanger Group Inc. 300 West Vine Street, Suite 1300 Lexington, KY 40507 t 859.252.9980 f 859.253.0781 masonandhanger.com
Mason & Hanger, Inc. 7270 West 162nd Street Overland Park, KS 66085 t 913.681.2323 f 913.681,3970

G;A
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
August 22, 2012
Mr. Jared Lock
Mason & Hanger
300 W. Vine St., Ste. 1300
Lexington, KY 40507-1814
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW6120602
SOP Access Control Point
Cumberland County
Dear Mr. Lock:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Division of Water Quality Central Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application for the
subject project on June 12, 2012; with additional information received August 17, 2012. A preliminary review
of that information has determined that the application is still not complete. The following information is
needed to continue the stormwater review:
As previously requested, some calculations were still not submitted that support the information
in the supplement forms. This includes the treatment volume calculation using the simple method
and draw down calculation. The provided calculations show the stage -storage tables, Swale talcs.,
and spillway talcs.; but not the above needed calculations. The minimum required volumes shown
on the supplement forms appear slightly less than should be. Please remember to seal, sign, and
date all calculations.
2. As previously requested, please provide in table form, for each DA, a breakdown of existing BUA to
remain, existing BUA removed, proposed added BUA, and proposed total BUA at completion.
Then, also provide those same values for the project as a whole. You must show that at least the
net increase in BUA is being captured and treated for the project as a whole.
As previously requested, an infiltration test (and SHWT determination) must be performed within
the footprint of each proposed infiltration basin, at the proposed bottom elevation. Only one of
the four basins (basin 4) appears to have this, and the resulting rate (0.13 in/hr) is below the
minimum required rate of 0.52 in/hr. The infiltration test should be done with a double ring
infiltrometer, amoozemeter, or other similar widely accepted method for determining stormwater
infiltration rates. Septic pert tests are not usually accurate enough. In your additional
information response, you stated that this is because you accounted for a lower infiltration rate as
a factor of safety. Using a safety factor is fine, but we must have actual infiltration rates.
4. As previously requested, an offline bypass and properly designed vegetated filter strip (VFS) are
not provided for the infiltration basins, but are required. The VFS and bypass requirements for
infiltration devices may both be waived by increasing the size of the infiltration device by 2.5 or by
Wetlands and stormwater Branch One
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 North Carolina
Phone: 91 M07-63001 FAX: [phone] Naturally
Internet: www,ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

Mr. Jared Lock
SW6120602 - SOF Access Control Point
August 22, 2012
infiltrating the 10-yr, 24-hr storm event. Piease see 16.3.9 in the BMP Manual for specific sizing
requirements. none of these options have been provided. The note provided on the plans that
attempted to address this is notsufficient. If you choose to install a level spreader and vegetated
Filter strip CLS & VFS), instead of waiving them with the other options, then the LS and VFS must be
Fully designed, detailed, and shown on the plans. There is also a supplement form needed for each
LS and VFS proposed. Please see Chapter 8 of the BMP Manual for LS and VFS design
requirements.
5. The DA and impervious area values for infiltration basin 1 is not consistently shown on SWU-101
and the supplement form. Please revise.
6. For infiltration basin 2: the supplement states the storage elevation is at 317.50', but the plans
show the overflow only at 316.S0'. Based on the stage -storage tables provided, this overflow
elevation would not provide even the minimum required treatment volume. Please revise as
needed.
7. For infiltration basin 4: based on the plans, the basin bottom elevation is not shown correctly on
the supplement form. Please revise.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary review. The requested
information should be received by this Office prior to September 5, 2012, or the application will be returned
as incomplete. Per Division policies, the project will be returned as incomplete if all items are not
adequately addressed from this second and final request for additional information. The retu rn of a
project will necessitate resubmittal of all required items, including the application Fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail or fax your request for a time extension to
the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. The request must indicate the date by
which you expect to submit the required information. The Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a
completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an approved
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 1.43-215.1 and is subject to enforcement action
pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
Any revised calculations or plans must be sealed, signed, and dated. Please reference the State assigned
project number SW6120602 on all correspondence. If you have any questions concerning this matter please
feel Free to call me at (91.9) 807-637S, or at [e-mail].
cc: SW6120602 File
ec: Don Higgins, PE - Mason & Hanger
Lee Ward - Fort Bragg DPW-WMB
David Heins - Fort Bragg DPW
Mike Lawyer - Fayetteville Regional Office
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Page 2 of 2

