20200545 Ver 1_More Info Received_20200901

Strickland, Bev
From:
David Weikle <[e-mail]>
Sent:
Tuesday, September 1, 2020 3:49 PM
To:
Annino, Amy M; James Gamertsfelder
Cc:
Smith, Mike M
Subject:
RE: [External] RE: Bostic Landfill site
Attachments:
Alignment.pdf, Calculations.pdf, Existing X Section.pdf; IMG_0883jpg; Profile.pdf,
Proposed X Section.pdf, Roughness coefficients.pdf
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Amy,
Please see below.
Also, revised plans are going out in the mail tomorrow for both Mike and Amy.
David Weikle, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
From: Annino, Amy M <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 3:02 PM
To: David Weikle <[e-mail]>
Cc: Smith, Mike M <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Bostic Landfill site
Mr. Weikle,
Thank you for providing the Division with the revised drawings, calculations, and response letter. After speaking with
Mike Smith (DEMLR), I understand that you have provided DEMLR with revisions to the plan and associated calculations.
Please see my comments below:
• Please provide the Division with the most recent revised project plans. [15A NCAC 02H .0502 (b)(3)] SHIELD IS
MORE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE DWR WITH THE LATEST APPROVED DRAWINGS.
• Please provide calculations showing that all stormwater entering jurisdictional waters at station 0+60 will be at
non -erosive velocities (2.5 ft/second) for the 10 year storm event. SHIELD HAS ATTACHED CALCUATIONS
SHOWING THE PRE- OF POST -PROJECT FLOWS AT STATION 0+30. A ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT OF 0.035 WAS
USED (OPEN CHANNELS— EARTH FAIRLY UNIFORM —SIDES CLEAN, COBBLE BOTTOM) FOR BOTH THE BEFORE
AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION. AS CAN BE SEEN, THE VELOCITY ACTUALLY DECREASES FROM 6.32 TO 4.89 DUE TO
THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF THE CHANNEL. IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT BASED ON THE NATURAL SLOPE
OF THE CHANNEL AND THE ACTUAL DRAINAGE AREA FEEDING THE CHANNEL, A VELOCITY OF 2.5 FPS IS
IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVIDE.
Impact S1: Provide justification for the proposed stream channel dimensions based on reference reach
information or stable dimensions upstream and downstream of the impact area. Size the channel appropriately
to prevent future channel aggradation or degradation. [15A NCAC 02H .0506 (b)] THE CHANNEL WAS SIZED TO
GRADUALLY NARROW/TRANSITION FROM OUR UPPER DITCH WIDTH OF 10' TO THE NATURAL WIDTH OF THE
CHANNELATTHE PROPERTY LINE.

Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(c), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested information for the
proper consideration of the application. If all of the requested information is not received by September 28, 2020, the
Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be returned.
Amy Annino
Environmental Specialist —Asheville Regional Office
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
2090 U.S. Hwy. 70
Swannanoa, N.C. 28711
828 296 4656 office
984 232 1222 mobile
amy.annino(cancdenr.gov
,f���D_ E_Q��
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
Based on the current guidance to minimize the spread of COVID-19, the Department of Environmental Quality has
adjusted operations to protect the health and safety of the staff and public. Many employees are working remotely or are
on staggered shifts. To accommodate these staffing changes, all DEQ office locations are limiting public access to
appointments only. Please check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your
requests by phone or email. We appreciate your patience as we continue to serve the public during this challenging time.
From: David Weikle [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 12:14 PM
To: Annino, Amy M <[e-mail]>
Cc: Smith, Mike M <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Bostic Landfill site
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Amy/Mike,
Attached you will find the revised drawings, ditch calculations, and a comment response letter. Please let me know if
either of you need anything else.
Have a nice Holiday.
David Weikle, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
From: Annino, Amy M <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, July 2, 2020 8:26 AM
To: David Weikle <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Bostic Landfill site

Hi David,
You can send me electronic revisions via email if the file isn't too large. Paper copies to the Swannanoa address are also
acceptable. Thank you,
Amy Annino
Environmental Specialist —Asheville Regional Office
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
2090 U.S. Hwy. 70
Swannanoa, N.C. 28711
828 296 4656 office
984 232 1222 mobile
amy.anninoa-ncdenr.gov
e:*4 D E A Qp%�`
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
Based on the current guidance to minimize the spread of COVID-19, the Department of Environmental Quality has
adjusted operations to protect the health and safety of the staff and public. Many employees are working remotely or are
on staggered shifts. To accommodate these staffing changes, all DEQ office locations are limiting public access to
appointments only. Please check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your
requests by phone or email. We appreciate your patience as we continue to serve the public during this challenging time.
From: David Weikle [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 12:26 PM
To: Annino, Amy M <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: Bostic Landfill site
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Amy,
I'll work on addressing the comments. In the meantime, where should I submit the new drawings? Do they need to be
paper copies sent to the address in Swannanoa?
David Weikle, P.E.
Senior Project Engineer
From: Annino, Amy M <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2020 7:21 AM
To: David Weikle <[e-mail]>
Cc: Smith, Mike M <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bostic Landfill site

