NC0071943_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2018 (7)

PPV
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. BOX 1014
BOILING SPRINGS, N.C. 28017
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
N
Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs
PO Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
1 /28/04
System Performance. Annual Report
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1677
Dear Mr. Popart;
7
Here is a copy of the Performance Annual Report from the Town of Boiling Springs. The
February 25, 2004 water bill will contain the statement,( Wastewater Performance Annual Report
posted at Town Hall. Copies available upon request.)
If you have questions regarding this report, please contact me at the WWTP, 704-434-5600.
Sincerely,
Charles Wiesner, Wastewater System Supervisor/ORC

"�q
, Performance Annual Deport
1. General Information
Facility/System Name: Town of Boiling Springs
Responsible Entity: Town of Boiling Springs
Person in Charge/Contact: Charles Wiesner
Applicable Permit(s): Wastewater Treatment Plant NC0071943
Wastewater Collection System No permit
Description of Collection System or Treatment Process:
The WWTP consists of two wastewater Wants which equal .600 MGD with clarifiers and UV
disinfection treatment.
The wastewater collection system has 21 miles of lines with 13 wastewater pumping stations
Each pumping station has and alarm system which will notify the Maintenance Department of
problems.
11. Performance
Text Summary of System Performance for Calender Year 2003
There were no violations at the WWTP during the Calender year of 2003. In October 2003 a
State inspection of the WWTP indicated two deficiencies, one in the Laboratory and the other in
the Self- Monitoring_log recorders.
In 2003 the Town had 5 reportable spills which to date the Town has not received a violation or
List (by month) any violations of permit conditions or other environmental regulations. Monthly
lists should include discussion of any environmental impacts and corrective measures taken to
address violations.
In April 2003, the wastewater facility did not document the calibration of the Ph meter on 3
different occasions. The Ph meter documentation are now checked on a regular basis to insure
proper calibration documentation.

PPV
The April 2003, the analysis times for the Ph measurements were not documented to verify the
compliance with the fifteen -minute holding time. The log documents were corrected the next day
to clearly indicate the fifteen -minute Ph holding time.
In January 8, a manhole in back of Gardner Web University overflowed on the ground and some
of the untreated wastewater went into and unnamed creek. Theline was jet cleaned and later a
camera was used to locate root intrusion. The bad section of line was replaced. A down stream
inspection of the creek indicated no environmental impact occurred as a result of this spill.
On March 20, a 4 inch rain caused a spill at Lyman Street Lift Station. I & I was a significant
factor in 6,000 gallons being discharged into Popular Branch Creek. This 4 inch rain event was
considered and act of God. No significant environmental impact occurred because of this spill.
The Town has and on going sewer fine repair program.
On April 4, a second spill occurred at Lyman Street Lift Station because of 5.5 inches of rainfall.
Approximately 13,500 gallons of untreated wastewater was discharged into Popular Branch
Creek. I and I problems in the sewer system was a contributing factor in this spill. The Town is
working with and Engineering Firm to repair and up grade the Town's sewer system. A
downstream inspection of Popular Branch Creek did not reveal any environmental impact on the
stream.
On May 22, a third spill occurred at Lyman Street Lift station as a result of a 6.3 inch rain. I and
I problems was a factor in this spill. I asked the State to consider this heavy rain event and act of
God. Approximately 35,000 gallons of wastewater reached Popular Branch Creek. Popular
Branch Creek was checked downstream of the spill with no evidence indicating and environmental
impact. A Capital Improvement Program is in place with a camera being used to locate sewer line
problems. Repairs are on and ongoing basis.
On May 24, and additional inch of rain started this by-pass to Popular Branch Creek less than 24
hours after the May 22 rain event. The spill area was limed and downstream of the Creek was
checked with no problems found which would indicate stream degradation. A CIP is in place and
problems are being located and repaired in the sewer lines.
I I I Notification
State how this report has been made available to users or customers of the system and how those
users have been notified of its availability.
Notification of availability of this report will be printed on utility bills. Copies will be available at
the office on request. A copy is posted at the Town of Boiling Springs bulletin board.

Ck
IV. Certification
I certify under penalty of law that report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
I further certify that this report has been made available to the users or customers of the named
system and that those users have been notified of its availability.
f
Responsible Person
Title Wastewater System Supervisor/ORC
Entity Town of Boiling Springs
PO BOX 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
Phone [phone]
Date

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
November 19, 2003
5013
Mr. Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017-
SUBJECT: Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification Renewal
FIELD PARAMETERS ONLY
Dear Mr. Wiesner:
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, in accordance with the provisions of NC
GS 143-215-.3 (a) (10), 15 NCAC 2H .0800, is pleased to renew certification for your laboratory to
perform specified environmental analyses required by EMC monitoring and reporting regulations 15
NCAC 2B .0500, 2H .0900 and 2L .0100, .0200, .0300, and 2N .0100 through .0800.
Enclosed for your use is a certificate describing the requirements and limits of your certification.
Please review this certificate to insure that your laboratory is certified for all parameters required to
properly meet your certification needs.
Please contact us at 919-733-3908 if you have questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
V
Z/� i "� Vl�
James W. Meyer
Laboratory Section
Enclosure
cc: Chester E. Whiting
Mooresville Regional Office
AWD Ic'4-` IRESCURCES
T.
�.0
180b 2 12003
N EU
N. C. Division of Water Quality Laboratory Section 1623 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623 [phone]
FAX: [phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF THE
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
In accordance with the provisions of N.C.G.S. 143-215.3 (a) (1), 143-215.3 (a)(10) and NCAC 2H.0800:
Field Parameter Only
` to
'' 6'
�' •`S£ QUAN1 v1dE f
.x'
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP
Is hereby certified to perform environmental analysis as listed on Attachment I and report monitoring data to DWQ for
compliance with NPDES effluent, surface water, groundwater, and pretreatment regulations.
By reference 15A NCAC 2H .0800 is made a part of this certificate.
This certificate does not guarantee validity of data generated, but indicates the methodology, equipment, quality control procedures,
records, and proficiency of the laboratory have been examined and found to be acceptable.
` This certificate shall be valid until December 31, 2004
Certificate No. 5013
James W. Meyer

rpv
Lab Name:
Address:
Attachment
North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification
Certified Parameters Listing
FIELD PARAMETERS ONLY
Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017-
Certificate Number:
Effective Date:
Expiration Date:
Date of Last Amendment:
5013
01 /01 /2004
12/31/2004
The above named laboratory, having duly met the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H.0800, is hereby certified for the measurement of the parameters listed below.
CERTIFIED PARAMETERS
INORGANICS
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Std Method 4500 O G
pH
Std Method 4500 H B
TEMPERATURE
Std Method 2550E
This certification requires maintance of an acceptable quality assurance program, use of approved methodology, and satisfactory performance on evaluation samples. Laboratories are
subject to civil penalties and/or decertification for infractions asset forth in 15A NCAC 2H.0807. _ _

b0�
W A T F9Q61
`r a) -7
o t�
Mr. Brian Alligood, Town Manager
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Dear Mr. Alligood:
rovcm=y�
Michae
l F. Easle}r
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
October 2, 2003
Subject: Notice of Deficiency
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO071943
Cleveland County, N.C.
Enclosed is a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection conducted at the
subject facility on September 24, 2003 by Mr. Wes Bell of this Office. Please advise the facility's Operator -in -
Responsible Charge of our findings by forwarding a copy of the enclosed report to him.
Although the operation and maintenace at this facility is commendable, it is requested that a written
response be submitted to this Office by October 23, 2003, addressing the deficiencies noted in the Laboratory
and Self -Monitoring Sections of the report. In responding, please address your comments to the attention of
Mr. Richard Bridgeman.
The report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning this report,
please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bell or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Enclosure:
cc: Cleveland County Health Department
141/:7
Phone [phone] Mooresville Regional Office, 919 North Main Street, Mooresville, North Carolina 28115
Fax [phone]
�a- jr7,`6
RED ENT
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

n
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Forth Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspeclion Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
j
1 U 2 U 31 NCO071943 I11 121 03/09/24 117 18 U 19Ig1 20I LJ
rur
Remarks
2111111111111111111111111111111111Jill Jill 111111166
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ------------- Reserved---------
67 1 1.5 169 701=1 71 U 72 L'J 73 W 74 751 I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:40 AM 03/09/24
99/01/01
Boiling Springs WWTP
ExitTime/Date
Permit Expiration Date
2556 Rockyford Road
Boiling Springs NC 28017
01:12 PM 03/09/24
03/08/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Tities(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Charles J Wiesner/ORC/704-434-5600/
Brian Alligood/Town Manager/704-434-2357/
Name, Address of Responsible OfficiaLITitle/Phone and Fax Number
rr
Brain Alligood,145 South Main Street Boiling Springs NC 28017/Towrrontacted
Manager/704-434-2357/7044342358 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit ?low Measurement Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
PERMIT:
The permit expired on August 31, 2003;•however, the facility has submitted the appropriate documentation for
a permit renewal. In addition, the permit description-; the recently issued draft permit (dated 9/15/03) only
included one aeration basin and digester (2 aeration basins and digesters on -site). The draft permit had
also removed influent monitoring for BCD and TSS (85% removal reauirement) and the weekly average limitations
for BOD, TSS, and fecal colifom. The Division's NPDES
(cont.)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
, n
Wesley N Bell /, / - 9 _ !/ // MRO WQ//704-663-1699/704-663-6040 l Q / '7/0—:�;
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type (cont.) 1
31 NC0071943 111 121 03/09/24 117 18Ifj
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Unit was contacted by this Office and will address the above -noted discrepancies. The remaining facility
descriptions in the draft permit appeared correct.
RECORDS AND REPORTS:
Records and reports consisting of Operator -in -Responsible Charge (ORC)/maintenance log, daily operation log,
calibration data, process control data, monthly monitoring reports, chain of custody forms, laboratory
analyses, flow charts, and sludge records were reviewed at the time of the inspection. All records were
in-depth and well maintained.
FACILITY SITE REVIEW/OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE:
The facility appeared to be properly operated and maintained. The mixed liquor appeared to be well mixed and
adequately oxygenated. The facility primarily utilizes a rectangular digester; however, an additional digester
is available for emergency situations. Screenings are disposed at the county landfill. The backup generator
is tested on a weekly basis. The facility is staffed with appropriately certified operators. The ORC and staff
were very knowledgeable of all treatment units and processes utilized at this facility.
The process control program.includes pH, DO, centrifuge measurements, settleability tests, and sludge blanket
measurements. Sludge wasting is based on the centrifuge measurements.
The collection system consists of thirteen pump stations that are equipped with telemetry and audio/visual
alarm systems. The pump stations are inspected on a weekly basis (minimum). Four pump stations are equipped
with on -site backup generators and the facility has access to an additional portable backup generator.
LABORATORY:
Pace Analytical Services, Inc. (Certification # 40) in Asheville, N.C. and Hydro Analytical (Certification
#103) in Clemmons, N.C_ have been contracted to provide analytical support. The laboratories were not
evaluated during this inspection. The on -site laboratory was issued Certification #5013 by the Division's
Laboratory Certification Unit to perform on -site field analyses. The laboratory instrumentation utilized for
field analyses appeared to be properly maintained.
On three occasions in April 2003, the facility did not document the calibration of the pH meter. Please be
advised that the facility must insure that all calibration data is properly documented as required by the
Permit.
EFFLUENT/RECEIVING STREAM:
The effluent appeared clear with no suspended solids or foam. The receiving stream did not appear to be
negatively impacted. The outfall location was accessible at the time of the inspection.
SELF -MONITORING- PROGRAM:
Self -monitoring reports were reviewed for the period August 2002 through July 2003, inclusive. No limit
violations were reported. No flow was reported on May 31, 2003; however, the inspection verified that the
above -noted discrepancy was a transcription error_
Composite samples are collected flow proportionately. The facility must insure that the preset number of
gallons between the collection of samples does not exceed 1/24 of the expected flow. All samples appeared to
be properly preserved. All sampling locations appeared correct.
Settleable solids and dissolved oxygen measurements were performed on the effluent; however, the values were
not reported on the.DMRs as required by the Permit. In addition, the analysis times for the pH measurements
were not documented to verify the compliance with the fifteen -minute holding time as required by 40 CFR 136.3
Table II_
FLOW MEASUREMENT:
Effluent flow is measured continuously by a H-flume and ultrasonic flow meter with totalizer and chart
recording. The flow meter is calibrated twice per year by Johnston, Inc. The flow meter was last calibrated
on 9/3/03.
SLUDGE DISPOSAL:
Digested sludge is either land applied by the ORC/staff according to the Land Application Permit #WQ0018352
or transported to the City of Shelby's WWTP for final disposal.

VP / +�/wry
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
October 2, 2003
1VIr. Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs
PO Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Dear Mr. Wiesner:
� � s
N""' .c ROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Revised Draft NPDES Permit
Permit NCO071943
Town of Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the revised draft permit for your facility. This revision is intended to
correct errors contained in the original draft. Please review the draft very carefully to ensure thorough
understanding of the conditions and requirements it contains.
The revised draft permit contains the following corrections to the original draft permit:
➢ Limits have been changed to Weekly Averages rather than Daily Maximums.
➢ The parameter for Total Residual Chlorine has been removed since the permittee does not use
chlorine for disinfection (neither as a primary nor as a back-up method).
➢ The footnote referring to 85% removal for TSS and BODS has been added as is required for
municipal facilities.
➢ The description of the facility has been changed to reflect two aeration basins and t-\vo sludge
digesters.
Submit any additional comments to me as soon as possible. Comments should be sent to the address listed
at the bottom of this page. If no adverse comments are received from the public or from you, this permit
will likely be issued in November, with an effective date of December 1, 2003.
If you have any questions or comments concerning this draft permit, contact me at the telephone number or
e-mail address listed below.
Sincerely,
J
Dawn Jeffries
NPDES Unit
cc: \ 11D1_.S Umt
ac_�lZ+c�ioi�sd Otfice / \\;"ata <t Clusrlitl �e_rcio�
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919 733-5083. extension 595 (fax) 919 733-0719
An Equal Opportunity Alfirmalive Action Employer dawn.lefiries@ ncmail.net

Permit NCO071943
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
• :u
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other
lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended,
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Boiling Springs Waste Water Treatment Plant
2556 Rockford Road
Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
to receiving waters designated as Sandy Run Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and N hereof.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on August 31, 2008.
Signed this day tbd.
Alan W. Klimek P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCO071943
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked.
As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective.
Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit
conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Town of Boiling Springs is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.60 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting
of the following:
♦ Mechanically cleaned bar screen and grit chamber
♦ Two aeration basins with coarse bubble diffusers
♦ Two secondary clarifiers
♦ Scum and recycle pump stations
♦ Ultra -sonic flow meter
♦ UV disinfection
♦ Two rectangular sludge digesters
♦ Emergency power generator
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Sandy Run Creek, classified C waters in the Broad River Basin.

Permit NC0071943
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REgUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration,
the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited
and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
'MONITORING REQUIREMENTS'
Monthly
Average
Weekly .
Average '
. Daily
.Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type_
Sample Location
Flow
0.60 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day'
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids'
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1 —October 31)
15.0 mg/L
35.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1 — March 31)
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH2
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Semi -Annual
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
Effluent
Footnotes:
I. The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall
not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

Town of Boiling Springs
COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM K. ELLIOTT, MAYOR PRO-TEM
BILL ELLIS
JOHN C. GLENN
DARLENE J. GRAVETT
MARTY L. THOMAS
10/8/03
D. Rex Gleason, PE
Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
Dear Mr. Gleason;
P.O. B 0 X 1014 � �����
BOILING SPRINGS, N.C. 2r _ � A' 0.
Y�R
Ej
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone] SMIEs L OFFICE
OCT 0 9 2003
Subject- Notice of Deficiency
Compliance Inspection
Town of Boiling Springs
NPDES Permit No. NCO071943
Cleveland County, NC
MAX HAMRICK
Mayor
RICK HOWELL
Town Administrator
MARGRETTA McKEE
Clerk
This letter is written to address the two deficiencies noted during a State Inspection Oct.23, 2003
conducted by Wes Bell.
Mr. Bell noted in the April 2003 inspection, three times documentation was not properly
completed for Ph calibration, This deficiency has been corrected and the log will continue to be
monitored for accuracy.
The daily log sheet has been modified to include the Ph analysis time to insure the 15 minute 40
CPR regulation for hold time is verified and followed.
If you have any further questions concerning this letter or comments on this State Compliance
Inspection, please contact me at the WWTP 704-.434-5600.
Sincerely,
Charles Wiesner, ORC
cc_ Brian Alligood, Town Manager
Joey Gantt, Public Works Director
Wes Bell, Compliance Inspector

State of North Carolina G6
Department of Environment ii�L� ���('��-. •
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENR
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
September 10, 2003
Mr. Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs
PO Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Subject: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit NCO071943
Town of Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
Dear Mr. Wiesner:
Enclosed with this letter is a copy of the draft permit for your facility. Please review the draft very carefully
to ensure thorough understanding of the conditions and requirements it contains.
The draft permit contains the following significant change from your current permit:
➢ Daily maximum limits for ammonia nitrogen have been added to the permit. See the attached
ammonia policy memo for details.
Submit any comments to me no later than thirty days following your receipt of the draft. Comments should
be sent to the address listed at the bottom of this page. If no adverse comments are received from the public
or from you, this permit will likely be issued in November, with an effective date of December 1, 2003.
If you have any questions or comments concerning this draft permit, contact me at the telephone number or
e-mail address listed below.
cc: NPDES Unit
I�IVlooresville Regional Office /Water Quality Section
Sincerely,
Dawn]eff les
NPDES Unit 3C DEPT. OF ENVIRONRIFEW
AND NATI 'IESOURCES
OFFICE
I.
i
SEP 1 5 2003
WATER QUAUTY SECTIOR
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919 733-5083, extension 595 (fax) 919 733-0719
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer dawn.jeffries@ ncmail.net

Permit NCO071943
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PF.RMTT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other
lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended,
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Boiling Springs Waste Water Treatment Plant
2556 Rockford Road
Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
to receiving waters designated as Sandy Run Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on August 31, 2008.
Signed this day tbd.
Alan W. HIimek P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCO071943
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked.
As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective.
Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit
conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Town of Boiling Springs is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.60 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting
of the following:
♦ Mechanically cleaned bar screen and grit chamber
♦"Aeration basin with coarse bubble diffusers
♦ Two secondary clarifiers
♦ Scum and recycle pump stations
♦ Ultra -sonic flow meter
e UV disinfection
♦`I/Rectangular sludge digester?
♦ Emergency power generator
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Sandy Run Creek, classified C waters in the Broad River Basin.

N,
Latitude:
350 14' 46"
Longitude:
810 41' 33"
USGS Quad #:
G12NW
River Basin #:
03-08-04
Receiving Stream: Sandy Run Creek
Stream Class:
C
jo
v
17.
Mal b.
Boiling Springs VRM
Na071943
Cleveland County

Permit NCO071943
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration,
the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited
and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS,
_MONITORING RED IREMENTS -. "
-
Mopthly .
Average,
eklyl
�9ve ar ge:':
Daily
Maximum
easureent
Frequencyw
Sample
Type
�pleC�catio
Flow
0.60 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1 - October 31
15.0 mg/L
35.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
November 1 - March 31)
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine'
28pg/L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pHz
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Semi -Annual
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. Monitoring requirement and limit apply only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
HC DEPT. OF ENV1R01VMj h�T
August 19, 2003 Q9R�sATURAL RESOURCES
9p4
5013 3:FICE
Mr. Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
P.O. Box 1014 AUG 2 0 2003
Boiling Springs, NC 28017-
SUBJECT: Initial Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certificationp��
FIELD PARAMETERS ONLY QUALITY SECTIO�
Dear Mr. Wiesner:
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, in accordance with the
provisions of NC GS 143-215.3(a) (10), 15 NCAC 2H .0800, is pleased to certify your
laboratory to perform specified environmental analysis required by EMC monitoring and
reporting regulations 15 NCAC 2B .0500 and 2H .0900 and 2L .0100, .0200, .0300, and 2N
.0100 through .0800.
A certificate acknowledging the certification of your laboratory is enclosed for your use.
The certificate describes the requirements and limits of your certification. Please review this
certificate to insure that your laboratory is certified for all parameters required to properly
meet your certification needs.
Please contact us at 919-733-3908 if you have questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
Vames W. Meyer
Laboratory Section
Enclosure
cc: Chester E. Whiting
Mooresville Regional Office
N. C. Division of Water Quality Laboratory Section 1623 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1623
- NO iE N R
[phone]
FAX: [phone]

Certificate No. 5013
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF THE
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
LABORATORY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
In accordance with the provisions ofN.C.G.S. 143-215.3 (a) (1), 143-215.3 (a)(10) and NCAC 2H.0800:
Field Parameter Only
v tAf'Y 20 ryys � N
O
lS • 11 J I •S ~ 'f J
QLIAM
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP
Is hereby certified to perform environmental analysis as listed on Attachment I and report monitoring data to DWQ for
compliance with NPDES effluent, surface water, groundwater, and pretreatment regulations.
By reference 15A NCAC 2H .0800 is made a part of this certificate.
This certificate does not guarantee validity of data generated, but indicates the methodology, equipment, quality control procedures,
records, and proficiency of the laboratory have been examined and found to be acceptable.
This certificate shall be valid until December 31, 2003
-
James W. Meyer

ppppp�
Attachment I
North Carolina Wastewater/Groundwater Laboratory Certification
Certified Parameters Listing
Lab Name: Town of Boiling Springs WWTP Certificate Number: 5013
Address: P.O. Box 1014 Effective Date: 08/08/2003
Boiling Springs, NC 28017- Expiration Date: 12/31/2003
Date of Last Amendment: 08/19/2003
The above named laboratory, having duly met the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H.0800, is hereby certified for the measurement of the parameters listed below.
CERTIFIED PARAMETERS
INORGANICS
DISSOLVED OXYGEN �ii�i
Std Method 4500 O G FIELD PARAMETERS ON`T
pH
Std Method 4500 H B
TEMPERATURE
Std Method 2550B
This certification requires maintance of an acceptable quality assurance program, use of approved methodology, and satisfactory performance on evaluation samples. Laboratories are
subject to civil penalties and/or decertification for infractions as set forth in 15A NCAC 2H.0807.

Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. BOX 1014
BOILING SPRINGS, N.C. 28017
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM K. ELLIOTT, MAYOR PRO-TEM
JAMES L. BEASON, JR.
JOHN C. GLENN
DARLENE J. GRAVETT
MARTY L. THOMAS
Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs
PO Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
2/21/03
System Performance Annual Report
North Carlina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Popart:
Here is a copy of the Performance Annual Report from the Town of Boiling Springs.
MAX HAMRICK
Mayor
GREG McGINNIS
Town Administrator
-1
MARGRET,TA -McKEE
Cle�r.k
If you have any questions concerning this report, please call me at the WWTP 704-434-5600.
Sincerely,
Charles Wiesner
Wastewater Supervisor/ORC
cc: Joey Gantt Public Works Director
Greg Mc Ginnis Town Administrator
MGP 1 8 2003
4

Performance Annual Report
1. General Information
Facility/System Name: Town of Boiling Springs
Responsible Entity: Town of Boiling Springs
Person in Charge/Contact: Charles Wiesner
Applicable Permit(s): Wastewater Treatment Plant NC0071943
Wastewater Collection System No permit
Description of Collection System or Treatment Process:
The WWTP consists of two wastewater plants which egua1.600 MGD with clarifiers and UV
disinfection treatment.
The wastewater collection system has 20 to21 miles of lines with 12 wastewater pumping
stations Each Pumping station has and alarm system which will notify the Maintenance
Department of problems.
11. Performance
Text Summary of System Performance for Calender Year 2002
There were no violations at the WWTP during the Calender year of 2002. In November 2002 a
BOD effluent sample was not tested by the Lab because of a Lab. error. As of this date no
violations have been received.
In 2002 the Town has 4 reportable spills which to date the Town has not received a violation or
fine.
List (by month) any violations of permit conditions or other environmental regulations. Monthly
lists should include discussion of any environmental impacts and corrective measures taken to
address violations.
March This spill occurred at the Lyman Street Lift Station where 2,000 to 3,000 gallons of
untreated wastewater went into the Poplar Branch Creek. And electrical component went
bad in the control box. A bad connection in the phone line prevented the auto dialer

from dialing out. And inspection of the stream did not indicate a significant environmental
impact. The auto dialers of all lift stations are now being called on a regular basis.
June 10 to 15 gallons of untreated wastewater went into a drainage ditch on HWY 150. This
came from The Snack Shop Restaurant. This was due to and underground grease trap
leak along with an underground leaking pipe coming from a sink. A contractor replaced
the grease trap and underground sewer lines. No significant environmental impact
occurred because of this spill
Nov. Approximately 500 to 700 gallons of untreated wastewater went into and unnamed stream
in back of Wellington Hamrick Concrete Company. About 2,000 feet of the sewer line was
cleaned by a contractor. Root intrusion was the reason for the by pass at a manhole. The
Town is investigating the replacement of this sewer line. The small stream was visually
checked and fish were found swimming down stream from the spill. No environmental
impact was noted.
Dec. Approximately 400 to 500 gallon spill occurred at Dellwood Lift Station because of a
power failure. The Town used a tanker truck to pump the wetwell until the Town's
portable generator could be hooked up. The generator operated the lift stations until
power was restored by Duke Power. The stream was inspected with no significant impact
noted. This was reported to 1-800-858-0368 and received by Karen after 1700 hours.
111 Notification
State how this report has been made available to users or customers of the system and how those
users have been notified of its availability.
Notification of availability of this report will be printed on utility bills. Copies will be available at
the office on request. A copy is posted at the Town of Boiling Springs bulletin board.
IV. Certification
I certify under penalty of law that report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
I further certify that this report has been made available to the users or customers of the named
system and that those users have been notified of its availability.
CQ-Z,,I, b-�tit4,L--
Responsible Person
Title Wastewater System Supervisor/ORC
Entity Town of Boiling Springs
PO BOX 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
Phone [phone]
Date

TOWN OF BOILING. SPRINGS
P. 0. BOX 1014
BOILING SPRINGS, NC 28017
OFFICE HOURSA -5, NON-FRI
ACCT# 056700
BILLING DATE FEB 25, 2003
PRESENT READING FEB 14 552
PREVIOUS READING 552
CONSUMPTION 0
WATER CHARGE $ 0.00
C TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
P. 0. BOX 1014
1 PRESORTED I
BOILIIIG SPRINGS, NC
29017 (
FIRST-CLASS NAIL
I U.S. POSTAGE P4TD
I
T
BOILING SPRINGS; NC
PERMIT NO.
A 122 Victor Dr.
ACCTJ 056700
MAID, REMITTANCE TO ADDRESS
$ RETURN THIS STUB
ABOVE MUST BE RECEIVED BY 10TH
i WITH PAYMENT.
DRAFTING AVAIL. 704-434-2357
R
WATER CHARGE $
0.00
E
AMOUNT DUB MAR 10 0.00 ANT DUE MAR 10 $ 0.00
AFTER MAR 10 $ 0.00
VACANT
NOTICE: WASTEWATER PERFORMANCE ANNUAL REPORT
POSTED AT TOWN HALL.COPIES AVAIL UPON REQUEST BOILING SPRINGS, HC 99999

PV
Town of Boiling
Springs
P.O. BOX 1014'
BOILING SPRINGS, N.C.
28017
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
COMMISSIONERS
WILLIAM K. ELLIOTT, MAYOR PRO-TEM
BILL ELLIS
JOHN C. GLENN
DARLENE J. GRAVETT
MARTY L. THOMAS
Charles Wiesner
Town of Boiling Springs
PO BOX 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
4/3 0/01
System Performance Annual Report
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Mr. Popart:
MAX HAMRICK
Mayor
RICK HOWELL
Town Administrator
MARGRETTA McKEE
Clerk
N1
F E B 2 8 2002 =
Here is a copy of the Performance Annual Report from the Town of Boiling Springs. This report
is late in coming because of a misunderstanding on my part as to the date in which it needed to be
sent. You said there would be no penalty if you received it by the end of this week.
If you have questions regarding this letter please call me at 70-434-5600.
Sincerely,
Charles Wiesner Wastewater System Director
cc: Joey Gantt Public Works Director
Rick Howell Town Administrator
NC DI (-'PT. Orr �':�1�'t�tC NMAE'e 5
D LC 1 0 2002
3 • 1 R � f � 'c : �1µRl

Performance Annual Rep®n
1. General Information
Facility/System Name: Town of Boiling_ Springs
Responsible Entity: Town of Boiling Springs
Person in Charge/Contact: Charles Wiesner
Applicable Permit(s): Wastewater Treatment Plant NCO071943
Wastewater Collection System No permit
Description of Collection System or Treatment Process:
{'D � 2 � � W N
U F E B 2 8 2002
The WWTP consists of two wastewaterplants which equal .600 MGD.with clarifiers.and UV_.
disinfection treatment.
The wastewater collection system has 10-12 miles of lines with 5 wastewater pumpiinn ; stations. Each pumping station has and alarm system which will notify the Maintenance Department of
problems
11. Performance
Text Summary of System Performance for Calender Year 2001
There were no violations at the WWTP during the Calender year of 2001. A notice of violation
was written in 2001 for a fecal coliform violation which occurred in 2000 and did not result in a
The Town received a number of deficiencies in the wastewater collection system inspection.
List (by month) any violations of permit conditions or other environmental regulations. Monthly
lists should include discussion of any environmental impacts and corrective measures taken to
address violations.
May The Town received a number of deficiencies from the Lyman Street outfall line which will
be corrected by the replacement of this teracotta pipe line and manholes in 2002.

"qNq

The ductile iron line going across Poplar Branch Creek is partially submerged and will be
checked two or more times a year.
During the year 2001 the Town eliminated overflows at the Lyman Street pumping station
by by-passing the excess flows created by power failures and I & I problems into and
abandoned WWTP. The Town needs this by-pass in order to eliminate spills into a near
by creek. The wastewater contents is pumped back into the lift station wetwell when the
pumps can keep up with flow. Only a 15 to 20 minute hold time is available at this lift
station if a power failure should occur. A heavy rain will reduce this hold time.
I I I Notification
State how this report has been made available to users or customers of the system and how those
users have been notified of its availability.
Notification of availability of this report will be printed on utility bills. Copies will be available at
the office on request. A copy is posted at the Town of Boiling Springs bulletin board.
IV. Certification
I certify under penalty of law that report is complete and accurate to the best of my. knowledge.
I further certify that this report has been -made available to the.users or customers of the named
system and that those users have been notified of its availability.
/ 116 /6 -:2
Responsible Person - Date
Title Wastewater System Director
Entity Town of Boiling Springs
PO BOX 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
Phone [phone]

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
C
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
-------------------------
P. 0. BOX 1014
P. 0. BOX 1014
PRESORTED
BOILING SPRINGS, NC 28017
U
BOILING SPRINGS, NC
28017
FIRST-CLASS MAIL
U.S. POSTAGE PAID
OFFICE HOURS:8-5, MON-FRI
T
BOILING SPRINGS, NC
PERMIT NO. 3
ACCT# 040800
H
117 Pineland Ave.
-------------------------
BILLING DATE FEB 25, 2002
ACCT# 040800
NAIL
REMITTANCE TO ADDRESS
PRESENT READING FEB 15
1960
E�
RETURN THIS STUB
ABOVE
MUST BE RECEIVED BY 10TH
PREVIOUS READING
1960
WITH PAYMENT.
DRAFTING
AVAIL. 704-434-2357
CONSUMPTION
0
R,
WATER CHARGE $
0.00
WATER CHARGE $
0.00
E
AMOUNT DUE MAR 10 $
0.00
ANT DUE MAR 10 $
0.00
-
AFTER MAR 10
$
0,00
'
VACANT
NOTICE _WASTBWATBR,-RE RFORMANCE-ANNUAL,
REPORT
P.OSTBD;AT_TOWN HALL:. COPIBS.AVAII,-UPON.;RBQUEST
BOILING SPRINGS, NC 28017

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Rick Howell
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Dear Permittee:
RIZ E I V E'm"D
J U L 1 1 2002
NC DEPT. OF ENVI RIX0,kEINT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OrFrICE
July 2, 2002
10
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Notice of Expanded Renewal Requirements
NPDES Permit NCO071943
Boiling Springs WVUTP
Cleveland County
The subject permit expires on August 31, 2003. This advance notice is being sent to explain the new
requirements for your permit renewal application.
North Carolina Administrative Code (15A NCAC 2H.0105(e)) requires that an application for permit renewal
be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration of the current permit. To satisfy this requirement, your renewal package
should be sent to the Division postmarked no later than March 4, 2003. Failure to respond to this notice by March
4, 2003 may result in a civil penalty assessment or initiation of Denial proceedings for this permit. If any wastewater
discharge will occur after August 31, 2003 (or if continuation of the permit is desired), the current permit must be
renewed. Discharge of wastewater without a valid permit violates North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and
could result in assessment of civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day.
The U.S. EPA changed the application requirements (at 40 CFR 122) for municipal permits, effective August
1, 2001. EPA forms 1 and 2A are attached to this Notice, and must be used for your permit renewal application. To
accommodate the limited time between implementation of the new requirements and your permit renewal deadline,
the effluent testing requirements have been amended as follows:
1. Conduct two Priority Pollutant Analyses (PPAs) and submit results with your renewal application.
Collect samples for the PPAs in conjunction with sampling for your current quarterly toxicity test. The
new PPA requirements differ from previous versions. Each PPA must include:
➢ Analyses for all total recoverable metals listed in Part D of form 2A. This includes metals that are
not normally monitored through your NPDES permit.
➢ Analyses for total phenolic compounds and hardness.
➢ Analyses for all of the volatile organic compounds listed in Part D.
➢ Analyses for all of the acid -extractable compounds listed in Part D.
➢ Analyses for all base -neutral compounds listed in Part D.
2. Conduct three toxicity tests for an organism other than Ceiiodaphnia and submit results with your renewal
application. The tests should be conducted quarterly, with samples collected on the same day as your
current toxicity test. Call the Aquatic Toxicology Unit at [phone] for guidance in conducting the
additional tests.
These additional analyses must accompany your permit"renewal application, or any request for a major permit
modification. The Division cannot draft your permit without the additional data. Any data submitted cannot be
over 41/2. years old.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919 733-5083, extension 511 (fax) 919 733-0719
VIS[T Us ON THE INTERNET @ hftp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES [e-mail]

Permit NCO071943
Boiling Springs WWTP
If all wastewater discharge has ceased at your facility and you wish to rescind this permit, contact Bob Sledge
of the Division's Compliance Enforcement Unit at [phone], extension 547. You may also contact the
Mooresville Regional Office at [phone] to begin the rescission process.
Use the enclosed checklist to complete your renewal package. The checklist identifies the items you must
submit with the permit renewal application. If you have any questions, please contact me. My telephone number, fax
number and e-mail address are listed at the bottom of the previous page.
Sincerely,
Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
NPDES Unit
cc: Central Files
M .t,resville R anal[CJ'fh N&Oter eualitM Section
NPDES File
The following items are REQUIRED for all renewal packages:
❑ A cover letter requesting renewal of the permit and documenting any changes at the facility since issuance of the
last permit. Submit one signed original and two copies.
❑ The completed application form (copy attached), signed by the permittee or an Authorized Representative.
Submit one signed original and two copies.
❑ If an Authorized Representative (such as a consulting engineer or environmental consultant) prepares the renewal
package, written documentation must be provided showing the authority delegated to the Authorized
Representative (see Part II.B.11.b of the existing NPDES permit).
❑ A narrative description of the sludge management plan for the facility. Describe how sludge (or other solids)
generated during wastewater treatment are handled and disposed. If your facility has no such plan (or the
permitted facility does not generate any solids), explain this in writing. Submit one signed original and two
copies.
PLEASE NOTE:
Due to a change in fees effective July 1, 1999, there is no renewal fee required with
your application package.
Send the completed renewal package to:
Mrs. Valery Stephens
NC DENR / Water Quality / Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

F 0 VV ATich
F Mael .F. Easley
Governor
aWilliam G. Ross, Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
April 9, 2001
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Manager
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Subject: Notice of Violation
GS 143-215.1(a)(6)
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO071943
Cleveland County, NC
Dear Mi. Howell:
Enclosed is a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report for the inspection
conducted at the subject facility on February 7, 2001 by Ms. Linda Love and Mr. Richard Bridgemai
of this Office. Please inform the facility's Operator -in -Responsible Charge of our findings by
forwarding a copy of the enclosed report.
This Report is being issued as a Notice of Violation (NOV) because of a violation of the
subject permit and North Carolina General Statuw (G.S.) 143-215.1, as detailed under the Self -
Monitoring Program heading. The cited violation had not .previously been cited under either an
NOV or a civil penalty assessment document. Pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6A, a civil penalty of not
more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) may be assessed against any person who
violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of any permit issued
pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1. Should this Office make an enforcement recommendation relative to
the violations, you will be advised in writing.
f,ICD:-::NR
Customer Service Mooresville Regional Office, 919 North Mac Sweet, Mooresville, NC 28115 PHONE [phone]
1 800 623-7748 FAX [phone]

Town of Boiling Springs WWTP
Page Two
The Town has a comprehensive record keeping system and the facility was well maintained.
The inspection did not disclose any deficiencies other than those summarized under the Self -
Monitoring Program heading. It is not requested that a response be submitted; however, should you
have additional information concerning the violations or comments which you wish to present,
please submit them to the attention of Mr. Richard Bridgeman.
The report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning
this report, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Lone or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality- Regional Supervisor
Enclosure
cc: Cleveland County Health Department
Maurice Horsey/EPA
LL

US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 20460 Form Approved.
OMB No.2040-0057
A Water Compliance Inspection Report fii�� . Approval Expires 8-31-98
g NC Division of Water Quality / Mooresville Regional Office NCQENR -
•rs" �� x.3� •..t-� - „3•tic, ..y Y- y :tY- ��� � .-.rij.-� .".' r z aro; E `F�c
Transaction Code NPDES No. Yr/Mo/Day Inspection Type Inspector Facility Type
N 5 NCO071943 01-2-7 C S 1
Remarks:
Inspection Work Days Facility Evaluation Rating BI QA ..........Reserved...........
1 y, 4 N N
.. 'Section Z: F&6dity Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected: Entry Time: Permit Effective Date:
Town of Boiling Springs 1:00 pm 1-1-99
2556 Rockford Road
Cleveland County, North Carolina Exit Time/Date: Permit Expiration Date:
2:30 pm 8-31-03
Name(s) of On -Site Representative(s)/Title(s)/Phone No(s)/Fax No(s):
Mr. Charles Wiesner/ORC/704-434-5600
Mr.. Terry Price/Back-up ORC/704-434-5600
Name and Address of Responsible Official: Title: Town Manager
Mr. Rick Howell
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014 Phone No: 704-434-2357 Contacted? No
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
:Section C AreasEvaluated`Du�ingInspec#ion.(Check only."those areassevaluated):=s
_.
X Permit X Flow Measurement X Operations & Maintenance X Sewer Overflow
X Records/Reports X Self -Monitoring Program X Sludge Handling/Disposal Pollution Prevention
X Facility Site Review Compliance Schedules Pretreatment Multimedia
X Eftluent/Receiving Waters Laboratory Storm Water Other:
,`,.' Section.D:,Summa y of3~indings/Comments - .
See Attached Sheet(s) for Summary.
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspectors:
11
'Linda L.Iowveee
Signature of Management QA Reviewer:
Agency/Office/Telephone No:
NCDWQ/MOORESN-ILLE/[phone]
Agency/Office/Phone & Fax No:
Date:
April 5, 2001
Date:
Date:
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev. 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP NCO071943
Page Two
The facility was last inspected by Mr. Wes Bell of this office on October 25, 1999.
PERMIT
The permit for this facility became effective on January 1,1999 and expires on August 31,
2003. A permit modification was issued August 23.1999 correcting the permit number on the
Effluent Limitations and Monitoring requirements pages in the current permit.
FACILITY SITE REVIEW
The existing facility is a 0.60 MGD waste'"rater treatment system. It is located on
Rockford Road in Boiling Springs, Cleveland County. This facility consists of the following:
-rotary screening
-grit chamber
-dual aeration basins with diffused aeration
-dual secondary clarifiers
-ultrasonic flow meter
-ultraviolet disinfection
-three sludge digesters
-standby power
The effluent from the facility is discharged into Sandy Run Creek which a Class C water
in the Broad River Basin.
RECORDS/REPORTS
Records and reports reviewed during the inspection include the following:
-ORC log
-daily operation log & process control data
-calibration data'
-process control data
-monthly monitoring reports
-chain-of-custody forms
-laboratory analyses
-flow charts
All records reviewed were kept in accordance with permit requirements.

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP NCO071943
Page Three
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
The process units appeared to be operating properly and the surrounding grounds were
well maintained. The mixed liquor suspended solids were well mixed with adequate dissolved
oxygen. Screenings and grit are disposed at the county landfill. The back-up generator is well
maintained and serviced. The generator is tested weekly. The weirs were not level on one of the
clarifiers, resulting in very little or no flow on one side.
The process control program of the aeration basin consists of pH, DO, temperature,
centrifuge measurements, settleability tests, and clarifier sludge blanket measurements. Sludge
wasting is based on the centrifuge measurements. Polymer is being added to aid in settling and
lime is sometimes added for pH adjustment in the aeration basin or sludge digester.
The facility is staffed with one Grade III ORC (Operator -in -Responsible Charge). A
certified back-up ORC has been designated and is available when the ORC is unable to visit the
facility.
A pilot study was discussed during the time of the inspection that would involve sampling
of Total Residual Chlorine in the effluent to determine if chlorine used on the clarifiers for algae
control alters Total Residual Chlorine levels in the effluent. Results of this study will determine
if sampling for TRC is necessary considering the facility has a 28 micrograms/liter limit and
ultraviolet disinfection.
The collection system consists of five lift stations that are equipped with telemetry and
audio/visual alarm systems. The lift stations are inspected weekly. A maintenance log is kept at
each lift station. A portable back-up generator is available. A comprehensive spill response
plan has been developed for the Town.
FLOW MEASUREMENT
Effluent flow is measured by a continuous recording flow meter with totalizer and chart
recording. The flow meter is calibrated twice per year by Johnston, .Inc., of Indian Trail, North
Carolina. The flow meter was last calibrated on November 8, 2000.
EFFLUENT/RECEIVING WATERS
At the time of inspection, the effluent was clear with no visible solids or foam. The
receiving stream did not appear to be adversely impacted by the discharge.