1-9; WA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
August 22, 2012
Mr. Jared Lock
Mason & Hanger
300 W. Vine St., Ste. 1300
Lexington, KY 40507-1814
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW612O6O2
SO Access Control Point
Cumberland County
Dear Mr. Lock:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Division of Water Quality Central Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application for the
subject project on June 12, 2012; with additional information received August 17, 2012. A preliminary review
of that information has determined that the application is still not complete. The following information is
needed to continue the stormwater review:
As previously requested, some calculations were still not submitted that support the information
in the supplement forms. This includes the treatment volume calculation using the simple method
and draw down calculation. The provided calculations show the stage -storage tables, swale talcs.,
and spillway talcs.; but not the above needed calculations. The minimum required volumes shown
on the supplement forms appear slightly less than should be. Please remember to seal, sign, and
date all calculations.
2. As previously requested, please provide in table form, for each DA, a breakdown of existing BUA to
remain, existing BUA removed, proposed added BUA, and proposed total BUA at completion.
Then, also provide those same values for the project as a whole. You must show that at least the
net increase in BUA is being captured and treated for the project as a whole.
3. As previously requested, an infiltration test (and SHWT determination) must be performed within
the footprint of each proposed infiltration basin, at the proposed bottom elevation. Only one of
the four basins (basin 4) appears to have this, and the resulting rate (0.13 irl is below the
minimum required rate of 0.52'in/hr. The infiltration test should be done with a double ring
infiltrometer, amoozemeter, or other similar widely accepted method for determining stormwater
infiltration rates. Septic pert tests are not usually accurate enough. In your additional
information response, you stated that this is because you accounted for a lower infiltration rate as
a factor of safety. Using a safety factor is fine, but we must have actual infiltration rates.
4. As previously requested, an offline bypass and properly designed vegetated filter strip (VFS) are
not provided for the infiltration basins, but are required. The VFS and bypass requirements for
infiltration devices may both be waived by increasing the size of the infiltration device by 2.5 or by
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, Norlh Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Attirmalive Action Employer
NorthCarolina
Natimallrf

Mr. Jared Lock
SW6120602 — SOF Access Control Point
August 22, 2012
infiltrating the 10-yr, 24-hr storm event. Please see 16.3.9 in.the BMP Manual for specific sizing
requirements. None of these options have been provided. The note provided on the plans that
attempted to address this is not sufficient. If you choose to install a level spreader and vegetated
filter strip (LS & VFS), instead of waiving them with the other options, then the LS and VFS must be
fully designed, detailed, and shown on the plans. There is also a supplement form needed for each
LS and VFS proposed. Please see Chapter 8 of the BMP Manual for LS and VFS design
requirements.
5. The DA and impervious area values for infiltration basin 1 is not consistently shown on SWU-101
and the supplement form. Please revise.
6. For infiltration basin 2: the supplement states the storage elevation is at 317.50', but the plans
show the overflow only at 316.50'. Based on the stage -storage tables provided, this overflow
elevation would not provide even the minimum required treatment volume. Please revise as
needed.
7. For infiltration basin 4: based on the plans, the basin bottom elevation is not shown correctly on
the supplement form. Please revise.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary review. The requested
information should be received by this Office prior to September 5, 2012, or the application will be returned
as incomplete. Per Division policies, the project will be returned as incomplete if all items are not
adequately addressed from this second and final request for additional information. The return of a
project will necessitate resubmittal of all required items, including the application Fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail or fax your request for a time extension to
the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. The request must indicate the date by
which you expect to submit the required information. The Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a
completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an approved
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and is subject to enforcement action
pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
Any revised calculations or plans must be sealed, signed, and dated.. Please reference the State assigned
project number SW6120602 on all correspondence. If you have any questions concerning this matter please
feel free to call me at [phone], or at [e-mail].
cc: cSW6120602 File
ec: Don Higgins, PE - Mason & Hanger
Lee Ward - Fort Bragg DPW-WMB
David Heins - Fort Bragg DPW
Mike Lawyer - Fayetteville Regional Office
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson, PE
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Page 2 of 2