On April 15, 2020, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application dated April 8, 2020 requesting a
401 Water Quality Certification from the Division for the subject project. On April 15, 2020, the application was placed
on hold while the Division determined whether an application fee was required. On May 8, 2020, the Division
determined that an application fee was not necessary. After initial review of the application, the Division has determined
that your application is incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on hold until the following items are
addressed:
1. The plan proposes to excavate landfill material from within and below an existing intermittent stream. After
excavation is complete, a 10 foot wide ditch with a 5.2% slope will be graded to provide a channel for the
intermittent stream below an existing spring head (to remain undisturbed). The new ditch will be stabilized with
seed, straw, and coir matting. No grade control within the proposed ditch has been proposed.
a. The Division is concerned about stream channel stability within the proposed 10 foot wide, 5.2% slope
ditch. Please provide calculations showing that streamflow and stormwater flow will not degrade the
restored channel or downstream waters. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(2) and (b)(3)]
2. Wattles are specified as 'Excelsior Wattle' in the drawing within the Sediment Wattle detail on sheet 9. All
wattles specified for placement in jurisdictional waters should be either a coir log or coir wattle and contain no
plastic netting or mesh. Please provide a specification sheet on selected product and update the plan
accordingly.
a. What is the timeline for maintaining and removing wattles from the stream after the project has
concluded? The wattles should not be left permanently.
b. Any sediment removed from behind wattles in the stream should be performed by hand with shovel and
bucket and spoils should be stabilized at least 30 feet from surface waters. Please provide a location on
the plan for spoils to be deposited and stabilized.
3. Is application of PAM proposed for all wattles? Use of PAM is not allowable on wattles in jurisdictional waters.
Please indicate this in the plan set.
4. The plan shows a silt fence outlet to be installed at the LOD within the channel of the intermittent stream.
a. This Office believes that the silt fence outlet can be revised to avoid and minimize the impacts to the
stream. Please provide an alternative to installing a silt fence outlet within the channel of the
intermittent stream. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(f) and (g)]
5. At what station do you expect to begin the pump around sequence? Please provide more detail on where / how
you intend to pump spring flow and stream flow (as well as any groundwater seepage) around the work area to
protect downstream waters.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(c), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested information for the
proper consideration of the application. If all of the requested information is not received by August 1, 2020, the
Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be returned.
Amy Annino
Environmental Specialist —Asheville Regional Office
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
2090 U.S. Hwy. 70
Swannanoa, N.C. 28711
828 296 4656 office
984 232 1222 mobile
amy.annino(cancdenr.gov

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
Based on the current guidance to minimize the spread of COVID-19, the Department of Environmental Quality has
adjusted operations to protect the health and safety of the staff and public. Many employees are working remotely or are
on staggered shifts. To accommodate these staffing changes, all DEQ office locations are limiting public access to
appointments only. Please check with the appropriate staff before visiting our offices, as we may be able to handle your
requests by phone or email. We appreciate your patience as we continue to serve the public during this challenging time.

c-b
Nv
14/ .14/ 14/ \P
��`�, / 14/ \P

BOSTIC STORM FLOW CALCULATIONS
Drainage Area #5 (24" Diam. RCP)
Total Drainage Area = 8.21
Q= ciA (Rational Method)
where: Q = Total Flow (cfs)
c = Runoff Coefficient
i10 = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr)
A = Drainage Area (Ac.)
10.99
= 0.180 [60% Lawns Heavy Soil 2-7% (0.20)]
[40% Woodlands (0.15)]
7.44 (Tc = 5 Minutes)
8.21
Drainage Area #6 (Post -Construction - Upper Rip Rap Ditch)
Total Drainage Area = 14.38
Q= ciA (Rational Method)
where: Q = Total Flow (cfs) = 16.70 See Note Below
c = Runoff Coefficient = 0.330 [55% Woodlands (0.15)]
[40% Single Family Lot (0.60)]
[5% Lawns Heavy Soil 2-7% (0.20)]
i25 = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) = 3.52 (Tc = 45 Minutes)
A = Drainage Area (Ac.) = 14.38
Total Flow = 16.70 + 12.52 (Drainage Area #5) = 29.22
Drainage Area #7 (Post -Construction - Lower Grass Ditch)
Total Drainage Area = 15.78
Q= ciA (Rational Method)
where: Q = Total Flow (cfs) = 15.62
c = Runoff Coefficient = 0.330 [55% Woodlands (0.15)]
[40% Single Family Lot (0.60)]
[5% Lawns Heavy Soil 2-7% (0.20)]
i10 = Rainfall Intensity (in/hr) = 3.00 (Tc = 45 Minutes)
A = Drainage Area (Ac.) = 15.78
Total Flow = 15.62 + 10.99 (Drainage Area #5) = 26.61