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP NCO071943
Page Four
Laboratory analyses for BOD, TSR, and ammonia are performed by Pace Analytical
Services, Inc. (Certification # 40) of Asheville, North Carolina. The laboratory was not
evaluated during this inspection. A laboratory exemption for pH and total residual chlorine
(TRC) was issued on February 27,1997 by the Division's Laboratory Certification Unit. Influent
and Effluent Composite samples are collected proportional to flow.
The thermometer used for measuring temperature is checked annually with a NIST
traceable certified thermometer. Fecal coliform samples are collected in a sterile container.
SELF -MONITORING PROGRAM
Self -monitoring data was evaluated for January through December 2000. Monthly
monitoring frequencies are maintained. Monthly monitoring reports are completed correctly.
One weekly average Fecal Coliform was exceeded in March. No other limit violations were
reported during the review period.
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
The ORC occasionally transports sludge to the City of Shelby WWTP for disposal. In
addition, Harris Septic Tank Service is also contracted to remove digested sludge on an as -
needed basis to the Shelby WWTP. Land application number QW0017442. A non -discharge
inspection conducted by Ms. Ellen Huffman of this Office in July 2000.
SEWER OVERFLOW
Please be advised that pursuant to Part II, Section E of your NPDES permit, and North
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 15A 2B .0506 (a)(2), any failure of a collection system,
pumping station or treatment facility resulting in a bypass without treatment of all or any portion
of the wastewater shall be reported to the appropriate regional office (Mooresville Regional
Office at 704-663-1699) as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours from the time the
permittee became aware of the bypass. Overflows and spills occurring outside normal business
hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency Response personnel at 800-662-7956,
800-852-0368, or 919-733-3300. A written report shall also be provided within five (5) days of
the time of the incident. The written report shall contain a description of the
bypass, and its cause; the period of the bypass, including exact dates and times, and if the bypass
has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken (or
planned) to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurrence of similar events.

FIV
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS WWTP NCO071943
Page 5
SEWER OVERFLOW CONTINUED ...
Any spill that reaches surface waters (i.e. any spill that reaches any water already present
in a conveyance, stream, ditch, etc...) or any spill greater than 1,000 gallons on the ground that
does not reach surface waters must be reported.
An adequate spill response for those spills reaching surface waters should include an
evaluation downstream of the point at which the spill entered surface waters to determine if a fish
kill occurred. The evaluation should also include the collection of upstream dissolved oxygen
and pH measurements for background information and dissolved oxygen and pH measurements
at multiple points downstream of the entry point to document any negative impact. Failure to
report the bypass of a collection system, pumping station or treatment facility subjects violators
to penalties of up to $25,000 per day per violation.

A 7— r. Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
�I 7
GregoryJ. Thorpe, Ph.D.
> „ ^i Acting Director
S7 Division of Water Quality
.. .. .�. - •�' '4.i irk' -
November 15, 2001
The Honorable Max J. Hamrick, Mayor
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
a;��l}: � _:_�?�•s.:�.° � -. it
Town of Boiling Springs
Approval of Addendum No. 2
Lyman Street Outfall Replacement
Project No. E-SEL-T-01-0034
0 200
Reference is made to Addendum No. 2, received November 15, 2001, from the Engineer,
Mr. Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E., West and Associates, P.A., for revisions to the subject project.
The proposed addendum, as described in the attachment, has been reviewed by this office
and is hereby approved, and eligible for State Emergency Loan funding in accordance with the
loan offer and conditions, thereof.
The approval of this addendum does not constitute any change in the amount of your
funding for this project.
It is the responsibility of the recipient and the consulting engineer to ensure that the
project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N.C.G.S. 133-3 (ratified
July 13, 1993). The administrative review and approval of addenda do not imply approval of a
restrictive specification for bidding purposes; nor is it an authorization for noncompetitive
procurement actions.
Adequate time must be allowed for the potential bidders and this office to receive and act
on addenda prior to the receipt of bids for subject project.
A copy of the approved addendum is attached for your files, and one (1) copy retained for
our files.
r
RI.. EIER i K.
Construction Grants and Loans Section 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone] Customer Service
E-Mail Address www.nccgi.net FAX [phone] 623-7748

- 2-
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Ishwar Devkota,
P.E. at [phone].
Sincerely,
} � �.
" rz' �?J17
Cecil G. Madden, Jr. . E., SupervMr
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Attachment
ICD:dr
cc: West and Associates, P.A. (Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.)
fflM-0 o irlle�R�eg� __ F l df a ele
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Valerie Lancaster
Don Evans
Ishwar C. Devkota, P.E.
CIU
DMU
SEL

WAr^
CR Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
.,Quality
September 26, 2001
The Honorable Max Hamrick, Mayor
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
OCT 0 1 Mt;
t[A I
Town of Boiling Springs
Permit No. WQ0020244
Wastewater Transmission Facilities
Project No. E-SEL-T-0 1 -0034
Cleveland County
In accordance with your application received June 20, 2001, we are forwarding herewith
Permit No. WQ0020244 dated September 26, 2001, to the Town of Boiling Springs for the
construction and operation of the subject sewer lines.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded, and shall be subject
to the conditions and limitations as specified therein.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable to you, you
have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 150B of North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N. C. 27699-6714. Unless such demands are made,
this permit shall be final and binding.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted facility has
been installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Mail the Certification to
the Non -Discharge Branch, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.
(Engineer's Certification Form is attached.)
One (1) set of final approved plans and specifications is to be forwarded to you, one (1) set
retained for the. Construction Inspection Unit, and one (1) set retained for the SEL file.
Construction Grants and Loans Section 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone]
E-Mail Address www.nccgi.net FAX (919) 71S-6229
#4: c7��ppyy
�r�UL
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by the Owner for
the life of the project.
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Cecil G. Madden, Jr.,
P. E. at [phone].
Sincerely,
111r-
Gregory J. Thorpe
Acting Director
Attachment to All
ICD:dr
cc: West and Associates, P.A. (Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.)
0'! �,,�res7 �al17 077 , na M
Cleveland County Health Department
Non -Discharge Unit
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Don Evans
Ishwar C. Devkota, P.E.
CIU
DMU
SEL

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH
WASTEWATER COLLECTION PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North
Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Town of Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
FOR THE
construction and operation of approximately Q85 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer outfall
replacement with no increase in discharge of collected domestic wastewater into the Town of
Boiling Springs existing sewerage system, pursuant to the application received June 20, 2001,
and in conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other supporting data subsequently
filed and approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and considered a
part of this permit.
This Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until rescinded, and shall be
subject to the following conditions and limitations:
1. This permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with
the conditions of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting
data.
2. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes described in
the application and other supporting data.
3. The facilities must be properly maintained and operated at all times.
4. The sewage and wastewater collected by this system shall be treated in the Town of
Boiling Springs Wastewater Treatment Facility prior to being discharged into the receiving

67hh,
stream.
5. This permit is not transferable. In the event there is a desire for the facilities to change
ownership, or there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal permit request must be
submitted to the Division of Water Quality (Division) accompanied by an application fee,
documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting materials as may be
appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or may
not be approved.
6. Construction of the sewers shall be scheduled so as not to interrupt service by the existing
utilities nor result in an overflow or bypass discharge of wastewater to the surface waters
of the State.
7. Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted
facility has been installed in accordance with this permit, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials. If this project is to be completed in phases
and partially certified, you shall retain the responsibility to track further construction
approved under the same permit, and shall provide a final certificate of completion once
the entire project has been completed. Mail the Certification to the Non -Discharge Branch,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617. (Engineer's Certification
Form is attached.)
A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by the
Permittee for the life of the project.
9. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may subject the
Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division, in accordance with North Carolina
General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
10. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with any and
all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by other government
agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
11. In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action, including those
as may be required by this Division, such as the construction of additional or replacement
wastewater collection facilities.
12. The facilities shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the North
Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
13. Any abandoning of the existing facilities must be done in accordance with the
requirements of the Division of Water Quality's Mooresville Regional Office.

NONCOMPLIANCE NOTIFICATION:
14. The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Mooresville Regional Office, telephone
number [phone], as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24 hours or on the
next working day following the occurrence or first knowledge of the occurrence of either
of the following:
a. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons, that renders the facility
incapable of adequate wastewater transport, such as mechanical or electrical failures
of pumps, line blockage or breakage, etc.; or
b. Any failure of a sewer line resulting in a by-pass directly to receiving waters without
treatment of all or any portion of the influent to such station or facility.
Persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall also file a written report in letter
form within five (5) days following first knowledge of the occurrence. This report must
outline the actions taken or proposed to be taken to ensure that the problem does not recur.
Permit issued this the 26th day of September, 2001.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
69ory J. Thorpe, Actin rector
,ision of Water Quality
Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit No. WQ0020244

Permit No. WQ0020244
Non -Discharge Permit
Town of Boiling Springs
ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in
the State of North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/weekly/full time)
the construction of the Boiling Springs Sanitary Sewer System serving the Lyman Street area,
located in Cleveland County, hereby state that to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence
was used in the observation of the following construction:
approximately 6285 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer outfall replacement with no
increase in discharge of collected domestic wastewater into the Town of Boiling Springs
existing sewerage system, pursuant to the application received June 20, 2001, and in
conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other supporting data subsequently
filed and approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and
considered a part of this permit.
I certify that the construction of the above referenced project was observed to be built within
substantial compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
Signature
Date
Registration No.
Mail this Certification to: DENR/DWQ
Non -Discharge Branch
1617 Mail Service Center.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.

Michael F. Easley, Governor
} William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
—} Acting Director
G Division of Water Quality
NC DEPT. OF EV.OROS AKWT
September 26, 2001 �;oO�tcSu;LLt= r�r
r;K C
The Honorable Max Hamrick, Mayor OCT 0 1 2001
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBiEri T : Town of Boiling Springs
Lyman Street Outfall Replacement
Approval of the Plans and Specifications
Project Number: E-SEL-T-01-0034
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
The review for completeness and adequacy of the project construction plans and
specifications has, been concluded by the Construction Grants & Loans Section of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality.
Therefore, said plan documents are hereby approved with eligibility for State Emergency
Loan funding determined as follows:
Eligible
Approximately 6285 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer outfall replacement including 27
manholes and reconnection of services.
Issuance of this approval letter does riot imply availability of funding. You are
encouraged not to advertise for bids until you have received the funding offer. In the event that
received bids exceed the amount established through the funding offer, and local funds are not
adequate to award contract(s), it will be necessary to consider all alternatives including redesign,
re -advertising, and rebidding.
Neither the State nor Federal Government, nor any of their departments, agencies or
employees are or will be a party to the invitation to bids, addenda, any resulting contracts or
contract negotiations/changes.
In accordance with the Federal Regulations, the Recipient is required to assure
compliance with the OSHA safety regulations on the subject project. In complying with this
regulatory responsibility, the Recipient should, by letter, invite the Training Officer, Standards
Analysis and Publications Unit, NC OSHA Division, 4 W. Edenton Street, Raleigh, NC 27601,
Construction Grants and Loans Section 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone]
E-Mail Address www.nccgi.net FAX [phone]
.0
>_ A
'~!t� ffE
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

(telephone [phone]), to participate in the Preconstruction Conference to assure that proper
emphasis is given on understanding and adhering to the OSHA regulations.
It is the responsibility of the Recipient and the Consulting Engineer to insure that the
project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N. C. G. S. 133-3 (ratified
July 13, 1993). The administrative review and approval of these plans and specifications, and
any subsequent addenda or change order, do not imply approval of a restrictive specification for
bidding purposes; nor is it an authorization for noncompetitive procurement actions.
Any addenda to be issued for subject project plans and specifications must be submitted
by the Recipient such that adequate time is allowed. for review/approval action by the State, and
for subsequent bidder action prior to receipt of bids.
It is mandatory for project facilities to be constructed in accordance with the North
Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, and, when applicable, the North Carolina Dam
Safety Act. In addition, the specifications must clearly state what the contractors' responsibilities
shall be in complying with these Acts.
While rejection of all bids is possible, such action may be taken only with prior State
concurrence, and only for good cause.
The Recipient will comply with the utilization of minority businesses in accordance with
GS 143-128.
Attached is a form (Part B) which is to be completed within twenty-one (21) days after
bids have been received, and submitted to the State for review. It must be accompanied by the
documents indicated on the form. Upon review and approval of this information, the State will
authorize the Recipient to make the proposed award.
Prior to entering into any contract(s) for construction, the Recipient must have obtained
all applicable project permits from the State, including an Authorization to Construct and/or Non
Discharge Permit.
Two (2) copies of any change order must be promptly submitted by the Recipient to the
State. If additional information is requested by the State, a response is required within two (2)
weeks, or the change order will be returned without further or final action.
One (1) set of the final approved plans and specifications will be forwarded to you. One
(1) set of plans and specifications identical to the approved set must be available at the project
site at all times.
Upon completion of the project construction, the Recipient shall submit a letter
confirming that the project has been constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications
approved by the State. "As -built" plans will need to be submitted with any changes color -coded
on the plans if the above confirmation cannot be made.

If there are any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E. at [phone].
Sincere y,
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Attachment
ICD:dr
cc: West'and Associates, P.A. (Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.)
WW Mo_or�si�l'le '.e; ,zc►nal �f
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Valerie Lancaster
Don Evans
Ishwar C. Devkota, P.E.
OSHA Training Officer
CIU
DMU
SEL

F Vd A TF
�r
Yj y''•v��.^
r'>
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
VC DEPT.trr
September 17, 2001 ', '' - lc`
FV
SEP 7 9 2001
The Honorable Max J. Hamrick, Mayor
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Approval
Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report (November, 2000)
Project Number: E-SEL-T-01-0034
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
The Construction Grants and Loans Section of the Division of Water Quality has
completed its review of the subject Preliminary Engineering Report. The project consists of
replacing approximately 6,500 linear feet of existing 8-inch diameter gravity sewer line with new
8-inch sewer line and associated manholes and site work. The estimated project cost is $403,000
and will be funded by a State Emergency Loan.
The subject Boiling Springs Preliminary Engineering Report is hereby approved.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Larry Horton, P.E.
of our staff at [phone].
Sincerely,
ellz�l
John R. Blowe, P. E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
DMB/dr
cc: West & Associates, P. A.
"�lo�� V131 l
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Don Evans
PMB/DMU/FEU/SEL
Construction Grants and Loans Section 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone]
E-Mail Address vwwv.nccgl.net FAX [phone]
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748

OF NN A r§ Michael F. Easley, Governor
_. William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
t f_ GregoryJ. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Acting Director
'C Division of Water Quality
November 1, 2001 T!C CEP'r. Or "E
i circa s:zn%:e
The Honorable Max J. Hamrick, Mayor
Town of Boiling Springs NOV 0 5 2001
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
td r.;, ... r
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Approval of Addendum No. 1
Lyman Street Outfall Replacement
Project No. E-SEL-T-01-0034
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
Reference is made to Addendum No. 1, received October 30, 2001, from the Engineer,
Mr. Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E., West and Associates, P.A., for revisions to the subject project.
The proposed addendum, as described in the attachment, has been reviewed by this office
and is hereby approved, and eligible for State Emergency Loan funding in accordance with the
loan offer and conditions, thereof.
The approval of this addendum does not constitute any change in the amount of your
funding for this project.
It is the responsibility of the recipient and the consulting engineer to ensure that the
project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N.C.G.S. 133-3 (ratified
July 13, 1993). The administrative review and approval of addenda do not imply approval of a
restrictive specification for bidding purposes; nor is it an authorization for noncompetitive
procurement actions.
Adequate time must be allowed for the potential bidders and this office to receive and act
on addenda prior to the receipt of bids for subject project.
A copy of the approved addendum is attached for your files, and one (1) copy retained for
our files.
��i+
��
Construction Grants and Loans Section 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone] Customer Service
E-Mail Address www.nccgi.net FAX [phone] SOD 623.7748

- 2-
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Ishwar Devkota,
P.E. at [phone].
Sincerely,
Cecil G. 4adden, Jr
/ Al%
L'�
P. E., Supervisor
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Attachment
ICD:dr
cc: West and Associates, P.A. (Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.)
a W i1 m ��5o5 511,.° : g l dfice
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Valerie Lancaster
Don Evans
Ishwar C. Devkota, P.E.
CIU
DMU
SEL

Michael F. Easley
ppn7"�Q
r Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., G Secretary
y Department of Environment and Natural Resources
> Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
May 21, 2001
Honorable Max Hamrick, Mayor
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014 MAY 2 2 2001
SUBJECT: Review Comments on Plans and Specifications
Town of Boiling Springs
Lyman Street Outfall Replacement
Project No. E-SEL-T-01-0034
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
A review of the plans and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs, Lyman Street
Outfall Replacement, has been completed by the Construction Grants and Loans Section. The
comments resulting from this review are being transmitted directly to your engineer for
clarification and resolution; a copy is attached for your reference. Our current goal is to approve
the plans and specifications in the month of July, 2001. A thorough and timely response is
necessary in order to accomplish this goal.
Upon receipt of satisfactory responses from your engineer to our comments, the review of
the plan documents will be completed. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
do not hesitate to contact Mr. Ishwar Devkota, P.E., the State Project Review Engineer, at (919)
715-6222.
Sincerely,
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E., fSupervigor
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
ICD/dr
Attachment (To All cc's)
cc: WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A. (Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.)
1Mr�CSui!1�leill��e�i�al_�ff cep,
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
4ss Ishwar Devkota, P.E.
�� Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.
'."+E�DENR AFT -
Customer Service Construction Grants & Loans 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone]
1 800 623-7748 FAX [phone] Internet Address: www.nccgl.net

0
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
Comments on Plans and Specifications
Town of Boiling Springs
Lyman Street Outfall Replacement
Project No. E-SEL-T-01-0034
(Please also refer to our previous comments of June 28, 1999)
General Comments:
Since, this entire project is not identical replacements of sewer lines in the same design
conditions (same location and alig,:ment), a new permit is required. Provide a
completed non -discharge permit application with the $400 application fee.
2. Bid item for gravity sewer line installation and/or replacement should be clarified.
3. Construction easement must be shown on the plans for entire portions of the project
including on plan sheet 6 of 9.
Plan Review Comments
Provide State Emergency Loan Project Number E-SEL-T-0 1 -0034 on first sheet of plans and
first sheet of specifications.
Sheet 3
1. The data associated with the spur line 18-1 appears to be incorrect. Invert out elevation
taken appears to be at the old manhole.
2. Provide a profile for spur line between MH-18-1 to MH-N-5.
Sheet 4
1. Exact location of the 6" water line must be verified in the field and a minimum vertical
separation must be maintained from the sewer line.
2. Stationing for manhole N-11 is labeled incorrectly as shown in profile view.
Sheet 6
Provide a profile for spur line between MH-A-21 to MH-A-2.
0

F WATE
0 9 Michael F. Easley
Governor
Cq William G. Ross, Jr.,Secretary
> North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
p `C Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
April 18, 2001
Mr. Richard Howell, Jr.,Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, N.C. 28017
Subject: State Emergency Loan Application
Lyman Street Sewer Collection System
Cleveland County, NC -
Dear Mr. Howell:
This is to inform you that the Mooresville Regional Office has received your letter dated April
12, 2001 regarding a State Emergency Loan to address I/I problems at the Lyman Street lift station and
subject sewer collection system. Your letter is being forwarded to Construction Grants and Loans for
their review. Required comments regarding this matter will be provided if requested by Construction
Grants and Loans. Should ,you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact Mr. Don Price or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Construction Grants and Loans Section
Cleveland County Health Department
M
AZA
�1CDENR
Customer Service Mooresville Regional Office, 919 North Main Street, Mooresville, NC 28115 PHONE [phone]
1 800 623-7748 FAX [phone]

Q�Michael F. Easley
�TF,Q Governor
\C) a ;�G William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
7 Department of Environment and Natural Resources
f
{ Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
OFF
March 7, 2001
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Howell:
Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
The Construction Grants and Loans Section has completed a preliminary review of the
subject Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) dated November 2000 that was received February
6, 2001. Because an application for a State Revolving Fund loan has been submitted for this
project, the PER should be revised and resubmitted as an Engineering Amendment to the Town's
201 Facilities Plan. When the report has been revised, three (3) copies of the Engineering
Amendment should be submitted for our review and approval.
If there are questions concerning this review, you may contact me at [phone].
Sipcerely,
K. Lawrence Horton, III, P.E.
Supervisor`
Facilities Evaluation Unit
KLH:pe
cc: Chester West, P.E., West and Associates
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
V V V Reginald Sutton, PhD.
I&
^.DE5. DMU/FEU/PMB/SRG
Customer Service Construction Grants & Loans 1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 [phone]
1 800 623-7748 FAX [phone] Internet Address: www.nccgi.net

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
October 30, 2000
4
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 10
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Subject: Technical Assistance Visit
Boiling Springs WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO071943
Cleveland County
Dear Mr. Howell:
A technical assistance visitation was conducted at the Boiling Springs Wastewater
Treatment Plant on October 26, 2000. The primary focus of the visit was to identify
areas that may help to enhance the treatment process and to offer assistance to the
operator concerning effluent appearance and quality. As a result of the visit, the
following comments and/or suggestions are offered. Please note that these are only
suggestions that may help in the performance of this facility.
1. The results from performing a settleometer test on each aeration tank indicated that
the supernatant was cloudy and the solids settling was very fast. This normally
indicates an older sludge and wasting should be increased in order to decrease the
Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids (MLSS) concentration. As was discussed on -site,
wasting should be done over a period of a week instead of all at one time; this will
help to prevent shocks to the system. The amount of wasting should be determined
by the process analyses performed on the mixed liquor. Although, the settleometer
test showed an older sludge, it appeared to be rather thin in the clarifier's return
sludge line, this appears to be due to the clarifier scum lines being tied in to the
RAS line. Observations of the secondary clarifier's indicated small particles of
ash -like material floating on the surface of each clarifier and in the mixed liquor
settleability test (refered to as ashing). This is an indication of excessive amounts
of grease entering the collection system and WWTP. It is suggested that the Town
conduct an industrial waste survey and enforce their sewer use ordinance
concerning oil & grease being discharged to the system. Oil & Grease
accumulation can interfere with the diffusers of the aeration system and can also
coat UV disinfection bulbs affecting their proper operation.
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEM OPERATORS CERTIFICATION COMMISSION
161E MAIL SERVICE. CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1618
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

2. Results from checking dissolved oxygen in both aeration basins indicated a DO of .8 mg/L in
the new aeration basin and a DO of 3.1 mg/L in the Aeromod basin. Each basin should have a
more comparable level of DO. This can create problems in settling by having the potential of
shearing the floc from the basin with the higher DO level. The flow between the basins should be
equalized to aid in equalizing the influent load and the RAS from the secondary. clarifiers, since
they are joined together in the influent channel to the aeration basins. Lowering the RAS rate can
also aid some in correcting this, but should be evaluated on a daily basis as to the need to raise or
lower the RAS rate.
3. It is recommended that additional process control analyses be run on a routine basis. Process
control data can be very helpful to an operator in determining plant changes and unusual situations
within the process. Mixed liquor suspended solids, centrifuges, settleometers, pH, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen should be analyzed on a regular schedule. This data should be recorded in
detail, so it can be referred to in the future when needed. The Technical Assistance and
Certification Unit would be happy to provide the test procedure for these analyses if you so desire.
4. Clarifiers are very temperamental and care must be given by the operator to insure calm
conditions. I would suggest developing some standard operating procedure (SOP) for these units.
Unfortunately, it will take some trial and error by the operator to discover the best operating
location for their telescopic valves. Different settings may be necessary during the course of the
day, and may aid in correcting DO levels along with varying the RAS rate to the aeration basins.
5. Lastly, I suggest that the staffing of the WWTP be re-evaluated. At the present time there is one
full time person and one part-time person for the WWTP.Should problems arise or there is a crisis
situation there could possibly not be enough staff to control the situation. I am enclosing with this
letter a copy of the chapter on "Evaluating Staffing Needs" from the EPA guide Management of
Small to Medium Sized Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants, which may prove beneficial to
the operation of the WWTP.
The observations outlined above are those that were the most apparent in contributing to the plant's
noncompliance. It is hoped that these observations and suggestions will assist you in operating
your wastewater facility. Please call me, at (919)-733-0026 ext. 339, to schedule a follow-up visit
or if you should have any questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
,P stv�a 1q,
Donald R. Price, WWTP Consultant
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
cc:oorsutz�IleiR_eggona_l��ffice_
Tony Honeycutt
Charlie Weisner
Central Files
TAC Files

Division of Water Quality
Technical Assistarm & Ceriiiicatwn :rrk
219 E North Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
MANAGEMENT OF
SMALL -TO -MEDIUM SIZED
MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS
by
Culp/Wesner/Culp-Clean Water Consultants
Box 40
E1 Dorado Hills, CA 95630
Contract No. 68-01-4917
EPA
Project Officer
Lehn Potter
July, 1979
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF WATER PROGRAM OPERATIONS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

EVALUATING STAFFING NEEDS
GENERAL
CONSIDERATIONS
— Understaffing
— Overstaffing
— Contracting
services
CERTIFICATION
PROGRAM
— Mandatory
—Voluntary
— Advantage
DETERMINING
STAFF SIZE-
- Labor
requirements
— Level of
utilization
— Classification
— Shifts
TRAINING PROGRAMS
— Tes:
VPreparatory
Skill management
Skill improvement
— On th.e job
— Miscelleneous
DETERMINING THE
QUALIFICATIONS
AND SKILLS NEEDED
— Organization charts
— Job descriptions
SAFETY PROGRAMS
—Responsibi!ities:
Provide safe place
Provide safe tools &
equipment
Hire qualified personnel
Train workers in safe
practices
—Accident report forms

SECTION 7
EVALUATING STAFFING NEEDS
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Selecting the right sized staff with the proper skills is critical. Under -
staffing may eventually cause increased costs from lack of needed maintenance,
poor treatment process performance, and poor morale among employees who are over-
worked. Overstaffing is expensive. Layoffs of extra staff are not only painful to
the individuals who lose their jobs, but are also expensive. You may have spent a
lot of time and money to train the employee. Deciding who is going to be laid off
often runs into personnel complications, union rules, and union contract condi-
tions. Reductions in staff may cause strikes and other disruptions and troubles.
Unemployment compensation may be costly. Both hiring and firing are costly.
For all of these reasons, use great care before you establish any new posi-
tion that might become a "permanent" one. When there is any doubt, either don't
create the position or establish it on a temporary basis. When a position becomes
vacant, ask yourself if the position is really necessary. Consider these
factors:
• Conservation of manpower
• Elimination of unnecessary work
• Full use of manpower
• High costs of manpower
• Dangers, costs, and complications from overstaffing
If you are now contracting for certain work, such as lawn maintenance or
instrumentation naintenance, you should not ordinarily give up this method to
permit your work force to do the work. Any temporary gain in savings will
probably be eaten up in the long run by rising labor costs. The trade-offs
between contracting for services and doing them in-house should be carefully
examined. If specialized skills are needed on a short-term basis, it may be most
economical to hire a consultant; however, a premium price may be paid - for con-
sulting services over an extended period of time.
DETERMINING STAFF SIZE
There are several methods used in planning the staffing requirements for
wastewater treatment facilities. These are reviewed briefly and their limitations
identified.
51

Determination of Labor Requirements
Comparison with Other Facilities --
One of the most common methods is to review the staffing level at similar,
operating facilities (15). This approach will identify differences between your
staff level and what is "typical" for other facilities.
The major shortcomings of this approach are that the mistakes of past can be
repeated, operational differences and differences in job functions are not easily
compared, and the productivity of the staff is not reflected. However, this
method does provide a "first cut" estimate of staffing level.
Staffing Guidelines --
Published staffing guidelines take two general forms: curves showing total
staff size as a function of wastewater flow, or a series of curves showing the
labor requirements for different unit processes as a function of wastewater flow
or a basic design parameter for that process.
The first type does not improve on the method of comparing staffing levels
with other operating facility. Examples of this method are included on Figures 7,
8, 9, and 10. These curves do not reflect differences between the types or sizing
of processes for liquid or sludge handling at different plants. They provide only
a "first cut" estimate of staff size. The scattered data points indicate varia—
tion in staff size for a particular flow. It should be noted that most of the
data points for these graphs fall below flows of 10 mgd.
The second type of guideline is a better method. This method (17) involves
listing the unit processes at the treatment facility. The labor requirements for
each process at the plant can be estimated from curves or tables and then added
together to determine the total annual labor requirement.
Published staffing curves based on unit processes are plotted in terms of
either the design flow or a basic design parameter. Curves based on flow would
be accurate if all design engineers used the same criteria for sizing the various
processes. This does not happen. Therefore, some uncertainty of staffing esti—
mates results from curves based on flow. However, such unit process curves can
provide improved estimates for a particular facility.
The labor requirements from individual process curves plotted as a -function
of a basic design parameter. result in even more accurate estimates, since the
actual sizes and types of the individual processes are considered.
Examples of the two types of unit process curves are shown in Figures 11,
12, and 13. Figure 11 shows the labor requirements for primary sedimentation and
raw -sludge pumping based on average plant flows. Figures 12 and 13 show the labor
requirements based on basic process design parameters. Some of these curves
divide the total labor requirements into operation and maintenance. Inspection of
the curves shows the basic differences between the approaches. For example, when
you consider 10 mgd primary sedimentation basins designed on the basis of over—
flow rates of 600 or 1,200 gpd/sq ft, the following results are obtained:
52

In
W
50
40
30
w
N
S 0.90 Q+3.25

Ln
A.
2.59
120 FZ
90
W
N S=1.1901
CD
W
Q . 60
F-
U '
30
0
10 30 60 90 120
Source: Reference 1.6 FLOW, mgd
Figure B. Staff size vs. actual flow - trickling filter.

cn
v,
240
165 am
000000
N
LL.
90
I-
C
15
0
01
0 10 15 45 75. 105
Source: Reference 16 FLOW, mgd
Figure 9. Staff size vs. actual flow - activated sludge.
S1.94Q+2.38

cn
90
70 - loe
ni 50
U)
LL
LL
Q
F-
Cn ....
30
1 /16
10
0 IL
10 30 50 70
Source: Reference 1.6 ACTUAL FLOW, mgd
Figure 10. Staff size vs. actual flow - advanced treatment.
i
i
r

0
t
I
m
E
C
0
Q
J
J
Q
D
Z
Z
Q
10,000 9
8
7
6
5
4
3
F
1,000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
e
7
6
10
5
4
3
2
2 3 4 5 6789 2 3 4 5 6789 2 3 4 5 6789
1 10
PLANT DESIGN FLOW, mgd
Source: Reference 18
Figure 11. Labor requirements for primary sedimentation.
57

100,000
9
8
7
6
5
10,000
0
L
0: d
O
0]
J
J
Z)
z
z
1,000
i
100
1
OPERATION LA
INTENANCE LABOR
2 3 4 5 6789 2 3 4 0 b /U'd
10 100
SURFACE AREA, 1,000 sq ft
Source: Reference 19
Figure 12. Labor requirements for sedimentation.
1,000
58

100,000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
cn 10,000
9
L 8
I 7
m 6
E 5
m
O 4
m
J
3
J
2
Z
Z
Q
1,000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
100
2
2 3 4 5 6789 2 3 4 5 6789 2 3 4 5 6789
10 100 1,000 10,000
FIRM PUMPING CAPACITY, gpm
Source: Reference 19 .
Figure 13. Labor requirements for primary sludge pumping.
59

10 mgd Primary Sedimentation and Sludge Pumping,.
man-hours per year
Figure 11 2,700
Figures 12 and 13
600 gpd/sq ft 2,100
1,200 gpd/sq ft 3,200
Individual Evaluation --
Individual evaluation requires experience with all the unit processes and
equipment at the plant. To do this, you would start by listing all the unit
processes and operations at the plant. For each process or operation, you would
list all the operational functions that would be carried out each day. Based on
the equipment manufacturers' recommendations, a similar list for the preventive
maintenance of all the equipment would be needed. Based on a combination of judg-
ment, common sense, and past experience, you can estimate the time required to
perform all activities listed. The sum of the labor requirements provides an
estimate of the overall labor requirements for the plant.
Determination of the Level of Utilization
The level of utilization is an estimate of the actual productive time spent
on the job. Productive time is less than the total available time of 2,080
hours per year, based on a 40-hour week. One report (19) has placed this at 1,872
hours per year, another (18) at 1,500 hours per year, and a third at 1,550 (15)
hours per year. However, it is best to determine the value individually for each
type of plant.
The main items to consider in estimating the level of utilization are:
• Vacation
• Holidays
• Average sick leave
• On-the-job training
• Safety and other meetings
• Productivity factor (accounts for such items as picking up equipment
off the plant site, coffee breaks, discussion groups, area -coverage,
and other miscellaneous lost time items)
The first three items are easily determined. Safety and other meetings can
be estimated. On-the-job training should be planned, the time required can then
be estimated. Training generally accounts for about 1 to 3 percent (20 to 62
hours per year) for typical secondary plants and about 3 to 5 percent (62 to 104
hours per year for complex .advanced treatment plants. Discretion and judgment
should be used in determining the requirments. During start-up of a new plant or
an upgraded plant, training requirements for the first year may reach as much as
10 percent (208 hours per year) of the annual available time.
Other items that may reduce productive time include off -site travel for
parts and equipment (which could be significant if the plant is some distance

from the nearest major city); plant coveragt, which is related to the general
layout of the plant and the distance between various processes and equipment; and
coffee breaks and discussion groups.
An example of a level of utilization computation is shown in Table 5. The
numbers are typical, but are not based on any specific plant. The annual hours
(1,656 hours) represent the time available for plant operation and maintenance
from each employee. Therefore, to determine the total staff required, the annual
labor requirement (in man-hours) would be divided by 1,656 hours. Once the total
number of people required for the plant is determined, then an organization can
be established.
TABLE 5. LEVEL OF UTILIZATION DETERMINATION
Item Hours
Annual vacation 80
Paid holidays 80
Average sick leave taken 56
On-the-job training 50
Safety meetings 6
Miscellaneous meetings 2
Off -site travel, plant coverage,
coffee breaks 150
Annual hours available
(52 wks x 40 hrs - 424 hrs)
TOTAL 424
1656
Determining Number of People by General Classification
The people required for plant operation will fall into the following five
general categories:
• Administration
• Laboratory
• Site work
• Operation
• Maintenance
61

The number of personnel required for plant administration and site work can
be estimated from individual published curves. The curves for plant administra-
tion are usually based on plant flow. The results from the curves must be
adjusted to reflect the actual management structure. For example, if the plant is
owned and operated by a city, town or community, the administration requirements
are usually lower than if the plant is in a separate district. With a separate
district, more administrative staff are required for accounting, monthly billing
and other work that would normally be handled by the city staff.
The labor requirement for laboratory operation is directly dependent upon
the number of samples taken per year and the number of tests conducted on each
sample. An estimate of the time can be obtained from published curves, such as
the one in Figure 14. For a more detailed evaluation, the time required for each
test can be used to estimate annual labor requirements. The number of tests
depends on many factors, such as the variability of flow, the NTPDES permit
requirements, the amount of in -plant testing necessary to operate the plant
efficiently, and any other testing completed for historical reasons or to deter-
mine plant efficiency.
The level of laboratory staffing can also be estimated using data from
another EPA report (8). This report has recommended staffing requirements as a
function of plant design flow and the level of treatment. The annual hourly labor
requirement can then be adjusted using factors for local conditions.
The two remaining categories are for the operation and maintenance person-
nel. Some of the guidelines have separate curves for operation and maintenance
labor for each unit process. For those curves with a single value for both
operation and maintenance requirements, the ratio of personnel in each category
can be affected by several factors:
• Capacity of facility
• Type of treatment process
• Complexity of equipment
• Plant layout
• Climate
• Variability and strength of influent wastewater
• NPDES discharge standards
As a general rule, as flow increases, the percent of labor for operation
decreases. Typical ratios are about 70/30 (70 percent operation, 30 percent
maintenance) for mgd and 60/40 for 10 mgd plants. The effects of other factors
have been estimated as shown on Figure 15.
Although the use of adjusted curves can give good estimates, local factors
and past experience are the best sources of information for making labor
estimates.
Shift Coverage
The decision of whether to provide partial or full shift coverage can be a
difficult one. The total number of staff for shift work is the number in each
position on the shift times a factor, which depends on 'the level of utilization.
62

100.000
m 10.00i
0
CCS
E
10
■■■■�����■■■■�����■■■■■R10
on
�nnnn�■■I�nnnn�■�I��nnMEN!
. �nnn■■■I�n���1l�nnnnn
�nnnnl■Il�nnnmi■li
ME
11
■��nnn■■iin��nnniii�
n�nni
COLLECTEDF
SAMPLES
..D
in
..■■.��MM..■..���r�r•�..■■.
��■MME
some■■■■M■v��/MEMNON
�■nnnn■■■1�n
000■11�riWEEN111
�nnnn■■11�m
En1111■�iir
min
�mommi����nmoll
�ri��en1■111
No
1
11011111111119
��mill
IMMMO
'
MAIN',
MEMOS
ONEMEM
so
MOONS
%
IItI�
�1��nnnn�■11
�n
�n1111
�
rAWE
l .l�dnn�lll
PA
I���ni��nnn�ni
c o a o r cy r 3 4 5 5 789 2 3 4 5 6 789
1 10 100 1,000
NUMBER OF DAYS SAMPLES ARE COLLECTED PER YEAR
Source: Reference 20
Figure 14. Labor requirements for laboratory.
63

LOCAL CONDITION
ADJUSTMENT
COMPACT
EXTENDED
PLANT LAYOUT
Yardwork - 50%
AVERAGE
Yardwork + 50%
operation., malnr...... - 10%
No adjustment
Operations mointenanc. +10%
STANDARD EQUIPMENT,
STANDARD EQUIPMENT,
NON-STANDAI'ID EQUIPMENT
UNIT PROCESSES
SAME MANUFACTURER
DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS
DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS
Operations, 10%
Maim .... c. - 10%
No adjustment
maintenance +
PRIMARY
ADVANCED Supervisory, Clerical
Suparvirory, Clerical
SECONDARY
Lpbpra...470✓A WT process
0 Nons+10%}
LE VEL OF TREATMENT
Operations - 40%
No adjustment
nonce - 0%
Laboramry _ 20%
_ 0
Yardwork 10%
Yord
PERCENTAGE OF WASTE REMOVAL
AMOUNT OF WASTE IN EFFLUENT, SUCH
TYPE OF WASTE REMOVAL.
SUCH AS'85% REMOVAL OF BOD'
AS 'NO MORE THAN 20 MG/L BOD'
REQUIREMENT
No adi—fin.nl
h;�%t" ns+.IV
NONE OR CONSTANT
SEASONAL
ERRATIC
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
No adjustment
Operotluns+5%
Laboratory, Operations +10%
PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR
HIGH
Operations, maint.nonce-15%
AVERAGE (6'h-HR/DAY)
No adjustment
LOW
Operations, Maintenance+ 15%
CLIMATE
MODERATE WINTERS
EXTREME WINTERS
No adjustment
Maintenance+l0%
CERTIFICATION AND
CERTIFICATION BUT NO
NEITHER CERTIFICATION NOR
TRAINING
CONTINUING EDUCATION
CONTINUING EDUCATION
CONTINUING EDUCATION
Oui"rlluni _ T %
No .djustm•nl
Supervisory, Operatlon.+10%
MONITORING WITH FEEDBACK
AUTOMATIC
NONE
MONITORING ONLY
Operation. - 5%
MONITORING
Op ... tlons+5%
No adjustment
Maim ....... 5%
THROUGHOUT
AUTOMATIC
NONE
OF INFLUENT AND EFFLUENT
Laboratory - 10%ANT
SAMPLING
Laboratory, Operations+5%
Laboratory, Operation. - 5%
Op.ntlan. - 5%
FOR RECEIVING -WATER
FOR ENTIRE PLANT
OFF -PLANT
NONE
MONITORING ONLY
Laboratory - 100%
LABORATORY WORK
No adjustment
Laboratory - 10%
ALL MAINTENANCE EXCEPT MINOR
OFF -PLANT
NONE
CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE ONLY
PREVENTATIVE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
MAINTENANCE
No adjustment
1
Main#...... - 25%
Maintenance -90%
RELATIVELY NEW AND/OR
RELATIVELY OLD AND/OR
AGE AND CONDITION
WELL -CARED FOR
POORLY CARED FOR
OF EQUIPMENT
No adjustment
increase maintenance +10%
STORM AND
NO ADJUSTMENT, EXCEPT MAY INCREASE SOLIDS DISPOSAL
INFILTRATION FLOW
FOR INCREASED SCREENINGS AND GRIT
PRESENT FLOW OPERATION
NO ADJUSTMENT, EXCEPT COMPLETELY BYPASSED
AT LESS THAN DESIGN FL OW
UNITS MAY DE SUBTRAGTED OUT
SMALLER NIGHT AND WEEKEND
NIGHT STAFF I FOR EVERY 3
OF DAY STAFF
LARGER NIGHT AND WEEKEND
STAFF THAN ORDINARY
WEEKEND STAFF: I FOR EVERY 3
STAFF THAN ORDINARY
PATTERN OF STAFFING
DECREASE APPROPRIATE.
OF WEEIQ)AV STAFF
INCREASE APPROPRIATE
STAFFING PROPORTIONATELY
NO AD.IUSTMENT
STAFFING PROPORTIONATELY
Source: Reference 18
Figure 15. Table of adjustments for local conditions.