`%
Mason&Hanger
A Day&Zmmermann Company
August 13, 2012
Robert D Patterson
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Stormwater Project No. SW6120602
Ft Bragg SOF Access Control Point
I greatly appreciate you taking the time to review our plans. The following is a quick summary of the revisions
to address your comments dated June 141h.
1. Please refer to General Note 4 on sheet CG700 for a note stating that there are no wetlands on the
site.
2. Please refer inside the front cover of the original submittal binder for the supplemental forms and
supporting calculations, have included forms in this submittal as well. Basin Storage calculation can be
found in the Stormwater Calculation portion of the drainage report in the original submittal.
3. Have updated and included the requested information on the SW U-101 pages.
4. Additional information on BUA has been included on the revised SWU-101 page.
5. Please refer to the supporting calculations on the supplemental forms for drawdown times for each
basin.
6. Have added information for Basin 3 spillway.
7. The Geotechnical information was provided by the Savannah Corps of Engineers prior to final
grading/layout with no chance to update their locations. Infiltration tests are located near but not in all
basins. The low infiltration rate on Basin 4 was taken into account during design to ensure complete
drawdown in less than 5 days as required.
8. There was no evidence of the SHWT on the borings so we treated the bottom of the boring as the
SHWT elevation and the bottom of each basin had over 2' of separation.
9. Have added the VFS notation to Basins 2 and 3, Basins 1 and 4 require the Rip Rap as the erosion
control due to the steep slope of the spillway. All basin overflows are designed to handle all runoff
beyond the detained volume.
10. Have labeled the basins on the enlarged sheets.
11. Have adjusted the side slopes of Basin 1 to 3:1.
12. Have received verification from Marti Morgan that there are no issues utilizing infiltration basins at this
site.
hank Y Lj,
a ed Lo
Civil Engineer
Mason & Hanger
AUG z 7 2012
bt; NR .
�A
The Mason & Hanger Group Inc. 300 West Vine Street, Suite 1300 Lexington, KY 40507 t 859.252.9980 f 859.253.0781 masonandhanger, corn
Mason & Hanger, Inc. 7270 West 162nd Street Overland Park, KS 66085 1913.681.2323 f 913,681,3970

Higgins, Don
From: Lock, Jared
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 12:28 PM
To: Higgins, Don
Subject: Ft Bragg Permit Submittal
Attachments: Ft Bragg Storm Review Summary.pdf; CG111.pdf; CG110.pdf; CG112.pdf
Don c4ai` Se Code = iv!!V• a���lD.a 1a54�. �ZQ 1
Attached you should find the pdfs to print 2 copies of and send. Please print the 3 drawings full size and sign.
Please overn�� iighWaffixtto the following address F"A Ex
Robert Patterson
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-161.7
The NCDENR job number is SW6120602 if they let you put a job number or reference number on
transmittal/label.
Thank You
Jared bock, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Mason & Hanger
A Day & Zimmermann Company
300 West Vine Street, Suite 1300
Lexington, Kentucky 40507-1814
ph 859.280.3567
fax [phone]
www.masonandhanger.com
AUG I EOU
Df;NR - A7q�17 Y ids cL,....._.

I�
Mason&Hanger
A Day&Zimmm nn Company
August 13, 2012
Robert D Patterson
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Stormwater Project No. SW6120602
Ft Bragg SOF Access Control Point
I greatly appreciate you taking the time to review our plans. The following is a quick summary of the revisions
to address your comments dated June 141h.
1. Please refer to General Note 4 on sheet CG700 for a note stating that there are no wetlands on the
site. Govr�RMr11> „ altll NO`r' -7*0 1- 01 OCZ0C. S4QHf71?4'( _'B-.)P4
2. Please.refer inside the front cover of the original submittal binder Or the supplemental fo stand
supporting calculations, have included forms in this submdta as well -basin Storage calculation can be
found in the Stormwater Calculation portion of the drainage report in the original submittal.
3. Have updated and included the requested information on the SW U-101 pages.
4. Additional information on BUA has been included on the revised SWU-101 page.
5. Please refer to the supporting calculations on the supplemental forms for drawdown times for each
basin.
6. Have added information for Basin 3 spillway.
7. The Geotechnical information was provided by the Savannah Corps of Engineers prior to final
grading/layout with no chance to update their locations. Infiltration tests are located near but not in all
basins. The low infiltration rate on Basin 4 was taken into account during design to ensure complete
drawdown in less than 5 days as required.
8. There was no evidence of the SHWT on the borings so we treated the bottom of the boring as the
SHWT elevation and the bottom of each basin had over 2' of separation.
9. Have added the VFS notation to Basins 2 and 3, Basins 1 and 4 require the Rip Rap as the erosion
control due to the steep slope of the spillway. All basin overflows are designed to handle all runoff
beyond the detained volume.
10. Have labeled the basins on the enlarged sheets.
11. Have adjusted the side slopes of Basin 1 to 3:1.
12. Have received verification from Marti Morgan that there are no issues utilizing infiltration basins at this
site.
T nk You,
ared�L�,�y-'
Civil Engineer
Mason & Hanger
The Mason & Hanger Group Inc. 300 West Vine Street, Suite 1300 Lexington, KY 40507 t 859,252,9980 f 859.253.0781 masonandhanger.com
Mason & Hanger, Inc. 7270 West 162nd Street Overland Park, KS 66085 t 913.681,2323 f 913.681.3970