Worksheet for Existing X-Section
Project Description
Friction Method Manning
Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.052 ft/ft
Discharge 26.61 cfs
Start Station
(0+00, 855.50)
Section Definitions
Station
Elevation
(ft)
(ft)
0+00
855.50
0+ 10
853.70
0+ 18
848.00
0+23
847.00
0+24
847.00
0+40
856.00
0+53
856.90
Roughness Segment Definitions
Ending Station Roughness Coefficient
(0+53, 856.90) 0.035
Options
Current Roughness Weighted
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Open Channel Weighting
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Closed Channel Weighting
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Results
Normal Depth
11.7 in
Elevation Range
847.0 to
856.9 ft
Flow Area
4.2 ftz
Wetted Perimeter
8.0 ft
Hydraulic Radius
6.3 in
Top Width
7.62 ft
Normal Depth
11.7 in
Critical Depth
13.9 in
Critical Slope
0.022 ft/ft
Velocity
6.32 ft/s
Velocity Head
0.62 ft
Specific Energy
1.60 ft
Froude Number
1.499
Flow Type
Supercritical
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution FlowMaster
PIPE and DITCH CALCULATIONS.fm8 Center [10.02.00.01]
8/31/2020 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Page 1 of 2
Watertown, CT 06795 USA [phone]

Worksheet for Existing X-Section
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth
0.0 in
Length
0.0 ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.0 in
Profile Description
N/A
Profile Headloss
0.00 ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity ft/s
Upstream Velocity
Infinity ft/s
Normal Depth
11.7 in
Critical Depth
13.9 in
Channel Slope
0.052 ft/ft
Critical Slope
0.022 ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution FlowMaster
PIPE and DITCH CALCULATIONS.fm8 Center [10.02.00.01]
8/31/2020 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Page 2 of 2
Watertown, CT 06795 USA [phone]

nqn ,'� .__ .ice > .. ! �.� '•, ,,r�, r n� 'c, '` V - �tr� � % �/.�JI
/i��w. eJ 'P x � i i�V 'V �) R A �� I } r O I Ix A� (j✓. O , t /
r y
11 r ! 1 r +}
�r 1'
g� �i','�� _ ��+` :-\�,,�'• ia't.. i•# `emu r ',P' l y�, t ' j . r � .. ..
4 _
1 � .
li
%:ZMW
a �� n'ql /y /l�p�I tadvY

E:10111
830
0�
E:10011
:u1l
830
)3

Worksheet for Proposed X-Section
Project Description
Friction Method Manning
Formula
Solve For Normal Depth
Input Data
Channel Slope 0.052 ft/ft
Discharge 26.61 cfs
Section Definitions
Station Elevation
(ft) (ft)
0+00 854.70
0+ 16 848.40
0+29 848.30
0+50 856.50
Roughness Segment Definitions
Start Station Ending Station Roughness Coefficient
(0+00, 854.70) (0+50, 856.50) 0.035
Options
Current Roughness Weighted
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Open Channel Weighting
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Closed Channel Weighting
Pavlovskii's
Method
Method
Results
Normal Depth
5.3 in
Elevation Range
848.3 to
856.5 ft
Flow Area
5.4 ftz
Wetted Perimeter
15.1 ft
Hydraulic Radius
4.3 in
Top Width
14.98 ft
Normal Depth
5.3 in
Critical Depth
6.5 in
Critical Slope
0.024 ft/ft
Velocity
4.89 ft/s
Velocity Head
0.37 ft
Specific Energy
0.81 ft
Froude Number
1.432
Flow Type
Supercritical
GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth 0.0 in
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution FlowMaster
PIPE and DITCH CALCULATIONS.fm8 Center [10.02.00.01]
8/31/2020 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Page 1 of 2
Watertown, CT 06795 USA [phone]