For example, for the level of utilization presented earlier of 1,656 hours (Table
5), the factor would be 5.29 (24 hrs x 365/1,656). This means that you need about
five people for each position if it is staffed continuously. However, if the
weekend and night shifts can be staffed by skeleton crews, this number can be
reduced. For example, with a six -person dayshift staff and only two people on the
offshifts, the total staff would be fourteen people.
Factors that affect the need for shift coverage include effluent quality,
public health and safety, variability of influent quality, complexity of pro-
cesses, level of discharge standards, etc. Some points to consider are:
• Plant capacity
• Highly variable influent quality (strength) or a large proportion of
industrial wastes
• The reliability of the electrical energy supply and the frequency of
power outages
• Advanced wastewater treatment processes at the plant
• Highly specialized equipment that requires close attention and a lot of
maintenance
• Effluent discharge to highly sensitive water bodies such as just
upstream from a raw water intake or into a primary contact recreational
lake or stream
• The amount of remote monitoring and automation at the plant
• Effluent making up more than 50 percent of the receiving water flow
• Providing 'shift coverage without increasing the number of personnel
(usually requires a staff of about 20 people)
After considering all these points carefully, you should use your own judg-
ment on whether or not full shift coverage is warranted. Automatic monitoring
and controls with remote alarms may be used to minimize plant staffing require-
ments. For example, an alarm system at the local police station may be used to
signal equipment failure. The police can then contact an operator by phone.
DETERMINING THE QUALIFICATIONS AND SKILLS NEEDED
Determining the qualifications for your staff is based on common sense and
judgment. However, there are some basic guidelines that may make the selection
easier. The first is that nobody should have direct supervision of more than five
people, which in turn requires that you develop an organizational chart. A typi-
cal chart which can be adapted for any plant is shown on Figure 16. For plants
less than 10 mgd, two organizational structures are shown on Figure 17. To assist
you, a list of 21 job titles and brief descriptions are included here. These are
from a U.S. EPA report (19), which should be reviewed for more detailed informa-
tion about each position.
I-V

OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR
SHIFT FOREMAN
OPERATOR II
OPERATORI
LABORER
I AUTO EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
SUPERINTENDENT
ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT
CLERK TYPIST
MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR CHEMIST
ELECTRICIAN II LABORATORY TECHNICIAN
MECH. MAINTENANCE FOREMAN
ELECTRICIAN I
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I
STOREKEEPER
MAINTENANCE HELPER
PAINTER
LABORERI " CUSTODIAN
Figure 1.6. Organization chart --conventional wastewater treatment plant.

I OPERATOR II 1
I OPERATOR I I
rn
J
SUPERINTENDENT
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC II 1
MAINTENANCE MECHANIC I I
I MAINTENANCE HELPER I
I ELECTRICIAN II 1
ALTERNATIVE 1
I OPERATOR II 1
I OPERATOR I
ALTERNATIVE 2
AUTO EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
LABORER
MAINTENANCE HELPER
AUTO EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
LABORER
Figure 17: Organizational charts - plant size: 10 mgd or less.

• Superintendent - Responsible for administration, operation and mainte-
nance of entire plant and review of operation and maintenance func-
tions. Exercises direct authority over all plant functions and person-
nel. Organizes and directs activities of plant personnel, including
training programs.
• Assistant Superintendent - Assist superintendent in review of operation
and maintenance functions and planning special operation and mainte-
nance tasks and alterations.
• Clerk Typist - Clerical duties such as typing operational reports and
filing, and other routine clerical duties.
• Operations Supervisor - Supervises and coordinates activities of plant
operators, laborers, custodians, and other plant personnel. Prepares
work schedules subject to the superintendent's approval. Inspects plant
to determine efficiency of operation and maintenance requirements.
• Shift Foreman - Supervises operation of plant, under general direction
of supervisors. Performs duties of operations or maintenance supervi-
sors in their absence. Replaces operation or maintenance worker during
emergency.
• Operator II - Operates treatment facilities to control flow and pro-
cessing. of wastewater, sludge and effluent. Observes variations in
plant monitoring equipment and makes necessary adjustments. Takes
samples and performs routine laboratory tests and analyses. Performs
routine maintenance functions and custodial duties. Operates and main-
tains power generating equipment and incinerators.
• Operator I - Assists Operator II in performing the operation and main-
tenance duties as outlined or shall perform tasks as requested.
• Automotive Equipment Operator - Operates automotive equipment such as
trucks, tractors, or fork lifts. Assists in loading and unloading of
equipment. Operates equipment to cut grass and weeds, bulldoze soil, or
remove snow. Performs maintenance on the equipment.
• Maintenance Supervisor - Supervises all preventive and corrective main-
tenance on entire plant. Plans, schedules, and directs all maintenance
work. Supervises and instructs maintenance workers. Supervises inspec-
tions of contract maintenance and submits maintenance budget requests.
Responsible for maintenance records.
• Mechanical Maintenance Foreman - Supervises mechanical maintenance crew
in performance of maintenance repair tasks on machinery, equipment,
buildings, structures and grounds. Supervises and instructs maintenance
personnel on routine and emergency tasks. Consults supervisors regard-
ing preventive maintenance program. Establishes and operates preventive
maintenance program. Performs inspections and determines repair
methods. Works with contractors and manufacturer's representatives on
difficult tasks. Maintains maintenance records.

• Maintenance Mechanic II - Performs preventive and corrective mainte-
nance on mechanical and electromechanical machinery. and equipment,
under direction of superior. Assists in keeping maintenance records and
installs and sets up new equipment. Supervises, instructs, and inspects
work of Mechanic I, Maintenance Helper, or Laborer to ensure proper
performance of maintenance work or repairs.
• Maintenance Mechanic I - Under the direction of Mechanic II, Foreman,
or Supervisor, performs or assists in performance of preventive and
corrective maintenance. These tasks may also include limited laborer
and custodial duties. Also, assists in keeping maintenance records.
• Electrician II - Performs corrective and preventive maintenance on
electrical or electronic operating and control systems. Performs tasks
using independent judgment in solving problems or under general super-
vision of maintenance supervisor or assistance superintendent. Main-
tains maintenance records and supervises Electrician I, Maintenance
Helper, and/or Laborer.
• Electrician I - Assists Electrician II or performs corrective and pre-
ventive maintenance on electrical systems, fixtures, or equipment.
Performs tasks based upon oral and written instructions including
specifications, codes and wiring diagrams. The work is frequently per-
formed independently and inspected by supervisor. Maintains maintenance
records and supervises Maintenance Helper and/or Laborer.
• Maintenance Helper - Assists maintenance mechanic in maintaining and
repairing equipment, machinery, buildings and grounds. Duties also may
include maintaining simple maintenance records and performing laborer
tasks as required.
• Laborer - Performs general tasks such as cleaning equipment, maintain-
ing buildings and grounds, performing custodial tasks and carries or
holds material, supplies, or tools to assist operating and/or mainte-
nance personnel.
• Painter - Prepares surfaces for painting such as scraping, washing,
burning, sanding, sandblasting, puttying and caulking. Matches, mixes,
and blends various interior or exterior paints or wall covers and
applies them. Erects and uses ladders, scaffolding, and swinging stage
equipment. Performs simple sign painting, using stencils. Requisitions
material and equipment. Responsible to maintain, clean, and store tools
and equipment; and clean or have arrangements made for laborer to clean
the work site.
• Storekeeper - Requisitions, receives, inspects, verifies, stores, and
issues materials, supplies, tools; and equipment. Maintains inventory
records; controls material; and reports materials used, spoilage or
other losses, inventory adjustments, and refusal of shipment..
Responsible for determining method of storage, identification and
location of stock. Divides stock quantities into portions to fill
orders and identifies when reorder is required.

• Custodian - Cleans all or designated portions of wastewater treatment
plant and grounds. Performs general custodial duties such as cleaning
restrooms, maintaining supplies, emptying waste cans and ashtrays,
maintaining grounds, picking up litter, sweeping walks, and shoveling
snow or cutting grass. Reports any repairs or adjustments required.
0 Chemist - Supervises and performs specialized and complex chemical,
bacteriological, and physical tests and analysis of wastewater and
sludge samples. Assembles data, maintains records and prepares
reports.
• Laboratory Technician - Assists chemist in above tasks. In absence of
chemist, operates laboratory.
Using these summary descriptions, and considering the type of process and
equipment at the plant, the number and qualifications of staff can be estimated
for your plant. A form, shown on Figure 18 can be used as an aid to determine
the number of people and skill levels. Appendix B contains some examples which
show how to use this form with published staffing guidelines. Reference 15 also
has an example of how to apply it.
CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS
A 1975 survey of the operator certification requirements in the U.S. showed
that about 80 percent of the states have mandatory requirements for certifica-
tion (21). They usually apply only to the superintendent or chief operator, how-
ever, some states require that the shift foreman or person in charge of day-to-
day operation also be certified.
The certification requirements are set by each state. They generally take
the form of a written and/or oral examination. In most states wastewater treat-
ment plants are classified depending on the complexity of treatment, population
served, downstream watercourse conditions, and potential health hazards. Operator
qualification requirements for the four plant classifications might be like these
(2Z):
Class I - Grammar school education or equivalent, one year experience and
a passing grade in a written examination.
Class II - Grammar school education or equiva tnt, three years' experience
and a passing grade in a written e�,.mination.
Class III - High school education or equivalent, five years' experience and
a passing grade in a written examination.,
Class IV - Class III certificate, two years in responsible charge of a
Class III or Class IV wastewater treatment works and a passing
grade in a written examination.
In some instances, there are other limitations (such as the minimum length
of time you have been operating wastewater treatment plants) before you c • get
Class IV certification. Also, some states include a fifth wastewater treatment
VAR

ESTIMATED PLANT STAFFING COMPLEMENT
Project Computed by Date
-Estimated Annual
Suggested
Staff Position Payroll Requirements
Staffing
Man hours Number of
Number of
employees*
employees
Administration & General:
Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent
Clerk Typist
Storekeeper
Subtotal
Operation Labor:
Operations Supervisor
Shift Foreman
Operator II
Operator I
Automotive Equipment Operator
Subtotal
Maintenance Labor:
Maintenance Supervisor
Mechanical Maintenance Foreman
Maintenance Mechanic II
Maintenance Mechanic I
Electrician II
Electrician I
Painter
Maintenance Helper
Subtotal
Laboratory:
Chemist
Laboratory Technician
Subtotal
Site Work:
Laborer
Custodian
Subtotal
Total Labor Requirements
*Man hours divided by level of utilization
Figure 18. Form for estimating plant staffing positions.
71

plant classification. You should determine the classification of your wastewater
treatment plant and make sure that all certification requirements are met. Usu-
ally, the higher and more complex the level of treatment, the higher the clas-
sification level and operator certification requirement. The plant classification
level may be part -of the NPDES discharge permit.
The states having mandatory or voluntary certification requirements are
shown on Figure 19. Table 6 shows the certification program administration and
agency in charge of the program for wastewater treatment facilities. This should
be used carefully because, of those states reporting voluntary certification pro-
grams, two have been re-evaluating their programs and are tending towards man-
datory certification.
Certification of plant operators does provide benefits to everyone associ-
ated with wastewater treatment programs. Whether or not certification is required
for a'position at your plant, you should encourage your staff to be certified.
The benefits which you should describe to them are:
State Agencies
Certification gives the responsible state agency the chance to set minimum
standards for the staff at all wastewater treatment facilities. Operation by a
qualified operator can reduce the chance of public health hazards and nuisance.
Many states have passed laws that require monthly reports from plants; a certi-
fied operator is more likely to be capable of understanding and completing these
reports. Many states have noticed improvement in plant operation after mandatory
certification was started, which has resulted in less operational assistance
requests of the state agency.
Plant- mmnar
The major benefit realized by the owner is the protection of the capital
investment, which results in longer facility life, reduced corrective maintenance
requirements, and lower operating costs. The qualified (certified) operator is
more likely to understand the benefits of preventive maintenance, which can
extend the life of all equipment. He will also be more aware of the laws and
violation penalties.
There are indirect benefits to the owner such as improved quality of the
receiving stream, protection of water supplies, and general improvement of the
aquatic environment. Finally, the owner has a group of qualified people to choose
from for other positions.
Plant Employees
Employee benefits resulting from certification include a recognized level
of skill and knowledge, better defined professional status and responsibility,
job security, and established career service. These benefits have been reported
in those states that have mandatory certification requirements as well as by
operators obtaining certification on a voluntary basis.
72

J
W
1
rt
I M
I M I
i I
1 V M
f
1
M V -- V
-T
f V f
f M M
IT
i M M I
\` M
I o0
o M CL d
4o p o 47
o v
CPO ALASKA HAWAII
Figure 19. Certification requirements.
M = Mandatory
V = Voluntary

TABLE 6. CERTIFICATION PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
State
Administration
ro
J
c ro
a
h3
Wastewater programs
Certification
Type administered by
o
F 41-J N °
°
ro v n -°
� �b o 1-1 ,1 o4-1
aJ 4J
o
7 ro ro H o ro
c Um �°H
r+ m s4 mm3 > awi q m0 4
Alabama
X
X
X
Alaska
X
X
X
X
Arizona
X
X
X
Arkansas
X
X
X
California
X
X
X
Colorado
X
X
X
Connecticut
X
X
X
Delaware
Florida
X
X
Inactive; to be revised
X
X
X
Georgia
X
X
X
Hawaii
X
X
Idaho
X
X
}{
Illinois
X
X
X
Indiana
X
X
Iowa
X
X
X
Kansas
X
X
X
(In
}{
Transition)
X
Kentucky
X
X
Louisiana
X
X
X
Maine
X
X
Maryland
X
X
X
X
Massachusetts
X
X
}{
Michigan
X
X
X
Michigan
Industry
X
X
X
Minnesota
X
X
Mississippi
X
X
X
Missouri
X
X
X
Montana
X
X
X
Nebraska
X
X
X
Nevada
X
X
X
New Hampshire
X
X
X
New Jersey
X
X
X
New Mexico
X
X
New York
X
X
X
X
North Carolina
X
X
X
North Dakota
X
X
X
Ohio
X
X
Oklahoma
X
X
X
Oregon
X
X
X
X
Pennsylvania
X
X
Rhode Island
X
X
X
X
South Carolina
X
X
X
South Dakota
X
X
X
Tennessee
X
X
X
Texas
X
X
X
Utah
X
X.
X
X
Vermont
X
X
X
Virginia
X
Washington
X
X
X
West Virginia
X
X
X
Wisconsin
X
X
X
Wyoming
X
X
X
X
X
74

TRAINING PROGRAMS
There are many reasons for training wastewater treatment plant personnel.
They include investment protection, efficient plant operation and maintenance,
and promoting a good self-image. Today's treatment facilities are more complex
and difficult to operate than the majority of the treatment plants constructed
prior to passage of PL 92-500. The more complex plants require more skilled
operators to meet discharge standards. The importance of training operators has
been analyzed (23) in terms of the amount spent on training programs for those
plants meeting and not meeting the design BOD removal criteria. The results of
this analysis, shown on Figures 20 and 21, indicate a direct relationship between
the amount spent on training and the number of treatment plants meeting the
criteria. The analysis shows that "the average training expenditure was in every
case higher at the facilities operating at or above the design level for BOD
removal." Other results of this analysis were that the training expenditures at
small plants with satisfactory treatment performance were twice those where
design removal efficiencies were not reached, and that the average treatment
plant performance improved by about 24 percent when the plant was operated by
satisfactorily trained personnel. The training cost as a percentage of salary
budget will vary significantly with the size of the plant and the skills and
abilities of the operators.
There are other benefits from proper training of plant personnel. These
include avoiding damage to expensive machinery, the ability to troubleshoot a
plant and the ability to fine tune a plant for good treatment at minimum cost.
There are three types of training:
a Preparatory training involves training a new recruit entering the
wastewater treatment profession. The training might take the form of a
two-year course at an accredited community college or vocational
school. The course should provide the fundamentals of wastewater treat-
ment technology. Preparatory training may also be useful for experi-
enced operators wishing to improve their positions by promotion or
transfer to other plants.
® Skill maintenance training is the training needed to help plant opera-
tors maintain skills necessary to perform their work. This might take
the form of on-the-job training sessions or short courses at local or
nearby community colleges.
a Skill improvement training is similar to the first training program
except it would involve short courses, correspondence courses, and on-
the-job training. This program might be used to teach existing person-
nel how to operate a treatment facility that is being expanded, or to
operate a particular piece of equipment.
The methods, aids, and personnel used for operator training are very impor-
tant. A recent study for the EPA evaluated the problems being experienced at many
wastewater treatment plants (24). The plants were evaluated in detail and items
most commonly limiting the performance of each plant were determined and ranked.
The .top ten items are given here in Table 7. The first four are related to plant
operation. The study showed that in many instances the problem was caused by
75

$996
®SATISFACTORY
PERFORMANCE
¢ UNSATISFACTORY
w PERFORMANCE
¢
J $444
J
O
0
$285 $335
115
1 MGD 1-10 MGD 10 MGD
Source: Reference 23
Figure 20. Average annual training expenditures.
SATISFACTORY
PERFORMANCE
1 38
}
2
J UNSATISFACTORY
< PERFORMANCE
F1
o $0.94
0
$0.84
w 0 65
$0.59
X
J
J
O
$0.24
1 MGD 1-10 MGD 10 MGD
Source: Reference 23
Figure 21. Average annual training expenditure
per $100 salary cost.
76

improper guidance or training. In nearly all facilities surveyed existing person-
nel had the aptitude to learn how to achieve better plant performance.
TABLE 7. RANKING OF FACTORS LIMITING PERFORMANCE FOR THIRTY EVALUATED FACILITIES
Item
no.
Ranking
(total
points)
Factor
No. of
times
cause
occurred
No. of
times
cause
ranked ill
Total
points
1
1
Operator Application of Concepts
28
6
53
and Testing to Process Control
2
2
Sewage Treatment Understanding
20
4
42
3
3
Technical Guidance
17
5
37
4
4
Process Control Testing
21
0
34
5
5
Sludge Wasting Capability
18
3
33
6
6
Process Flexibility
16
2
32
7
7
Process Controllability
20
0
31
8
8
Clarifier (Secondary)
11
2
21
9
9
Sludge Treatment
15
0
19
10
9
Aerator
9
2
19
On -The -Job -Training
On-the-job training can be a formal classroom approach or through individual
instruction as part of a normal daily routine. The classroom approach should be
arranged at the end of one shift and the beginning of the next shift in order to
have as many people as possible attending the class.
The principal reasons for training and, more particularly, for on-the-job
training include:
• To transfer ideas from the design engineer to the plant staff
• To provide information on specific unit processes used at the plant
• To show methods for optimizing the efficiency of unit processes using
the actual treatment units involved
• To provide "hands-on" training with feedback at a full scale, operating
facility
• To use the classroom and "hands-on" approach to minimize trial -and -
error plant operation
• To increase operator confidence by giving "hands-on" experience in the
presence of the instructor
77

Miscellaneous Training Courses
There are several other methods available for training wastewater treatment
plant operators. These include short schools; correspondence courses; college
extension classes; and classes at community colleges, vocational schools, and
special schools offered by many state agencies. Many of the schools offer con-
tinuing education units for their courses. A certain number of these units may be
required for certification renewal in your state. These alternates are briefly
discussed below.
• Short Schools - Offered by state pollution control agencies or univer-
sities, short schools are usually held once per year. They are usually
classroom -type courses taught by experienced, certified operators who
may also have college degrees. You should check with the local state
regulatory agency or local Water Pollution Control Association to find
out about the courses held in your area.
• Correspondence Courses - Correspondence courses are completed by mail.
The type of course allows self -pacing and the chance fcr.the student to
test the course material at his facilities. The student must work
alone, without personal contact from an instructor. Correspondence
courses include those offered by the Water Pollution Control Federa-
tion, California State University of Sacramento, and International
Correspondence School.
• College Extension Courses - These courses are similar to the short
schools, but are offered by the extension division of local universi-
ties. The extension classes are frequently geared to more specialized
skills and can be taken for college credit.
• Community Colleges - The community colleges or two-year schools that
serve your area may offer a complete two-year associate degree in
wastewater treatment plant operation. These courses provide ideal
training for those people starting a career in the wastewater treatment
field. Part-time or evening courses are also suitable for the fully
employed operator. You should contact the local community college for
more information about these classes.
• Vocational Schools - One- or two-day schools or seminars are often held
throughout each state. These schools are put on by state agencies as
well as by the EPA and private consultants. You can get the school
schedules from your state pollution control agency. In some instances,
you can arrange to hold these special schools at your plant.
• Local Association Schools - The local Water Pollution Control Associa-
tion and other such organizations. hold schools for operator training.
Information on times and locations can be obtained from the magazines
or bulletins published by the local association or from the Association
secretary.
78

Selecting a Training Approach
There are several
use. You must compare
are listed below (25):
Type of Course
On-the-job training
by the use of the
demonstration
approach.
Self -instruction by
correspondence course
or other educational
packages.
Classroom approach.
SAFETY PROGRAMS
factors to consider in deciding which training approach to
the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Some
Advantages
Learning in a practical
situation, trainee can see
and hear the operation.
Cost/man hour is usually
low, trainees are actively
involved, instruction is
self -paced and consistent,
and materials have been
pre -tested and their
effectiveness proven.
Less time-consuming, more
material can be covered
quickly, fewer inter-
ruptions allow instruc-
tor to pursue objectives,
and the same lecture can
be given to more than one
group with little in-between
preparation.
Disadvantages
May be one-way communica-
tion, difficult to set up,
may place heavy demands on
instructor, limited number
of trainees can partici-
pate.
Slow feedback, no instruc-
tor for supplemental guid-
ance, requires high level
of motivation, and can be
difficult to teach "hands-
on" experience because
specific self -instruc-
tional materials are not
always available.
Communication may be one-
way, opportunities for mis-
understanding information
are great, and lectures
cannot be tailored to in-
dividual needs and may
lack trainee involvement.
Planning a lecture that
will hold the interest of
the trainees is difficult.
A WPCF Safety Survey taken in 1978 (26), shows an increasing trend in the
injury frequency at wastewater treatment plants, as can be seen in Figure 22.
Figure 23 shows that the injury frequency rate increases sharply until the
population served is about 250,000. The decline for the larger plants may be due
to having a full-time safety officer at the plant. This information points out
the need to pay more attention to safety in the small- to medium-sized municipal
wastewater treatment plants. The following suggestions on how to set up a safety
program and the benefits to be derived from them may be helpful to you in
assessing your safety needs.
A good safety program at a wastewater treatment facility can reduce the
frequency and seriousness of accidents. A successful safety program must start
with management; it is up to you to start and follow the program. A good program
will accomplish three goals: reduce the total cost of operations, increase
79

¢
}
� f
w
w
}
0
J
d
2
W
O `
¢
W
a
w
a: 4
z
z
ui
F' 3
¢
}
U
z
w
w 2
¢
LL
}
z
1
COLLECTION SYSTEMS / v
ALL WASTE WATER WORKS
o/ /
/ TREATMENT PLANTS
Source: Reference 25
LEGEND
ANNUAL AVERAGE
LONG TERM TREND: 1967 TO PRESENT
1974
YEAR
Figure 22. Injury Frequency rate vs. year.
80
1976 197

w
w
0
J
a 7
2
w
L
a: 6
w
d
w •
5 •
Z
? q
w • \
Q
o
M 3
U
Z
Z) 2 •
e
w
I
w
} 1
Q
Z
0
0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000
POPULATION SERVED BY SYSTEM IN THOUSANDS
Source: Reference 25
Figure 23. Injury frequency rate vs. population served by system.
81

productivity (the level of utilization), and provide a feeling of security and
well-being for plant personnel. Safety is the common sense approach to any task,
but the real key to safety is the individual worker (13).
At the start of the program, you should explain it completely, name a person
to be in charge of it, describe the advantages of it, and finally, spell out the
responsibilities of each individual. At smaller treatment plants, you may be the
supervisor and, therefore, have the complete responsibility for directing the
safety program. You should encourage the plant staff to take a course in safety
and first aid taught by a qualified safety engineer and first aid instructor. An
outside safety consultant should be hired about once a year to check on your
safety program. This person should also make periodic checks of operational pro-
cedures and report any safety hazards or areas in need of improvement. The safety
engineer or technician should also establish a set of safety rules for each part
of the plant.
After the safety program has been prepared you should have regular safety
meetings at the plant. These meetings should be held monthly, or more often,
depending on the potential hazards at the plant. The meetings should be 10 to 30
minutes long and the employees should be encouraged to actively participate.
You should have the meetings at the beginning or end of a shift, but always on
paid time to indicate the importance you place on the program. Films on safe
driving, slips and falls, gases, danger of fires, etc., are very helpful instruc-
tional aids.
You have the primary responsibility for safety at your treatment facility.
It covers four major areas (27):
• Providing a safe place to work
• Providing safe equipment and tools
• Hiring only qualified personnel, or personnel with an interest and
aptitude for learning
® Training workers for job skills as well as safety precautions
Some safety features of the plant that must be maintained are:
® A minimum of two employees should be assigned for any work' that is
potentially dangerous such as manhole inspections, machinery mainte-
nance, etc.
• Handrails should be provided around all basins and openings.
• All stairs, walkways, and platforms• should be free of grease, oil, and
debris, and well lighted.
• Adequate ventilation systems should be provided for all enclosed
spaces.
• Life preservers and throwlines should be provided adjacent to all
basins, ponds, and lagoons.
82

• Protective guards should be provided on all rotating machinery.
• Protective guards and handrails which can be removed for maintenance
should be replaced after maintenance work is complete.
• Where flammable gases may be present, explosion —proof electrical equip—
ment should be. provided and all bolts, gaskets, globes and guards
should be intact.
• Carbon dioxide fire extinguishers should be provided adjacent to motor
control centers and automatic control systems.
• Signs should be provided at the entrance of all wet wells and rooms in
which toxic or flammable gases may be present.
• Instrumentation for the detection of toxic and flammable gases and low
oxygen levels should be provided and should be operational.
• All boats at lagoons should be provided with a life jacket for each
person.
• All vehicles should be equipped with appropriate safety equipment,
including lights, horns, windshield washers, and fire extinguishers.
• Pressure vessels should be operated within their design rating and
should have a pressure relief valve.
• Ear muffs should be provided at the entrances of all rooms that are
excessively noisy.
A list of minimum recommended safety equipment is given in Table 8.
After a new employee has been hired, you must be sure that he is given the
proper training in both the work skill for the position and in the safety pro—
gram. This will greatly reduce the chance of accidents.
In case of accident, the immediate supervisor and safety officer should be
informed. The supevisor should investigate each accident thoroughly and complete
an accident report similar to the one shown on Figure 24. In the -event an
employee needs medical attention, he should be taken to a specified doctor,
clinic, or hospital. The accident report should show the doctor's name and diag—
nosis, the cause of the accident, and what has been done to prevent it from hap—
pening again, The information on these forms can be used to prepare a monthly
summary of all accidents. A form such as the one shown on Figure 25 can be used.
You should review these reports to find ways of decreasing accidents.
83

TABLE 8. MINIMUM RECOMMENDED SAFETY EQUIPMENT FOR
WASTEWATER WORKS PERSONNEL
Equipment Use
Portable air blower (gas motor or Ventilating manholes and other enclosed
electric motor operated) subterraneous structures
Electric explosion -proof lantern
Safety harness
Hose mask with hand blower and
50-ft hose
Two self-contained air packs for
plants using chlorine
Illumination in tanks or sewers where
gas may be present
For workers entering deep manholes or
tanks
Respiratory protection in all gas and
vapor atmospheres including oxygen
deficiency
Respiratory protection against chlorine
gas leaks

CITY OF PORT ARTHUR
No.
SUPERVISOR'S ACCIDENT REPORT
A.M.
Name of Injured
Date of Injury
Time P.M.
Department
Division
Location
Occupation
Doctor
Hospital Estimated Lost Time
Describe the Injury
Describe fully how accident happened, and what employee
was doing when injured:
CAUSES OF ACCIDENT
Unsafe Equipment
Unsafe Conditions
Unsafe Act
Explain the above:
What has been done to prevent a recurrence of this type
of accident?
Witnesses:
Reported by:
Approved by Dept.. Head
Approved by City Manager
Source: Reference 13
Figure
24. Supervisor's accident
report form.
85

J
ao
ON
!'TmV rl. nnnm AnmLn—
THIS MONTH
UMULATIVE HIS YEAR
Department & Divisions
Man Hrs
Worked
Minor
Acc.
L.T.
Acc.
Days
Lost
Fre-
quency
Sever-
ity
Man Firs
Worked
Minor
Acc.
L.T.
Acc.
Days
Lost
Fre-
uenc
Sever -
it
General Government:
City Manager
City Secretary
City Attorney
Finance
Tax
Personnel
Inspection & Permits
Public Safety:
Police
Fire
Civil Defense
Health:
Electrical:
Public Works:
Engineering
Street Maintenance
Street Construction
Urban Renewal
Drainage
Bridge
Sanitation
Administration
Parks & Recreation:
Library:
Water & Sewer:
Water Office
Water
Sewer
OTALS
Source: Reference 13
Figure 25. Monthly accident summary form.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
September 13, 1999
MEMORANDUM TO: Kim H. Colson
FROM: D. Rex Gleasoni
PREPARED BY: G. T. Chen eY
SUBJECT: Town of'Boiling Springs
Lyman Street Pump Station -Modification
Cleveland County
We are forwarding the attached application package for
Authorization to Construct an emergency overflow bypass in the Town
of Boiling Springs. The package was inadvertently sent to this
Office. by West & Associates, P.A., the Town's consultant. This
Office has reviewed the subject request and recommends it be
approved.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please
advise.
gtc

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
June 28, 1999
Honorable Max Hamrick, Mayor JUN '30 1999
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Sewer System Improvements
Contracts A, B, and C
Dear Mayor Hamrick:
A review of the plans and specifications for the subject wastewater facilities has been
completed by the Construction Grants and Loans Section. The comments resulting from this
review are being transmitted directly to your engineer for clarification and resolution; a copy
is attached for your reference. If additional comments are necessary following the receipt and
review of the responses and revised plans and specifications, these will promptly be made.
Upon receipt of satisfactory responses from your engineer to our comments, the
review of the plan documents will be completed. If you have any questions concerning this
matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Steven Pellei, the State Project Review Engineer,
at [phone].
7il
ely,
AVG. Madden, Jr., 7PE
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants and Loans Section
SP/nw
Attachment
cc: West and Associates (w/attachment)
Mooresville Regional Office (w/attachment)
DMU/CIU (w/attachment)
Steve Pellei (w/attachment)
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
Comments on Plans and Specifications
Town of Boiling Springs
Sanitary Sewer Improvements
General Comments:
With submittal of revised plan, provide an updated itemized cost estimate for the
proposed project if costs have changed.
2. Provide a completed non -discharge permit application with the $400 application fee.
3. Provide a copy of the Sedimentation and Erosion Control Permit from the Division of
Land Quality or a letter from them stating that no permit is required for this project.
4. For all stream crossings provide a copy of the 401 Water Quality Certification, and Army
Corps of Engineer's 404 Permit or provide a letter from the Corps stating that none is
required for this project.
5. For proper identification, it is recommended that plans and specifications be stamped,
"Final Drawings — Not for construction".
6. Advise if there are gas stations or former gas stations, in the vicinity of the proposed
project. If affirmative, then an investigation should be performed on the soils and
groundwater to determine if they are petroleum contaminated. When the contamination
exists, plans and specifications must address how the contaminated soils and groundwater
must be handled.
Comments on the Contract Documents:
1. The bid schedules for Contract A and B do not include line items for installation of the
service waterline to the pump stations. Should they be added or are these items included
under Pump Station Complete?
2. The Notice of Award should have places for the signatures of the Contractor and the
Local Government's Authorized Representative.
3. The sequence of construction should be identified in the specifications. This sequence
must not result in overflows or bypasses to the waters of the state.
4. If funding is desired, all addenda should be submitted to our office for review and
approval prior to opening of bids. Contractors should have all addenda at least 7 days
prior to bid opening.
SDP/Blg Sprgs/ DMU comments/6-25-99

5. Approval of all "or equals" must be by addenda prior to receipt of bids.
Comments on Plans:
All Sheets
1. Designate the 100-year flood stage elevation on the plans. Manholes must be designed
for 100-year flood protection. This should include watertight covers and venting. If
applicable, a statement may be added that all components are above the 100-year flood
stage elevation.
2. All construction easements, permanent easements, and rights -of -way must be shown on
the plans.
3. All existing wells (both public and private wells) within 100 feet of the project must be
shown on the plans.
4. Clearly show how horizontal and vertical control are provided.
Sheet 1 of 18
For clarity, label each contract on the vicinity map.
Sheet 2 of 18
A legend should be added that includes a description for all symbols and line types used
on the plans. The symbols should make a distinction between proposed and existing.
Sheet 3 of 18
1. Some statement should be added to the plans to clarify the status of the seven large trees
and right-of-way monuments on these plans. Are they to be protected or do they require
removal/replacement? If they will be removed will the contractor be required to replace
them?
2. It appears several residences are not served by water from the Town. Confirm that all
wells in the vicinity have been shown on the plans.
3. At station 13+00, it appears the proposed sewer line comes very close to the existing gas
line. Will the gas line require special treatment or replacement? Some clarification
should be made so that the contractor knows what is expected.
SDPIBtg Sprgs/ DMU comments/6-25-99

4. Protection of the old store building adjacent to the sewer line. Some statement should be
added to the plans to clarify any special treatment, protection, supports that must be
provided by contractor prior to excavation. What effect will the cut depths exceeding 10
feet have on the structure?
Sheet S of 18
Protection of items within the sewer line. Some statement should be added to the plans to
clarify the status of the USGS monument "Joshua". Is it to be protected or does it require
removal/replacement? If it will be removed will it be the contractor's responsibility
include replacement?
2. Some consideration should be given as to whether the depth of the 8 inch sewer for
contract "A" can be reduced. Can manhole 12 be relocated or its depth reduced such that
the whole length of the sewer line can be raised, thereby reducing cut depths?
Consider including a detailed profile view of the road crossing, manhole 12, and existing
utilities which provides better clarity. This view could include thrust blocks and
minimum clearances for the utilities.
4. Advise if odor control has been satisfactorily addressed at manhole no. 12 due to the
close proximity of residences. Has corrosion protection been considered for manhole 12?
Sheet 6of18
l . Consider installing the check valve in the horizontal section of the discharge pipe instead
of the vertical.
2. Typically we expect the force main to be a minimum of 4-inches in diameter. This will
also necessitate a larger pump size to provide a minimum 2.0 fps scour velocity. Please
revise plans and specifications accordingly or provide a sound engineering basis for the
smaller selection. Such basis must address maintenance issues associated with small
force mains.
3. Include a comment on the applicability of standby power for the pump station. What will
be the standard operating procedure for the school upon loss of power. Provide a
connection at the pump station for a portable generator hook up.
4. The size of the stone or gravel should be specified for the gravel access road and the
pump station area.
Has approval been received from DOT or others for the un-encased boring under
McBrayer Homestead Road?
SDP/Blg Sprgs/ DMU comments/6-25-99

Sheet 7 of 18
1. Provide engineering calculations to confirm the existing sewer lines have adequate
capacity to convey any additional flows to the WWTP. At a minimum, the sewer should
have sufficient capacity to handle the peak flow with the sewer full. This evaluation
should be based upon 20-year flow projections for all tributary lines.
2. Provide engineering calculations to confirm the concrete piers for the aerial crossing were
designed to prevent overturning and settlement. For clarity, the type of concrete used for
the pier construction should be specified.
3. The elevation of the 25 year flood should be marked on the stream crossing and the
impact of debris and flood waters evaluated. The bottom of the pipe should be placed no
lower than the 25-year flood elevation.
4. For aerial crossings of navigable waters provide a copy of the Section 10 Permit or a
letter from the Corps stating that none is required for this project.
5. At several stations, the proposed sewer line crosses existing utilities or fences. Some
clarification should be made so that the contractor knows what is expected with regard to
the following items:
a. Fence lines at station 8+00 and elsewhere, also identify type of fence,
b. Power lines at station 13+20.
6. The slope between manhole A-2 and A-3 appears to be incorrect. It should be 6.98%.
The stationing at manhole A-7 appears to be incorrect. The stationing or the distance
form the previous manhole should be corrected.
7. The extent of the right of way is not clearly defined on this plan. It should be clarified.
Has approval been received from DOT or others for an open cut at station 9+20?
Sheet 8 of 18
The elevations at manhole A-3 appear to be incorrect. The stationing at manholes C-1
and T-3-4 appears to be incorrect. The stationing or the distances form the previous
manholes should be corrected.
2. The stream crossing detail calls for PVC pipe in the two views, however the profile calls
for DIP and two 45' elbows.
3. The force main invert was not specified for manhole C-3.
Sheet 9 of 18
SDP/Big Sprgs/ DMU comments16-25-99

The slopes between manhole T-2, T-2-2 and T-2-3 appear to be incorrect. The elevation
at manhole T-2-4 appears to be missing.
2. For clarity, consider removing gridlines from the top left of the profile view.
Has approval been received from DOT or others for an open cut at station 8+25?
Sheet 10 of 18
There is a discrepancy between rim elevations for manhole T-4-3. The alignment for
manhole T-2-2 appears to be incorrect.
2. The right of way is not clearly designated for Line T-4.
3. The status of the pond and whether minimum setbacks are required are unclear.
Typically the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommends a 50 foot distance between the
nearest edge of the cleared right-of-way and a body of water, where ever possible.
Sheet 11 of 18
Typically we expect the force main to be a minimum of 4-inches in diameter. This will
also necessitate a larger pump size to provide a minimum 2.0 fps scour velocity. Please
revise plans and specifications accordingly or provide a sound engineering basis for the
smaller selection. Such basis must address maintenance issues associated with small
force mains.
2. The minimum separation distance from the water line of 10 feet should be specified.
The size and depth of stone should be specified for the gravel access road and beneath the
pump station.
4. In order to provide for system reliability, the Division requires one of the following:
a. dual source or stand-by power on site,
b. telemetry systems with a sufficient number of stand-by generators and personnel
for distribution,
C. approval from the Director (see NCAC 2H.0219(h)(3)), or
d. where vicinity waters are classified as C, show a history of power reliability.
Please comment on which method will be utilized for this pump station.
Sheet 12 of 18
1. It appears invert elevations for manhole N-3 are incorrect.
SDP/Blg Spigs/ DMU comments/6-25-99

2. The invert elevations for the spur line from manhole 18-1 are inconsistent with slopes and
distances on the plans.
3. At station 3+30 additional DIP pipe may be required to ensure a minimum of three feet of
cover is provided for all non-ferrous pipe.
4. Some note may be required to clarify what will happen to the abandoned sewer pipe and
manholes. Will there be any recovery, demolition, or will they be abandoned "in -place"?
Sheet 13 of 18
1. It appears that the stationing for manhole N-9 is incorrect and the leader arrow indicates
the wrong manhole. In addition, the stationing is inconsistent between the plan and
profile views.
2. It appears that the stationing for manhole N-I I is incorrect in the profile view.
3. The slope between manhole N-7 and N-8 appears to be incorrect. It should be 0.96%.
4. The invert elevations, slope, and distance for the line from manhole N-8-1 are not
specified. A profile of this line must be provided.
5. The roadway type is not specified at manhole N-12. A profile of the new line from
existing manhole 10 must be provided. Has approval been received from DOT or others
for an open cut?
6. A profile of the spur lines, which connect to manholes N-13 and N-16, must be provided.
7. advise contractor what method is to e used to plug existing sewer.
Sheet 14 of 18
1. The slope between manhole N-17 and N-18 appears to be incorrect. In addition there is
no drop from invert "in" to invert "out" for manhole N-17.
2. The note regarding removing pipe from the existing line 5A is vague. Does the note
apply to both lines to N-16 or just one?
Sheet 15 of 18
This sheet is missing the north arrow.
2. Station 48+25 may require additional lengths of DIP to ensure a minimum three feet of
cover on all non-ferrous pipe.
SDRBlg Sprgs/ DMU commentsl&25-99

3. It appears the invert "in" elevations for existing manhole 2 are inconsistent between the
plan view and profile view.
4. It appears that the stationing and rim elevations for existing manhole A-3 are incorrect in
the profile view.
For clarity profiles should be shown for the line segments between manholes A-4 through
A-6.
6. Confirm that a 25 foot permanent easement exists beginning at manhole 2.
Sheet 17 of 18
1. Several details are included in this plan which do not appear to be part of this project.
Please remove them.
2. Some details from a previous submission were left out. They include a detail on manhole
construction, a detail on borings and encasements, transition manhole (force main to
gravity line) and typical waterline, force main and sewer line section views. They should
be re-inserted.
3. A detail of the installation of manholes constructed over existing lines should be
provided.
4. The minimum diameter of manholes shall be 4 feet with a minimum access hole of 22
inches. Each manhole should be labeled with its size or a note added that advises all
manholes are 4 feet.
5. As stipulated in 15A NCAC 211.0219(i)(2)(J), drop manholes shall be provided where
invert separations exceed 2.5 feet. Drop manholes shall be constructed with an outside
drop connection with the entire connection encased in concrete or ferrous pipe with
necessary blocking.
6. Pipe connections must be watertight and made by gasketed flexible connection or any
connection that will allow differential settlement of the pipe and manhole.
7. A detail for the replacement of gravel drives should be added. In addition, consider
adding a note on each plan referencing the location of the details for the replacement of
driveways.
Where sewers are subject to traffic bearing loads, ferrous material or other pipe with
proper bedding to develop design supporting strength shall be provided as stipulated in
15A NCAC 21-1.0219(i)(2)(H). Please specify which method will be utilized.
SDP/Blg Sprgsl DMU commenfs/6-25-99

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF, WATER QUALITY"
June 9, 1999
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
SUBJECT: Approval
JL 01AM of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
Dear Mr. Howell:
The Town of Boiling Springs Preliminary Engineering Report has been reviewed
by the Division of Water Quality. The project consists of the installation of
approximately 16,70011 of 8-inch gravity sewer line, approximately 61 manholes,
1,8001.f. of 2-inch force main, one creek crossing, 32011 of bored pipeline, two pump
stations (32 gpm and 33 gpm), and associated driveway/asphalt repairs and service
connections. The estimated cost of this proposed work is $797,760. The Preliminary
Engineering Report is hereby given approval.
A State High -Unit Cost Grant has been requested for this project. The project
falls within the minimum criteria for which the environmental review process is not
required. If the funding source changes to the State Revolving Fund (SRF), then the
environmental review process must be reinstated.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Jay Lucas at
[phone].
Sincerely,
J" 6
Ary John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
DMB/nw
cc: West and Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Don Evans
DMU/FEU
SRG-Application
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SOq RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

NC®ENR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 30, 1999
Memo To: Steve Pellei, Construction Grants
From: Rex Gleason
Prepared By: Michael Parker l
Subject: Town of Boiling Springs
McBreyer-Homestead .Road Elementary School
Sanitary Sewer Extension
Cleveland County
Per your request, a review has been conducted by the staff of this Office of
the subject sanitary sewer engineering plans and specifications. This project
involves the construction of a sanitary sewer line to serve the subject elementary
school. ,
Within the past two (2) years, the Town of Boiling Springs has upgraded
their existing WWTP. The upgrade included an expansion of the plant as well as
significant improvements of the Town's existing sewer collection system with
regards to 1/I. 1
Such being the case, we have no additional comments -to offer at this time.
The Town should be capable of accepting the additional wastewater generated by
the school. Depending on whether any wetland and/or stream channel impacts
are necessary during the construction of the proposed collection system (none
were observed on the plans), additional review/permitting may be necessary.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please advise.
/mlp
hAgen\consgrnt.mem

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
{ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 16, 1999
MEMORANDUM -
m
From:
Rex Gleason
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Mooresville Regional Office
Steven Pellei, Environmental EngineeiEA
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Town of Boiling Springs/Cleveland County
McBreyer-Homestead Road Sewer Line Extension
j,JAR J.'s 1999
Enclosed is one set of plans and specifications for the above referenced facility.
Please review them at your earliest convenience and advise this office of any
comments, concerns or questions you may have regarding this project.
If you have any questions or require additional information, you may contact me
at [phone].
SDP
Enclosures
cc: project file
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
n 7-" -_m`

S �
,
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
B. ""NTJR ysy;
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
Dear Mr. Howell:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
❑IVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 12, 1999;:
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
and Contract Documents for
__ McBrayer Homestead
Road/Elementary School
The Construction Grants & Loans Section has completed its review of the subject
Preliminary Engineering Report and contract documents and has the attached comments.
Please note that our review of the preliminary engineering report covers Crest Acres, the
McBrayer-Homestead area, and Lyman Street, while our review of the contract
documents covers only the McBrayer-Homestead project. Responses to these comments
should be submitted for our review and approval as soon as possible.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Daniel
Blaisdell at [phone].
Sincerely,
J, cl_-Dc" �. e.-
T. Allen Wahab, P.E.
Assistant Chief for Engineering Branch
DMB/nw
Attachment (all cc's)
cc: West & Associates
�Mr0MReio a"me
Don Evans
Jay Lucas
Cecil Madden
SRG
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
and Contract Documents for McBrayer-Homestead Area
Construction Grants and Loans Comments
I. Preliminary Engineering Report
1. Please include NPDES permit flow sheet(s) in a revised PER.
2. Please include a statement regarding the treatment plant's ability to meet NPDES
permit limits with the addition of flow from the three areas discussed in the report.
3. Include a copy of any current SOC's, JOC's, moratorium letters, as applicable, in
a revised PER.
4. Please include evidence which substantiates the need for replacement of the
Lyman Street sewer line. This evidence should be in the form of a video of the
sewer line, smoke testing reports, flow monitoring reports, or some other
appropriate evidence.
5. Please confirm whether costs for service connection are included in the project
costs on page 4. If so, these costs should be broken out in the estimates and the
bid form since they are eligible for grant/loan funding only to the right-of-way or
easement.
6. Confirm whether costs for start-up and O&M manual(s) are included in all of the
cost estimates. If not, please add those costs.
H. Biddability/Constructability
A. Contract Documents
1. The Notice of Award must be signed by the owner or the owner and
engineer.
2. Confirm whether section 06900 pertains to this project.
3. Consider adding the phrase "stone bedding" in the asterisked statement on
the bid schedule. This will clearly differentiate between stone bedding and
stone foundation conditioning (i.e. undercutting).
4. The measurement/payment section in section 07210 discusses service
laterals. Please clarify if service laterals are part of this project. Also see
comment I.5, above.