Spillway Design I I
j
Ft Bragg Rip Rap Spillway
JDL
-
8/9/2012
Area
0
B
Z
Slope
Depth,,„m
A
P
R
T
Ave Depth
Mannings n
dso
()assumed
Vx
Basin 1
0.90
2
3
0.07
0.160
0.3968
3.01192885
0.13174282
2.96
0.134
0.0445921
0.3
0.908240119
0.600533
Basin 2
1.04
5
3
0.33
0.130
0.7007
5.82219219
0.12034986
5.78
0.121
0.0960461
0.3
1.522157002
1.175321
Basin 4
3.40
5
3
0.33
0.145
0.788075
5.91706052
0.13318691
5.87
0.134
0.0442456
0.3
3.97601739
1.241278
Spillway flow depth is less than 2 inches and velocities are below 1.25 fps for 10 yr storm
NCDQT Class A rip rap is being utilized for erosion control due to slopes ranging from 7%-33%
Area
Q
B
Z
Slope
Depthasum
A
P
R
T
Mannings n
()assumed
Vx
Basin 3
1.44
5
3
0.02
0.25
1.4375
6.58113883
0.21842724
6.5
0.07
1.5694553
1.092
The low velocity at
the spillway does not require an erosion control mat.

I 1_
1
1 1_ 1
1 yr 13.07 in 1
1
1 1 1
Pre -Development
I
1
I
Name 1
Area I
C 1
Runoff (cf)1
1 1
11
862571
0.421
9274.3531
1 1
21
516881
0.441
5822.1361
1 1
1 1
15096.491
1 1
1
1
1
Post -Development
1 1
I
I
Name I
Area
IC IRunoff
I
I I
1
6095
_
0.671
1045.4141
1
I
2
11351
0.221
63.92321
1
1
3
93931
0.291
697.33631
1
1
4l
i 489
f 0.63
1240.14591
1
1
51
39529
0.591
5970,461
1
1
61
170231
0.491
2135.3651
1
I
- 71
85981
0.71
I 1562.7721
1
1 -
8I
126491
0.491
1586.6911
1
1
91
84141
0.561
1206.2311
1
1
101
206571
0.481
2538.3321
1
1
111
129631
0.551
1825.191
1
1
1
1
1 18871.861
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
i
additional
generated
3775.3731
hold
59751_
1_
_basins
total reduction
2200Iwhich
_
is approx 14.5% reduction

Lock, Jared
Subject: FW: Ft Bragg SOF ACP Permit
From: Morgan, Martha[mailto:martha.morgan(&ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:17 PM
To: Lock, Jared
Subject: RE: Ft Bragg SOF ACP Permit
Hey there,
I just heard back from Jason Adcock at Ft. Bragg DPW that there are no environmental issues is this location that would
cause any concern for use of the infiltration basins. Thanks for checking with us.
Marti Morgan

859.253.0781 » 9198076494 P 2/2
Mason&Hanger
� T)J�Flrrn,!lrrmra++r S.;an rnrnr
July 13, 2012
Robert D, Patterson, PE
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Request for additional time
Stormwater Project No. SW61206OZ
Dear Mr, Patterson;
We received the request for additional information on Stormwater Project No. SW6120602 and are working to
gather the required information but request additional time to get the data submitted back to you. We expect to
have all requested information submitted to you by:Adgust 20' 2DIf
Thank you for all your assistance as we attempt to attain this permit.
Very truly yours,
MASON & HANGER
Jared Lock, PE
Civil Engineer
Mason & Hanger
The Mason & Hanger Group Inc, 300 West One Street, Suite 1300 Lexington, KY 40507 t 859.252,9980 f 859.253.0781 masonandhanger.com
Mason & Hanger, Inc. 7270 West 162nd Streal Overland Park, KS 66085 t 913,681.2323 f 913,681.3970