Worksheet for Proposed X-Section
GVF Input Data
Length
0.0 ft
Number Of Steps
0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth
0.0 in
Profile Description
N/A
Profile Headloss
0.00 ft
Downstream Velocity
Infinity ft/s
Upstream Velocity
Infinity ft/s
Normal Depth
5.3 in
Critical Depth
6.5 in
Channel Slope
0.052 ft/ft
Critical Slope
0.024 ft/ft
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution FlowMaster
PIPE and DITCH CALCULATIONS.fm8 Center [10.02.00.01]
8/31/2020 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Page 2 of 2
Watertown, CT 06795 USA [phone]

Table A-1: Manning Equation Coefficients of Roughness
Page 1 of 4
Table A-1: Manning Equation Coefficients of Roughness
Manning's n range
I. Closed Conduits:
A.
Concrete Pipe............................................................................................... 0.011 - 0.013
B.
Corrugated -metal pipe or pipe arch:
1. 2-2/3 by 1/2 in corrugation (riveted pipe):
a. Plain or fully coated..................................................................................
0.024
b. Paved invert (ranged values are for 25%
and 50% of circumference paved):
(1) Flow full depth.....................................................................
0.021 - 0.018
(2) Flow 08 depth......................................................................
0.021 - 0.016
(3) Flow 06 depth......................................................................
0.019 - 0.013
2. 6 by 2-in corrugation (field bolted).................................................................
0.030
C.
Cast-iron pipe, uncoated..........................................................................................
0.013
D.
Steel pipe...............................................................................................
0.009 - 0.011
E.
Monolithic concrete:
1. Wood forms, rough.............................................................................
0.015 - 0.017
2. Wood forms, smooth...........................................................................
0.012 - 0.014
3. Steel forms............................................................................................
0.012 - 0.025
F.
Cemented rubble masonry walls:
1. Concrete floor and top.......................................................................
0.017 - 0.022
2. Natural floor........................................................................................
0.019 - 0.025
��. Open Channels, Lined (straight alignment):
A.
Concrete with surfaces as indicated:
1. Formed, no finish.................................................................................
0.013 - 0.017
2. Trowel finish.........................................................................................
0.012 - 0.014
3. Float finish............................................................................................
0.013 - 0.015
4. Float finish, some gravel on bottom ...................................................
0.015 - 0.017
5. Gunite, good section............................................................................
0.016 - 0.019
6. Gunite, wavy section............................................................................. 0.018 - 0.022
B.
Concrete, bottom float finished, sides as indicated:
1. Dressed stone in mortar......................................................................
0.015 - 0.017
2 Random stone in mortar....................................................................
0.017 - 0.020
http://harris.centreconnect.org/Table%20A-l.htm 5/ 16/2006

Table A-1: Manning Equation Coefficients of Roughness
Page 2 of 4
3. Cement rubble masonry ......................................................................
0.020 - 0.025
4. Cement rubble masonry, plastered ....................................................
0.016 - 0.020
5. Dry rubble(riprab)..............................................................................
0.020 - 0.030
C. Gravel bottom, sides as indicated:
1. Formed concrete..................................................................................
0.017 - 0.020
2. Random stone in mortar....................................................................
0.020 - 0.023
3. Dry rubble(riprap)..............................................................................
0.023 - 0.033
D. Asphalt
1. Smooth..............................................................................................__...........
0.013
2. Rough.................................................................................,......._......_............0.016
E. Concrete -lined excavated rock:
1. Good section........................................................................................
0.017 - 0.020
2. Irregular section.........................................................._......._.................
0.022 - 0.027
Open Channels, Excavated (straight alignment, natural lining):
A. Earth, uniform section:
1. Clean, recently completed....................................................................
0.016 - 0.018
2. Clean, after weathering........................................................................
0.018 - 0.020
3. With short grass, few weeds.................................................................
0.022 - 0.027
4. In gravelly soil, uniform section, clean ................................................
0.022 - 0.025
B. Earth, fairly uniform section:
1. No vegetation........................................................................................ 0.022 - 0.025
2. Grass, some weeds................................................................................
0.025 - 0.030
3. Dense weeds or aquatic plants in deep channels ...............................
0.030 - 0.035
4. Sides clean, gravel bottom...................................................................
0.025 - 0.030
5. Sides clean, cobble bottom.................................................................. 0.030 - 0.040
C. Dragline excavated or dredged:
1. No vegetation........................................................................................
0.028 - 0.033
2. Light brush on banks...........................................................................
0.035 - 0.050
D. Rock:
1. Based on design section..................................................................................... 0.035
2. Based on actual mean section:
a. Smooth and uniform..................................................................
0.035 - 0.040
b. Jagged and irregular .............................................. ..........
0.040 - 0.045
E. Channels not maintained, weeds and brush uncut:
1. Dense weeks, high as flow depth..........................................................
0.080 - 0.120
http://harris.centreconnect.org/Table%20A- l .htm
5/16/2006