-3-
B. Plan Documents
1. Sheet 5 of 9 -
a. Consider extending the DIP sewer line to manhole 12.
b. Show the telephone conduit in the plan view near manhole 12.
2. Sheet 6 of 9 -
a. Consider adding notes in the plan view regarding the grade of the
4-inch and 6-inch sewer lines that the contractor will extend
beyond the fence.
a
C.
In conjunction with comment a, above, the 1" = 50' plan view _
shows invert elevations for two manholes outside the pump station.
Are the lines and manholes part of this project? Please clarify with
a note on the plan sheet.
Note the seeding/haying, etc. requirements near the pump station,
if any.
d. Is the proposed manhole on the far side of the football field part of
this project? Please note accordingly.
e. Confirm whether air release valves are required on the 2-inch force
main.
f. Show the 2-inch force main under McBrayer Homestead Road as a
bore in the profile.
g. In the plan view of the pump station, elevation "G" is listed in a
table. Where is "G" in the elevation view?
h. Please note if the 6 x 6 timber post should be set in concrete in the
elevation view of the pump station.
3. Sheets following 6 of 9 -
a. Please add sheet numbers in the title blocks of the last three sheets
and provide legible signatures on the P.E. seals.

III. General
The Construction Grants and Loans Section has historically limited "C" factors to
C = 120. This is to account .for system aging. Please revise the friction loss
calculation accordingly. Also confirm, based on the revised calculations, whether
the operating point, impeller size, or TDH value will require modification.
2. Please confirm that the pump station design complies with all items under
214.0219(h) and (i), especially number h(3) (copies attached).
3. Confirm that all required easements, encroachment agreements and rights -of -way
have been obtained.

15A Environmental Management 211.0219
(e) Modification of a Local Program. After a local sewer system
program has been approved by die Commission. any modification of
the program procedures or requirements specified in Paragraph (a) of
this Rule must be approved by die Commission to assure that the proce-
dures and requirements remain at least as stringent as die state—wide
requirements of die Commission.
(f) Appeal of Local Decisions. Appeal of individual permit denials
or issuance with conditions the permit applicant finds unacceptable
shall be made to the local program authority or to an appropriate judicial
level. The Commission will not consider individual permit denials or
issuance with conditions to which the permittee objects. This Paragraph
does not alter die enforcement authority of die commission as specified
in G.S. 143-215.1(f).
(g)'Ilie Division shall maintain a list of all local units of government
with approved local sewer system programs and make copies of die
list available to the public upon request and payment of any reasonable
costs for reproduction. 'Ilne list can be obtained from: Permitting and
Engineering Unit Supervisor. Division of Environmental Management.
Water Quality Section. P. O. Box 29535. Raleigh. North Carolina.
HISTORY No-m
Statutory Authority G.S. 143-215.1: 143-215.3(a)(1):
Eff. February 1. 1986:
Amended Eff. February 1. 1993: October 1. 1987.
.0219 MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
(a) All facilities requiring a permit pursuant to this Section shall be
designed following good engineering practice. The plans and specifica-
tions for all projects must be sealed by a Professional Engineer. Tlie
only exceptions from die Professional Engineer requirement are those
allowed in Rule .0205(d)(1)(A)(iii) of this Section.
(b) Waste. including treated waste. shall not be placed directly into.
or in contact with. GA classified groundwater unless such placement
will not result in a contravention of GA groundwater standards. as dem-
onstrated by predictive calculations or modeling methods acceptable
to die Director.
(c) Impoundments. trenches or other excavations made for die pur-
pose of storing or treating waste will not be excavated into bedrock
unless the placement of waste into such excavations will not result in
a contravention of assigned standards. as demonstrated by predictive
calculations or modeling methods acceptable to die Director.
(d) The bottoms of earthen impoundments. trenches or other similar
excavations with die exception of nitrification fields. infiltration sys-
tems. and sewer line excavations shall he at least four feet above die
bedrock surface. except that die bottom of excavations which are less
than four feet above bedrock shall have a liner with a hydraulic conduc-
tivity no greater than 1 x 10-7 centimeters per second. Liner thickness
will be that thickness necessary to achieve a leakage rate consistent
with the sensitivity of classified groundwaters. Separation distances or
liner requirements may be reduced if it can be demonstrated by predic-
tive calculations or modeling methods acceptable to die Director. that
construction and use of these treatment and disposal units will not result
in contravention of assigned standards.
(e) Waste shall not be applied or discharged onto or below die land
surface when die vertical separation between the waste and tie seasonal
high water table is less than one foot. It' die area is to be utilized for
Industrial waste and has a separation of less dean three feet. and in other
areas as designated by die Director. a demonstration must be made us-
ing predictive calculations or modeling methods. acceptable to die Di-
rector. that such placement will not result in contravention of classified
groundwater standards.
(t), Treatment works and disposal systems utilizing eartien basins.
iagooi's. ponds or trenches. excluding nitrification fields. infiltration
systems. and holding ponds containing non —industrial treated effluent
prior to spray irrigation. for treatment. storage or disposal shall have
either a liner of natural material at least one foot in thickness and having
a hydraulic conductivity of no greater than 1 x 104) centimeters per
second when compacted. or a synthetic liner of sufficient dhiclaiess to
exhibit structural integrity and an effective hydraulic conductivity no
greater than that of die natural material liner.
(g) Except as otherwise provided by these requirements or by terms
of a permit. all waste treatment. storage and disposal facilities must
maintain and operate a groundwater monitoring system as approved
by the Division. Tlie monitoring system must be designed to assess
the impact of any discharge on die quality of the underlying groundwa-
ters and must be -based on die results of die hvdroeeologic investigation.
--td(h) For pumping stations:
(1) no by—pass or overflow lines:
(2) multiple pumps shall be provided capable of pumping at a rate
of 2.5 times die average daily flow rate with any one pump out of ser-
vice. Pump —on Pump=offelevations shall -be -set suclrthat 2—&pumping------
cycles per hour may be achieved in the pump station at average flow.
If extended detention times are necessary due to phased development.
the need for odor and corrosion control must be evaluated by the appli-
cant:
(3) at least one of die following shall be required:
(A) dual source or standby power supply on site or:
(B) telemetry systems with sufficient numbers of standby generators
and personnel for distribution on
(C) approval by tie Director that die pump station:
(i) serves a private water distribution system which has automatic
shut—off at power failure and no elevated water storage tanks. and
(ii) has sufficient storage capacity that no potential for overflow ex-
ists. and
(iii) is connected to facilities that can tolerate septic wastewater due
to prolonged detention or:
(D) where die waters that would be impacted by a power failure are
classified as C. the applicant may be allowed to show a history of power
reliability that would demonstrate that an alternative power source or
other reliabilitv measures would not be needed:
(4) screened vents for all wet wells:
(5) high water audio and visual alarnls:
(6) protection front a 100 year flood:
(7) restricted access to die site and equipment:
(8) all—weadier roadway to the site.
—+(i) For sewer systems and sewer system extensions:
(1) All building drains and building sewers which are approved by
the local building inspector in accordance with die North Carolina
Building Code are deemed to be permitted by die Environmental Man-
agement Commission:
`(2) All sewers shall he designed based upon at least minimum stan-
dards which include:
(A) wastewater flow rate at design loading should result in die sewer
flowing approximately half full. Tine sewer must also be evaluated as
to its ability to carry peak loadings:
(B) a velocity of two feet per second:
(C) construction and operation shall not result in water pollution:
(D) infiltration rate limited to 100 gallons per day per inch of pipe
diameter per mile of pipe:
c......i...._... o N��. i. 4 MA 1996

2H.0219 BARCLAYS OFFICIAL NORTH CAROLINA ADNUNISTRATIVE CODE Title
(E) construction and operation consistent with all applicable local
ordinances:
(F) for public gravity sewers. a minimum eight inch diameter pipe
and for private gravity sewers. a muiimum six inch diameter pipe:
(G) minimum separations
(i) Stomi sewers (vertical) 12 inches
(ii) Water mains (vertical-watcr over sewer) 18 inches
or (horizontal) 10 feet
(iii) In benched trenches (vertical) 18 inches
(iv) Any private or public water supply source.
includine any WS-I waters or Class I or
Class II impounded reservoirs used as a source
of drinking water 100 feet
(v) Waters classified WS-II. WS-III. B. SA. ORW.
HQW. or SB [from normal high water (or tide elevation)] 50 feet
(vi) Any other stream. lake or impoundment 10 feet
(vii) Anv building foundation 5 feet
(viii) Anv basement 10 feet
(ix) Top slope of embankment or cuts of 2 feet or
more vertical. height--- ------ --- ----- 10 -feet
(x) Drainage systems
(I) Interceptor drains 5 feet
(II) Ground water lowering and surface drainage ditches 10 feet
(xi) Any swimming pool 10 feet
(xii) Ferrous sewer pipe with joints equivalent to water main stan-
dards. shall be used where these minimum separations cannot be main-
tained. The minimum separation shall however not be less than 25 feet
from a private well or 50 fi from a public water supply well:
(H) three feet minimum cover shall be provided for all sewers unless
ferrous material pipe is specified. Ferrous material pipe or other pipe
with proper bedding to develop design supporting strength shall be pro-
vided where sewers are subject to traffic bearing loads:
(I) the maximum separation between manholes shall be 425 feet un-
less written documentation is submitted with the application that the
owner, authority has the capability to perform routine cleaning and
maintenance on the sewer at die specified manhole separation:
(1) drop manholes shall be provided where invert separations exceed
2.5 feet:
(K) manholes shall be desimied for 100-year flood protection:
0-) an air relief valve shall be provided at all high points along force
mains:
(M) odor and corrosion control must be satisfactorily addressed by
the applicant for all sewers and force mains with extended travel times.
to 0) For treatment works and disposal systems:
(1) no by-pass or overflow lines:
(2) multiple pumps if' pumps are used:
(2) at least one of the followumg:
(A) dual source.,dual feed or automatically activated standby power
supply on site. capable of powering all essential treatment components
under desiLm conditions: or
(B) approval by die Director that die facility:
(i) serves a private water distribution system which has automatic
shut-off at power failure and no elevated water storage tanks, and
60 has sufficient storage capacity that no potential for overflow ex-
ists. and
(iii) can tolerate septic wastewater due to prolonged detention: or
(C) where the waters that would be impacted by a power failure are
classified as C Waters. Lie applicant may be allowed to show
a history
of power reliability that would demonstrate that an alternative power
source or other reliability measures would not be needed:
(4) protection from 100 year flood:
(5) buffer zones of at least the following distances. and greater where
necessary to comply with Section .0400 of this Subchapter or
to address
particular site or waste characteristics:
(A) Any habitable residence or place of public assembly under sepa-
rate ownership or which is to be sold:
(i) for spray irrigation systems
(application area) not covered by
15A NCAC 2H .0219(k)
400 feet
(ii) for surface residual application
400 feet
(iii) for subsurface residual injection
200 feet
(iv) for facultative lagoons
400 feet
(v) for activated sludge plants or surface sand Filters
100 feet
(vi) for soil remediation sites
100 feet
(B) Any private or public water supply source
100 feet
(C) Streams classified as WS or B:
(i) for subsurface disposal
50 feet
(ii) for non -discharge surface disposal except
for high rate infiltration systems
100 feet
(iii) high rate infiltration systems
200 feet
(D) Waters classified SA or SB:
(i) all systems except for high rate
100 feet
infiltration systems
from mean
high water
(ii) high rate infiltration systems
200 feet
from mean
high water
(E) Any other stream. canal. marsh. or coastal waters
(i) for subsurface disposal
50 feet
(ii) for non -discharge surface disposal except
for high rate infiltration systems
100 feet
(iii) high rate infiltration systems
200 feet
(iv) wastewater treatment facilities
50 feet
(F) Anv Class I or Class II impounded reservoir
used as a source of drinking water
(i) all systems except for high rate infiltration
systenms
100 feet
from normal
high water
(ii) high rate infiltration systems
200 feet
from normal
high water
(G) Any other lake or impoundment:
(i) for subsurface disposal
50
feet
(ii) for surface disposal except for high rate
infiltration systems
100
feet
(iii) high rate infiltration systems
200
feet
(If) Any building foundation except
treatment facilities:
(i) for subsurface disposal
10
feet
(ii) for surface disposal
15
feet
(I) An%- basement
(i) for subsurface disposal
15
feet
Page 246 supplement 96, Numbcr5; May 1996

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 30, 1999=r"rrh�''
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Town Administrator 1PR Isn"
Town of Boiling Springssil
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
SUBJECT: Grant Application
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Howell:
This will acknowledge receipt of three (3) copies of an application and
supporting documents for a state grant to aid in the cost of construction of new
wastewater collection lines to serve areas with failing septic systems and rehabilitation
of sewers.
Upon initial review of the application it was found that the following required
items was not included:
• Local Government Water Supply Watershed Protection/Wellhead
Protection Ordinance Evaluation Form (attached)
For High -Unit Cost Grant application, the additional document must be
provided:
• Official copy of applicant's existing water rate structure and sewer rate
structure with documentation of an average monthly residential water and
sewer user charge. (The documentation should be certified by authorized
representative.)
Depending on the volume of applications and the availability of funds this review
cycle, award of applications may depend on the priority criteria. Additional priority
points may be obtained by submitting the items listed on the attachment titled "Priority
Points". A check beside each item will indicate we have received this information and
the priority points have been posted.
Upon receipt of the items indicated, the application and supporting documents
will be processed and prioritized.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29S79, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

-2-
Submittal of final plans and specifications will place your application in a higher
category for funding. Final plans and specifications should be submitted no later than
June 1. 1999 in order to receive the higher ranking. If plans and specifications cannot be
completed by June 1, 1999, please indicate the scheduled date for submission.
Also, a monthly schedule of disbursement grant funds will be required prior to an
award of funds.
Please be advised that all supporting documentation, including documentation for
priority points, must be submitted by April 30, 1999 in order to be included in the
priority ranking.
If I can be of assistance, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Don Evans, Supervisor
State Revolving Loan & Grant Program
DE/nw
Enclosures
cc: West & Associates - Morganton
SRG

),�6 1 L I hJb i,.�Gl5
Attaclunent
PRIORITY POINTS
(A ::heck "✓" will indicate information already received)
A. Planning & Water Conservation (Bonus Points)
(1)
Applicant demonstrates it has a continuing I/I program in its wastewater sewer maintenance program.
5 points
(2)
Applicant demonstrates it has a continuing program of water conservation education and information.
5 points
(3)
Applicant demonstrates it has established a water conservation incentive rate structure; created incentives for new or replacement
installation of low -flow faucets, shower heads, and toilets; or has a water reclamation or reuse system.
5 points
(4)
Applicant demonstrates that it has adopted a comprehensive land -use plan that meets the requirements of G.S. 155H, Article 18
or G.S. 160A, Article 19, or applicant is a local government unit that is not authorized to adopt a comprehensive land -use plan,
but that is located in whole or in part in another local government unit that has adopted a comprehensive land -use plan, and that
the proposed project is consistent with the plan.
7 points I/
(5)
Applicant demonstrates that the comprehensive land -use plan exceeds the minimum state standards for the protection of water
resources.
8 points
(6)
Applicant demonstrates that actions have been taken toward implementation of the comprehensive land -use plan. These actions
may include the adoption of a zoning ordinance or any other measure that significantly contributes to the implementation of the
comprehensive land -use plan.
10 points
(7)
Applicant has developed a capital improvement plan as defined in Session Laws.1998, Chapter 132.
15 points
(8)
Proposed project is consistent with the water supply watershed protection requirements of G.S. 143-214/5.
5 points
(9)
Applicant demonstrates voluntary water supply watershed protection activities in excess of the minimum requirements of
G.S. 143-214.5 or
15 points
(10)
Applicant demonstrates it has developed a voluntary wellhead protection program, or applicant demonstrates it has both (9) and
(10).
20 points
B. Wastewater Treatment Works Projects
(1)
Classifications of receiving waters: SA, WS-I, WS-II, ORW, HQW
20 points
WS-III, WS-IV, WS-V
15 points
B, SB
10 points
C, Sc
5 points
(2)
Regional project
15 points
(3)
Wastewater treatment process for removal of nutrients
5 points
(4)
Reduction of the overall volume of effluent discharged to state's waters by using alternative methods of wastewater treatment
and disposal
25 points
(5)
Financial need
/ �Z9Points f/
(6)
Applicant is in a distressed county
Sewer Use Ordinance 6 draft 4
10 points
points
(7)
(adopted points, points)
(8)
Capital reserve fund established by resolution
4 points
(9)
Proper accounting and fiscal reporting as evidenced by audit
All rights -of -way, or easements acquired; site certificates completed ,z} �i`f �C°7 !��
15 points
10 points
(10)
necessary sites,

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 23, 1999
MEMO TO: Ryan ScruggQ, Project Manager
Facility Evaluation Unit
FROM Rex Gleason
Prepared By: Samar Bou-Ghazale 5)'C
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
As requested by your memo dated March 16, 1999, this Office
has reviewed the preliminary engineering report submitted by West
and Associates for the Town of Boiling Springs concerning the
Crest Acres,'McBreyer-Homestead Area and Lyman Street sewer
project. The Town of Boiling Springs needs to replace the
existing degraded terra cotta pipe on Lyman Street that has been
in service approximately fifty years. The construction of sewers
on the McBreyer-Homestead Road portion of the project will serve
a new school and 35 homes and businesses. The Crest Acres
portion of the project will serve 38 homes in which 23 have
severe problems with current septic tank systems.
The Town is in the process of completing construction of a
new 0.3 MGD WWTP adjacent to the existing 0.3 MGD plant. The
current average monthly flow is 0.27 MGD. The expected additional
flow from the proposed sewer construction is 36,720 GPD.
This Office has no objections to the project as proposed.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please
advise.

[NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 16, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO: Rex Gleason, Regional Supervisor
Mooresville Regional Office
FROM: Ryan Scruggs, Project Manager C
Facilities Evaluation Unit Oks
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Preliminary Engineering Report
kil
ks,
MAR 17 1999
Transmitted herewith is one copy of the above subject Preliminary Engineering Report
for your files. Please return your comments to this office before April 19, 1999.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Attachment
RMS:pe
=
cc: FEU
SRG
G�
If
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29S79, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] _ FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
FOR
CREST ACRES, McBREYER-HOMESTEAD AREA & LYMAN STREET
SEWER PROJECT
BOILING SPRINGS, NORTH CAROLINA
JANUARY, 1999
BENJAMIN B. THOMAS, P.E.
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A-
MORGANTON, NORTH CAROLINA
ram, C-,--
NA R
LOXN WSLECTION
11 U'M 1999
t,W-1•jT
w.-1 m
vonv ti

Introduction
The following is a Preliminary Engineering Report for the extension and replacement of sanitary sewer
lines in the Town of Boiling Springs. The report includes a general overview, area description, cost
breakdown and location map.
General Overview
The Town of Boiling Springs, located in Cleveland County, proposes the installation of 16,680
linear feet of 8" sanitary sewer line. Of this 9,180 linear feet is new line construction with the remaining
7,500 linear feet the replacement of a degraded line presently in service. This project focuses on three
areas of concern that are either in need of replacement of existing sanitary sewer lines or the installation of
new sanitary sewer lines to serve the area. The three areas are located within the town limits or the service
area of the Town of Boiling Springs. These areas are the Crest Acres area, the Lyman Street area, and the
McBreyer-Homestead Road School area. The total cost for this project is estimated at $797,760 and is
estimated to take six months to complete after funding is secured The Town of Boiling Springs has the
funds to cover 12.5 percent ($100,000) of the total estimated cost and is requesting a grant under the NC
Clean Water Revolving Loan and Grant Act of 1987 for the remaining $697,760.
Area Description
The Crest Acres area portion of the project consists of the installation of 6,500 linear -feet- of -8"
PVC sanitary sewer and 14 manholes. Crest Acres contains 38 homes and presently has no access to public
sewer and are utilizing private septic tank systems. In a survey conducted of the 38 homes, 23 reported
moderate to severe problems with the current septic tank systems, with the remaining 15 experiencing
sporadic problems. These problems range from heavy seepage surfacing from the tanks to sewage backing
up into the homes. The Cleveland County Health Department has determined that there is not adequate
room for drain field repair areas to correct the existing problems and recommends connection to public
sewer. The total cost of this portion is estimated at+$273,200:
The Lyman Street portion of the project consists of the replacement of 1,30C linear feet of severely
degraded 8" terra Gotta sanitary sewer pipe with an equal amount of -8"--PVC sanitary sewer. The existing
-2-

1
terra Gotta pipe has been in service approximately fifty years. This replacement is to eliminate the large
amounts of inflow and infiltration that has been identified on this section of line. In researching the
feasibility of replacement verses rehabilitation of the existing line, smoke testing and video inspections
were carried out. The results of these determined that replacement was more cost effective and would
better maintain the integrity of the system than rehabilitation. The estimated cost for this portion of the
project is. $303,200.
The McBreyer-Homestead Road portion of the project consists of the installation of-3;680-linear
feet of 8" PVC sanitary sewer to serve a new school and 3'5-hi mesarid-businesses. The new school will
serve approximately 600 students. The estimated cost for this portion is-$221;360.
-3-

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
SEWER EXTENSION ON McBREYER-HOMESTEAD ROAD
TO SERVE NEW SCHOOL
Material
Quantity
Cost
8" Gravity Sewer
3,680 LF @ $27.00/LF
$ 99,360.00
Manholes
14 @ $1,400.00/EA
19,600.00
Boring & Encasement
120 LF @ $85.00/LF
10,200.00
Drive Repairs
Lump Sum
7,000.00
3" Force Main
1,200 LF @ $7.001LF
8,400.00
Pump Station
Lump sum
40,000.00
Subtotal
184,560.00
Contingencies (101/o)
18,400.00
Engineering (100/6)
18,400.00
Total
$221,360.00
-4-

Material
8" Gravity Sewer
Manholes
Boring & Encasement
Drive Repairs
Reconnect Service Lines
Subtotal
Contingencies (10%)
Engineering (100/.)
Total
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
LYMAN STREET SEWER REPLACEMENT
aantit
7,500 LF @ $27.00/LF
25 @ $1,400.00/EA
200 LF @ $85.001LF
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
-5-
Cost
$202,500.00
35,000.00
17,000.00
10,000.00
4,000.00
253,200.00
25,000.00
25,000.00
$303,200.00

s
a
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
SEWER EXTENSION ON NORTH MAIN STREET TO CREST ACRES
Material
Quantit
Cost
8" Gravity Sewer
5,500 LF @ $27.00/LF
$148,500.00
Manholes
22 @ $1,400.00/EA
30,800.00
Pumping Station
Lump sum
40,000.00
Force Main
600 LF @ $6.50/LF
3,900.00
Asphalt Repairs
Lump Sum
4,500.00
Creek Crossing
Lump Sum
1,500.00
Subtotal
229,200.00
Contingencies (10%)
22,000.00
Engineering (10%)
22,000.00
Total
$273,200.00

CALCULATIONS OF AVERAGE
USER COST FOR TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
WATER & WASTEWATER CUSTOMERS
November — December, 1998
Residential Water Receipts
Residential Water Customers
Water Cost per Customer
Residential Sewer Receipts
Residential Sewer Customers
Sewer Cost per Customer
Average Water and Sewer Bill for November — December, 1998
October —November, 1998
Residential Water Receipts
Residential Water Customers
Water Cost per Customer
Residential Sewer Receipts
Residential Sewer Customers
Sewer Cost per Customer
Average Water and Sewer Bill for October — November, 1998
September — October, 1998
Residential Water Receipts
Residential Water Customers
Water Cost per Customer
Residential Sewer Receipts
Residential Sewer.Customers
Sewer Cost per Customer
Average Water and Sewer Bill for September - October, 1998
August — September, 1998
Residential Water Receipts
Residential Water Customers
Water Cost per Customer
Residential Sewer Receipts
Residential Sewer Customers
Sewer Cost per Customer
Average Water and Sewer Bill for August - September, 1998
-7-
$23,569.30
1,180
$23,569.30/1,180 = $19.97
$14,500.85
685
$14,500.85/685 = $21.17
$41.14
$22,952.11
1,180
$22,952.11/1,180 = $19.45
$13,899.01
685
$13,889.01/685 = $20.29
$39.74
$23,771.05
1,177
$23,771.05/1,177 = $20.20
$14,688.17
683
$14,688.17/683 = $21.51
$41.71
$24,101.68
1,175
$24,101.68/1,175 = $20.51
$14,987.52
683
$14,987.52/683 = $21.94
$42.45

July — August, 1998
Residential Water Receipts $23,693.91
Residential Water Customers 1,171
Water Cost per Customer $23,693.91/1,171 = $20.23
Residential Sewer Receipts $13,976.04
Residential Sewer Customers 682
Sewer Cost per Customer $13,976.04/682 = $20.49
Average Water and Sewer Bill for July - August, 1998 $40.72
June — July. 1998
Residential Water Receipts
$24,017.81
Residential Water Customers
1,170
Water Cost per Customer
$24,017.81/1,170 = $19.45
Residential Sewer Receipts
$14,207.50
Residential Sewer Customers
681
Sewer Cost per Customer
$14,207.50/681 = $20.86
Average Water and Sewer Bill for June - July, 1998 $41.93
Average Water and Sewer Bill for Six (6) Months 247.15 = $41.19
6
High User Cost Threshold for Cleveland County
Current Average Water and Sewer Bill
Additional O & M Due to New customers and Start-up of New WWTP (See Attached)
Average Monthly Bill after completion of Project and Start-up of New WWTP
Amount Over High User Cost Threshold per Month
-8-
$43.33
41.19
4.37
$45.56
$2.23

H.
Attachment
Due to New Customers
Administration
Billing
Meter Reading
Additional O & M Cost
0 already getting water bill
0 already getting water bill
Flow Increase to System
77 homes 77 x 3 bedrooms x 120 gpd/BR/day = 27,200.00 Gal/Day
1 school 600 x 15 gpd/student 9,000.00 Gal/DaV
Increase in Flow 36,700.00 Gal/Day
Current Average Daily Flow 270,000 Gal/Day
36,720 - 13.6% Increase in Flow to System
270,000
(13.6% Inc.)
Current
New
Increase Due
Budget
Budget
to Expenses
Utilities $24,182
$27,470
$ 3,200
Repairs & Maintenance $31,533
$35,821
4,200
Material & Supplies $36,389
$41,337
4,900
Due to Plant Start-up
Additional Personnel Cost
Sununary
Total O & M Increase Due to New Customers
Total O & M Increase Due to Plant Start-up
$27,700
Annual Cost per Customer/Month = 40,000 = $4.37
763 x 2
-9-
$12,300
$12,300
27,700
$40,000

1
tI. .. ....
—$LB
`-fie•
P/-•.. c>B1 nlelwsoH
•�c �`
l 7.
-
o .I
'
-�
m r - -
�.
CO
Is
-
zep
Puiito'
ASS 11)
09i I \
oas
�\
-
1 1
—
P91I\\
•a
.\ _,. A i; is
-
�1is
�8--.,
\.
co

v
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
CREST ACRES, McBREYER-HOMESTEAD AREA & LYMAN STREET
SEWER PROJECT
BOILING SPRINGS, NORTH CAROLINA
JANUARY, 1999
BENJAMIlv B. THOMAS, P.E.
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MORGANTON, NORTH CAROLINA

0
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
I. Existing Development
The Proposed wastewater collection lines in Boiling Springs area located in three different areas of
the Town. We are identifying the projects as follows:
Project #1 - Wastewater line extension to serve a new school an on extension of North Main Street
known as McBreyer-Homestead Road
The development along McBreyer-Homestead Road is a mixture of commercial, residential and
agricultural. Lot sizes vary from %2 acre to several acres. The site selected for the new school is
now used for agricultural purposes_
Project #2 - Wastewater line extension to serve Crest Acres Subdivision
The area in and around the crest Acres project is all single family residential development. This
project is located in the northeast quadrant of town along North Toney Street and South Toney
Street.
Project #3 - Wastewater line replacement from Lyman Street pumping station to School Avenue
This project begins at an existing pumping station located off the south end of Lyman Street and
generally follows an unnamed tributary of Poplar Creek in a northwesterly direction crossing
Highway NC 150 and ending at School Street. This line serves the central business district of
Boiling Springs and other areas developed for residential, commercial, and institutional purposes.
The property along the first 2,000 feet of this line is undeveloped
IL Existing Environment
Boiling Springs is located in the southeastern quadrant of Cleveland County. The topography of
the Boiling Springs area and the remainder of Cleveland County consists of a series of rounded
hills and rolling ridges with a generally southern trend
The topography in the project area, generally the eastern half of the Town of Boiling Springs,
varies from a high elevation of 900 feet at the proposed school site to a low elevation of 760 at the
Lyman Street pumping station.
1H. Surface Geology
Based on the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, the soils in the project area are '
classified as a mica schist and gneiss complex.
The mica schist and gneiss complex is deeply weathered at most areas and is covered by a thick
layer of residual clay containing fragments and layers of the parent material. The soil cover
overlaying the thick residual clay and weathered rock is usually thin and light.
IV. Water Resources
The Town of Boiling Springs is drained by two tributaries of the Broad River. Sandy Run Creek
drains the western half of the Town and Beaverdam Creek drains the eastern half of the town. Our
project is located in the Beaverdam Creek drainage area.
-2-

10
V. Ground Water Supply
Ground water supply is an important resource in Cleveland County. Much of Cleveland County is
dependent upon subsurface sources of water supplies. Smaller towns, individual residences, and
industries are characteristically served by a single well. Still, groundwater resources of the County
have been developed only to a very limited extent.
Groundwater supplies of at least a few thousand gallons per day are adequate for domestic and
similar purposes and can be obtained almost anywhere in the area from individual wells tapping
the bedrock aquifers.
The Town of Boiling Springs purchases water from the City of Shelby, which has a water
filtration plant for treating surface water.
VL Need
The Town of Boiling Springs will complete construction a new wastewater treatment plant in
February of 1999. With this new plant, the Town will have the capacity to expand their collection
system into areas previously unserved. Many older communities such as Crest Acres are
experiencing major problems with their single family septic tank systems. Of the 38 homes in
Crest Acres, 23 have moderate to severe problems and the remainders have sporadic problems. In
order to eliminate the public health problems caused these septic tank failures, the Town wishes to
extend collection lines into Crest Acres.
For the past several years, the Town of Boiling Springs has been conducting video and smoke
examination of their wastewater collection system in an effort to reduce the infiltration and inflow
into this system. As a result of this work, the Town has identified a 7,500 feet section of old terra
cotta pipe as a major source of infiltration and inflow. Replacement of this section of pipe will
greatly reduce the hydraulic overload at the Lyman Street pumping station and the wastewater
treatment plant, which occurs after significant rainfall events.
VH. Alternative Analysis
Project #1 - Wastewater line extension to serve new school
In order to provide sewer service to the new school site, two options are available.
A. Construct a package treatment plant and approximately 4,500 LF of effluent line to
discharge into Sandy run Creek.
B. Extend approximately 4,000 LF of gravity sewer lines to connect to the Boiling Springs
sewer system
The most cost effective and environmentally acceptable option is to extend the Boiling Springs
sewer lines to the school site.
Project #2 - Wastewater line extension to Crest Acres Subdivision
Residents of Crest Acres have the option of making onsite repairs to their septic systems or
connect to the wastewater collection system of Boiling Springs.
Option #1 — Onsite Repairs: After an evaluation of the home sites in Crest Acres, the
Cleveland County sanitarian concluded that many of the sites did not have adequate
repair areas and where homes did have repair areas, any repairs made would only be a
temporary solution
-3-

OL
Option #2 — Wastewater line extension into Crest Acres: Extending the wastewater
collection system into Crest Acres will initially have the greater capital cost but will
permanently eliminate the environmental problems, which now exist.
We recommend Option #2 as the most environmentally acceptable solution.
Proiect #3-Replacement of existing wastewater collection lines to Lyman Street Pumping Station.
As previously mentioned, this section of sewer line has been videoed and smoke tested to
determine the extent of degradation. Video footage of the terra cotta pipe revealed improper
alignment, sections of broken lines, poor service taps, and significant root intrusion at the joints.
We considered the options of:
A. Slip lining the existing pipe, or
B. Construct a parallel line and abandon the old system
Construction of a new line parallel to the existing line and abandoning the old system is the most
cost-effective way to correct the problems.
VM. Environmental Consequences
A. Changes in Land
The Extension of the existing wastewater collection lines to serve the new school and
Crest Acres Subdivision will be located in existing street right-of-way. No natural areas
will be disturbed as a result of the new wastewater lines. The replacement of the outfall
line will be confined to the existing easements, which contain existing wastewater lines.
No new easements will be needed for the replacement of the Lyman Street outfall line.
B. Wetlands:
There are no wetlands located in the project area.
C. Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands
A portion of the wastewater line to be replaced crosses property used for pasture
purposes. This property is not classified as prime or unique property.
D. Public Lands
There are no public lands effected by this project.
E. Scenic and Recreational Areas
There are no scenic and recreational areas located in the project area.
F. Areas of Archeological or Historical Value
The entire project is located in previously disturbed areas where no archeological or
historical sites were identified.
G. Air Quality
Proper dust control measures will be included in the project specifications.
H. Groundwater Quality
Our proposed project should have a beneficial effect on the quality of groundwater in two
areas.
1. The elimination of improperly functioning septic tanks.
2. Reduction of exfiltration which may be occurring on the Lyman Street outfall.
-4-

I. Nuisance Conditions
The project area is located in an urban area with associated urban noises. Any additional
noises and odor associated with this construction should be minor and temporary.
J. Water Supplies
This project will have no effect on any water supply.
K. Fish Habitats
Proper erosion control measures will be followed to prevent any siltation of fish habitats.
L. Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats
The entire project is located in street rights -of -way and cleared utility easements. No
additional clearing will be required which would effect wildlife or wildlife habitats.
M. Introduction of Toxic Substances
New flow into the wastewater collection system will be entirely domestic and should
contain no toxic substances.
N. Receiving Waters
Additional flows from the proposed project area will be treated by the Boiling Springs
wastewater treatment plant. With the recently completed expansion and upgrade of the
plant, there should be no additional impact in Sandy Run Creek
O. Indirect Measures
With the completion of a new wastewater treatment plant, the quality of the effluent
discharged into Sandy Run Creek will improve and since the discharge is small compared
to the stream flow, the impact on the stream should be negligible.
P. Mitigative Measures
1. Proper erosion control plan.
2. Review by Corps of Engineers for compliance with stream and wetland
regulations.
3. Review by Fish and Wildlife for habitat protection.
IX. Summary/Conclusion
The Cumulative environmental effects due to the expansion of the Boiling Springs wastewater
collection system and the replacement of the Lyman Street outfall will be:
A. The elimination of failing septic tank system will be beneficial to the groundwater
supplies as well as surface water in the project area.
B. Eliminate any potential health problem associated with failing septic tanks.
C. Reduce infiltration and inflow associated with the Lyman Street outfall
D. Eliminate an additional discharge into Sandy Run Creek from the new school
The negative effects associated with the construction of the project area considered minor and
temporary. The major effect will be improved environment and elimination of inflow into the
Boiling Springs system.
-5-

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO071943
�_. aci ity n ormatio :,� :v S�
,
( FacilityName:
Boiling Springs
(2.) Permitted Flow,County:
eve an
( .) Facility ass:
Regionalice:
Mooresville
( aci ity ermit tatus,
(i.e. New, Modification,
Existing or Renewal)
Renewal
(7.) USUS'lopoQuad:
x .:.. ._f
am JFaraeterisfips n_ >� . =;.°_
( ecervmgStream:
Sandy Run Creek
Stream Classification:
inter 7Q10 (cts):
u asin:
- -
(cts):
(4.) Drainage Area (mi ):Average
Flow (cts):
5.) Summer 7Q 10 (cts)
o):
5.3
-roposect. Changes
✓Fecal
-Parameters Affected
asis or c ang s � .1
Removed mstream monitoring
na vertent y added
for fecal.
during a modification to correct
flow wording on effluent page.
Updated supp to cover to me u e
Supplement to cover page
-A7C-i-ss-u-e-d tor expansion.
new construction.
Changed monitoring equency
Temperature
0500 re —as for a class 11 tacility.
from weekly to daily.
Wasteload Allocation Summary: JMN . 10/21/96
SOC 10/8/96 IAU recommended flow limit = 0.5 MGD because of I&I problems. Work on
collection system is ongoing.
Receiving Stream: Sandy Run Creek Index #: 9-46 G12NW 9/1/74 Class C
From source to Broad River
Coin liance violations in the last two years.
One flow violation m the last year 1 98 0.357 MGD
Previous year - 3 flow, 1 BOD, and 5 TSS violations.
CF Notes / history:
_
4/29 96 Faci i1'ty submitted request for SOC.
8/7/96 Add info was requested for justification of 0.2 MGD additional flow. Flow was not substantiated.
11/22/96 SR Mike Parker Facility will remain a Class II at expansion. 37 points now
10/17/97 Compliance Inspection Patricia Beam NOV for self monitoring data violations
12/5/97 SOC issued till 3/1/99 Flow = 0.35, BOD = 40, TSR = 50, Fecal = monitor
2/20/98 AtC issued by Construction Grants. Penn ittee states that construction has begun to expand to 0.60 MGD.
3/2/98 NOV 1/98 flow = 0.375 SOC limit = 0.35
3/9/98 NOV 17,000 gallons sewer overflow
Instream monitoring:
Fecal mstream was (inadvertently) added 12/3/97 during a modification to correct flow wording
Facility has none recommended in WLA and is not performing any instream monitoring.