2012-07-13 08:34 mi
1
Mason&Hanger
.f Dxf ��Prri+ln.m,anr Cnrnynrr
781 » 9198076494 P 1/2
300 West vine Street
Suite 1300
Lexington, ICY 40507-1 B14
t 859.252,9980
f 859.253,0781
masonandhanger.com
FAX COVER SHEET
TO Robert —__-_-_Robert DPattern ........................------ --
on FROM: Jared Lock
COMPANY: Wetlands and Stormwater Branch ;REFERENCE NUMBER: SW612p602
FAX NUMBER: 919-807-64g.4-,..,..,,..�..-_..___...._._-__.-_.�..___......_,__...__..--------------------- -----------------------..,.,.-._.._-.�
TELEPHONE NUMBER: 919-807-.6300
DATE: July
PAGES:
tj
Page 1 of 1

1110
NC®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor
Mr. Jared Lock
Mason & Hanger
300 W. Vine St., Ste. 1300
Lexington, KY 40507-1814
Dear Mr. Lock:
Director
June 14, 2012
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW6120602
SOF Access Control Point
Cumberland County
DPP Freeman.
'Secreiary
The Division of Water Quality Central Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application for the
subject project on June 12, 2012. A preliminary review of that information has determined that the
application is not complete. The following information is needed to continue the stormwater review:
11. Please delineate any wetlands in and around the project; or provide a note on the plans that none
exist. The note that states
(7-2)A completed infiltration basin supplement formmust be completed for each of the 4 proposed
infiltration basins. None were submitted even though V1.3. was initialed. In addition, calculations
must be submitted that support the information in the supplement forms. This includes the
treatment volume calculation using the simple method, draw down calculation, etc.
✓3. Please address the following items on SWU-101:
a. Items 1.3. and IV.1. were left blank.
b. Item 11.2. specified that the project was low density, but this is a high density project.
Please correct it.
c. The table in IV.10. was left mostly blank. One drainage area (DA) must be completed for
each of the infiltration basins.
A) Please provide, for each DA, a breakdown of existing BUA to remain, existing BUA removed,
proposed added BUA, and proposed total BUA at completion. Then, also provide those same
values for the project as a whole. You must show that at least the net increase in BUA is being
captured and treated.
0 Please show that each infiltration basin with drawdown within 5 days.
A The overflow spillway calculation for basin 3 is not included in the calculations table. Please
provide.
Wetlands and Stownwater Branch
1517 Mai! Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: www,ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
None
rthCarolina
Naturally

Mr. Jared Lock
SW6120602 - SOF Access Control Point
June 14, 2012
( ' An infiltration test must be performed within the footprint of each proposed infiltration basin, at
the proposed bottom elevation. Only one of the four basins (basin 4) appears to have this, and the
resulting rate (0.13 in/hr) is below the minimum required rate of 0.52 in/hr. The infiltration test
should be done with a double ring infiitrometer, amoozemeter, or other siniiiar widely accepted
method for determining stormwater infiltration rates. Septic perc tests are not usually accurate
enough.
✓8. The submitted geotech report submitted does not include a specific SHWT elevation
determination based on mottling of the soil. This must be done within the footprint of each
proposed infiltration basin. The information included only talks about apparent water table at the
time the borings were performed. There must be a minimum of 2' separation bet— een the hottom
of the basin and the SHWT.
An offline bypass and properly designed vegetated filter strip (VFS) are not provided for the
infiltration basins, but are required. The VFS and bypass requirements for infiltration devices may
both be waived by increasing the size of the infiltration device by 2.5 or by infiltrating the 10-yr,
24-hr storm event. Please see 16.3.9 in the BMP Manual for specific sizing requirements.
✓10. Please label the infiltration basins on the plan view of sheets CG100 - CG112.
✓11. The side slopes shown on the plan view for basin 1 are 2:1, which is too steep. These must be no
steeper than 3:1. Please also label the side slopes on the basin 1 section, as done for the other 3.
/12. For projects with infiltration proposed at Fort Bragg, please provide written verification from
Marti Morgan, at the Division of Waste Management (DWM), that there are not any issues with this
project in relation to any DWM regulated sites or features. You can contact Mrs. Morgan via email
or phone at [e-mail] or 919-508-8447.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary review. The requested
information should be received by this Office prior to July 14, 2012, or the application will be returned as
incomplete. The return of a project will necessitate resubmittal of all required items, including the application
fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail or fax your request for a time extension to
the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. The request must indicate the date by
which you expect to submit the required information. The Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a
completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an approved
Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and is subject to enforcement action
pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
All revised original signed documents must be returned or new originals must be provided. Copies are not
acceptable. Any revised calculations or plans must be sealed, signed, and dated. Please reference the State
assigned project number SW6120602 on all correspondence. If you have any questions concerning this
matter please feel free to call me at [phone], or at [e-mail].
Page 2 of 3