Table A-1: Manning Equation Coefficients of Roughness Page 3 of 4
2. Clean bottom, brush on sides............................................................. 0.050 - 0.080
3. Clean bottom, brush on sides, highest stage of flow ......................... 0.070 - 0.110
4. Dense crush, high stage........................................................................
0.100 - 0.140
IV. Channels & Swales w/Maintained Vegetation (Values shown are for velocities of 2 & 6 f.p.s.):
A.
Depth of flow up to 0.7 foot:
1. Bermudagrass, Kentucky bluegrass, buffalograss
a. Mowed to 2 inches ................................. .................... :............ .....
0.045 - 0.070
b. Length 4-6 inches........................................................................
0.050 - 0.090
2. Good stand, any grass:
a. Length about 12 inches................................................................
0.090 - 0.180
b. Length about 24 inches....................:..........................................
0.150 - 0.300
3. Fair stand, any grass:
a. Length about 12 inches...,.........................................................
0.0800 - 0.140
b. Length about 24 inches.............................................................
0.1300 - 0.250
B.
Depth of flow 0.7 - 1.5 feet:
1. Bermudagrass, Kentucky bluegrass, buffalograss
a. Mowed to 2 inches ............................................ ......... :...:.............
0.030 - 0.050
b. Length 4-6 inches..........................................................................
0.040 - 0.060
2. Good stand, any grass:
a. Length about 12 inches...............................................................
0.070 - 0.120
b. Length about 24 inches...............................................................
0.100 - 0.200
3. Fair stand, any grass:
a. Length about 12 inches..............................._................................
0.060 - 0.100
b. Length about 24 inches...................................::..........................
0.090 - 0.170
V. Street and Expressway Gutters:
A.
Concrete gutter, troweled finish ............................................ ............. ...:..........
.......... 0.012
B.
Asphalt pavement:
1. Smooth texture.................................................................................................. 0.013
.................
2. Rough texture.......................................................................... ...
.............. 0.016
C.
Concrete gutter with asphalt pavement
1. Smooth .......................... ...................-....•... 0.013
2. Rough.............................................................................................................0.015
D.
Concrete pavement:
1. Float finish ............................ .............. ............... ................. I ............. ............ ..... 0.014
2. Broom finish......................................................................................................
0.016
E.
For gutters with small slope, where sediment may accumulate,
increase above values of x by..................................................................................... 0.002
VI. Natural Stream Channels:
A.
Minor streams (surface width at flood stage less than 100 feet):
http://harris.centreconnect.org/Table%20A-1.htm 5/ 16/2006

Table A-1: Manning Equation Coefficients of Roughness
Page 4 of 4
1. Fairly regular section:
a. Some grass & weeds, little or no brush ......................................
0.030 - 0.035
b. Dense growth of weeks, depth of flow materially
greater than weed height..............................................................
0.035 - 0.050
C. Some weeks, light brush on banks ..............................................
0.035 - 0.050
d. Some weeks, heavy brush on banks ........... ..:.::................ ........... 0.050 - 0.070
e. Some weeks, dense willows on banks ..........................................
0.060 - 0.080
f. For trees within channel with branches submerged at
high stage, increase all above values by .......................................
0.010 - 0.020
2. Irregular sections, with pools, slight channel meander; increase
values given in 1 a-e about...................................................................
0.010 - 0.020
3. Mountain streams, no vegetation in channel, banks usually steep,
trees and brush along banks submerged at high stage:
a. Bottom of gravel, cobbles and few boulders ..............................
0.040 - 0.050
b. Bottom of cobbles, with large boulders .....................................
0.050 - 0.070
B. Flood plains (adjacent to natural streams):
1. Pasture, no brush:
a. Short grass....................................................................................
0.030 - 0.035
b. High grass......................................................................................
0.035 - 0.050
2. Cultivated areas:
ti
a. No crop.........................................................................................
0.030 - 0.040
b. Mature row crops.........................................................................
0.035 - 0.045
c. Mature field crops ........................................ :...::::::.:...... :........... ::.
0.040 - 0.050
3. Heavy weeds, scattered brush.............................................................. 0.050 - 0.070
http://harris.centreconnect.org/Table%20A- l .htm 5/16/2006