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO071943
Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
Draft Permit to Public Notice: 10/7/98
Permit Scheduled to Issue: 11/23/98
State Contact
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Mary Cabe
at [phone], extension 518.
Copies of the following are attached to provide further information on the permit development:
• Reasonable Potential Analysis (majors only)
• Existing permit effluent sheets with changes noted (existing facilities only)
• Draft Permit
a to re:
NPDES Recommendation by:
Regional Office Comments
3
RHO is the facility constructing an equalization basin? Proposed on last SR, but not listed on CG ATC.
/ 6't P/1� ?'Lt7 'GIDLr �i2G�G`G�
al Recommendation by:
Reviewed by:
gSupervisor:ignatur
Re tonal
%G��
NPDES Unit:
ign.le:
Date

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
^�
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
�. .
March 11 1999 &
'VAR
19953
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
"FIR OF
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs�`���
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 29017
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
WWTP Improvements
Project No. CS370757-02
Final Inspection
Dear Mr. Howell:
A final inspection• for the federally funded portion of the subject project was
performed by the Construction Inspection Unit of the Construction Grants and Loans
Section on March 9, 1999. Please note that our inspection report covers both loan
administration and construction. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your
records.
In discussions with you and your engineer, it has been determined that the
initiation of operation of the upgraded treatment facility was February 26, 1999, since at
that time all of the major unit processes were functional and only minor punchlist items
were outstanding. Accordingly, a cutoff date of April 12, 1999 has been established,
after which additional project costs incurred will be ineligible for SRF loan participation.
If you or your engineer have any questions regarding this inspection, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Daniel M. Blaisdell, P.E.
Construction Inspection Unit
Enclosure
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Hickory Construction Co.
Robertson Controls
PMB
CIU/SRF
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/1 Oq POST -CONSUMER PAPER

CONSTRUCTION GRANT AND LOANS SECTION
FINAL INSPECTION REPORT
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
SRF PROJECT NO. CS370757-02
MARCH 9, 1999
I. LOAN ADMINISTRATION
The original SRF loan was for $1,033,000 with an interest rate of 2.91% and a fifteen
(15) year term. The loan was subsequently increased by $200,000 to a revised principal
amount of $1,233,000. The interest rate and term did not change. Construction is
scheduled to be complete and interest will begin accruing on March 12, 1999.
B. LOAN PAYMENTS
SRF
Date of Last Request(s) - 1/11/99
Requested to Date - $1,109,700
Total Disbursement: 90% of SRF Loan Funds
Disbursement #8 - $127,204
C. GENERAL
II. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
A. CONTRACT A
Name - Hickory Construction Co., Inc.
Address - P. O. Box 1769, Hickory, NC 28603-1769
Original Contract Amount - $1,185,125
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $1,182,125
Contract Description -General Construction
Superintendent at Site - Mike Beard
Date of NTP - 5/16/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99

-2-
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 99% Actual % Complete - 89% per application for
payment No. 8 dated 01/04/99 for construction
completed and materials stored through 12/25/98.
However, all work appeared complete during the
final inspection, with the exception of outstanding
punchlist items.
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. Approval Date Amount (Days) Remarks
None to date
B. CONTRACT B N.
Name - Robertson Controls, Inc.
Address - 515 Plato Lee Road, Shelby, NC 28150
Original Contract Amount - $90,900
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $90,300
Contract Description -Electrical Construction
Superintendent at Site - Bobby Bridges
Date of NTP - 5/16/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 99% Actual % Complete - 73% per application for
payment No. 3 dated 12/15/98 for construction
completed and materials stored through 12/15/98.
However, all work appeared complete during the
final inspection, with the exception of outstanding
punchlist items.
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. Approval Date Amount (Days) Remarks
None to date

-3-
1. The Following Work Was Observed to Be Completed
All of the work under both contractors is complete, with the exception of outstanding
punchlist items.
2. Work Schedule for next Month
Contract A - Complete outstanding punchlist items and turn the facilities
over to the owner.
Contract B - Complete outstanding punchlist items and turn the facilities
over to the owner.
III. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
A. CONSTRUCTION SITE:
1. Weather - Rain, snow & sleet Site Conditions: Wet
2. Storage/Protection of Stored Materials and Equipment Adequate:
Yes _ No _ N/A X
3 Safe Conditions/Methods Observed: Yes _ No _ N/A X
If not, note:
4. Were Unsafe Practices Brought to the Inspectors, Contractors or Recipient's Attention?
Yes _ No _ N/A X
5. Site Comments:
B. ENGINEERING/INSPECTION:
1. Resident Inspector On -Site: Yes _ No X
2. Inspector's Records, Reports, Shops, Files, Etc. Reviewed:
Yes _ No X Filed at A/E office.
3. Copies of Required Testing (concrete, soil, other) Reports Reviewed:
Concrete: Yes —No X
Soil: Yes —No X
Other: Yes _ No X
4. As-Builts Being Kept Up -To -Date: Yes X No _ Unknown _
5. Comments or Recommendations:
6. Was There Any Evidence of Open Burning on the Site? Yes _ No X
C. CONTRACTOR(s):
1. Davis -Bacon Act Wage Rate Posted: Yes X No
2. Recipient was Reminded to Perform Labor Interviews: Yes _ No _ N/A X
3. Reviewed Labor Interviews Performed by Recipient: Yes — No X

-4-
4. N.C. OSHA/Labor Laws Posted: Yes X No _
5. Up -To -Date Construction Schedule (Bargraph, CPM) Posted:
Yes —No X Issued at the beginning of construction.
6. Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed: Yes X No
7. Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) as per
Contractor:
8. If Construction Appears Not to be Completed as per Contract Estimate,
Additional Time Needed for Completion:
9. Soil and Erosion Control Certificate Posted? Yes X No
D. PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Certified Weekly Payrolls of Contractor(s) and Their Subcontractor(s) Being
Submitted: Yes X No _
2. Payment Milestones Discussed: Yes _ No X
3. J.O.C./S.O.C./Dates/Schedule Discussed: Yes X No _
4. Work Completed, Acceptable for Reimbursement: Yes X No
IV. GENERAL COMMENTS / RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
1. Attached is a copy of an SRF Loan Project Closeout Checklist (Attachment 1).
The checklist consists of 9 items that should be provided to the Construction
Grants and Loans Section in order for the project to be closed out. Several of
these items were discussed and are included in the summary package given to the
owner during the final inspection. Items 7 and 8 should be submitted no later than
March 31, 1999. The remaining items, with the exception of item 9, should be
submitted on or before the cut-off date of April 12, 1999. Item 9 must be
submitted after the first year of operation.
2. The DWQ inspector and the owner also discussed the items listed on the final
SRF Inspection Checklist (Attachment 2). Based on those conversations, the
owner has received the checked items. Items 2, 3, 9, 10 and 11 should be turned
over to the owner as soon as possible. Items 10 and 13 should be forwarded to
our office. Item 14 is for the owner's information. (Note that items 10 and 12 are
also addressed in comment 1, above.)
The DWQ inspector discussed with the A/E a final punchlist that was developed
during his final walk through of the facilities. The Final Inspection Punchlist
(Attachment 3) contains 6 items and is provided with this report for the owner's
use in conjunction with any other punchlist(s) developed by the owner and/or
A/E. All items should be addressed to the owner's satisfaction.

We
V. PROGRESS MEETING PARTICIPANTS
Name
Rick Howell
Joey Gantt
Benji Thomas
Mike Beard
Daniel M. Blaisdell
Bobby Bridges
Kurt Eckard
Inspector's Signature
Representing
Town of Boiling Springs
Town of Boiling Springs
West & Associates
Hickory Construction
NCDWQ
Robertson Controls
Hickory Construction
3
Date

Attachment 1
SRF LOAN
PROJECT CLOSEOUT CHECKLIST
RECIPIENT Town of Boiling Springs PROJECT NO. CS370757-02
As of 3/8/99, this office has not received any change orders for this project. If any
change orders have been issued, please submit (3) copies to this office as soon as
possible. All change orders must be approved by NCDWQ.
2. Final construction estimates must be submitted.
Information should be submitted on all nonrefunded bid deposits for eligible
contracts.
_4. Copies of any additional paid invoices for materials or services considered
eligible for reimbursement under this project, as well as engineering amendments,
must be submitted prior to the final payment request.
5. Submittal of all final contractor invoices showing retainages paid must be
submitted prior to the final payment request.
_6. A certification from the consulting engineer's firm that the Federal project is
complete and has been constructed according to the approved plans and
specifications and is operating according to design criteria is required (sample
enclosed).
X_7. An Initiation of Operation letter from the Town is required (sample enclosed).
_X 8. A Certification of Completion from the Town is required (sample enclosed).
9. Project Performance and Certification from the Town will be required on the date
one year from the initiation of operation (sample enclosed).
X = Submit to CG&LS by 3-31-99

Attachment 2
FINAL SRF INSPECTION CHECKLIST
Town of Boiling Springs
Project No. CS370757-02
March 9, 1999
The following, applicable items should be received by the owner from either the contractor(s) or
the engineer before final acceptance of the facilities. Please note that items 12 and 13 should be
sent to CG&LS before the established cut-off date:
✓1. As -built drawings.
2. Test reports (concrete, soil compaction, etc.).
3. Inspector's daily logs.
✓4. Approved shop drawings and submittals.
Z5. Operation/Maintenance Manual(s).
"I. Spare parts inventory.
Z8. Approved plans and specifications.
9. Contractor's certified payrolls.
10. Contractor's final sales tax report.
11. Consent of Surety to final payment.
,/Iil A certification from the Engineer/Architect stating the project is complete, and has been
constructed in accordance with the approved contract documents.
13. A listing of any pending costs expected to be incurred for the project.
14. Miscellaneous items:
- All Change Orders final ?
- All Disputes, Claims, etc. resolved ?
- Satisfactory clean up ?
- Removal of temporary services, trailers, signs, etc. completed ?
- Punch list items completed ?
- Initiation of operation date established ? 2-26-99
- Cut-off date established for loan -eligible project costs ? 4-12-99
* These dates to be established by CG&LS, in conjunction with owner.

Attachment 3
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS and LOANS SECTION
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION UNIT
TOWN of BOILING SPRINGS
PROJECT NO. CS370757-02
FINAL PUNCH LIST
March 9,1999
1. Complete grading/seeding, as required, throughout the construction site.
2. Complete any necessary touch-up painting.
3. Connect the permanent telephone line(s) in the lab building and install cover plates on the
junction boxes, as required.
4. Remove all temporary facilities from the construction site, including construction trailers,
utility poles, etc.
5. All erosion control devices should be removed after adequate stabilization has occurred.
6. The blades of the skimmers on the secondary clarifiers should be adjusted to ensure that
most of the collected material is deposited into the scum trough.

-4h"/
(t NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 17, 1999 "��` ,Yf •� �g.�c' r
FEB 22 1999
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs _., ..}�1,,,,"ka,� ,,,_� .,_ ,�r
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
SUBJECT: O & M Manual Receipt
Project No. CS370757-02
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Howell:
This office hereby acknowledges receipt of one copy of the O&M manual for the
referenced project. This manual will be reviewed and you will be advised of any
recommendations, comments, or other matters to be resolved should this be necessary.
Once the manual has been approved, two (2) additional copies must be submitted to this
office.
If you have any questions or desire assistance regarding this matter, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Thomas V. Fahnestock, Assistant Chief
Project Management Branch
TF/nw
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Valerie Lancaster
Jim Behmer
CIU/SRF
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
i�� � .:•RYA
December 21, 1998 jj
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
WWTP Improvements
Project No. CS370757-02
Interim Inspection
Dear Mr. Howell:
An interim inspection for the federally funded portion of the subject project was
performed by the Construction Inspection Unit of the Construction Grants and Loans
Section on December 16, 1998. This inspection was conducted in conjunction with the
monthly progress meeting. Please note that our inspection report covers both loan
administration and construction. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your
records.
If you or your engineer have any questions regarding this inspection, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
//&�/M _3 _ee'�
Daniel M. Blaisdell, P.E.
Construction Inspection Unit
DMB/nw
Enclosure
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Hickory Construction Co.
Robertson Controls
PMB
CIU/SRF
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

CONSTRUCTION GRANT AND LOANS SECTION
INTERIM INSPECTION REPORT
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
SRF PROJECT NO. CS370757-02
DECEMBER 16,1998
I. LOAN ADMINISTRATION
A. SRF LOAN
The original SRF loan was for $1,033,000 with an interest rate of 2.91% and a fifteen
(15) year term.. The loan was subsequently increased by $200,000 to a revised principal
amount of $1,233,000. The interest rate and term did not change. Construction is
scheduled to be complete and interest will begin accruing on March 12, 1999.
B. LOAN PAYMENTS
SRF
Date of Last Request(s) - 11/16/98
Requested to Date - $550,437
Total Disbursement: 45% of SRF Loan Funds
Disbursement #6 - $16,389
C. GENERAL
II. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
A. CONTRACT A
Name - Hickory Construction Co., Inc.
Address - P. O. Box 1769, Hickory, NC 28603-1769
Original Contract Amount - $1,185,125
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $1,182,125
Contract Description -General Construction
Superintendent at Site - Mike Beard
Date of NTP - 5/12/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 73% Actual % Complete - 40% per application for
payment No. 5 dated 10/2/98 for construction
completed and materials stored through 9/25/98.
However, based on observation by the DWQ
inspector actual % complete is between 50-60%.

MR
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. Approval Date Amount Mays) Remarks
None to date
B. CONTRACT B
Name - Robertson Controls, Inc.
Address - 515 Plato Lee Road, Shelby, NC 28150
Original Contract Amount - $90,900
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $90,300
Contract Description -Electrical Construction
Superintendent at Site - Bobby Bridges
Date of NTP - 5/12/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 73% Actual % Complete - 27% per application for
payment No. 2 dated 10/30/98 for construction
completed and materials stored through 10/30/98.
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. 'Approval Date Amount Mays) Remarks
None to date
1. The Following Work Was Observed to Be Completed
a. Operations Building: Overall, the building is about 85-90% complete.
Temporary power has been connected and permanent power should be connected
soon.
b. Bar Screen/Grit Chamber: Concrete work for this structure is complete. The
mechanical screening device has been installed in the channel. A hoist has been
set, and 4 slide gates have been installed in the effluent channel.

C. Aeration BasinlSludge Digester: The base slab and all walls for the aeration basin
have been poured. Backfilling has been completed around this structure.
Concrete finishing is complete. Aeration piping and diffusers have been set in the
bottom of both tanks. Air piping from the aeration blowers has been connected to.
the diffuser piping. The blowers have been set and bolted on their concrete pad
and the shed roof has been erected.
d. Recycle Pump Station: The precast vault for the pump station has been set and
backfilling around the structure has begun.
Final Clarifiers: Concrete work for the clarifiers is complete, with the exception
of grouting the floors and concrete finishing. Equipment has been installed in
clarifier #1. Backfilling around both tanks is nearly complete.
f. DisinfectionlFlow Measurement Structure: Concrete work for this structure is
complete, and both influent and effluent pipe sleeves have been installed.
g. Sitework: The temporary embankments on the southern and western ends of the
site have been seeded.
h. Electrical: Electrical work in the operations building is nearly complete. The
main duct bank leading from the operations building has been installed to the
south end of the new aeration basins. A control panel for the headworks has been
set, and the standby generator has been set on a concrete pad. Control panels and
switchgear have been installed for the new blowers, and the blowers have been
connected.
i. Miscellaneous: The U.V. system, blowers, all pumps, and all electrical panels
have been delivered. Excavation for manhole #7 was ongoing during the
inspection. Yard piping is about 80% complete.
2. Work Schedule for next Month
Contract A - - Complete all of the yard piping
- Set clarifier equipment in clarifier #2
- Complete backfilling throughout the site
- Set the ultraviolet disinfection equipment
- Begin installing handrail and miscellaneous metals
- Grout clarifier bottoms
Begin start-up activities
Contract B - - Install duct banks and conduits in accessible areas
- Continue work in the operations building and connect permanent electrical
power

D. PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Certified Weekly Payrolls of Contractor(s) and Their Subcontractor(s) Being
Submitted: Yes X No _
2. Payment Milestones Discussed: Yes X No_
3. J.O.C./S.O.C./Dates/Schedule Discussed: Yes X No _
4. Work Completed Acceptable for Reimbursement: Yes X No
IV. GENERAL COMMENTS / RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
All contractors should continue to regularly inspect and insure that safety
measures on the construction site meet current OSHNC standards.
2. All required soil and erosion control measures should be installed and
properly/regularly maintained (See III. A.5, above).
3. The owner, A/E, and contractor discussed changes that have been or will be made
to the site fencing and the addition of a sludge thickener. These items may be
included in a future change order for the project.
4. The DWQ inspector discussed the requirement for the submittal of operation and
maintenance manuals prior to reaching the 90% loan disbursement milestone. If
O&M manuals are not received by the 90% disbursement milestone, loan
payments will be suspended until their receipt.
V. PROGRESS MEETING PARTICIPANTS
Name
Joey Gantt
Benji Thomas
Mike Beard
Daniel M. Blaisdell
Bobby Bridges
Representing
Town of Boiling Springs
West & Associates
Hickory Construction
NCDWQ
Robertson Controls
Inspector's Signature Date

r-]
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
November 24, 1998
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
WWTP Improvements
Project No. CS370757-02
Interim Inspection
Dear Mr. Howell:
An interim inspection for the federally funded portion of the subject project was
performed by the Construction Inspection Unit of the Construction Grants and Loans
Section on November 18, 1998. This inspection was conducted in conjunction with the
monthly progress meeting. Please note that our inspection report covers both loan
administration and construction. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your
records.
If you or your engineer have any questions regarding this inspection, please
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
kQ0_"'
n� 2
Daniel M. Blaisdell, P.E.
Construction Inspection Unit
DMB/nw
Enclosure
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Hickory Construction Co.
Robertson Controls
PMB
CIU/SRF
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

CONSTRUCTION GRANT AND LOANS SECTION
INTERIM INSPECTION REPORT
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
SRF PROJECT NO. CS370757-02
NOVEMBER 18,1998
I. LOAN ADMINISTRATION
A. SRF LOAN
The original SRF loan was for $1,033,000 with an interest rate of 2.91% and a fifteen
(15) year term. The loan was subsequently increased by $200,000 to a revised principal
amount of $1,233,000. The interest rate and term did not change. Construction is
scheduled to be complete and interest will begin accruing on March 12, 1999.
B. LOAN PAYMENTS
SRF
Date of Last Request(s) - 10/6/98 & 10/20/98
Requested to Date - $533,958
Disbursement #4 - $56,133 Total Disbursement: 43% of SRF Loan Funds
Disbursement #5 - $81,123
C. GENERAL
II. CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
A. CONTRACT A
Name - .Hickory Construction Co., Inc.
Address - P. O. Box 1769, Hickory, NC 28603-1769
Original Contract Amount - $1,185,125
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $1,182,125
Contract Description -General Construction
Superintendent at Site - Mike Beard
Date of NTP - 5/12/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 45% Actual % Complete - 40% per application for
payment No. 5 dated 10/2/98 for construction
completed and materials stored through 9/25/98.

-2-
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. Approval Date Amount M a s Remarks
None to date
B. CONTRACT B
Name - Robertson Controls, Inc.
Address - 515 Plato Lee Road, Shelby, NC 28150
Original Contract Amount - $90,900
Amount Based on Latest Change Order - N/A
Current Loan Eligible Contract Amount - $90,300
Contract Description -Electrical Construction
Superintendent at Site - Bobby Bridges
Date of NTP - 5/12/98 Contract Time - 300 CDs
Original Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Completion Date - 3/12/99
Current Loan Eligible Contract Time Period - 300 CDs
Scheduled % Complete - 45% Actual % Complete - 1% per application for
payment No.1 dated 9/29/98 for construction
completed and materials stored through 9/24/98.
However, based on observation by the DWQ
inspector, actual % complete is closer to 20%.
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Response or Time
No. Approval Date Amount Mays) Remarks
None to date
1. The Following Work Was Observed to Be Completed
a. Operations Building: Overall, the building is about 75% complete. Temporary
power has been connected and permanent power should be connected soon.
b. Bar ScreenlGrit Chamber: Concrete work for this structure is complete. The
mechanical screening device has been installed in the channel. A hoist has been
set, and 4 slide gates have been installed in the effluent channel.

C. Aeration Basin/Sludge Digester: The base slab and all walls for the aeration basin
have been poured. Backfilling has been completed around this structure.
Concrete finishing is complete. Aeration piping and diffusers have been set in the
bottom of both tanks. Air piping for the aeration blowers was being installed
during the inspection.
d. Recycle Pump Station: No work has begun on this structure.
e. Final Clarifiers: Concrete work for the clarifiers is about 85% complete.
Backfilling around both tanks was ongoing during the inspection.
f. Disinfection/Flow Measurement Structure: No work has begun on this structure.
g. Sitework: The temporary embankments on the eastern and northern ends of the
site have been seeded.
h. Electrical: Electrical work in the operations building is nearly complete. About
30 feet of the main duct bank leading from the operations building has been
installed. A control panel for the headworks has been set, and the standby
generator has been set on a concrete pad. Discussions have taken place with the
electric company regarding new electrical service for the facility.
i. Miscellaneous: Clarifier equipment has been delivered and has been painted on
site. The U.V. system, blowers, all pumps, and all electrical panels have been
delivered.
2. Work Schedule for next Month
Contract A - - Complete all concrete pours for all structures
- Set the precast RAS pump station
- Complete about 90% of the yard piping
- Set the aeration blowers
- Set clarifier equipment
Contract B - - Install duct banks and conduits in accessible areas
- Continue work in the operations building and connect permanent electrical
power
III. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
A. CONSTRUCTION SITE:
1. Weather - Clear; 70' Site Conditions: Slightly wet
2. Storage/Protection of Stored Materials and Equipment Adequate:
Yes X No _

-4-
3 Safe Conditions/Methods Observed: Yes X No _
If not, note:
4. Were Unsafe Practices Brought to the Inspectors, Contractors or Recipient's Attention?
Yes _ No _ N/A X
5. Site Comments: Soil and erosion control measures continue to be maintained in an
acceptable manner. The general contractor is encouraged to continue with the positive
efforts being made to control sedimentation.
B. ENGINEERING/INSPECTION:
1. Resident Inspector On -Site: Yes X No
2. Inspector's Records, Reports, Shops, Files, Etc. Reviewed:
Yes X No
3. Copies of Required Testing (concrete, soil, other) Reports Reviewed:
Concrete: Yes X No
Soil: Yes No X
Other: Yes —No X
4. As-Builts Being Kept Up -To -Date: Yes X No _ Unknown
5. Comments or Recommendations:
6. Was There Any Evidence of Open Burning on the Site? Yes _ No X
C. CONTRACTOR(s):
1. Davis -Bacon Act Wage Rate Posted: Yes X No
2. Recipient was Reminded to Perform Labor Interviews: Yes X No _
3. Reviewed Labor Interviews Performed by Recipient: Yes X No
4. N.C. OSHA/Labor Laws Posted: Yes X No
5. Up -To -Date Construction Schedule (Bargraph, CPM) Posted:
Yes _ No X Issued at the beginning of construction.
6. Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed: Yes X No
7. Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) as per
Contractor: None to date.
8. If Construction Appears Not to be Completed as per Contract Estimate,
Additional Time Needed for Completion:
9. Soil and Erosion Control Certificate Posted? Yes X No _
D. PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Certified Weekly Payrolls of Contractor(s) and Their Subcontractor(s) Being
Submitted: Yes X No
2. Payment Milestones Discussed: Yes X No_
3. J.O.C./S.O.C./Dates/Schedule Discussed: Yes X No
4. Work Completed Acceptable for Reimbursement: Yes X No _

-5-
IV. GENERAL COMMENTS / RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
1. All contractors should continue to regularly inspect and insure that safety
measures on the construction site meet current OSHNC standards.
2. All required soil and erosion control measures should be installed and
properly/regularly maintained (See III. A.5, above).
V. PROGRESS MEETING PARTICIPANTS
Name Representing
Joey Gantt
Town of Boiling Springs
Benji Thomas
West & Associates
Mike Beard
Hickory Construction
Daniel M. Blaisdell
NCDWQ
Hal Hughes
West & Associates
Kurt Eckard
Hickory Construction
Rick Howell
Town of Boiling Springs
Bobby Bridges
Robertson Controls
Inspector's Signature Date

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
May 20, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs .
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
SUBJECT
Dear Mr. Howell:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
MAY P, 1 1998
i r Cr::2 3tlyi
Offer and Acceptance For
a State Loan Increase
Project No. CS370757-02
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
As you were notified by letter from Governor Hunt, the Town of Boiling Springs
has been approved for a loan increase from the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund
in the amount of $200,000. The revised loan amount available to the Town of Boiling
Springs is now $1,233,000.
Enclosed are two (2) copies of an Offer and Acceptance Document extending a
State Revolving loan in the amount of $1,233,000. This offer is made subject to the
assurances and conditions set forth in the Offer and Acceptance Document. Upon
executing the Offer and Acceptance Document, please submit the following items to the
Construction Grants and Loans Section, P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina
27626-0579 within forty-five (45) days of receipt.
A resolution adopted by the governing body accepting the loan increase
and making the applicable assurances contained therein.
2. One (1) copy of the original Offer and Acceptance Document executed
by the authorized representative for this project. Retain the other copy
for your files.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

4*
Page 2
On behalf of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, I am
pleased to make this offer of State Revolving Loan funds made available by the North
Carolina Clean Water Revolving Loan and Grant Act of 1993 and the Federal Clean
Water Act Amendments of 1987.
JDB/nw
Enclosures
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Valerie Lancaster
Vega George
SRF
Sincerely,
�A/ John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section

NCDENR
'-JAMES B. HUNT JR ,@
"GOVERNOR
l
WAYNE MCDEVITT r,�j
SECRETARY
_
A. FIRESTON
JR.,
s _
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
March 4, 1998
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Dear Mr. Howell:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PIC.WET.. cy
FaiNV- 1Rf>AbMR,NrT, £9AI_?TK_
&� NATURAL t.&WU,RCfZ:6
MAR r, 1998
^Yo'L �L�alSi�e �V/nb'5i/Il� RSf"�lM1:�
SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Approval of Addendum No. 3
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project No. CS370757-02
Reference is made to Addendum Number 3, received March 3, 1998, from
West and Associates for revisions to the subject project plans and specifications.
The proposed Addendum items.as described in the attachment have been
reviewed by this office and are hereby approved, and eligible for SRF.fundmig in
accordance with the loan offer and conditions thereof.
The approval of this Addendum does not constitute any change in the amount
of your loan for this project.
It is the responsibility of the Recipient and the Consultant Engineer to insure
that the project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N.C.G.S. 133-3
(ratified July, 13, 1993). The administrative review and approval of Addenda do not
imply approval of a restrictive specification for bidding purposes; nor, is it an
authorization for noncompetitive procurement actions.
Adequate time must be allowed for the potential bidders and this office to
receive and act on Addenda prior to the receipt of bids for subject project.
A copy of the approved Addendum is attached for your files, and one (1)
copy is retained for our files.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29S79, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

If additional information is needed please contact Mr. John N. Royal of this
office at 919-715-6208.
Sincerely,
ae /S/
Cecil . Madden, Supery
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Attachment
JR/pe
cc: West and Associates (w/ attachment)
Mooresville Regional Office
CIU
PMB
John Royal
DMU/SRF

"NCDENR
`+JAMES B. HUNT JR.
<;rtiGOVERNOR M 6
1 �
WAYNE MC0EVITT r
SECRETARY +.?
�;�, •'.:::ice.;:,
A. PRESTON HOWARD, ".?a
- s
P.E.
DIRECTOR
1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
XY ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
yn DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 20, 1998
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
SUBJECT
Dear Mr. Howell:
FEB 20 1995
, s
��m 1fi MOM oiligt:
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Permit No. NCO071943
Authorization to Construct
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Project No. CS370757-02
E-SRF-T- [93&96] - 0074
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
The final plans and specifications for the subject project have been reviewed and
found to be satisfactory.
Authorization is hereby granted for the construction of improvements to upgrade
and expand the existing Town of Boiling Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant from 0.3
MGD to 0.6 MGD capacity to consist of headworks modifications including raising the
wall height of the existing screen chamber, installation of a new mechanically cleaned
bar screen, grit chamber, construction of a new rectangular aeration basin with coarse
bubble diffusers, new blowers, two (2) new 35 ft. by 12 ft. SWD secondary clarifiers,
new scum and recycle pump stations, a new ultrasonic flow meter, new ultraviolet (UV)
disinfection equipment and chamber, a new rectangular sludge digester, a new 480 sq. ft
operations building with storage, a new 125 KW generator for emergency standby
power, improvements to the existing gravel access road, and all associated site work,
yard piping, and electrical work. The existing aeration basin and digesters will be
modified and a new floating decanter will be added. New diffusers will be added to the
existing plant at the completion of the project.
Alternate treatment facilities based on the Aeromod treatment system will be bid
and may be selected, at the Owner's option, in lieu of the conventional extended
aeration system. Note that State Revolving Loan participation will be limited to the
least cost system.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29S79, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Do not proceed with construction until the Authorization -to -Award package and EEO and
MBE documentation/certification have been reviewed, and you are in receipt of our approval, if
funding is desired for project construction.
The Permittee shall employ an actively State certified wastewater treatment plant operator
to be in responsible charge of the wastewater treatment facilities. Such operator must hold a valid
State Certificate of the grade at least equivalent to the classification assigned to the wastewater
treatment facilities by the Certification Commission. When a new chief operator must be obtained
to be in responsible charge of the new facilities, it is required that this be done by the time the
construction of the facilities is 50% complete.
The Authorization -to -Construct is issued in accordance with Part III, Paragraph A of
NPDES Permit No. NC0071943, issued July 7, 1997 and shall be subject to revocation unless the
wastewater treatment facilities are constructed in accordance with the approved plans,
specifications, and supporting documents; and are in compliance with the conditions and
limitations specified in Permit No. NC0071943.
The Permittee shall have an acceptable sludge analysis and a sludge toxicity analysis which
have been approved by the Division of Water Quality prior to the disposal of any sludge from the
new wastewater treatment plant. Copies of the analyses, supporting documents, and approvals
shall be submitted to the Division of Water Quality's Mooresville Regional Office.
The disposing, selling or free distribution of wet, dried, composted sludge or
sludge -like materials from wastewater facilities without prior review and approval by this
Division is illegal.
During the construction of the proposed additions/modifications, the permittee
shall continue to properly maintain and operate the existing wastewater treatment
facilities at all times, and in such a manner, as necessary to comply with the effluent
limits specified in the NPDES Permit.
You are reminded that it is mandatory for the project to be constructed in
accordance with the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, and, when
applicable, the North Carolina Dam Safety Act. In addition, the specifications must
clearly state what the contractor's responsibilities shall be in complying with these Acts.
One (1) set of final approved plans and specification is to be forwarded to you for
your files. The copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file
by the Owner for the life of the project.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must be received from a Professional Engineer certifying that the permitted

facility has been installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Mail
the Certification to the Permits and Engineering Unit, P. O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27626-0535.
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
Cecil Madden at [phone].
Sincerely,
/�� 4 -
f--11/Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Attachment
JR/pe
cc: West and Associates
David Barnwell (OSHA)
ffXM_geeAni=11 Regional., e
E r
PMB
Valerie Lancaster
John Royal
DMU
SRF
Central Files
NPDES Unit

ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION
I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of
North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/weekly/full time) the
construction of the project,
(Project)
for the
(Name or Location) (Project Owner)
hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the
observation of the project construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
Signature
Date
Permit No. NC0071943
Registration No.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 30, 1998
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Howell:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
SUBJECT: Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Approval of Addenda No. 1 & 2
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project No. CS370757-02
Reference is made to Addenda Numbers 1 and 2, received January 30, 1998,
from West and Associates for revisions to the subject project plans and
specifications.
J The proposed Addenda items as described in the attachment have been
reviewed by this office and are hereby approved, and eligible for SRF funding in
accordance with the Loan offer and conditions thereof.
The approval of these Addenda does not constitute any change in the amount
of your loan for this project.
It is the responsibility of the Recipient and the Consultant Engineer to insure
that the project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N.C.G.S. 133-3
(ratified July, 13, 1993). The administrative review and approval of Addenda do not
�y imply approval of a restrictive specification for bidding purposes; nor is it an
authorization for noncompetitive procurement actions.
a Adequate time must be allowed for the potential bidders and this office to
" receive and act on Addenda prior to the receipt of bids for subject project.
.r.
i
A copy of the approved Addenda is attached for your files, and one (1) copy
is retained for our files.
"4
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
__. :..
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
- -- PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

FF'
If additional information is needed lease contact Mr. John N. Royal of this office
at 919-715-6208.
Attachment
JR
cc: West and Associates (w/ attachment)
resville Regional Office
CIJ
PMB
John Royal
DMU/SRF
Siinncerel ,
T1
Cecil G. Madde , Supervi or
Design Management Unit
Construction Grants & Loans Section

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 29, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Dear Mr. Howell:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
rEB 8 1995
91,11"T ll 07
SUBJECT: Offer and Acceptance For
a State Loan
Project No. CS370757-02
Boiling Springs, NC
As you were notified by letter from Governor Hunt, the Town of Boiling Springs
has been approved for loan assistance from the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund
in the amount of $1,033,000. This loan will assist in the upgrade and expansion of the
existing 0.3 mgd wastewater treatment facility to 0.6 mgd.
Enclosed are two (2) copies of an Offer and Acceptance Document extending a
State. Revolving loan in the amount of $1,033,000. This offer is made subject to the
assurances and conditions set forth in the Offer and Acceptance Document. Upon
executing the Offer and Acceptance Document, please submit the following items to the
Construction Grants and Loans Section, P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina
27626-0579 within forty-five (45) days of receipt.
A resolution adopted by the governing body accepting the loan offer and
making the applicable assurances contained therein.
2. One (1) copy of the'original Offer and Acceptance Document executed by
the authorized representative for this project. Retain the other copy for
your files.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/1 0% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

On behalf of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, I am
pleased to make this offer of State Revolving Loan funds made available by the Federal
Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987.
JB/rc
Sincerely,
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Enclosures
cc: West & Associates
Mooresville Regional Office
Valerie Lancaster
Vega George
SRF

JR., P
E
.
DIRECTOR
r
1
~ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 26, 1998
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
SUBJECT
Dear Mr. Howell:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
JAPE 28 033
Wastewater Treatment
Plant Expansion
Approval of the
Plans and Specifications
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project No. CS370757-02
The review for completeness and adequacy of the project construction plans and
specifications has been concluded by the Construction Grants and Loans Section of the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. The Construction Inspection Unit's
Biddability/Constructability comments, including all the minor comments, have been
satisfactorily resolved and incorporated into the plans and specifications.
Therefore, said plan documents are hereby approved with eligibility for
Revolving Loan funding as follows:
Eligible
Construction of improvements to upgrade and expand the existing Town of Boiling
Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant from 0.3 MGD to 0.6 MGD capacity to consist of
headworks modifications including raising the wall height of the existing manual bar
screen chamber, installation of a new mechanically cleaned bar screen, a new grit
chamber, construction of a new 278,000 gallon aeration basin with coarse bubble
diffusers, three new 40 HP blowers, two (2) new 35 ft. diameter secondary clarifiers
with a 12 ft. SWD, a new recycle sludge pump station with two 90 GPM submersible
pumps, a new effluent ultrasonic flow meter, new ultraviolet (UV) disinfection
equipment with dual banks and disinfection chamber, a new 10,000 cubic ft. aerobic
sludge digester with coarse bubble diffusers, a new 480 sq. ft. operations building with
storage, a new 125 KW generator for emergency standby power, improvements to the
existing gravel access road, and all associated site work, yard piping, and electrical
work. The existing aeration basin and digesters will be modified and a new floating
decanter will be added.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOANS SECTION
P.O. BOX 29579, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Page 2
Alternate treatment facilities based on the Aeromod treatment system will be bid and may be
selected, at the Owner's option, in lieu of the conventional extended aeration system. They will
consist of headworks modifications including raising the wall height of the existing manual bar
screen chamber, installation of a new mechanically cleaned bar screen, a new grit chamber,
construction of a new 278,000 gallon aeration basin with coarse bubble diffusers, three new 40
HP blowers, a 9600 cubic foot clarifier tank with three Aeromod clarifier units, new air lift
recycle sludge pumping equipment, a new effluent ultrasonic flow meter, new ultraviolet (UV)
disinfection equipment with dual banks and disinfection chamber, a new 10,000 cubic ft. aerobic
sludge digester with coarse bubble diffusers, a new 480 sq. ft. operations building with storage, a
new 100 KW generator for emergency standby power, improvements to the existing gravel
access road, and all associated site work, yard piping, and electrical work. The existing aeration
basin and digester will be modified and a new floating decanter will be added.
The following items were determined to be non -eligible and are to be broken out in the
bid proposal:
Non -Eligible
Operator training, and any higher cost associated with choosing the non -conventional alternative.
The owner must add new diffusers to the existing plant at the completion of the project.
Funding for this project is based on an estimated cost of $1,361,008 and is limited to the
proposed loan amount of $1,033,000 established and approved by the Environmental
Management Commission. In the event that received bids are not adequate to award contract(s),
it will be necessary to consider all funding alternatives including redesign, readvertising and
rebidding.
Neither the State nor the Federal Government, nor any of its departments, agencies, or
employees is or will be a party to bids, addenda, any resulting contracts or contract
negotiations/changes.
If the recipient does not maintain the court sanctioned schedules which extended the date
for complying with the final effluent limits established in the NPDES Permit, then project costs
incurred will not be eligible for Revolving Loan payments.
Your project is subject to the one-year performance certification requirements. By this,
you are required on the date one year after the completion of construction and initial operation of
the subject treatment facilities, to certify, based on your consultant engineer's advisement,
whether or not such treatment works meet the design performance, specifications, and the permit
conditions and effluent limitations.