�►_ wo . Jared Lock
SW6120602 - SOF Access Conrrol Pnint
June 14, 2012
cc: SW6120602 File
ec: Don Higgins, PE - Mason & Hanger
Lee Ward - Fort Bragg DPW-WMB
David Heins - Fort Bragg DPW
Mike Lawyer- Fayetteville Regional Office
Sincerely,
Robert D. Patterson. PE
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater Permitting Unit
Page 3 of 3

Rc-fupa't) 40
Application Corr+pleteness Review
7
First Submittal ❑ Re -submittal
DevelopmentlProject Name: SQJ
Receiving stream name
IV 191te-
River Basin: CA Pg T-9Ar.
Date Received: ¢ rL Date Reviewed: L3 iz By Bill Diuguid —
s
Classification:
For post -construction requirements, a program will be deemed compliant for the areas where it is
implementing any of the fol!ow!ng programs. WS-I Vnrc-II, ln.►S-!!!, 1Ais-IV, HQ1nr ORW, Neuse River Basin
NSW, Tar -Pamlico River Basin NSW, and the Randleman Lake Water Supply Watershed Nutrient
Management Strategy.
High Density Projects that require a 401/404 within an NSW require 85% TSS, 30% TN and 30% TP removal. �}
T&E Species (Goose Creek, Waxhaw Creek or Six Mile Creek Water Sheds): N1A
Latitude and Longitude: 3-6- 109 00 t/ - 79 t0 J - tfS W jurisdiction. FT. B AA-CrG/cmM�
Project Address: ZN-r fxsrcT16#-J _oF LRrne,sT ROAD i�}mk�Jl�,es RcP z631
Engineer name and firm: j o a L.o CS _s1 o
Phone: �s9-z8o —356'7 - Email: MILLp. 1, * ag oV A9454AA49AAA1 JeJE
Is the project confirmed to be in the State MSI Stormwater Permit jurisdiction? Vlyes or ❑ No
❑ Low Density (no curb and gutter) ❑ Low Density with curb and gutter outlets & igh Density ❑ Other
❑ 401/404 impacts to surface waters, wetlands, and buffers (add language to cover letter and/or add info letter)
/BUA � �%
[� Check for $505.00 included
tr Original signature (not photocopy) on application
Legal signature (Corporation-VP/higher, Partnership -General Partner/higher, LLC-member/manager, Agent),
Check spelling, capitalization, punctuation: http://www.secretary.state.nc.us/corporations/thepage.aspx
If an -agent signs the application, a signed letter of authorization from the applicant must be provided which
includes the name, title, mailing address and phone number of the person signing the letter.
❑/ For subdivided projects, a signed and notarized deed restriction statement
of Sealed, signed & dated calculations
` D Correct supplement and O&M provided for each BMP on site (check all that were provided & number of each)
N /
❑
Bioretention
❑
Dry Detention Basin
❑
Filter Strip
❑
Grass Swale
Infiltration Basin
❑
Infiltration Trench
❑
Level Spreader
❑
Permeable Pavement
ti
Restored Riparian Buffer
❑ Rooftop Runoff Management
❑ Sand Filter
❑ Stormwater Wetland
❑ Wet Detention Basin
❑ Low Density
0 Curb Outlet
❑ 'Off'Site
❑ NCDOT Linear Road
Two sets of sealed, signed & dated layout & finish grading plans with appropriate details
Narrative Description of stormwater management provided
t�Soils report provided Gov Tf,,-+rK+c t L.
Wetlands delineated or a note on the plans or in the accompanying documents that none exist on site and/or
adjacent property
54/ Details for the roads, parking area, cul-de-sac radii, sidewalk widths, curb and gutter;
�d Dimensions & slopes provided
Drainage areas delineated ❑ Pervious and impervious reported for each ❑ Areas of high density
BMP operation and maintenance agreefpzits provided
❑ Application complete K ❑ Application In Returned: (Date)
Comments
44+V6
May 5, 2011 Revision, Bill Diuguid
Ft r Sr- +,,/c e-
LA-VPS
ufi/ 4 IKoz-y.