Page 3
In accordance with the Federal Regulations, the Recipient is required to assure
compliance with the OSHA safety regulations on the subject project. In complying with this
regulatory responsibility, the Recipient should, by letter, invite the Bureau Chief, Education and
Training Bureau, North Carolina OSHA Division, 319 Chapanoke Road, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27603 (telephone [phone]), to participate in the Preconstruction Conference to
assure that proper emphasis is given on understanding and adhering to the OSHA regulations.
It is the responsibility of the Recipient and the Consultant Engineer to insure that the
project plan documents are in compliance with Amended N.C.G.S. 133-3 (ratified July 13,
1993). The administrative review and approval of these plans and specifications, and any
subsequent addenda or change order, does not imply approval of a restrictive specification for
bidding purposes; nor is it an authorization for noncompetitive procurement actions.
Any addenda to be issued for subject plans and specifications must be submitted by the
Recipient such that adequate time is allowed for review/approval action by the State, and for
subsequent bidder action prior to receipt of bids.
It is mandatory for project facilities to be constructed in accordance with the North
Carolina Sedimentation Control Act, and, when applicable, the North Carolina Dam Safety Act.
In addition, the specifications must clearly state what the contractors' responsibilities shall be in
complying with these Acts.
Prior to entering into any contract(s) for construction, the Recipient must have obtained
all applicable project permits from the State, including an Authorization to Construct and/or
Non -Discharge Permit.
Do not advertise for bids on the construction of this project until receipt of a proper
Wage Rate Decision from EPA that will not expire before bids can be received and a tentative
contract award made. Contact Tom Fahnestock of the Project Management Unit (919/715-6217)
for Wage Rate Decisions required in bid documents prior to advertising.
While rejection of all bids is possible, such action may be taken only with prior State
concurrence, and only for good cause.
Positive efforts shall be made by the Recipients and Consultants to utilize small business,
minority -owned business, and women -owned business sources of supplies and services. Such
efforts should allow these sources the maximum feasible opportunity to compete for
subagreements and contracts to be performed utilizing Federal loan funds.
The Recipient shall comply with the provisions of 40 CFR, Part 7, Subpart C -
Discrimination Prohibited on the Basis of Handicap.
Attached is one (1) copy of the Project Review and Cost Summary (Approval to Award)

Page 4
which is to be completed within twenty-one (21) days after bids have been received, and
submitted to the State for review. It must be accompanied by documents including a detailed
cost breakdown showing units, unit cost, and value of the eligible work. Upon review and
approval of this information, the State will authorize the Recipient to make the proposed award.
Do not proceed with construction until the Authorization -to -Award package and the EEO
and MBE documentation/certification has been reviewed, and you are in receipt of our approval,
if a Federal loan is desired for project construction.
Two (2) copies of any change order must be promptly submitted by the Recipient to the
State. If additional information is required by the State, a response is required within two (2)
weeks, or the change order will be returned without further of final action.
One (1) set of the final approved plans and specifications will be forwarded to you.
One (1) set of plans and specifications identical to the approved set must be available at the
project site at all times.
Upon completion of the project construction, the Recipient shall submit a letter
confirming that the project has been constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications
approved by the State. "As -built" plans will need to be submitted with any changes color -coded
on the plans if the above confirmation cannot be made.
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E. at [phone].
Si
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Attachment
JR
cc: West and Associates
David Barnwell (OSHA)
�11� Tesui�lae-Re__gional';Office
CIU
PMB
Valerie Lancaster
John Royal
DMU/SRF

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
November 3, 1997
�EHNR.
N.C. rau . Q,
EP NATURAL �
90V 6 1,991
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator til.�4(. iJ l9� UC' 4.114 JLL�;�� k,t i;,=i �c�fEfJT Town of Boiling Springs pFFiCa
Post Office Box 1014 - -
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Biddability/Constructability Comments
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
A biddability and constructability review has been completed by the Construction Grants
and Loans Section of the plans and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs' Wastewater
Treatment Plant Expansion. The comments resulting from this review are being transmitted
directly to your engineer for clarification and resolution; a copy is attached for your reference. If
additional comments are necessary following the receipt of and review of the responses and
revised plans and specifications, these will promptly be made.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
John Royal, the State Project Review Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Cecil . Madde , Jr., dPE_XAuprvisor
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
JR/kc
cc: West and Associates (w/ Attachment)
Mo ro esvlle Regional: Off ce_(wl Attachinerit)`
John Royal (w/ Attachment) .
SRF (w/ Attachment)
Construction Grants & Loans Section
F.O. Eox 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Actian Employer 50% recycled/ 10'a post -consumer paper

Town of Boiling Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements
Project No. CS370757-02
Bid dability/Constructibility Review
Bid Forms, General/Supplemental Conditions, Etc.
1. For ease of use and clarity, it is suggested that all of the pages in the contract
documents be numbered sequentially, by appropriate section.
2. The Contract Drawings index that is shown on the second page of the contract
documents should also be included in the plan documents as a sheet index.
3. On the third page of the Information for Bids, the statement regarding taxes
should be revised to state that sales tax reports must be submitted monthly to the
owner. Usually the reports are submitted along with applications for partial
payment.
4. The base and alternate bids for Contract B: Electrical include liquidated damages
of $100. Should the amount be $200 to agree with the multi -prime and single -
prime bid documents preceding the electrical bids?
Either a form of Agreement for a single -prime contract should be included in the
contract documents or the contract designations in number 1 should be blank.
6. It is unclear whether Section 17 of the General Conditions is applicable, since it
will be solely the contractors' responsibility to determine the subsurface
conditions. Please review Section 17 and revise accordingly, if necessary.
7. The Notice of Award must be signed by the owner, or the owner and the engineer.
Please revise the document accordingly.
8. Under the "Project Requirements" section, the wording in the last sentence of part
D should be revised to state that under no circumstances should the contractor
operate the treatment facilities. Only the Operator in Responsible Charge should
operate the facilities.
II. Technical Specifications
A statement should be included in an appropriate part of Section 01560, Special
Controls informing the contractor that open burning of ay material will not be
permitted during construction.
2. Section 03100 - Please confirm that payment for undercutting, removal, and

-2-
replacement of unsuitable material is clearly addressed in the contract documents.
If it is not, additive change orders for undercutting may not be eligible for SRF
loan funding.
3. Section 05100 - Please confirm, since this project will be bid as a lump sum, that
Sections 05100.6 and 05100.7 are appropriate, and revise if necessary.
4. The first sentence in paragraph two of page two under Section 11000 should
include at least two additional brand names.
5. It appears that the total volume of the aeration basin under Section 12010.6 is
misstated. Should this figure be three hundred thousand gallons?
6. Section 12020 should be revised to clearly state which pumps will be required for
the base and alternate bids, respectively.
7. Add the words, "Base Bid" in the title of Section 12030.
III. Plan Documents
1. Sheet 2
a. It is suggested that an index of drawings and a key/legend of symbols and
abbreviations be included on this sheet or some other appropriate place in
the plan documents. Also, see comment I.2., above.
b. Please confirm that there will be no conflicts with the existing 6-inch
water line during construction of new manhole 91. Also, show details of
the pipe connections and arrangements for all new manholes, as necessary.
C. Please show an invert elevation for the connection of the new 16-inch DIP
influent pipe to the existing aeration basin.
2. Sheet 3
a. The air piping connection to the new aeration basins appears to be shown
in the wrong place. Please address and revise as necessary.
b. It appears that existing blower building will have to be relocated during
construction. It is suggested that the preferred temporary placement of the
building be shown on this sheet.

-3-
3. Sheet 7
a. Please change the broken line at elevation 710.50 in Section 1-1 to a solid
line, since the line indicates the top of the orifice plate.
b. Based on the notation in the upper right corner of the plan view, it is
unclear whether polymer drip feed, or other delivery system will be
required in the new aeration basins under the base and/or alternate bids.
Please address and include in the contract documents any required
equipment or materials.
C. Please extend the Section 1-1 call out to the right on the plan view.
d. The 7' 0" dimension shown on the northern wall near the aluminum weir
plate does not appear to match the dimension shown in Section 1-1.
Please revise this sheet accordingly.
4. Sheet 9
a. Add dimensions for the placement of each wall penetration shown on the
plan view of this sheet (i.e. three on the south wall and one on the east
wall).
5. Sheet 10
a. Add dimensions for the placement of each pipe wall penetration and
notches/openings on the plan view of this sheet.
b. Please confirm whether Sections A -A, AI -Al, and B-B pertain to both the
base and alternate bids. If so, please add a clarification note under those
sections.
C. Please confirm that the steel steps shown in the plan view are covered in
the technical specifications.
6. Sheet 11
a. The reinforcing steel requirements in the base slab of the secondary
clarifiers should be clearly shown.
b. Include an identifying note for the material shown below the base slab in
Sections B-B and C-C.

M
C. Confirm that the materials for the weir plates and scum baffles shown on
this sheet are included in the technical specifications.
7. Sheet 12
a. This sheet should more clearly distinguish which pump stations are
included in the base and alternate bids, respectively.
b. Please confirm that the typical control panel shown on this sheet is
acceptable for each pump station.
C. Please confirm whether hoists or cranes are needed to remove pumps in
any of the pump stations.
d. Should a guide rail be included in the scum pumping station, Section
X-X?
8. Sheet 13
a. Add a note stating that the flow level transmitter/recorder will also move
to the opposite side under the base bid.
b. It appears that two dimensions on the plan view should be revised: 8"
should be 9" on the east wall, and 2' 0" should be 2' 3" on the north wall.
Is this correct?
C. Please complete the right side of the section A -A callout line in the plan
view.
d. Please clarify that the 12-inch DIP effluent line is new construction that
connects to the existing outfall.
9. Sheet 14 —
a. It is unclear why a flow drain and an emergency eyewash shower are
required in the storage/electrical room for only the alternate bid. Will the
finished floor be sloped in the base bid?
b. If chemicals will be stored/used in the electrical room, consider
substituting a glass paneled door with bottom louvers for the door
currently shown on the storage room. Also consider having the door open
out with panic bar hardware.

-5-
10. Sheet 15
Please confirm that the specifications cover the waterstop shown in
Section A -A.
11. Sheet 17
It is strongly suggested that an electrical site plan, which includes existing
duct banks and conduit runs, be included in the electrical series of
drawings.

o
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr. Benjamin B. Thomas, P.E.
West and Associates,
405 South Sterling Street
Morganton, N.C. 28655
Dear Mr. Thomas:
e��
DE HNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
October 7, 1997
Subject: Town Of Boiling
SRF Project No.
Cleveland County
Springs
CS370757-02
Per your request, this Office has reviewed the proposed
construction sequence for the wastewater treatment plant expansion
at the subject facility.
Based on our review, the proposed sequence of construction
appears to be sufficient to maintain an acceptable level of
treatment plant operation while the wastewater treatment plant
expansion is underway. Also, please note that any changes in the
current treatment sequence and/or construction sequence, as a
result of planned (or unplanned) construction activities, must
receive prior approval from the Division before implementation.
If you have additional questions or need further information,
please contact Mr. Michael L. Parker or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D . Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
mlp
h:\gen\gltrl.doc
919 North Main Street, �y� FA,X 704-663-6040
Mooresville, Nor, Carolina 28115 An Equcl Opportur.i� //Alrmative Acton Employer
Void 7N-6,63-1699 _ 5M. recyc;e-,' i M10 pest -consumer paper

WWE'ST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
i�inducuiiu� tp�r�' aeez2
August 21, 1997
Mr. Rex Gleason
NCDEHNR
Land Quality Section
919 N. Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
Re: Town of Boiling Springs WWTP Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370757-02
Construction Sequence
Dear Mr. Gleason:
L'J1��AI�Ad\ONINIj: 1
AUG' 2 5 1997
Enclosed is a copy of the Project Requirement excerpt from the
specifications for this project. Please review the construction
sequence and advise our office of your approval/disapproval.
Sincerely,
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, PA
Benjamin B. Thomas, PE
cf
Enclosure
PC Mr. Cecil Madden, Construction, Grants, and Loans
405 S. STERLING ST. • MORGANTON, NC 28655 • 704-433-5661 FAX: [phone]

ppppppp�
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
A. General Description of Work:
The work to be performed under this Contract consists of new construction, demolition, and modifications to the existing
0.300 MGD wastewater treatment plant owned by the Town of Boiling Springs. Upon completion of all work, the plant
shall have a design capacity of 0.600 MGD and a peak capacity of 1.2 MGD.
The work is divided into two contracts, and is generally described as follows:
General Construction: This includes, but is not limited to, the construction of concrete structures
and the installation of equipment and appurtenances as follows: mechanical screen, manual grit chamber,
modifications to existing bar screen chamber, blower pad and equipment, aeration basins, clarifiers, operations
building, aerobic digesters, pump stations, ultraviolet disinfection channel, plant piping, sidewalks and steps,
handrails, site grading, fencing, and revegetation. All plumbing work shall be included.
Electrical Construction: Work of this type includes all work necessary for the construction of electrical
components which includes electrical panels, power service, wiring, conduit, instrumentation panel boards,
control wiring, standby generator, heating/cooling unit and all other work necessary for a complete installation
whether or not shown on the plans or outlined in the specifications. The supply of electrical control panels which
are listed under specific equipment specifications shall be included under General Construction.
In the event that an equipment item or item of work is not distinguished between the two contracts by the Contract
Documents, it shall be assumed to be a part of the General Construction unless it is an item that is normally considered
electrical work.
- — —
_, a_._ _ ______The oC nfiaatoi srialI plan; sc e Ie—aud coordinate his operations with subcontrw ors, suppliers; '5hT a Owner in a
manner which will facilitate continuous progress of the work within the time limits of the contract.
C. Major Equipment Stipulation:
Cost of Changes: In all contracts where equipment is furnished due to the lack of standardization of equipment as
produced by the various manufacturers, it may become necessary to make minor modifications in the structures, buildings,
piping, mechanical work, electrical work, accessories, controls, etc., to accommodate the particular equipment offered.
The bid price for any equipment offered shall include the cost of making any of the aforementioned necessary changes
as well as the cost of preparing detailed drawings showing such changes subject to the approval of the Engineer.
D. Operation of Existing Facilities:
The existing treatment plant must be kept in continuous operation throughout the construction period. No interruption
will be permitted which adversely affects the degree of service provided. Provided permission is obtained from Owner
in advance, portions of the existing facilities may be taken out of service temporarily.
Contractor shall provide temporary facilities and make temporary modifications as necessary to keep the existing facilities
in operation during the construction period. However, the Contractor at no time shall be required to operate any facilities,
except for short periods of time as may be required for testing new equipment.

ppppppp-
E. Sequence of Construction:
The following sequence of construction shall be followed by each Contractor. However, the General Contractor in mutual
agreement with the Electrical Contractor may submit his own construction sequence. If the General Contractor elects
to submit another sequence of Construction, the alternate must be submitted prior to the pre -construction conference.
The Contractors may not commence work until the Sequence of Construction is approved by the Engineer and the
Division of Water Quality Regional Office. In lieu of an alternate, the following sequence of construction shall be
followed.
1. The existing wastewater plant shall be kept in operation throughout construction of the new work.
2. All new work may commence at any time except for the removal of the existing office building and
chlorine building, which must be postponed until their respective replacements are complete and in
operation.
3. Once all work for the new treatment train has been completed, tested, and accepted, the wastewater
flow may be diverted to the new side. At this time, modifications to the existing plant may be
commenced and all yard piping completed.
4. The Electrical Contractor may perform his work any time in accordance with the General Contractor's
schedule of equipment, installations except that existing or temporary power supply must be maintained
to the existing facility until the new treatment train is in operation.
The preceding schedule describes the general sequence of work such that the treatment process can be kept in operation
during the construction. More precise sequencing and scheduling, particularly with regard to coordination with
subcontractors and suppliers, shall be the responsibility of the Contractors.
The Contractors shall be required to complete work -within a time frame that will prevent overflows. Bypassing -is -not -
an approved alternative. In the event that bypassing should result in an overflow, the Contractor will be required to
contact the Owner, Engineer, and the DWQ regional office in Mooresville, North Carolina.
F. Schedule of Values:
After review of the tentative schedule at the preconstruction conference, and before submission of the first application
for payment, Contractor shall prepare and submit to Engineer a schedule of values covering all work. The schedule of
values, showing the value of each kind of work, shall be acceptable to Engineer before any application for payment is
prepared.
The sum of the items listed in the schedule of values shall equal the contract price. Such items as bond premium,
temporary construction facilities, and mobilization may be listed separately in the schedule of values, provided the amounts
can be substantiated. Overhead and profit shall not be listed as separate items. No more than 3 percent of the contract
amount shall be paid for mobilization and bonds.
G. Access to Work and Site:
Any duly authorized representative of EPA or the State of North Carolina shall have access to the work whenever it is
in preparation or progress and the contractor shall provide proper facilities for such access and inspection.
In addition, access by vehicle must be maintained from the plant entrance to the existing office building and to the existing
digesters at all times for the Owner to operate the existing facility.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ` •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
-boom EMMMM
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary C
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director C
1ti.CJ. D—_,. ... lei
October 6, 1997
,,,.
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Howell:
BUT 4, >�
Review Comments
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
A review has been completed by the Construction Grants and Loans Section of the plans
and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs' Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion. The
comments resulting from this review are being transmitted directly to your engineer for
clarification and resolution; a copy is attached for your reference. If additional comments are
necessary following the receipt of and review of the responses and revised plans and
specifications, these will promptly be made.
Upon receipt of satisfactory responses from your engineer to our comments, and the State
Construction Inspection Unit Biddability/Constructability comments, the review of the plan
documents will be completed.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
John Royal, the State Project Review Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely,
CG. adden, Jr., .E., Sup or
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
Attachment
JR/kc
cc: West and Associates (w/ Attachment)
Mooresville Regional Officq,.
John Royal
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 509110 recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Town of Boiling Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Review Comments
General Review
1. In regard to comment number 8, a detailed specification should be provided for the
reduced pressure back -flow prevention device.
2. _ _ _Provide detailed design calculations for the supernatant pump station including the
engineering basis for the influent flow estimate.
3. Supernatant flow can be directed to a submersible return sludge pump station for the base
bid.
4. Regarding previous comment number 40, it appears that the grating and handrail detail
has been eliminated. This detail should be included in the plans, with a fiberglass
specification as an "or equal".
5. It appears that base bid is required to have a separate scum removal pump station which is
capable of removing the scum to the digesters while the alternate bid merely returns scum
to the aeration basin. For the base bid a submersible recycle sludge pump station could be
designed to recycle scum to the aeration basins similar to the alternate bid.

Plans Review
General
1. The signature and date on the Professional Engineer's seal are not clear on a number of
the plan sheets.
2. Consideration should be given to providing a graphical scale on each sheet, especially the
site plans and staking plans.
3. The type and quantity of stone under each basin should be included iri the plans.
4. Alarm lights and alarm horns should be provided at each pump station and in the influent
headworks. Since the facility is remotely located, it is suggested that the alarms also be
connected to an auto -dialer.
5. Advise if a composite/refrigerated sampler is necessary for the influent and/or effluent.
Sheet 1
1. The Town name is incorrect.
Sheet 2
1. A valve assembly between the aeration basins and clarifiers should be provided to allow
usage of either clarifier for each aeration basin, and vice -versa.
2. Some sort of switch over apparatus such as a weir is suggested in manhole number 1.
This would allow the mechanical bar screen to be automatically bypassed in the event
that it clogs or breaks down.
3. The aeration basin for the base bid should be no larger than the aeration basin for the
alternate bid. Currently the volume of the base bid aeration basin is 300,000 gallons while
the volume of the alternate bid unit is only 278,000 gallons.
4. Advise how sludge from the storage tank will be loaded into the contract hauler's truck.
5. Advise if thickening/decant is necessary at the existing sludge storage tank.
6. Confirm with a hydraulic profile that a gate valve is not needed between manhole number
5 and the existing grit removal channel.
Sheet 3

1. Some sort of switch over apparatus such as a weir is suggested in manhole number 1.
This would allow the mechanical bar screen to be automatically bypassed in the event
that it clogs or breaks down.
2. Provide complete plan and specification details for the polymer feed equipment and
provide an engineering estimate of the dosing rate.
Sheet 4
1. This sheet indicates that the base bid clarifiers will be 41 feet in diameter while sheet 11
and the design calculations indicate they will be 35 feet in diameter.
Sheet 5
1. State on the plans which contractor will be required to provide the electrical supply to the
proposed blower building.
Sheet 6
1. A high water alarm with auto -dialer should be provided in the influent channel before the
bar screen.
2. Advise if the fabricated grit bucket is to be hot dip galvanized before or after the welding
is complete.
3. Advise how the bucket, weighing 50 to 60 pounds when it is full, will be moved out of
the ditch.
4. Consideration should be given to using a prefabricated container such as a 5-gallon paint
bucket in lieu of the fabricated grit bucket for cost savings.
5. A profile view of the entire mechanical screen and grit chamber should be provided.
6. Advise if the area where screenings are collected will drain back into the influent channel
as required. Details should be provided.
Sheet 7
1. A high water alarm with auto -dialer should be provided in the influent channel before the
bar screen'.
2. The total of the dimensions for the orifice plate sum to 3' 1 ", but the detail shows a total
plate width of 3'0".

3. Confirm the orifices on the weir plate for the new plant will not be susceptible to
clogging. Advise if fewer holes of a larger area should be used in place of the six small
holes.
Sheet 8
1. Advise if silencers are to be provided to reduce blower noise. The specifications indicate
that they will be required while the plans do not.
2. Confirm the blower control panel is adequately protected from weather.
3. Advise why air piping is above ground for the alternate bid design and below ground for
the base bid design. Unless an engineering basis is provided, the base bid aeration piping
and the alternate bid aeration piping should both be above ground or both be below
ground.
Sheet 9
1. It is recommended that the wall separating the digester and aeration basin on the base bid
design be extended to the outer west wall of the basin to save on concrete costs.
2. A profile of the base bid aeration basin should be included along with structural steel
details
3. Regarding comment 33, gravel is not shown under the concrete slab for the base bid
aeration basin.
4. Include in the plans adequate stone mat to insure that the pressure relief valves will
function properly.
5. All air piping and diffuser requirements including any required shut-off valves should be
included in the plans and specifications.
Sheet 10
1. Confirm on the plans that handrails will be provided on all the walkways above the basin.
2. Confirm that a top rail is all that is required for handrails above the basin as the plans
show. Typically, this office expects a "mid -rail" and a kick plate on all handrails above a
basin.
3. Provide details of the sludge/mixed liquor wasting air lift pump. Design calculations
should include details on sizing and information on air requirements.
4. All air piping and diffuser requirements including any required shut-off valves should be

included in the plans and specifications.
5. Details should be provided to show how the influent reaches the clarifiers and how
the effluent leaves the clarifiers.
6. Details of the clarifier weirs should be provided.
7. Details of sludge return should be provided including sizing for sludge return pumping
and scum pumping.
Sheet 11
1. Consideration should be given to wasting sludge through a telescopic valve assembly in
lieu of direct coupling the sludge drain to the suction line of the pump. The telescopic
valve would allow the operator to view the sludge as it leaves the clarifier and allows him
to establish a continuous recycle rate. Direct connection to the pump suction can result in
pulling a hole in the sludge blanket with little or no warning.
2. Details of the scum skimmer, scum beach, and the sludge rake should be provided.
3. Advise on the plans if stone is required under the clarifiers. Include the type and quantity.
Sheet 12
Advise on the plans how pipes are sealed at wall penetration for the supernatant pump
station.
2. Advise if stone is required under the supernatant pump station.
3. Advise how the operator will drain the sump in the recycle pump station. Confirm the
Town has the necessary sump pump.
4. Alarm lights and alarm horns should be provided at each pump station. Since the facility
is remotely located, it is suggested that the alarms also be connected to an auto -dialer.
5. Provide detailed design calculations for the supernatant pump station including the .
engineering basis for the influent flow estimate.
6. Consideration should be given to wasting sludge through a telescopic valve assembly in
lieu of direct coupling the sludge drain to the suction line of the pump. The telescopic
valve would allow the operator to view the sludge as it leaves the clarifier and allows him
to establish a continuous recycle rate. Direct connection to the pump suction can result in
pulling a hole in the sludge blanket with little or no warning.
7. Advise if the recycle pumping station and the supernatant pumping station can be

combined into one unit for cost savings in the base bid design. This would also allow use
of the telescopic valve assembly mentioned above.
Sheet 13
1. Advise how the effective length of the weir at the end of the ultraviolet disinfection unit
is determined.
2. Advise if the ultraviolet disinfection unit will function properly (i.e. disinfect peak flow)
with one rack out of service for cleaning or bulb replacement.
3. The downstream side of the V-notch weir should be chamfered 45 degrees down to
approximately 0.125 inches to allow a more accurate flow reading.
4. An auto -dialer should be added to the audible/visible alarm due to the remote location of
the plant.
5. Confirm that the top bulb of the ultraviolet disinfection unit will remain submerged under
all flow conditions.
6. Advise what the maximum distance will be between the top bulb and the surface of the
effluent at peak flow.
7. Confirm in the specifications that all electronics of the ultraviolet disinfection unit can be
submerged without damage or down time.
Sheet 14
1. Consideration should be given to providing a fire extinguisher in the lab area. It is
recommended that this item be procured separately with the office furniture
2. For the alternate bid design, spill protection in the form of curbing should be provided for
the storage area of the proposed operations building. The curbing should be capable of
holding the entire contents of a ruptured barrel of polymer.
3. An audible alarm should be provided for the emergency eye wash in the alternate bid.
The alarm should be connected to an auto -dialer as well.
4. For cost savings, consideration should be given to using painted block for the exterior of
the operations building in lieu of brick veneer.
Sheet 15
1. Confirm the construction of additional digester volume will not adversely affect the 6-

inch PVC sludge drain line.
2. Indicate in detail on the plans how mixed liquor moves from the old aeration basin to the
new clarifiers.
3. This office suggests coring a hole on the west southwest side of the old aeration basin
and installing the V-notch weir arrangement to reduce piping costs.
4. Confirm the adequacy of the existing aeration/diffuser equipment within the existing
basin under both base bid and alternate bid arrangements.
5. The polymer feed equipment for the alternate bid design should be shown.
Sheet 16
1. Indicate in the plans and specifications that the general contractor provides the slab for
the standby generator.
2. Confirm that the existing manual bar screen is adequate and has no more than a 0.5 inch
clear space between bars.
3. The existing influent bar screen and basin should be modified so that influent cannot
overflow the basin.
4. Confirm that a "mid -rail" is not required as part of the handrail in the stairway section of
sidewalks.
Sheet 17
1. In regard to General Electrical Note number 1, local permits are not eligible for funding.
The contractor can be required to obtain them, but he must be provided with a check to
cover the fee. This must be clear in the plans and specifications.
2. Identify the acceptable voltage dip for the standby generator.
3. Provide the basis for note number 2 on the bottom right of the page. The middle blower
may need to be operated when one of the other blowers is out of service.
Sheet 18
1. Identify the acceptable voltage dip for the standby generator. It would appear that a 125
kW generator would be appropriate for both alternatives.
2. See comment number 3 from page 17.

Sheet 19
1. Advise on the typical pavement repair detail if asphalt must be saw cut. If the detail does
not apply to this project it should be removed from the plans.
2. The drop manhole detail should be removed from the plans if it does not apply to this
project.
3. This sheet should be numbered.
Sheet 20
1. This sheet should be numbered.

Specifications Review
General Review
1. Incidental training that the operator may gain by being present during construction is
acceptable. However, requiring the manufacturer to provide the training is not eligible.
All training requirements should be removed or broken out in the bids.
Section 10160
1. State law prefers performance specification over prescriptive specification. When a brand - - -
name is mentioned, a minimum of three (3) brand names or approved equal must be
mentioned to comply with NCGS 133-3. An example of where additional manufacturers
need to be included is on page four.
Section 11051
1. It appears that 125 kW generator identical to that used for the base bid including
appurtenances such as the automatic transfer switch and fuel tank would be more
appropriate for the alternate bid design due to the voltage drop at start-up conditions.
Section 12000
1. Confirm there are three (3) competitive vendors for the blowers. An addendum must be
issued prior to bids identifying a minimum of three (3) acceptable blower manufacturers,
even if only one company makes a submittal.
Section 12010
A minimum of three suppliers for the aeration equipment should be listed.
Section 12020
1. For competitive bidding between the two alternatives, it is suggested that less expensive
pumps be specified in this section.
Section 12110
1. It is suggested that an auto -dialing alarm be installed in the channel with the mechanical
bar screen.
2. The headworks should be equipped with some type of automatic bypass such as a weir in
the existing manual bar screen chamber to prevent flooding.
Section 12120

1. This section appears to be restrictive. A minimum of three manufacturers must be
identified in an addendum even if only one submits. In lieu of a performance
specification you may bid Trojan as an alternate bid and identify a base bid.
Section 12141
1. It is desirable to have a flow meter that records flow on a strip or circular chart so that
future studies of infiltration and inflow can be conducted. Simple electronic storage of
average and peak daily flows is not adequate for that purpose.
Section 12150 - -
1. The Aeromod specifications are extremely brief and lack the detail shown in the base bid
design. If awarded to the Aeromod design alternative you have no assurances of what you
will receive. Change orders due to this lack of detail will not be eligible for funding.

SRF Checklist Review
1. In accordance with the mitigative measures in the Finding of No Significant Impact
(FNSI), the Town must have the Corps of Engineers evaluate the proposed plan and
confirm that no authorization is required to construct the proposed facilities.
2. Do not advertise for bids on SRF loan projects until receipt of a Proper Wage Rate
Decision from EPA that will not expire before bids can be received and a tentative
contract award made. Contact Tom Fahnestock of this office for Wage Rate Decisions
required in bid documents prior to advertising.
3. Confirm positive drainage in vicinity of influent headworks and concrete steps.
4. Advise if grit will be a problem at the head of the bar screen chamber.
5. Provide a staff gauge at each V-notch weir to allow for direct reading and calibration of
flow meters.
6. Review the following guidelines for the design of weirs used in flow measurement, and
advise how each was taken into account when designing the effluent flow V-notch weir:
a. The weir should consist of a thin plate 1/8 to 1/4 inch (3 to 6 mm) thick with a
straight edge or a thicker plate with a downstream chamfered edge. The upstream
sharp edge prevents the nappe from adhering to the crest. Knife edges should be
avoided because they are difficult to maintain. However, the upstream edge of the
weir must be sharp with right angle corners, since rounded edges will decrease the
head for a given flow rate.
b.. The upstream face of the weir should be smooth and perpendicular to the axis of
the channel in both horizontal and vertical directions. The crest of the weir should
also be exactly level to insure a uniform depth of flow.
C. The connection of the weir to the channel should be waterproof. Therefore, the
joint between the weir plate and channel should be packed with chemically inert
cement or asphalt type roofing compound.
d. The length of the weir crest of the notch angle must be accurately determined,
because the percentage error in measured flow rate will be proportional to the
error in determining these dimensions.
e. The weir should be ventilated, if necessary, to prevent a vacuum from forming on
the underside of the nappe.
f. The height of the weir from the bottom of the channel to the crest should be at
least 2 times the maximum expected head of liquid above the crest. This is

necessary to lower the velocity of approach. The weir height should never be less
than 1 foot (0.3 m).
g. The approach section should be straight upstream from the weir for a distance of
at least 20 times the maximum expected head of liquid, and should have little or
no slope.
h. The crest must be set higher than the maximum downstream elevation of the
water surface. Otherwise, a submerged flow condition will occur instead of the
free flow condition required for reliable flow measurement.
i. The device for measuring the head (flow meter) should be placed upstream at a
distance of at least 3 times the maximum expected head on the weir and should be
located in a quiet section of the channel away from all disturbances, preferable in
a stilling well. Also, the zero point of the head measuring device must be set
exactly level with the weir crest.
j. The crest of the weir must be kept clean. Fibers, stringy materials, and larger
particles tend to cling to the crest and should be removed periodically. The
upstream side of the weir should also be periodically purged of accumulated silt
and solids.
k. The cross -sectional area of the approach channel should be at least 8 times that of
the nappe at the crest for a distance upstream of 15 to 20 times the head on the
crest. This is necessary to minimize the velocity of approach. The approach
channel should also permit the liquid to approach the weir in a smooth stream free
from turbulence, and the velocity should be uniformly distributed over the
channel; this may be accomplished through the use of baffle plates if necessary.
1. If the weir pool is smaller that defined by the above criteria, the velocity of
approach may be too high and the head reading too low. Weirs should be
installed and maintained to make the velocity of approach negligible. Appropriate
corrections should be made where this is not possible.
7. It is recommended that a method be established to measure both sludge wasting rates and
sludge return rates.
8. Complete the activated sludge section of the SRF checklist based on the alternate bid.

Design Calculations Review.
1. Provide air lift pump information to show 100% recycle is achieved for the alternate bid
at both the new and old plants.
2. Identify the additional air requirements necessary for air lift pumps and indicate those
additional blower requirements in the alternate bid.
3. Clearly show how the effective weir length of 111 if was derived for the alternate bid.
Effluent weirs should be shown in the plan details.
4. Provide calculations demonstrating adequate blower capacity to achieve mixing.
5. The estimated grit accumulation appears low. Metcalf & Eddy indicates 2.0 cubic feet
per million gallons treated.

Revised 9/35 Attactrnent VII.H.1
. Page 39
Page of
Date
XIII. ACTIVATED SLUDGE
A. Type of process (conventional, contact, etc.
B . Process Lca-ding
1. MCR1 days
2.- F/M ratio
3. F/M ratio #B0D5/i VSS-day
4. MLVSS concentration in reactor #COD/#MLVSS-day
5. Da il_v Pounds of BOD5tc aeration system
C. Sludge Return
1. Capacity % of design flaw.
2. Eirergency capacity provided: Yes
3. Type of flaw measurement provided. NO
4. MuLtiple variable speed pumps provided: Yes
If not, explain. ---_
D. Sludae Wasting
1. Pumping capacity
2. Type of flow measurame_rit provided. g Pn-
3. A*r--,unt c,�,sted
4. Waste sludge goes to # day.
E. Aeration and Mixino
1. Oxygen Supplied
a. #02/BOD5 oxidized
b. #02/aNH3,q oxidized
2. Air supplied
cfrn/1000 ft.3 (diffuser) or
#02/HR (mechanical).
3. System design is controlled by oxygen requirements or mixing require-
ments .
4. A -,count of air or oxygen may be varied: Yes
5. Diffusers may be readily cleaned: Yes No
No

Revised 9/85
Attachment VII . H.1
Page 40
Page of
Date
E. Aeration and Mixing (continued)
6. Adequate provisions have been made to remove rrecnani.cal aerators
for servicing: yes No
7. Aeration epuipllent will be test
No ed before acceptance: yes
8. Emergency aeration/mixing equiprlent provided: Yes No
9. Air/oxygen distribution throughout aerrats icn tanks uniform.
No
10. Describe method of emerge-nc�; ae_ration/mi,cing with largest aerator/
cc apressor out of service
F. Aeration Tanks
1 • Tank dire—e rsicns
3. Detention tine base-4 on return. flow, excluding recirculation
4.
Pounds of EOD5/(1c100
ft3 aeration
tank capacity)
5.
Tank drains provided:
Yes
No
6- Tank drainage goes to
7. Method of dist_-ibuting floss equally to all tanks.
8 -
Each tank may be taken out of
se -vice:
Yes
NTrJ
9.
Provisions have be-e_-i rrade for
scorn and
foam control:
Yes No

al
al
sad •buTuEaTa so9 aTg7ssaao2 ATTs---�D ssTaM 't>T
aurr-4 buTsaqj-tap Xu-pL p
sa)l : pau T2sp aq XLDiu as �ua • a
: oq saob abau L2--zz • q
ON sa), : papTAo zd =2aa • a
abau T2sp *I-PL - E T
sad • ao -as go -4no La i aq X-au
s' TTe Oq �TTPrlba -mcT-; DUT-4ngTagsTD =o pou4aW 'TT
: '-@PTAo-ld uoT-4._.aTToo abpnTs Jo •OT
o-4 sao5 =DS • o
ON sad : papTAosd sT Tenauas umDs • g
aI sa-T, : aTq-eq snC pa ssTaM
a -us rOT�7sano sTaM - 9
• ssTaM �LanT��a
sano ssoT spTTos azTurr= 04 ua� aq oq aA-,-q LPTU sdaqs agTsosaQ • S
Z I�pPIm a-42s buTpaoT spTToS
Z /P� ages buTpaoT oTTn'2- ply ' E
s*mq go sacumN ' Z
soot suanrrpL • T
ssaTgTs2TJ 1LTapuDz-S -0
90 abaa
Ti, a6D8 S8/6 pasTAag
T-H'IIA -4u�o�74K

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
IL
IDEHNFz1
September 16, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Howell:
L?.C. pup-j . OF
& Nt'Tur'-p'i. %_ `SOURCES
i01
IiJ aLd:ExI I �{ kse�if i UFA
Full Facilities Plan Approval
Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
The subject amendment to the Town of Boiling Springs 201 Facilities Plan has been
reviewed by the Division of Water Quality and has been found to comply with the requirements
set forth in 40 CFR Part 35. Therefore, the subject plan is hereby given full approval.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jay Lucas of our staff at [phone].
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
RMS/kc
cc: West & Associates
R_fi re vis alle R�egi no alp® f cep
PMB
DMU
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A4
A±g;lk a
mom
�EHNF=1
August 27, 1997
t i C. DEPT. Q�
J. Richard Howell, Jr., Town Administrator 'SEA 19g7
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014 `'ritiEEfh"�i��t BFFiCF`
SUBJECT: Review Comments
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
This is to acknowledge receipt by the Construction Grants and Loans Section of the
final plans and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs' wastewater treatment plant
expansion. Any comments resulting from our review will be transmitted directly to your
engineer for clarification and resolution with a copy attached for your reference.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
John Royal, the State Project Review Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely, W/
2ci'11G`
Madden Jr., P. ., Sineir
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
JR/kc
cc: West and Associates
Ioo ser �i1le—IRegional_ ei
_ John Royal
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt; Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
EDEHNR
Y r
Ito , CA- , XA-.O-L- 6,0c.
July 24, 1997 d,L"6q_ J
0
TO: Rex Gleason
Mooresville Regional Office
FROM: Allen Wahab l)
Construction Grants & Loans
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
Schedule Update
As you know, the Town of Boiling Springs is going through the process to receive a
$900,000.00 loan from the Construction Grants and Loans Program to upgrade and
expand their wastewater treatment facility.
The review process has generated delays which will affect the "Begin Construction Date"
in the SOC. The town has revised this date from October 31, 1997, to April 30, 1998.
We concur with this projected date. The town and their engineers and our staff are
working diligently to approve the project. All the planning issues have been resolved and
the facility plan. approval will likely be in September. The plans and specification issues
are in the process of being resolved. It appears that the town will have no problem in.
meeting the new construction date.
If you have any questions or I can be of assistance, please give me a call at (919) 715-
6220.
TAW/pe
cc: Richard Howell, Jr., Town of Boiling Springs
Bobby Blowe
Jay Lucas
Cecil Madden
Construction Grants & Loans Section FAX FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579NiA*f
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 1 •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary p E H N
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 25, 1997 N.C. D' -r, aR
E1TLL?Oi't.^,
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs JUL1�7
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014 SUBJECT: FNSI Advertisement
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
This is to inform you that the Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) and the
environmental assessment have been submitted to the State Clearinghouse. The documents will be
advertised for thirty (30) working days in the N.C. Environmental Bulletin. Advertising the FNSI is
required prior to a local unit of government receiving a loan under the State Revolving Fund. You
will be informed of any significant comment or public objection when the advertisement period is
completed.
A copy of the documents is transmitted for your record. The documents should be made
available to the public.
If there are any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
T. Allen Wahab, P.E.; Assistant Chief
for Engineering Branch
RS
Attachment
cc: Mooresville Regional Office
West & Associates
Reg Sutton
FEU/PMB/DMU
Construction Grants & Loans Section �� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 5T°k recycles/ 10°k post -consumer paper

N.0
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT rz „,; ' = `1
AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Nc1 t UPIAI,
° JUL 25 1997
OEM G,
Li p
UPGRADE AND EXPAND THE EXISTING
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
BOILING SPRINGS, NORTH CAROLINA
AGENCY: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
CONTACT: JOHN R. BLOWE, P.E., CHIEF
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS AND LOANS SECTION
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
P.O. BOX 29579
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0579
July 25,1997

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FNSI)
Title VI of the amended Clean Water Act requires the review and approval of
environmental information prior to the construction of publicly -owned wastewater
treatment facilities financed by the State Revolving Fund (SRC'). The proposed project
has been evaluated for compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act and
determined to be a major agency action which will affect the environment.
Project Applicant: Boiling Springs, North Carolina
Project Number: CS370757-02 -
Project Description: The proposed project consists of upgrading and expanding the
existing 0.3 mgd plant to a 0.6 mgd treatment facility.
Total Project Cost: $17193,835
Revolving Loan Amount: $ 900,000
Mitigative measures will be implemented to avoid significant adverse environmental
impacts, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) will not be required. The decision
was based on information in the facilities plan, a public hearing document, and reviews
by governmental agencies. An environmental assessment supporting this action is
attached. This FNSI completes the environmental review record, which is available for
inspection at the State Clearinghouse.
No administrative action, will be taken on the proposed project for at Ieast thirty working
days after notification that the FNSI has been published in the North Carolina
Environmental Bulletin.
Sincerely, )
f
A. Preston Howar , ., ,E., Director
Division of Water Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Proposed Facilities and Actions
Figure 1 identifies the site of the proposed improvements to the existing wastewater
treatment facilities.
Treatment Facilities. The existing 0.3 mgd treatment plant will be upgraded and
expanded to a 0.6 mgd facility. The proposed project consists of installing a new 0.3 mgd
extended aeration system. Improvements will include a mechanical bar screen, grit
chamber, aeration basins, clarifiers, ultraviolet disinfection, aerobic digester, supernatant
pump station, effluent flow monitoring equipment, operations building, blowers, blower
building, and standby power. The existing 0.3 mgd extended aeration plant will be
retrofitted with new air diffusers and clarifier scum skimmers. More sludge digestion
volume will also be provided for the existing plant. Additional requirements will consist
of yard piping, fencing, site grading, and electrical work. The effluent will continue to
be discharged into Sandy Run Creek. The town of Boiling Springs has contracted to have
the liquid sludge processed at the city of Shelby's composting facility. The sludge will be
trucked with an existing vehicle, and a drain pipe will be installed at the composting
facility to receive the sludge.
B. Existing Environment_,
Topography and Soils. The two major municipal governments in Cleveland County are
the city of Shelby and the town of Boiling Springs. Boiling Springs is located in the
southeastern quadrant of Cleveland County. Topography in the Boiling Springs area and
the remainder of Cleveland County consists of a series of rounded hills and rolling ridges.
Elevations range from approximately 1,600 feet above mean sea level in the northern part
of the county to about 600 feet above mean sea level in the southern section. Most of the
soils in the area are well drained.
Surface Waters. Boiling Springs is located in the Broad River Basin. The effluent from
the wastewater treatment plant is discharged into Sandy Run Creek, which is north of its
confluence with the Broad River. Sandy Run Creek is a Class C stream with a 7-day, 10-
year low flow of 2.22 cfs.
Water Supply. The town of Boiling Springs purchases its potable water from the city of
Shelby.
C. Existing Wastewater Facilities
The town of Boiling Springs constructed -the existing treatment plant in 1988. The
facility consists of a manual bar screen, grit chamber, and an extended aeration process
plant. This plant includes dual aeration basins, internal clarifiers, aerobic sludge

digesters, and chlorine contact chambers. Effluent is discharged into Sandy Run Creek,
and the aerobically digested sludge is currently land applied. There are approximately
235 homes within the town of Boiling Springs that are not connected to the central
collection and treatment system. Some of the homes are reported to be experiencing
failing treatment systems, and the town plans to connect all of the residences to the
collection system within five years. Additionally, the town has evaluated the sewer
collection system, and it has been determined that infiltration and inflow are non -
excessive. However, there are sections of the collection system with extraneous flows,
and the town has committed to making the necessary improvements.
D. Need for Proposed Facilities and Actions
The town of Boiling Springs has a 0.3 mgd wastewater treatment plant that is not capable
of consistently achieving the existing effluent limitations for BODS, TSS, and Fecal
Coliform. A Special Order by Consent (SOC) has been proposed to upgrade the plant to
comply with the established effluent limitations. Accordingly, the existing effluent
limitations (summer/winter) are BOD5=30/30 mg/l, TSS=30/30 mg/l, and Fecal
Coliform=200/100 ml. In addition to the treatment plant not being able to achieve the
existing effluent limitations, the facility has experienced average daily flows that have
exceeded the design capacity. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) rules require a
municipality to evaluate future flows prior to the treatment plant's flow exceeding 80
percent of the permitted capacity. The municipality must also make plans to expand the
wastewater treatment plant prior to the permitted hydraulic capacity exceeding 90 percent
of the design flow. Since the demand for additional treatment capacity is projected to
increase and the town is already in violation of the existing NPDES permit, the existing
plant must be expanded from 0.3 to 0.6 mgd. An increase in the hydraulic capacity
requires more stringent effluent limitations to protect water quality in Sandy Run Creek.
Speculative effluent limitations (summer/winter) for the proposed treatment plant are
BODS 30/30 mg/l, TSS=30/30 mg/l, NH3-N=15/NR mg/l, Fecal Coliform=200/100 ml,
Residual Chlorine=28 Mg/l, and pH=6.0-9.0 SU. The town plans to install an ultraviolet
disinfection system, and this process will eliminate the need for compliance with an
established effluent limitation for residual chlorine. Since more stringent treatment and a
larger flow will increase the amount of sludge generated, the proposed improvements for
sludge processing facilities are required despite the town's plan to transport the digested
sludge to a composting facility.
E. Alternatives Anal,sis
The town of Boiling Springs needs to make significant improvements to the existing
wastewater treatment facilities to process future flows, to comply with sludge
requirements, and to meet more stringent effluent limitations. Accordingly, a facilities
plan was prepared, and several alternatives were evaluated. The "no -action" alternative
Pa

was determined not to be practical due to the inability of the existing plant to process the
projected hydraulic flow and protect water quality in Sandy Run Creek. An optimum
plant operation will not achieve the desired results because additional treatment capacity
is required, and the existing treatment facilities do not have the capability to consistently
achieve the established effluent limitations. A spray irrigation system was investigated
and determined not to be the most feasible solution for solving the wastewater treatment
plant problem. A subsurface disposal alternative would require the purchase of a large
tract of land on which wastewater would be treated at the existing plant and the effluent
would be discharged below grade for absorption and nitrification. This alternative would
be the most expensive one to implement, and the town rejected the plan. The town
explored pumping the wastewater to the city of Shelby, and this alternative was also
rejected due to being too costly. Most of the existing equipment at the treatment plant is
in good condition, and the components can be used in the future treatment process.
Therefore, upgrading and expanding the existing treatment plant was determined to be the
most cost-effective approach. This alternative has the lowest present -worth value, and it
is the selected alternative.
F. Environmental Consequences, Mitigative Measures
All of the proposed improvements to the treatment plant will take place at the existing
four -acre site owned by the town of Boiling Springs. New construction will disturb
approximately 0.5 acre of the previously cleared site. The Department of Cultural
Resources is not aware of any properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological
significance which would be affected by the project. North Carolina's Wildlife
Resources Commission elected not to comment on the proposed plan. Although the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that the proposed project will not adversely impact
federally listed endangered or threatened species, there are species in the general area that
could be impacted if the selected alternative is modified or another alternative is selected.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will evaluate the proposed plan and confirm that no
authorization is required to construct the proposed facilities. Moreover, all project
activities will take place in accordance with applicable rules, regulations, and permit
conditions.
G. Public Participation, Sources Consulted
A public hearing was held April 17, 1997 on the proposed project to upgrade and expand
wastewater treatment facilities. The hearing covered problems of the existing facilities,
need for the proposed improvements, and cost to implement the selected alternative. No
opposition to the proposed project has been expressed. A customer using 5,000 gallons of
water currently pays $10.35 per month for sewer. service. The proposed project will
result in a typical customer paying approximately $21.53 per month for sewer service.

This is a significant increase in the sewer user fee, but the proposedproject is the most
cost-effective alternative that can be implemented to'comply with the NPDES permit and
facilitate future needs.
Sources consulted about this project for information or concurrence included:
1) Town of Boiling Springs
2) North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
-Wildlife Resources Commission
-Division of Parks and Recreation
-Division of Air Quality
-Groundwater Section
-Division of Environmental Health
-Water Quality Planning
-Division of Pollution Prevention & Environmental Assistance
-Division of Forest Resources
-Mooresville Regional Office
-Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
3) North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
4) North Carolina State Clearinghouse
5) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
4

1
00
41-
I lb
00
00
' !� • !' ` �_ , �`r( .� Dilin 'Spr' g
•Cr�ee�e cl, J � .� .i` � 1 �% C•
b PROJECT �� `� �_ , � _ �'• �'��' �• � � �• v� .%, •I -
�-••o�A"f log! � - ` . ; • ' � � �•: _ �o. � ---
•• \ bsla
I5g
Fos la a<v.: �, .�;�• r,
5�s 800
ji
gop
\\\ �( `\ :\ —✓ x 8q9 ()\/ / `\ O 1 I Il! Q70gou
•r
=i
LEW
Lo[A'0oN MAP
o .

4-
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 2, 1997
Mr. Chester R. West, P.E.
West & Associates
405 S. Sterling St.
Morganton, �do:�h Carolina 28655
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. West:
e��
E)EHNR
N.C. D;~~ v i, CW
JUL 3 1997
;Z.ML e't :.Ll. 1Y��.^i:f+al. .7:($1dL
Town of Boiling Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Project Number CS370757-02
This letter is intended to clarify the Section's comments regarding the cost-effective
comparison and bidding of a conventional type plant with the Aeromod system for the Town of
Boiling Springs. Reference the facility planning comments in our June 18, 1997 letter and
comment 15 in the plans and specifications comment letter dated June 3, 1997.
The intent of the comments is to ultimately provide the most cost effective alternative for
the town. It appears to us that the conventional upgrade and expansion (alt.5C) is equivalent or
slightly more cost effective. However, I am sure this can be resolved with further discussion and
response to our comments.
In order to comply with NCGS 133-3, we have recommended that the base bid include
the conventional external clarifiers since the Aeromod system is a sole source item. The
Aeromod alternative can be bid as an alternate which is allowed under the regulation. This of
course will require that the base bid be designed and included in the plans and specifications as
well. The dual design is unfortunate, but we strongly believe that this will assure that the town
will receive competitive bids for two viable alternatives.
Construction Grants & Loans Section �� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 500k recycles/ 100% post -consumer paper

If you should have any questions or I can be of further assistance, please contact me at
[phone].
Sincerely,
T. Allen Wahab
Assistant Chief
Engineering Branch
TAW/pe
cc: Town of Boiling Springs /sp
�es:lble�l�e4 9YlCillY�T_ [' 6 iJy
Bobby Blowe
DW
FEU
SRF

Pprpp�
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
e��
IDEHNR
June 18, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014 Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
The Construction Grants and Loans Section has completed its review of the subject
201 Facilities Plan Update and has the attached comments. A revised 201 Facilities Plan Update
which incorporates responses to these comments should be submitted for our review and
approval as soon as possible.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ryan M. Scruggs
Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
Attachment (all cc's)
cc: West and Associates
1Vlooresowi
all► e.egi no a1C�ff ce
Allen Wahab
DMU
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section fowlr FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 509/o recycles/10% post -consumer paper

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
Technical Review Comments for the
Revised 201 Facilities Plan Update (May,1997)
6/18/97
1. According to the revised design calculations in Appendix E, the existing blowers
no longer provide adequate aeration and mixing in the existing Aero-Mod
treatment unit at design flow. The two 30 hp, 1200 cfrn blowers should be
capable of providing the required aeration and mixing in the treatment unit with
one blower out of service. Currently, one blower is capable of providing 1347
scfrn but 1388 scfm is required in the treatment unit. Consider replacing the
existing 30 hp blower motors with larger motors in order to provide the required
aeration/mixing. Costs for replacement of these motors should be included in all
applicable cost estimates. Please provide blower curves to verify the capabilities
of the existing blowers with any replacement motors.
2. Please provide a more detailed breakdown of costs for the Two New Circular
Clarifiers, Recycle Pump Station, and Scum Pump Station included in alternatives
5C and 5D. The costs for two circular clarifiers appears very high. Typical costs
for two 32 foot diameter circular clarifiers would be in the range of $200,000 to
$260,000. Only one recycle pump station is necessary for these alternatives. This
would reduce the cost of one recycle pump station to approximately $45,000. The
cost for the scum pump station also appears very high. A cost of approximately
$10,000 would be a more typical ,cost for the scum pump station necessary at the
treatment plant.
3. In the cost estimate for alternatives 5A, please provide a separate cost breakdown
for the following items:
A. , Equipment (blowers, diffuser system, aeration, clarification,
digestion, start-up services, O&M manuals, etc.)
B. Concrete (total cubic yards)
C. Labor, Misc. (excavation costs, etc.)
In addition,please identify the number, type, and size/capacity of the new blowers
for the new treatment unit and show with calculations that one blower is capable
of providing the necessary aeration and mixing in the new treatment unit with the
second blower out of service.
4. Alternative 5A's cost estimate includes $35,000 for a standby generator while
alternatives 513, 5C, and 5D include $40,000 for a standby generator. The costs for
standby generators should be the same in all of these alternatives. Please revise
the cost estimate for alternative 5A.

5. Please provide an explanation for the differences in costs for Equipment in
alternatives 5C ($55,000) and 5D ($50,000). The Concrete, Labor, Misc. costs for
alternatives 5C and 5D should be less than the Aero-Mod alternatives because
they do not require separate concrete walls for a selector tank or a concrete wall to
divide a two -stage aeration basin. Please provide an cost breakdown for these
concrete costs as well as a justification for these costs.
6. Provide an explanation for the differences in costs for the New Diffuser System in
alternative 5C ($55,000) and 5D ($50,000). These costs are much higher than the
costs presented in Appendix E for the installation of a new coarse bubble diffuser
system for $41,866.
7. Please provide an engineering justification for replacing all of the existing
aeration equipment with a new diffuser system in the existing treatment unit if a
new external clarifier is added in alternatives 5C and 5D. Including these new
diffuser system costs in alternatives 5C and 5D does not provide an "equal"
alternative analysis against alternatives 5A and 5B.

rpr
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
CJritJuu`ir'p _ it�irrc�dJ
June 4, 1997
Mr. Jay B. Lucas, PE
NCDEHNR
Division of Water Quality
Construction Grants and Loans Section
PO Box 29579
Raleigh, NC 27626-0579
Re: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update (2nd Revision)
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Lucas:
11'. OF
El Wfl
JUN 13 1997
11INNT
JINOViLLE f,' k'�v A OFF19E
Enclosed are three copies of the plan update for your review. as well as an itemized response to the
Technical Review Comments of May 7, 1997.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know.
Sincerely,
WEST AND ASSOCIATES
Benjamin B. Thomas, PE
cf
Enclosures
PC ex Gl can M +r�resville Re a e t C+rnrnent
Ric owell, Town of Boiling Springs
405 S. STERLING ST. • MORGANTON, NC 28655 • 704-433-5661 FAX: [phone]

RESPONSE TO 5/7/97 TECHNICAL REVIEW CONEvIENTS
OF THE REVISED 201 FACILITIES PLAN UPDATE
The option of building a 0.400 mgd plant parallel with the existing plant, and decreasing the
average design flow to the existing plant to 0.200 mgd, was considered. This option is labeled
sub -alternative #5B and has a net present worth cost of $3,578,249.00, compared to
$3,499,439.00 for the selected alternative #5C. The selected alternative would be to allow an
average flow of up to 0.300 mgd to the existing plant but a peak flow of only 0.320 mgd.
The selected alternative has been shown in recent months to be compliant with NPDES limits
(with the addition of polymer) while experiencing average clarifier overflow rates of 770
gpd/sf and without limiting peak storm flows. Thus, it is reasonably proposed to continue
using the existing plant as it is now but with the additional safeguard of limiting peals flows.
?. cos't of afire, analysis has bem provided -andar Sections D and E aS stib-a'1ternalives 0A,
#5C, and #5D.
3. This comment was considered and it has been decided to add additional clarifier area to the
new plant for the package plant alternatives (#5A and #5B). It is proposed to add 320 sq. ft.
of clarifier area such that the design overflow rate is 313 gpd/s£ For a 2.0 sustained peaking
factor, the overflow rate through the new clarifiers would be 939 gpd/sf (1.2 mgd less 0.3
mgd to the existing plant). See the revised calculations in Appendix E. Cost estimates have
been increased to allow this addition.
4. This cost analysis is provided as Part VII of Appendix E. On both the existing and the new
treatment units, the effect of a more efficient aeration system would be to decrease energy
costs but to increase maintenance costs and worry. Also, a fine bubble system provides less
mixing in the aeration basins (although it would be adequate). Both options are good methods,
but the Town would prefer to use stainless steel coarse bubble diffusers.
5. Calculations in Appendices E and G have been revised to show 30 days sludge storage at a
wasting rate which disregards volatile solids destruction.
6. Appendix G has been revised accordingly.
7. An additional alternative (#2B) in Appendix G was used to consider the cost effectiveness of
using the abandoned steel tank as a new sludge digester.
8. A -draft copy of the contract is included in Appendix C. Both parties are expected to sign
within about 30 days. The amended Shelby sludge permit is still pending.
9. The transcript and affidavit are included in Appendix I.
10. The resolution is included in Appendix I.
11. A description of Pacolet-Saw soil is included in Section H.

12. The map has been revised.
13. The SOC milestone dates have been revised, but the Consent is not yet signed by both parties.
The dates are 3 months later than the SRF project schedule to allow extra time for compliance.
14. The flow figures have been revised accordingly.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 3, 1997
J. Richard Howell, 'Jr., Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
Dear Mr. Howell:
maATk?WA
40
IDEHNR
SUBJECT: Review Comments
I!'14' I ':; ME KI HAL 611Fi1i9
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
A review has been completed by the Construction Grants and Loans Section of the plans
and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs' Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion. The
comments resulting from this review are being transmitted directly to your engineer for
clarification and resolution; a copy is attached for your reference. If additional comments are
necessary following the receipt of and review of the responses and revised plans and
specifications, these will promptly be made.
Upon receipt of satisfactory responses from your engineer to our comments, and the State
Construction Inspection Unit Biddability/Constructability comments, the review of the plan
documents will be completed.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr.
John Royal, the State Project Review Engineer, at [phone].
Sincerely,
ecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E., u ervisor
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
Attachment
JR/kc
cc: West and Associates (w/ Attachment)
M`-J fdS_-, �_lle Regional 0ffrce-4
John Royal
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579NtICAn Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/ 101% post -consumer paper

Town of Boiling Springs
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Review Comments
General Review
1. Submit with the final plans and specifications an up-to-date project cost estimate showing
eligible and non -eligible costs, including a copy to Mr. Tom Fahnestock, Supervisor,
Project Management Unit, of this office.
2. Provide complete/final design calculations for all the proposed wastewater process units
based on compliance with the NPDES permit limits; and a completed EPA
plans/specifications review checklist (copy of checklist provided to A/E). Calculations
should clearly show how sludge will comply with federal sludge regulations, (40 CFR
503, dated February 19, 1993).
3. The construction contract specifications shall note that any duly authorized representative
of EPA and the State shall have access to the work whenever it is in preparation or
progress; and that the contractor shall provide proper facilities for such access and
inspection.
4. A detailed description of the proposed operation methods for operating the existing
facilities during construction, including construction sequence, must be submitted for
approval. The project contract specifications must include a detailed sequence to
specifically advise the contractor how the facilities are to be constructed, so that the
Recipient can operate the wastewater treatment plant and continue to comply with
NPDES permit conditions/limits. At no time can/shall the contractor be required to
operate the wastewater facilities.
5. Final plans, specifications, and supporting documents are to be submitted to this office
with a letter certifying that they are 100 % final/complete as submitted. Three (3) sets are
to be submitted for the initial review; and four (4) sets when plan documents are
satisfactory for our final approval.
6. Prior to the authorization to award construction contracts, the applicant shall demonstrate
to our satisfaction that it has or will have a fee simple or such other estate or interest in
the site of the project, including necessary easement and rights -of -way, to assure
undisturbed use and possession for the purpose of construction and operation for the
estimated life of the project. Confirm that all permanent and construction easements and
rights -of -way have been obtained, and are shown at all locations on the plans. These must
be obtained in compliance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 40 CFR Part 4.
7. Confirm that all public/private potable water supply wells within a 100-foot radius and/or
water transmission lines in the vicinity of the proposed work have been shown and

labeled on the plans. Legal action can be taken by any well owner against the Recipient
and A/E when wastewater facilities are constructed within a 100-foot radius of a potable
water well. If wells are located within 100 feet, then ferrous sewer pipe with joints
equivalent to water main standards shall be used. The minimum separation shall not be
less than 25 feet for private wells or 50 feet for a public well. Also, a non -discharge
permit with conditions on testing any gravity/force main within the 100 foot radius must
be issued by the Division of Water Quality. The force main testing and leakage limits
shall be included in the specification and in the permit.
8. A reduced pressure back -flow prevention device approved by the University of California
Cross -Connection Laboratory must be installed on any public water supply extension to
serve a wastewater treatment facility. An air gap system is required for any water -seal
unit using potable water.
9. State law requires separate contracts for plumbing, heating, and electrical work. It is
strongly recommended that careful attention be given in the plans and specifications to
clearly defining existing and proposed work, including the specific responsibility of each
contractor for all the work to be accomplished under each contract; and requiring
coordination of the work between contractors. Many change orders have resulted from the
confusion caused by not clearly showing the scope or responsibility of the work
necessary to provide a complete facility including not adequately cross referencing
responsibilities in the plans and specifications. Any such future change orders will be
closely scrutinized concerning eligibility of costs and time extensions for loan
participation.
10. Nationally recognized performance specifications/standards such as ASTM and AWWA
must be provided where applicable.
11. Adequate alarm device(s) applicable to the type and size of the facility should be
provided to alert the operator.
12. It is the Recipient's choice to use either arbitration or judicial proceeding to settle
disputes. If arbitration is not to be used, then any references to arbitration in the contract
documents must be deleted. Notification must be given in the Information for Bidders
section that arbitration will not be used, and the preferred method for dispute settlement
must be included.
13. A complete hydraulic profile of the plant must be included in the plans.
14. If excavation is bid "unclassified", it should be clear that this includes all types of rock,
because too frequently, claims are made for additional costs/time pertaining to rock/muck
excavation, which over extends the Recipients funds. This will be made a condition of the
State's approval of the project plans and specifications.
15. Single/sole source procurement is only allowed as a bid alternate, in accordance with

NCGS 133-3. The law does not allow a sole source item to be considered base bid. This
office suggests that a base bid include an extended air coarse bubble diffuser activated
sludge system with external circular clarifiers having a twelve (12) foot sidewater depth.
Typically clarifiers are sized at a loading rate of 400 gpdpsf. The base bid would include
retrofitting the existing equipment with new aeration and external clarification. The base
bid design must be clearly illustrated in the design drawings and specifications. If brand
names are used, then a minimum of three brand names or equal must be specified. If a
prescriptive specification is used then the A/E must advise this office of three (3)
manufacturers who can comply with the base bid. If the owner desires, Aeromod may be
bid as an alternate with the following considerations: the new Aeromod clarifiers should
not be loaded at a higher rate than the base bid clarifiers, and the existing clarifiers should
be replaced with the newer type or the flow splitting device should be designed to limit
peak flow to the existing facility. When this is done, the new clarifiers will have to
account for the increased loading. Additionally, design calculations must be presented to
justify the flow splitting design.
16. The attached check for $150.00 is being returned. Please provide a $200.00 check made
payable to the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources .
17. Please provide a letter from Boiling Springs requesting an Authorization to Construct.
Plans Review
1. The SRF project number, CS370757-02, needs to be on the cover sheet.
2. The site plan, sheet 2, does not show full length catwalks over the proposed plant. Sheet
7 states that full catwalks will extend between all the basins except for between the
clarifier and selector tank.
3. Sheet 2 needs to indicate the property lines. It should also indicate the distance between
the property line and the nearest point of the proposed plant. Note that a minimum
distance of fifty (50) feet is required between the property line and the proposed facilities.
4. Sheet 2 needs to provide a means of establishing horizontal and vertical controls for the
proposed facilities.
5. Sheet 2 should identify the contractors' suggested staging area.
6. Advise if sufficient fill material can be obtained on site.
7. Advise if a separate construction entrance can be provided. If so, identify that entrance on
the site plan.
8. It is recommended that the owner document the condition of the existing road and

structures with a video on or about the day of the Notice to Proceed.
9. Sheet 2 should identify the 25 year flood elevation as well as the 100 year flood
elevation.
10. Sheet 2 should indicate the fence modifications.
11. Sheet 3 should identify the elevation of invert of the existing pipe to connect to the
proposed manhole #3.
12. Note #2 should clearly indicate which contractor, electrical or general, is responsible for
maintaining power service.
13. The existing water main needs to be provided with reduced pressure principal backflow
prevention.
14. Influent flow monitoring at the plant is recommended as this will enhance the ability to
identify future infiltration and inflow.
15. Advise if any floor drains are needed in the proposed lab building on sheet 4.
16. The refrigerator, desk, and office chair should be procured separately. These items
should be removed from the plans or it should be clearly indicated that they are not part
of the construction contract on sheet 4. If funding is desired for items not installed by the
contractor, separate procurement specifications should be submitted for review and
approval.
17. Advise if vermiculite insulation will be used in the walls of the proposed lab building on
sheet 4.
18. Advise what chemicals, etc. will be stored with the electrical equipment in the storage
area of the proposed lab building on sheet 4. Confirm chemicals will not cause
accelerated corrosion of electrical equipment.
19. Advise if the switch to the exhaust fan in the storage area of the proposed lab building on
sheet 4 should be at the door.
20. Clarify which contractor will be required to provide the electrical supply to the proposed
blower building on sheet 5.
21. Design calculations should indicate if one blower alone will provide sufficient aeration
for peak flows through the both the existing and the proposed plants.
22. Document that the proposed mechanical bar screen is not a sole source design.

23. Clarify who will be required to provide the container for screenings from the proposed
bar screen.
24. Design calculations should provide velocity calculations for the grit removal channel. A
description of how the grit channel will be operated (cleaned) and an estimate of the grit
volume to be removed should also be included.
25. A hydraulic profile should be provided as part of the plans and specifications with
supporting calculations. It should show the hydraulic ability to run the peak flow through
both trains of the plant.
26. Advise how an even flow split is achieved between the two trains of the plant. If the
flow must be split by valves, advise how an accurate flow split will be verified.
27. On sheet 7,:two additional manufacturers should be listed. State law prefers performance
specification over prescriptive specification. When a brand name is mentioned, a
minimum of three (3) brand names or approved equal must be mentioned to comply with
NCGS 133-3.
28. Handrails should be provided with the walkways to extend between the basins of the
proposed plant (sheet 7).
29. A detail for the connection between the steel and aluminum of the stairs on sheet 7 should
be provided.
30. It is unlawful to allow any manufacturer, his representatives or agents to write,'plan,
draw, or make project plans or specifications (NCGS 133-2), ref. sheets 8, 13, and 14.
31. The dimensions at the top of sheet 9 are not legible.
32. Handrails are required instead of post and chain along the outside of the proposed plant if
the edge of the proposed plant is in the normal walking area.
33. Advise if gravel will berequired under concrete slabs and foundations. If so, it should be
clearly indicated on the plans (sheets 9 and 10).
34. Advise if polyethylene will be required under concrete slabs and foundations. If so, it
should be clearly indicated on the plans (sheets 9 and 10).
35. Advise if the ultraviolet disinfection unit will function properly with one rack out of
service. Advise as to how the unit will be cleaned and how often. If a pilot test has been
performed on the existing effluent, provide the results in your written responses.
36. On sheet 10, two additional manufacturers should be listed. State law prefers
performance specification over prescriptive specification. When a brand name is

mentioned, a minimum of three (3) brand names or approved equal must be mentioned to
comply with NCGS 133-3.
37. Sheet 11 should show electrical service connections for the proposed lab building
38. Advise if it is standard practice to run circuits from a panel in an existing building
without providing a sub -panel in the now building (sheet 11).
39. Yard hydrants should include potable or non -potable labels (sheet 12).
40. Section A -A on sheet 12 should include a fiberglass specification as an "or equal".
41. Sheet 13 is not legible.
42. Advise if asphalt must be saw -cut (sheet 15).
43. Advise where drop manholes apply (sheet 15).
Specifications Review
1. The cost for plans and specifications should be included in the Advertisement for Bids,
and the date for bid receipt should be left blank until it can be determined. The
Advertisement for Bids should also include references to the State and Federal funding
for this project.
2. Page three of the Information for Bidders states that a list of contract drawings is in the
specifications' Table of Contents, but no list was found in the review copy. The last
sentence (on page 5) of the Information for Bidders also needs clarification.
3. Confirm the accuracy of the construction period found on the bid form and the agreement
form.
4. The bid form needs to have separate sections for general and electrical construction to
comply with NCGS 143-128.
5. The bid form needs to indicate that the electrical contractor will be required to
provide the standby generator.
6. Provide design calculations supporting the generator size.
7. The engineer will need to confirm that the included wage rates are still current when the
project is actually advertised.
8. The SRF Special Conditions which were given to the engineer at the May 6, 1997

meeting need to be included in the Specifications.
9. An updated cost estimate will need to be submitted with the revised plans and
specifications, showing cost breakdowns for both general and electrical construction. The
electrical work includes the cost of the standby generator.
10. The SRF program does not allow reimbursement for cutting and stacking firewood
(Section 1560.5).
11. The paragraph regarding right-of-ways should be deleted if it is not applicable to this
project (Section1560.5).
12. Section 1560.7 states that the engineer will provide the benchmarks. Please provide the
means of establishing them on the site plan.
13. Advise how traffic maintenance (Section 1560.11) is applicable to this project.
14. Advise where sewer line installation is to be done in this project (Section 07210). If this
work is not part of this project, it should be removed from the specifications.
15. The electrical specifications do not appear to include panels, switches, circuit breakers,
lighting fixtures, or fans (Section 11000).
16. Advise as to who will provide electrical service to the site. The plans indicate Duke
Power will provide the service, while the specifications (Section 11000) indicate that it
will be the responsibility of the electrical contractor.
17. Confirm that the design influent ammonia (NH3) level is reasonable (Section 12150.5).
Typical influent ammonia readings are on the level of 20 mg/l, not 240 mg/l.
18. The wastewater treatment facility should provide a minimum of thirty (30) days of sludge
storage, not the twenty-five (25) days stated in the specifications (section 12150.5).
19. It is unlawful to allow any manufacturer, his representatives or agents to write, plan,
draw, or make project plans or specifications (NCGS 133-2), ref. Section 12110.3,
Section 12120.6, and Section 12150.6.
20. Lab equipment and furnishings should be procured separately from the construction
contracts (Section 12130.9)
21. This office allows a maximum of three percent of construction cost for mobilization
while the specifications allow for a maximum of five percent. Please revise accordingly.
22. State law prefers performance specification over prescriptive specification. When a brand
name is mentioned, a minimum of three (3) brand names or approved equal must be

mentioned to comply with NCGS 133-3. Some examples of where additional
manufacturers need to be included are on page four, Section 10160; pages 5 and 7,
section 12120; page 6, Section 12130; and Section 12130.9 B.2.
23. Provide site specific details as well as standard details on the plans for sedimentation and
erosion control measures. Provide documentation that this project has been approved by
the Land Quality Section.
24. The specifications must clearly state that "the facilities shall be constructed in accordance
with the NC Sedimentation Pollution Control Act". In addition, the specifications must
clearly state what the contractor's responsibilities shall be in complying with these acts.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 8,1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Parker
DWQ Mooresville Regional Office
FROM: John N. Royal U °'J P-
Construction Grants and Loans
EDEHNR
l .'C DR , qp
REALM,
87 NATURAL -C ESOURCERS,
tad 9 1997
i'�41iJ;.L'I1 Ur .'i Ifq!w n,ff T
Al I
nn-•.
Uf�LF
SUBJECT: gill Sp�and Salisbury
Wastewater Treatment Facilities Plans and Specifications
Attached are plans and specifications for the Town of Boiling Springs wastewater
treatment facilities. These items are at approximately the 50% design stage, and we ask that you
review them for construction sequence.
Also attached are final plans and specifications for the City of Salisbury wastewater
treatment facilities. Please review these items and forward comments to our office. If no
comments are received by May 30, 1997, we will proceed with approval in order to maintain the
project schedule.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Attachment
JR:kc
cc: SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section �4 FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �)An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 500% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

41
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 7, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
Dear Mr. Howell:
IDEHNR
N.C. DP T4 OF
t'IA` ur't'j' rEFiSOU CC
MAY 1 OR 1997
Ot�Wt9i� .�F El1'rl����,RE�TOi &iElfdA�E:�E�i
— TGRE ILE REM ;tAL OfflVE
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
The Construction Grants and Loans Section has completed its review of the subject
201 Facilities Plan Update and has the attached comments. Three (3) copies of a revised 201
Facilities Plan Update which incorporate responses to these comments should be submitted for
our review and approval as soon as possible.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
A' Ry M. Scruggs 407��
Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
Attachment (all cc's)
cc: West and Associates
tfflKoor s�;lle 1RegonalFOffice
Allen Wahab
DMU
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section it�� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 500k recycles/10% post -consumer paper

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
Technical Review Comments for the
Revised 201 Facilities Plan Update
5/7/97
1. The Construction Grants and Loans Section strongly recommends reducing the
design overflow rates to the existing Aero-Mod clarifier units currently designed
for 769 gpd/sf. One method of achieving this goal would be to limit the existing
300,000 gpd Aero-Mod treatment unit to approximately 200,000 gpd (300,000
gpd at peak) due to the limited capabilities of the tube settling clarifiers and
expand the new treatment unit to approximately 400,000 gpd-to compensate. In
this case, the existing clarifier units would have a design surface overflow rate of
513 gpd/sf and a peak overflow rate of 769 gpd/sf. The new larger treatment unit
would be more capable of accommodating the higher peak flows expected due to
limiting the existing unit to 300,060 gpd peak flows. Another method of
achieving this goal would be to provide additional external clarification to reduce
the design overflow rates to the existing Aero-Mod clarifier units to acceptable
levels.
2. Please provide a cost effective analysis which compares an expanded treatment
facility with the proposed Aero-Mod clarifier units against an expanded facility
with external "conventional" clarifiers on a 20-year net present worth basis. Also,
consider the size/volume difference of the digester tanks due to wasting mixed
liquor solids (0.25%) with the internal clarifiers and wasting a thicker sludge
(0.75%) with external clarifiers.
3. According to the design calculations in Appendix E, the new 300,000 gpd
treatment unit will receive an hourly peak factor of 3.0 and a sustained peak factor
of 2.0. If the WWTP receives a sustained peak flow of 1,200,000 gpd (2.0 x
600,000 gpd) and the existing treatment unit is limited to 320,000 gpd peak flows,
the new treatment unit will receive the remaining 880,000 gpd which represents a
sustained peak factor .of nearly 3.0. This would result in a sustained peak
overflow rate of 1375 gpd/sf in the new clarifier units. This rate is much higher
than the maximum 1000 gpd/sf peak overflow rate suggested by the Ten State
Standard. In order to meet the 1000 gpd/sf standard, the new clarifiers would
have to be designed to handle approximately 330 gpd/sf at design flow
(approximately 910 sf of clarifier). A peak flow of 880,000 gpd would also result
in a peak solids loading rate of approximately 39 lbs/day/sf in the new clarifier
units (not including recirculation). Metcalf & $ddy recommends a design solids
loading rate of 5 to 24 lbs/day/sf and a peak solids loading rate of 34 lbs/sf/day in
clarifiers. An approximately 910 sf clarifier would have a design solids loading
rate of 19 lbs/sf/day at 300,000 gpd and a peak solids loading rate of 28 lbs/sf/day
(not including recirculation) at 880,000 gpd.. An hourly peak factor of 3.0 would
have a more significant effect on the new clarification units. The treatment plant

has also experienced an average daily peak flow as high as 710,000 gpd on 2/4/96
which represents a peak factor of 2.4. The treatment plant and its clarifiers should
be more conservatively designed to accommodate these peaks. Based on these
apparent high overflow rates on the proposed clarifiers during the sustained and
hourly peak flows, a re-evaluation of the size of the clarifiers should be provided.
Consideration should be given to meeting the weekly and monthly average BOD
and TSS effluent limits.
4. The proposed aeration diffuser system has an assumed oxygen transferxate of
only 3 to 4 %. Please provide a cost effective analysis on a 20-year net present
worth basis for the proposed coarse bubble diffusion aeration alternative versus
fine bubble diffusion or other more efficient methods of oxygen transfer. Address
the effect that a more efficient aeration system would have on the existing and
new treatment units.
5. Due to the volume of sludge (approximately 30,000 gpd) wasted out of the liquid
train and the minimum size of the digester/thickening tank, it is recommended that
a volatile solids reduction of approximately 30% not be considered in overall
sludge production. In the existing treatment unit, 365 lbs/day of solids wasted
from the aeration basin to the digester would result in approximately 2920 gpd
wasted from the digester at 1.5%. In the new treatment unit, 3591bs/day of solids
wasted from the aeration basin to the digester would result in approximately 2870
gpd wasted from the digester at 1.5%. Therefore, the total volume wasted from
the aerobic digester would be approximately 5800 gpd at 1.5%.
6. The 4577 gpd digester solids wasting rate used in Appendix G does not appear to
coincide with design calculations in�Appendix E. The design calculations in .
Appendix E use a volume of 2342 gpd of sludge (1.5%) wasted from the existing
digester and a volume of 2292 gpd of sludge (1.5%) wasted from the new
digester. Therefore, the total volume of sludge wasted from the digesters would
be 4634 gpd. According to Comment 45 (see above), the theoretical volume
wasted from the digester should be more conservatively estimated for design
purposes.
7. A minimum of 30 days of sludge storage is required at the wastewater treatment
plant site if the Town of Boiling Springs transports its sludge to the City of
Shelby's sludge composting facility for ultimate disposal. Currently,
approximately 20 days of sludge storage is provided at the existing plant for the
current design flow. Additional sludge storage will be required at the plant.
Provide a cost effective analysis on a 20-year net present worth basis of
alternatives for increasing the existing sludge digestion and storage at the plant.
Alternatives should include the conversion of the existing abandoned package
plant unit into an aerobic sludge digester/holding tank or the construction of a new
sludge digester/holding tank with sufficient volume to handle future needs.

8. A copy of a sludge disposal contract between Boiling Springs and Shelby with a
stated capacity should be provided as well as a copy of the amended Shelby
sludge permit which specifies a maximum yearly sludge amount for Boiling
Springs.
9. Provide a transcript or detailed summary of the public hearing and an affidavit of
publication.
10. Provide a resolution from the Town of Boiling Springs agreeing to implement the
selected alternative as described in the 201 Facilities Plan. ,(See Attachment A)
11. The response to Environmental Assessment comment #2 needs additional
information. Please describe the characteristics of Pacolet-Saw soil.
12. The map provided in response to Environmental Assessment comment #9 should
include a north arrow, map scale, and title. The map appears to cut off a portion
of the Town of Boiling Springs. Please provide a map that identifies the entire
Boiling Springs area.
13. The SOC milestone dates should be updated to correspond with the SRF project
schedule.
14. Please revise the flow figures on pages 10 and 11 of the Facilities Plan Update to
match the figures provided in Attachment B.

Attachment A
(Suggested Format)
RESOLUTION CONCERNING ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT
TO THE TOWN OF, 201 FACILITIES PLAN
WHEREAS, An Amendment to the Town of
been prepared and dated
_ 201 Facilities Plan has
199 , and
WHEREAS, The Town of has need for and intends to construct a
(state whether a wastewater treatment works or a wastewater transport system)
project as identified in the Amendment to the Town of
201 Facilities Plan as the selected alternative and described as (give brief
description of project).
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT
The Board of Commissioners of the Town of agrees to
implement the selected alternative as proposed in the Amendment to the
Town of 201 Facilities Plan.
Adopted this the day of , 199
at the Town of , North Carolina.
(Mayor)
Attested:
(Town Clerk)

Attachment B
2. Projected Sewer Flows:
a. Current Wastewater Usage:
During the year of 1996, the three highest water consumption months
were August, September, and October. Following are sewer gallons
billed based on water meter readings (residential, commercial, and
Gardner -Webb University portions are approximated).
Month
Residential
Commercial
GWU
Total
Aug.
4,103,600
780,200
729,800
5,613,600
Sept.
3,549,900
1,049,600
229731100
7,572,660
Oct.
2,606,800
7742100
22189,000
5,5707100
ADF 0.112 mgd 0.028 mgd
Less 10% 0.101 0.025
Current Wastewater Flows
Residential Wastewater Usage*
0.064 mgd 0.204 mgd
0.058 0.184
Commercial Wastewater Usage**
Industrial Wastewater Usage
Gardner -Webb University Wastewater Usage ***
Current 1996 Wastewater ADF (excluding I/I)
Current Non -Excessive *T /Z
Current 1996 Wastewater ADF (incl. I/I)
0.101
mgd
0.025 mgd
0.0 mgd
0.058 mgd
0.184 mgd
175
n c-�'-rrrec�
0,399 ► a oL
* (Based on residential water billing records minus a 10%
consumptive loss)
** (Based on commercial water billing records minus a 10%
consumptive loss)
*** (Based on University water billing records minus a 10%
consumptive loss)
b. Future Wastewater Usage:
The estimation is made. by adding the current average daily floe to
the flow due to the expected population growth. The Gardner -Webb
University increase is taken to be the 430 planned by Gardner -Webb
University. The residential increase is:
" o(..
PA&F- ro

Projected Total
4,981
Less GWU Planned
430
Less Current Users
2,400
2,151
Future Wastewater Flow Pro'ec1 tions
Current 1996 Wastewater Average Daily Flow
(excluding Id) 0.184 mgd
10% Industrial Reserve (10% of Current
Wastewater ADF excluding M) 0.018 mgd
2,151 Residential 20-year Increase x 70 gpd/capita 0.151 mgd
Commercial 20-year Increase (Residential
Increase x 15 gpd/capita) 0.032 mgd
430 Gardner -Webb University Increase
x 70 gpd/capita 0.030 mgd
20-year Industrial Commitment 0.0 mgd -
20-year Design Flow (excluding I/I) 0.415 mgd
Current Non -Excessive X X: /Z �•'n ' c o . 175 l gcL
01 o v+19G1
20-year Design Flow (incl. I/I)
0.600 ►V CL
Although I/I rates are non -excessive, the Town plans to continue
efforts to reduce I/I. ,
�1� -- ,- �-
is 0.600 mgd.
The proposed design flow, therefore,
P/% I 1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
,�EHNR
f�ja April 16, 1997
MEMORANDUMS ? 19n7
TO: Rex Gleason, Regional Water Quality Supervisor
Mooresville Regional Office °
ATTN: Michael Parker
FROM: Ryan Scruggs, Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Transmitted herewith is one copy of the above subject 201 Facilities Plan Update for your
files. Please return your comments to this office before May 8, 1997.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
RMS/kc
Attachment
cc: FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section , FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579Nlef C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

f �
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
.. Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 16, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell
Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017
Subject: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit No. NCO071943
Boiling Springs WWTP
Cleveland County
Dear Mr. Howell:
7. .
I- "� i� b
The Division has drafted the_ NPDES permit for the above referenced facility. The most significant
modifications from the last permit are the additions of a summer ammonia limit of 15 mg/l based on
protection of instream toxicity and a total residual chlorine limit of 28 µg/l in both the summer and winter.
Please note that you have 30 days after receipt of this draft permit to send written comments to my
attention. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at [phone], extension
512.
Sincerely,
Jacq lyn M. Nowell
Environmental Modeler
Instream Assessment Unit
cc: Mooresville Regional Office / Water Quality Section
Permit File
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]/FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

F
Permit No. NCO071943
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended,
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Boiling Springs WWTP
2556 Rockford Road
Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
to receiving waters designated as the Sandy Run Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, lII and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective x, 1997
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31, 2002
Signed this day x, 1997
DIRAFT
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0071943
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to:
Continue to operate an existing 0.300 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting
of a manual bar screen, grit chamber, aeration (diffused) basin, dual clarifiers,
aerobic sludge digestors, chlorine contact tank with gas chlorination, aerated sludge
holding tank and an instrumented flow measuring device. The plant is located at the
Boiling Springs WWTP, 2556 Rockford Road, Boiling Springs, Cleveland County
(See Part III of this Permit), and
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from Division of Water Quality,
construct and operate a 0.600 MGD wastewater treatment plant, and
3. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map
into Sandy Run Creek which is classified Class C waters in the Broad River Basin.

44 IU' "Jo "Sl (6t-iLLtl Y 1:0,d DVVJ
t D1 r
odi:egbb
SP0* e•
Z /
77 �_,
. . . . . . . ....ramr
27
xB0
1195
V
9
Z1,
x
no
_7L
67
0
J J
7
C-11—
7
0
N
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
PRIMARY HIGHWAY LIGHT -DUTY ROAD, HARD OR
HARD SURFACE IMPROVED SURFACE
SECONDARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE UNIMPROVED ROAD
Latitude 35*14'46"
Longitude 81*41'33-
Map # G12NW
Sub -basin 03-08-04
Stream Class
C
Discharge Class
01
Receiving Stream
Sandy Run Creek
Design Q 0.3 MGD
Permit expires 12J31/98
SCALE 1:24 000
0 1 MILE
0 7000 FEE7w
0 1 KILOMETE
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET
QUAD LOCATION
Boiling Springs WVVTP
NCO071943
Cleveland County

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NCO071943
K
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expansion above 0.30 MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
....... ..........................................................................:.l..t.Ml'i�S........................................................................iVltkN.11TdDRtt�G.....i�.ECi.tri.t�.
U E,NT.....?D.H.A.R.�CTIE~ i�t�.1'1 C 5..........................................................................................:.................................................................................................................................................................................
M ...............................
Y
Y...............................
>:<::::<:>D Y.....................................................................
; : r :e:: <::::::>
aim ;[::::>:>>:::>:>
......... .
aA>>>><
6.::.:::.:.;;:
::::::::>::>::>:<:>::::>::»::>::::»:::::»>::::�><:>:<:>;;::<:;;;::>::<:<:::::>:::<:::>::::>:>:>::::>::>::::::>::::::::>:::<:::::::.
...........................
a
>»><`
:::: Ili. .
00
Flow MGD
0.30
Continuous
Recordina
I or E
BOD52
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m /I
45.0 m /I
Weekly
Composite
E I
NH3 as N
Weekly
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E
H3
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
2/week
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
1►51
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -SUMMER (April 1 -October 31) Permit No. NCO071943
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until the expansion above 0.30 MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
CT�I��T0:3...................................................:......................................
.....................................................................................:.......................................................................................
................................:...:...........................................................................
:.:......I1VIb.ntbk
:;:
...............Ne.ek............................................................................................:...:...
Qai.t...................fUl:ea:su�r::e.m..
Y.....................................................................:............................................................:.....
m.t............
:............................................R.........
`1»....
.:................................................................
.::::.:::::..
:::::.-::::::.
..................................................................
f tit::>::><;:::>
<:::>::::F:r::e .0 .. c
.
TV
ri:.><>:>>::
IMCP I�i .
Flow MGD
0.60
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m /I
45.0 m /I
Weekly
Composite
E I
NH3 as N
15 m /I
Weekly
Com osite
E
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E
H3
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
28 /I
2/week
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
►•
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
19

A(1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -WINTER (November 1 -May 31) Permit No. NCO071943
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expansion above 0.30 MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
....
E. F.L, t7 E.T..... O.H.MON
�T 1Et�T1CS...................................................................:..
A R.A......................................................................................................::.......................................................................................................:.......................................................................................
.. ....
.......................................................................................................................................:.....................
ENT... C`tD tR.EI[+ .. .
..................................................:.:.:::::::::::.::.:.................................................
:..:.:::::::
..........:::::..W
::>::>:::>::>::»:«:::>::;.
:e.e k�.......................t�ai.l...................
;;;:.;:.;:.;;
... M ea.s..r...m...:.:.:.::...............................................................:...
Sam ..............
P.................
:::::::::::::.:...................................................................:.:.::::.:::::::::.::::::::.:::::::::
..........
� r..............tul��tmt�m»:::>:>:>:
<>:::>::>:F:.::r::e �::e:n..........:..........:.
....�.................................
�o
Flow MGD
0.60
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
E,
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 m /I
45.0 m /I
Weekly
Composite
E I
NH3 as N
Weekly
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean
200 /100 ml
400 /100 ml
Weekly
Grab
E
Hs
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
28 /I
2/week
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Semi -Annual
Com osite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
►n.
I Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
There.shall.be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
C�inas�li V r' a
April 10, 1997
N.C. )D PT. O-'
Es3V1n%o1-,?,ENi T, HEAL T Y1
N -, a '�L RESOURCES
!� 1 3 1991
�r}�:?�'i'blwil
1.1
Mr. Jay B. Lucas, PE
NCDEHNR
Division of Water Quality
Construction Grants and Loans Section
PO Box 29579
Raleigh, NC 27626-0579
RE: Town of Boiling Springs
Revised 201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Lucas:
Enclosed are six copies of the revised plan for your review as well as an itemized response to the
Technical Review Comments of February 10, 1997.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know.
Sincerely,
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, PA
Benja-min B. Thomas, PE
cf
Enclosures
PC . ,ej@leasr�, �'s�re a Pie I al i i .. e�
Rick owell, Town of Boiling Springs
405 S. STERLING ST. • MORGANTON, NC 28655 ° 704-433-5661 FAX: [phone]

RESPONSE TO TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS
Our population projection for 2016 has been -revised from 5,310 to 4,981. This is based on
immediate plans for growth for the first 10 years and the Office of State Planning numbers for
the second 10 years. The planned growth is outlined in part C.1.
2. The current estimation of flow has been revised as per this comment.
3. A breakdown of apartments, dornutories, and subdivisions that are planned is included in part
C.1. Verification was made by conversations between the Town Manager and developers
concerning their plans to develop new lots and build new homes or apartments. A letter from
Gardner -Webb University is also included concerning their immediate plans.
4. The present worth analysis has been revised accordingly.
The issue of flow equalization is important for the existing WWTP due to the limitations of
the tube -settler type clarifiers which are upset by peak flows. However, the typical diurnal
peaking factor is only about 1.3, therefore flow equalization would have little benefit. The
peak flows which upset the clarifiers seem to be due to I/I. Following storm events, the
WWTP sees ADF's of about 0.6 MGD, and a flow equalization basin could not reduce the
flow below the daily average. This 201 Facilities Plan update proposes that upon plant
expansion that excess flow be diverted to the new side as it will be better able to handle peak
Rows. The AeroMod ClarAtor clarifiers or conventional clarifiers (both of which are allowed
to be bid) are both external types which can receive peak flows much better than the tube -
settler type.
The AeroMod ClarAtor is the type proposed and used for plant expansion design but it is
completely different from AeroMod's previous type presently used at Boiling Springs. Air lifts
are still used for sludge removal but the units are sized more conservatively and do not have
settling tubes. Descriptive literature is included in the Appendix and Aeromod, Inc. has
indicated their willingness to meet with DWQ to explain the newer design.
6. A cost effective analysis comparing flow equalization alternatives was not made as per the
.response to com men t #5. A sludge thickening/disposal alternatives analysis was made and is
included in the Appendix. The percent solids of the sludge to be hauled is estimated to be
1.5%. This would be achieved by AeroMod's design of displacing supernatant by wasting
mixed liquor to the digestors. However, the current operator has been able to achieve higher
concentrations (up to 8%) by use of a transfer pump and by extending the blower off time
to the digesters.
7. The current and proposed sludge storage capacity of the digesters is about 20 days. This is
sufficient since the sludge will begin the composting process when received by the Shelby
WWTP and therefore a certain degree of pathogen reduction is not required prior to hauling.
The sludge disposal alternatives analysis includes the alternative of increasing sludge storage
volume.

8. Engineering design calculations are included in Appendix E.
9. Part VI of Appendix E describes the proposed flow splitter box.
10. A more detailed description of the existing treatment units and their capabilities and
deficiencies has been included in part B.2. The current NPDES limits are shown in Appendix
A. The existing WWTP is sufficient to handle 0.300 MGD if polymer is added, except that
sludge digester volume is inadequate for land application. Supporting calculations are shown
in Appendix E.
11 The existing effluent outfall is sufficient for 2.5 times the 20-year design flow as shown in Part
II of Appendix E.
12. Because a second effluent flow meter will be added to the existing one (one for each side of
the expanded plant), the two together will be capable of measuring expected peak flows. The
existing meter has a capacity of 0.7 MGD. The new one will have a capacity of about 1.5
MGD.
13. The City of Shelby has tentatively agreed to accept hauled sludge from the Town of Boiling
Springs WWTP. A sludge disposal contract between the municipalities as well as a modified
composting permit for Shelby are in progress but not yet complete. Some documentation is
included in Appendix C. The contract will be for 5,000 GPD, which is slightly greater than
the 20-year design quantity.
14. Current and 20 year sludge production rates and related disposal costs are shown in
Appendices E and G.
15. A detailed breakdown of O & M costs is shown in Appendix I It is assumed that an
expanded WWTP would become a Class III or IV facility. Therefore, the cost for an
additional ORC has been included in the estimate of future O & M costs.
16. A detailed description and cost estimate for the selected altemative (#5) is included in Part
D. 5.
17. In the original application the Town requested $800,000 in SRF loan funds and $100,000 in
High Unit Cost grant monies. Since there are no High Unit Cost funds available, the Town
has subsequently requested a SRF loan of $900,000 which includes $17,647 in closing costs.
The closing cost is included in the cost estimate.
18. The latest billing records show a total of 807 sewer accounts, and the estimate of the service
population has been revised to about 2,400. See Part C.1.
19. The speculative NPDES limits are included in Appendix B.

20. Number and capacities of pumps are described in Part B. L(b).
21. The requested power outage history is shown in Appendix K.
22. The monthly fee estimate has been included.
23. Design, Administration, and Contingency costs have been revised to be the same percentage
for each of the alternatives.
24. The only demolition and removal to be done as part of the expansion would be the very small,
wooden chlorine and office buildings. This cost may be about $500.00.
25. No patent fees are associated with any of the alternatives.
26. Potential open space and recreational opportunities are discussed for each alternative in Part
D.
27. Advice taken. The Town has a sewer use ordinance which is in effect. A copy is included
in Appendix L.
28. The selected alternative proposes the use of UV disinfection which has proven effective from
a pilot test at the WWTP. Therefore, the existing chlorine system would be abandoned.
29. The Local Government Commission has given preliminary, verbal approval of the proposed
loan and user charge increase. A meeting with the LGC is scheduled for the week of April
14, 1997.
30. For the selected alternative, no unallowable costs under the Act will be incurred.
31. The project specifications for the selected alternative have been sent to Mr. Cecil Madden.
The specifications allow for multiple sources of equipment suppliers, including the secondary
treatment plant.
32. Public meetings have been held. Excerpts of minutes are in Appendix I.
33. A public hearing has been scheduled for April 17, 1997.
34. Affidavit of hearing advertisement is included. A summary of the hearing will be forwarded
when completed.
35. This resolution will be made after the public hearing if the outcome is to implement the
selected alternative. A copy will be forwarded when made.
36. The 20 year design flow has been estimated to be 0.600 MGD.
37. The SOC milestone dates have been proposed to change. See Part B.2.

38. The EA comments have been received.
39. The e-mail stating that the Mooresville Regional Office has no comments was received.
RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS
1. There are 235 houses inside the Town limits currently not connected to the collection system.
The Town plans to connect all of these within about 5 years. In these unsewered areas, septic
tank and subsurface drainfield systems are used, individual on -site. The Town is aware of
problems with these septic systems, especially for the 34 homes in Crest Acres Subdivision.
Approximately a third of these homeowners have complained about fail ng systems.
2. The soils in the service area are Pacolet-Saw.
3. The WW IP site is wooded except for the graded areas occupied by the process units, gravel
road, and gravel parking area.
4. The Town of Boiling Springs purchases its potable water from the City of Shelby via a 16-
inch interconnecting water main. The town has its own elevated water storage tank within the
town limits.
5. Speculative effluent limits are the same as current, except for chlorine residual and ammonia
nitrogen, therefore the pollutant loading to the stream at the 20 year design flow would be 150
LB/DAY of BODS and TSS, no chlorine, and 75 LB/DAY of NH3-N, based on the
speculative limits.
6. The closest residential structure to the treatment plant is 1,200 feet away. There have been
no odor complaints reported to the town administrative office or the wastewater treatment
plant since the plant began operating in 1988.
7. A public hearing is scheduled for April 17, 1997. A copy of the hearing transcript will be
submitted following the April 17 hearing. The affidavit of advertisement is in Appendix I.
This statement has been included at the end of the section.
9. An 8 1/2" x 11" USGS location map has been included. in addition to the site plan map.
10. Technical Support Branch comments:
(1) The spray irrigation application rate is lower because it applies to the gross area whereas
the subsurface rate applies to the actual trench area only.
(2) Land costs per acre have been adjusted to be the same for both alternatives.

(3) This is due to the difference in actual application area, as explained above.

a� 16
RESPONSE TO TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS &
LOAN SECTION
1. Our population projection for 2016 has been revised from 5,310 to 4,98L...This is based on
immediate plans for growth for the first 10 years and the Office of State Planning numbers for
the second 10 years. The planned growth is outlined in part C.1.
2. The current estimation of flow has been revised as per this comment.
3. A breakdown of apartments, dormitories, and subdivisions that are planned is included in part
C.1. Verification was made by conversations between the Town Manager and developers
concerning their plans to develop new lots and build new homes or apartments. A letter from
Gardner -Webb University is also included concerning their immediate plans.
4. The present worth analysis has been revised accordingly.
5. The issue of flow equalization is important for the existing WW17P due to the limitations of
the tube -settler type clarifiers which are upset by peak flows. However, the typical diurnal
peaking factor is only about 1.3, therefore flow equalization would have little benefit. The
peak flows which upset the clarifiers seem to be due to M. Following storm events, the
WWTP sees ADF's of about 0.6 MGD, and a flow equalization basin could not reduce the
flow below the daily average. This 201 Facilities Plan update proposes that upon plant
expansion that excess flow be diverted to the new side as it will be better able to handle peak
flows. The Aeromod C1arAtor clarifiers or conventional clarifiers (both of which are allowed
to be bid) are both external types which can receive peak flows much better than the tube -
settler type.
The AeroMod C1arAtor is the type proposed and used for plant expansion design but it is
completely different from AeroMod's previous type presently used at Boiling Springs. Air lifts
are still used for sludge removal but the units are sized more conservatively and do not have
settling tubes. Descriptive literature is included in the Appendix and Aeromod, Inc. has
indicated their willingness to meet with DWQ to explain the newer design.
6. A cost effective analysis comparing flow equalization alternatives was not made as per the
response to comment #5. A sludge thickening/disposal alternatives analysis was made and is
included in the Appendix. The percent solids of the sludge to be hauled is estimated to be
1.5%. This would be achieved by AeroMod's design of displacing supernatant by wasting
mixed liquor to the digestors. However, the current operator has been able to achieve higher
concentrations (up to 8%) by use of a transfer pump and by extending the blower off time
to the digesters.
7. The current and proposed sludge storage capacity of the digesters is about 20 days. This is
sufficient since the sludge will begin the composting process when received by the Shelby
WWTP and therefore a certain degree of pathogen reduction is not required prior to hauling.
The sludge disposal alternatives analysis includes the alternative of increasing sludge storage
volume.
ORIGINAL
d-2

�f
8. Engineering design calculations are included in Appendix E.
9. Part VI of Appendix E describes the proposed flow splitter box.
10. Amore detailed description of the existing treatment units and their capabilities and
deficiencies has been included in part B.2. The current NPDES limits are shown in Appendix
A. The existing WWTP is sufficient to handle 0.300 MGD if polymer is added, except that
sludge digester volume is inadequate for land application. Supporting calculations are shown
in Appendix E.
11 The existing effluent outfall is sufficient for 2.5 times the 20-year design flow as shown in Part
H of Appendix E.
12. Because a second effluent flow meter will be added to the existing one (one for each side of
the expanded plant), the two together will be capable of measuring expected peak flows. The
existing meter has a capacity of 0.7 MGD. The new one will have a capacity of about 1.5
MGD.
13. The City of Shelby has tentatively agreed to accept hauled sludge from the Town of Boiling
Springs WWIP. A sludge disposal contract between the municipalities as well as a modified
composting permit for Shelby are in progress but not yet complete. Some documentation is
included in Appendix C. The contract will be for 5,000 GPD, which is slightly greater than
the 20-year design quantity.
14. Current and 20-year sludge production rates and related disposal costs are shown in
Appendices E and G.
15. A detailed breakdown of O & M costs is shown in Appendix I It is assumed that an
expanded WWTP would become a Class III or IV facility. Therefore, the cost for an
additional ORC has been included in the estimate of future O & M.costs.
16. A detailed description and cost estimate for the selected alternative (#5) is included in Part
D.S.
17. In the original application the Town requested $800,000 in SRF loan funds and $100,000 in
High Unit Cost grant monies. Since there are no High Unit Cost funds available, the Town
has subsequently requested a SRF loan of $900,000 which includes $17,647 in closing costs.
The closing cost is included in the cost estimate.
18. The latest billing records show a total of 807 sewer accounts, and the estimate of the service
population has been revised to about 2,400. See Part C.1.
19. The speculative NPDES limits are included in Appendix B.

20. Number and capacities of pumps are described -in Part B.1.(b).
21. The requested power outage history is shown in Appendix K.
22. The monthly fee estimate has been included.
23. Design, Administration, and Contingency costs have been revised to be the same percentage
for each of the alternatives.
24. The only demolition and removal to be done as part of the expansion would be the very small,
wooden chlorine and office buildings. This cost may be about $500.00.
25. No patent fees are associated with any of the alternatives.
26. Potential open space and recreational opportunities are discussed for each alternative in Part
D.
27. Advice taken. The Town has a sewer use ordinance which is in effect. A copy is included
in Appendix L.
28. The selected alternative proposes the use of UV disinfection which has proven effective from
a pilot test at the WWTP. Therefore, the existing chlorine system would be abandoned.
29. The Local Government Commission has given preliminary, verbal approval of the proposed
loan and user charge increase. A meeting with the LGC is scheduled for the week of April
14, 1997.
30. For the selected alternative, no unallowable costs under the Act will be incurred.
31. The project specifications for the selected alternative have been sent to Mr. Cecil Madden.
The specifications allow for multiple sources of equipment suppliers, including the secondary
treatment plant.
32. Public meetings have been held. Excerpts of minutes are in Appendix I.
33. A public hearing has been scheduled for April 17, 1997.
34. Affidavit of hearing advertisement is included. A summary of the hearing will be forwarded
when completed.
35. This resolution will be made after the public hearing if the outcome is to implement the
selected alternative. A copy will be forwarded when made.
36. The 20-year design flow has been estimated to be -0.600 MGD.
37. The SOC milestone dates have been proposed to change. See Part B.2.

38. The EA comments have been received.
39. The e-mail stating that the Mooresville Regional Office has no comments was received.
RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS
1. There are 235 houses inside the Town limits currently not connected to the collection system.
The Town plans to connect all of these within about 5 years. In these unsewered areas, septic
tank and subsurface drainfield systems are used, individual on -site. The Town is aware of
problems with these septic systems, especially for the 34 homes in Crest Acres Subdivision.
Approximately a third of these homeowners have complained about failing systems.
2. The soils in the service area are Pacolet-Saw.
3. The WWTP site is wooded except for the graded areas occupied by the process units, gravel
road, and gravel parking area.
4. The Town of Boiling Springs purchases its potable water from the City of Shelby via a 16-
inch interconnecting water main. The town has its own elevated water storage tank within the
town limits.
Speculative effluent limits are the same as current, except for chlorine residual and ammonia
nitrogen, therefore the pollutant loading to the stream at the 20-year design flow would be 150
LB/DAY of BODS and TSS, no chlorine, and 75 LB/DAY of NH3-N, based on the
speculative limits.
6. The closest residential structure to the treatment plant is 1,200 feet away. There have been
no odor complaints reported to the town administrative office or the wastewater treatment
plant since the plant began operating in 1988.
7. A public hearing is scheduled for April 17, 1997. A copy of the hearing transcript will be
submitted following the April 17 hearing. The affidavit of advertisement is in Appendix I.
8. This statement has been included at the end of the section.
9. An 8 1/2" x 11" USGS location map has been included in addition to the site plan map.
10. Technical Support Branch comments:
(1) The spray irrigation application rate is lower because it applies to the gross area whereas
the subsurface rate applies to the actual trench area only.
(2) Land costs per acre have been adjusted to be the same for both alternatives.

(3) This is due to the difference in actual application area, as explained above.

fu
PUBLIC NOTICE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA �'®R ' `� 19�
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMItSSION....,_
iliiiiiu_�a L:. _:.-.•, .. :I.n .... �7:f.li
POST OFFICE BOX 29535 -; Lei- r f,�6..L! L of E
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A STATE NPDES PERMIT
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of
North Carolina, Public Law 92-500 and other lawful standards and regulations, the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission proposes to issue a permit to discharge to the persons listed
below effective 6/9/97 and subject to special conditions.
.Persons wishing to comment upon or object to the proposed determinations are invited to submit same in
writing to the above address no later than 5/23/97 . All comments received prior to that date will be
considered in the formulation of final determinations regarding the proposed permit. A public meeting may
be held where the Director of the Division or Environmental Management finds a significant degree of
public interest in a proposed permit.
A copy of the draft permit is available by writing or calling the Division of Environmental Management,
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535, [phone].
The application and other information may be inspected at these locations during normal office hours.
Copies of the information on file are available upon request and payment of the costs of reproduction.
All such comments or requests regarding a proposed permit should make reference to the NPDES permit
number listed below.
Date APR 1 6 1997
A. Preston Howard Yr., P.E., Director
y� Division of Environmental Management
Public notice of intent to issue a State NPDES permit to the following:
1. NPDES No. NC0071943. Town of Boiling Springs, PO Box 1014, Boiling Springs, NC 28017 has
applied for a permit modification for a facility located at Boiling Springs WWTP, 2556 Rockford Road,
Boiling Springs, Cleveland County. The modification involves the increase of permitted wasteflow from
0.300 MGD to 0.600 MGD. This facility discharges treated domestic wastewater from one outfall into
Sandy Run Creek, a Class C stream in the Broad River Basin which has a 7Q10 flow of 16.7 cfs and a
30Q2 flow of 33.5 cfs. Ammonia and total residual chlorine are water quality limited. This discharge may
affect future allocations.

Z'- - State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
March 6, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
The Construction Grants & Loans Section has completed its environmental review of the
subject 201 Facilities Plan Update and has the attached comments. A revised 201 Facilities Plan
Update which incorporates responses to these comments should be submitted for our review and
approval as soon as possible.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
A, #l•.A'."
Ryan M. Scruggs
Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
Attachment (all cc's)
cc: West and Associates
h ooresville-Regional. Off_ce6 '
Allen Wahab
DMU
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section �`�® FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMENTS
Boiling Springs Facilities Plan
March 3, 1997
1. How many residential structures are not connected to the town's central collection and
treatment system? Describe the type of on -site treatment systems in the unsewered areas.
Are the existing on -site systems operating properly? Are there plans to connect all
residences to the central collection and treatment system?
2. The environmental assessment should include a description of soils in the service area.
3. A descriptive analysis ( vegetation, land use, etc.) should be provided about the area in
which the wastewater treatment plant is located.
4. What is the source of potable water for the town of Boiling Springs?
5. Speculative effluent limitations should be included in the document. Also, calculate the
pollutant loading to the stream with the existing and speculative effluent limitations.
6. What is the distance of the nearest residential structure to the existing treatment plant?
Have any complaints been received about odor problems?
7. A copy of the public hearing transcript /record must be provided. Document that the
hearing was properly advertised.
9. The environmental assessment should include a statement about the indirect and
cumulative impacts that are anticipated from implementing the proposed project.
10. The location of the proposed facilities should be clearly identified on an 8Y2 x 11
topographical map.
11. Comments were received from several agencies. A review comment that requires a
response was received from the Technical Support Branch. The review comment from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is provided for your information.

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 26, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michelle Suverkrubbe
THRU: Don Safrit
Ruth Swanek
Carla Sanderson
FROM: Jacquelyn M. N well
Colen Sullinu��
SUBJECT: 201 Facilities Plan Update for Boiling Springs
- Both the Instream Assessment (IAU) and the Permits and Engineering Units have
reviewed the subject document and have the following comments. The Plan does not
discuss the projected effluent limits for the expansion to 0.6 MGD or whether the upgraded
treatment plant would able to meet these limits. Attached is a copy of a speculative
response from IAU in May 1996 that gave tentative effluent limits for the requested
expansion of the Boiling Springs WWTP to 0.6 MGD. This information should be
included in the document.
Clarification is also needed concerning information in the alternatives analysis.
Futher explanation is required on the following:
1) Why is there a difference in application rates between spray irrigation and
subsurface disposal? For example, the analysis has a rate of 0.2 gpd/sf for spray and 0.3
gpd/sf for subsurface.
2) Why are there differences in per acre land costs for the two different land based
alternatives? The analysis for a subsurface system was based upon a $3000/acre cost and
for spray irrigation, a $5000/acre cost. Yet, there is no discussion of the reasons for the
differences in costs for each of the proposals.
3) What is the explanation on the different amount of land required for the
alternatives of spray versus subsurface disposal options? For example, 69 - 85 acres is
documented as required for a spray irrigation system (at a rate of 0.2 gpd/sf) as opposed to
275 acres for subsurface (at a rate of 0.3 gpd/sf). A subsurface disposal option is required
to have a reserve area of size able to dispose of the permitted capacity of the entire system.
However, with the higher rate of application, it would appear that the land area required
would be at most two times that required for a spray irrigation system.
The revised plan should address these comments. Please contact if there, are
questions regarding this response.
Rftxehmo-J- -
cc: Rex Gleason
WLA File

:;_State of North Carolina
;department of Environment, . .
-.:
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ­• =
_
:
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ..
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director :-:..... =.
May 9, 1996
The Honorable Max J. Hamrick
Mayor of Town of Boiling Springs
P.O. Box 1014 - - -
Boiling Springs, N.C.- 28017-1014
Subject:. -.Boiling Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion ST
NPDES Permit No. NCO071943
-Cleveland County
Dear Mr. Hamrick:
Your recent request for speculative effluent limits for the expansion of.the Boiling
Springs WWTP from a design flow of 0.300 MGD to an expanded flow of 0.600 MGD
has been completed by the staff of the Technical Support Branch. In order to receive final
permit limits, a formal application will have to be submitted to the Division's Permits and
Engineering Unit. Per North Carolina's anti -degradation policy (15A NCAC 2B.0201
(c)(1)), each application for an NPDES permit .or NPDES permit expansion to discharge
treated waste will require documentation of an -effort to consider non -discharge alternatives
pursuant to North Carolina Regulation 15A NCAC 2H.0105 (c)(2).
Based on available information, the to tative limits at 0.600 MGD for conventional
constituents are:
Summer Winter
BOD5 (mg/1) 30 30
NH3-N (mg/W 15 nr*
TSS (mg/1) 30 30
Fecal Coliforrn (#/100m1) 200 200
pH (SU) 6-9 6-9
Chlorine (1.tg/1) 28 28
*nr - no requirement
It should be noted that the summer NH3-N limit is based on protecting Sandy Run
Creek against instream toxicity. North Carolina is evaluating all NPDES dischargers for
ammonia toxicity following the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance to
protect the waters for an instream criteria of 1 mg/l in the summer and 1.8 mg/1 in the
winter, under 7Q10 flow conditions.
The Division of Environmental Management (DEM) is now recommending chlorine
limits and dechlorination for all new or expanding dischargers proposing the use of
chlorine for disinfection. An acceptable level of chlorine in your effluent is 28 µg/l to
ensure protection against acute toxicity. The process of chlorination/dechlorination or an
P.O.'Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1 o% post -consumer paper

ti Y
Letter to Mi. Hamrick
-page 2 -
alternate form of disinfection;"such as -ultraviolet radiation; should allow the facility to
comply with ,the total residual chlorine limit
The request did not Iridicatewhe'ther any of the expansion wastewater would have
any industrial'constituency, therefore this aspect could not be evaluated. If there is any
industrial flow, there is the possibility that effluent limitations or monitoring for toxicants
or metals could be added to the permit upon further evaluation.
DEM is implementing a basinwide water quality management initiative. Our _
schedule for the Broad River Basin is set for 1998. The plan will attempt to address all
sources of point and nonpoint pollutants where deemed necessary to protect or restore
water quality standards. In addressing interaction of sources, wasteload allocations may be
affected. Those facilides*that already have committed.to high levels of treatment technology
are least likely to be affected.
FinalNPDES effluent limitations will be determined after a formal permit
application has been submitted to the Division. If there are any additional questions
concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Ruth Swanek (ext- 503) or Jackie Nowell
(ext. 512), of my staff at [phone].
.... A
DLS/JMN
cc: Rex Gleason
Jerry Twiggs, .West and Associates
Central Files
WLA File

United States ' Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
February 21, 1997
Mr. Reginald R. Sutton
Division of Water Quality
Construction Grants and Loans Section
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29579
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579
Dear Mr. Sutton:
Subject: 201 Facilities Plan for the Town of Boiling Springs, Cleveland County, North Carolina
We received a copy of the subject document on January 24, 1997, requesting our comments. The
following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions 'of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
According to information provided in the document, alternatives were evaluated to meet the
NPDES permit limits and allow for future population growth. The document concludes that the
best alternative is to expand the existing wastewater treatment plant and continue discharge into
Sandy Creek of the Broad River drainage. Expansion of the existing plant capacity will involve
approximately 0.5. acre ofpreviously cleared land and Will increase discharge to 0.6 MGD uom
the current 0.3 MGD. This is a minor discharge relative to the 6.65 MGD average flow of Sandy
Creek, although 7-year low flow is 1.44 MGD. The purpose of this project is to improve sewer
service to the Town of Boiling Springs.
If the preferred alternative is modified or one of the other alternatives is subsequently selected,
the Service would then be concerned about the potential impacts this project could have on the
federally threatened dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) and two Federal species of
concern that may occur in this area. According to our records, while there are no known
occurrences of these species from the specific project site, there are populations in the general
area.

Two plant species that are of Federal concern occur in Cleveland County --sweet pinesap
(Monotropsis odorata) and Carolina saxifrage (Saxifraga caroliniana). These species are found
in similar habitats. Monotropsis odorata occurs in mixed deciduous woods and flowers February
to April; Saxifraga caroliniana occurs in rocky woods, flowering in May and June.
Please note that these species of concern are not legally protected under the Act and are not
subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, unless they are formally proposed or listed
as endangered or threatened. We are including these species in our response to give you advance
notification and to request your assistance in protecting them. The Service encourages you to
conduct surveys for these species if potentially suitable habitat exists. Hexastylis naniflora
flowers from March to May. If surveys are conducted for Hexastylis naniflora, we would
appreciate it if you would also include the above -mentioned species of concern.
It is the responsibility of the appropriate Federal regulatory agency to review its activities or
programs and to identify any such activities or programs that may affect endangered or
threatened species or their habitats. If it is determined that the proposed activity may adversely
affect any species federally listed as endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this
office must be initiated.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. In any future correspondence
concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-97-057.
cc:
Ms. Linda Pearsall, Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, NC 27611
Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 320 S. Garden Street,
Marion, NC 28752

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality !�
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor 1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ® = H N R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 16, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator'
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
This is to acknowledge receipt of the subject 201 Facilities Plan Update. Review of
the document has been initiated, and we will notify you and your engineer upon completion of
our review.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Tom
Ryan M. Scruggs
Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
cc: West & Associates
o oresville-Regi_ondl-Office.
DMU
PMB
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section ���� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
j
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
/
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
February 10, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
Dear Mr. Howell:
�EHNR
MNYI-RONMENTIIEALIUJ,
e,? NATURAL RiSOURCES
0{1I3W1.01' 11V9MgT11 NAUS&1VrtT
MWESULE SE AL BFF#;E
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
The Construction Grants and Loans Section has completed its review of the subject
201 Facilities Plan Update and has the attached comments. A revised 201 Facilities Plan Update
which incorporates responses to these comments should be submitted for our review and
approval as soon as possible.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Ryan Scruggs at (919)
715-6209.
Sincerely,
ay B. Lucas, P.E.; Supervisor
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
Attachment (all cc's)
cc: West and Associates
i 'ooresville_$egional_�ffice
Allen Wahab
DMU
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section ���� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
Technical Review Comments for the
201 Facilities Plan Update
2/10/97
1. The population projections provided in the report are based on the growth rate
over a six year period being maintained throughout the 20-year planning period.
Population growth figures based on the Office of State Planning census data have
been used to determine a more realistic 20-year planning period growth and are
included for use in the determination of future flows at the Boiling Springs
WWTP (see Attachment 1). The attached population projections estimate a 400
person population increase over the 20-year planning period. This, of course,
does not include any annexation or serving of areas outside the town limits.
2. The current estimation of flow at the WWTP should be based on water billing
records minus a consumptive loss as shown in the attached flow calculation table
(see Attachment 2) with an allowance for Inflow and Infiltration added to this
figure. A good approximation may be determined by using an average of the
three highest consecutive water consumption months minus a 10 % consumptive
loss. An allowance for typical wet weather Inflow and Infiltration average daily
flows should also be included. Industrial letters of commitment can also be
provided to increase the future flow projections.
3. Verify the immediate requests for additional capacity for a new dormitory at
Gardner -Webb University elderly housing, new apartments, and new subdivisions
which will add an additional 450 people. A breakdown of additional people per
new dormitory, apartment complex, and subdivision should also be provided.
4. Please revise the present worth analysis using a discount rate of 7.75 % and
associated compound interest factors (See Attachment 3). The existing analysis
uses a 4% discount rate and does not appear to give land a 100% salvage value.
Salvage values should be determined according to the attached EPA Guidelines
(see Attachment 4). Debt service has been included as a portion of the O&M cost
in the present worth analysis for Alternatives #1, 2, and 3 but not in the selected
alternative. Please do not include the debt service costs in the present worth
analysis. Please revise all figures accordingly.
5. Adequate engineering justification must be provided for required flow
equalization. The following supporting documentation should be provided:
• Provide a brief description of the problem requiring correction by flow
equalization.
• Identify the anticipated 4-hour peak flows at the treatment facility, once
the proposed Gardner -Webb University sewer replacement is completed.

• Identify the permit limits that flow equalization will help the facility
achieve.
• Advise whether the proposed equalization facility would be operated as an
in -line or side -line basin.
• Provide preliminary sizing calculations which justify the size of the
proposed equalization facility. The attached excerpt from an EPA Manual
on flow equalization is provided to assist your engineer in sizing
calculations.
• Identify alternative methods of accomplishing the same task.
• If conventional clarifiers are used at the plant, would flow equalization be
necessary? Typically, extended aeration plants with external clarifiers can
handle normal diurnal peak flow of 2 to 3 times the average daily flow.
• A flow equalization facility includes a holding tankibasin, a wastewater
pumping station, an aeration/mixing system, and a wash down or solids
removal system. Identify the sizes of each component and their associated
capital cost.
• A cost effective analysis should be performed, which compares the cost of
treatment facilities with and without flow equalization on a 20-year net
present worth basis (see Comment #6).
6. Provide a cost effective analysis which compares an expanded treatment facility
with internal clarification preceded by a flow equalization basin against an
expanded facility with external "conventional" clarifiers not preceded by flow
equalization on a 20-year net present worth basis. Also, consider the size/volume
difference of the digester tanks due to wasting mixed liquor solids (0.25%) with
the internal clarifiers and wasting a thicker sludge (0.75%) with external clarifiers.
Evaluate alternatives for additional sludge thickening in the existing digesters
which would make it more cost effective to transport thickened sludge to Shelby.
Identify the percent solids of the sludge that you anticipate hauling to the Shelby
sludge facility.
7. A minimum of 30 days of sludge storage is required at the wastewater treatment
plant site if the Town of Boiling Springs transports its sludge to the City of
Shelby's sludge composting facility for ultimate disposal. Currently,
approximately 20 days of sludge storage is provided at the existing plant for the
current design flow. Additional sludge storage will be required at the plant.
Provide a cost effective analysis on a 20-year net present worth basis of
alternatives for increasing the existing sludge digestion and storage at the plant.
Alternatives should include the conversion of the existing abandoned package
plant unit into an aerobic sludge digester/holding tank or the construction of a new
sludge digester/holding tank with sufficient volume to handle future needs.
Please include engineering design calculations for all existing and proposed units
at the expanded treatment plant.

9. Provide a description of how the flow will be split between the two treatment
units as well as how the flow equalization will be shared.
10. Provide a detailed description of the existing treatment units and provide an
engineering analysis of the capabilities and deficiencies of each unit process, in
both the liquid and the sludge trains. Provide a copy of the current NPDES limits
pages and advise of the ability to comply with the existing limitations. Special
attention should be given to specific ways to overcome the deficiencies in the
existing clarification and digestion units at the treatment plant. Provide
manufacturer literature and engineering design calculations to prove that the
existing clarifiers and digesters can adequately handle the current design flow of
0.300 mgd.
11. Provide calculations to verify that the existing effluent outfall is capable of
transporting 2.5 times the 20-year design flow.
12. Confirm that the existing effluent flow meter is capable of recording the expected
peak flows at the wastewater treatment facility.
13. The City of Shelby should perform an analysis of their sludge facilities to
determine if the facility is capable of meeting the 20-year Boiling Springs sludge
needs. Currently, Shelby's sludge permit does not allow for the acceptance of any
sludge from Boiling Springs. In order for the Shelby sludge facility to accept
sludge from Boiling Springs, the Shelby sludge permit must be amended. A copy
of a sludge disposal contract between Boiling Springs and Shelby with a stated
capacity should be provided as well as a copy of the amended Shelby sludge
permit which specifies a maximum yearly sludge amount for Boiling Springs.
14. Provide calculations for the current and 20-year sludge production rates. Yearly
sludge disposal costs for Boiling Springs at current and 20-year sludge production
rates should also be provided.
15. Provide a more detailed breakdown of the annual O&M costs for the existing and
future WWTP. The current WWTP is rated as a Class II facility. Will the
proposed expansion bring the facility to Class III or IV? If so, have additional
O&M costs been included for a new class rating?
16. Provide a more detailed description of the selected alternative as well as a more
detailed cost estimate for this alternative.
17. Confirm that the amount of SRF Loan funds requested is $800,000. The closing
costs for $800,000 in SRF Loans is $15,686 which is included in the total
$800,000 loan amount. This closing cost should be included in the cost estimate
for the selected alternative which currently shows $0 for Closing Costs and
$795,000 in Revolving Loan Funding.

18. Confirm that only 800 customers represent the current service population of 2707
people.
19. A copy of the speculative NPDES limits for the Boiling Springs WWTP, as
provided by the Water Quality Section, should be included in the 201 update.
20. Provide the pumping capacity of pump (in gpm) in each of the four pumping
stations. Identify the number of pumps at the Ramsgate Drive Pump Station.
21. Due to recent pump station overflows resulting from power outages, please
provide a power outage history from the local electrical power supplier that
specifies the dates and duration of power outages at the town's pumping stations
for the last five years. Standby power may be required at pump stations which
have experienced lengthy or frequent power outages in the last five years.
22. An estimation of the monthly fee paid to the City of Shelby should be included in
the present worth analysis for alternative #3 - Transport Wastewater to Shelby.
23. In the determination of the capital cost of each alternative, the same Design,
Administration, etc. (%) should be used for all alternatives. Alternatives #1 and 3
use 15% while Alternative #2 uses 10%. The cost estimate for the selected
alternative should also use the same Design, Administration, etc. cost percentage
as the other alternatives.
24. Are there any costs included in the cost estimates for demolition or removal of
existing structures? Please be advised that although this is likely an ineligible
cost for SRF funding, those costs should be included in the present worth
analysis.
25. Are there any patent fees associated with any of the alternatives? If so, those
costs should be included in the cost estimates and cost-effectiveness analysis.
26. Please discuss the potential open space and recreational opportunities associated
with this project.
27. Please be advised that a loan under the SRF program cannot be awarded until the
user charge system and sewer use ordinance have been approved.
28. Current OSHA regulations and the State Building Code contain requirements for
safety and control of hazardous materials such as compressed chlorine gas. Are
costs for complying with these regulations included in the cost estimates? If not,
the requirements should be examined, and costs for compliance should be
included in a revised 201 Plan.
29. Please be advised that receipt of a loan from the North Carolina Water Pollution

Control Revolving Funds is contingent on the review and approval of the
proposed loan by the Local Government Commission.
30. Please be advised that, if applicable, all real property associated with the proposed
project must be acquired in accordance with the Uniform Relocation and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. The following costs are unallowable
under that Act:
a. The costs of acquisition of sewer rights -of -way (i.e. legal, administrative,
engineering).
b. Any amount paid by the recipient for eligible land in excess of just
compensation based on appraised value, negotiation or condemnation
proceedings.
C. Removal, relocation or replacement of utilities located on land by
privilege.
31. Several of the recommended units at this plant could be construed to be of a sole
source nature. Please note that our approval is generic and does not constitute
approval of sole source procurement. Please contact Mr. Cecil Madden of our
Design Management Unit to assure that Plans and Specifications are written to
comply with N.C. General Statute Chapter 133, Section 3.
32. Public meetings in the early stages of the project development are encouraged.
These meetings can be regular town/city meetings in which the project is
discussed. A summary of these meetings should be included in the facilities plan.
33. One public hearing, with a 30-day notification, is required. A copy of the facility
plan should be made available for review by the public at least 15 days prior to the
public hearing.
The hearing should cover the following items:
a. Identify the problem.
b. Discuss the selected alternative.
C. Identify the size of the projected loan.
d. Discuss any associated.interlocal agreements.
e. Identify the effect this project.will have on the typical residential
users monthly sewer bill.
The advertisement should provide the following information:
a. Identify the time and location of the public hearing.
b. Advise where and when a copy of the facility plan can be
observed.

C. Provide a brief description of the proposed project.
d. Advise how much funds are required and identify the source of
funding.
34. Provide a transcript or detailed summary of hearing and affidavit of publication.
35. Provide a resolution from the Town of Boiling Springs agreeing to implement the
selected alternative.
36. If the Town of Boiling Springs cannot justify 600,000 gpd of future wastewater
flow according to the SRF guidelines and if the Town desires to construct the
facility larger than what they can justify for the 20-year planning needs, two items
must be provided.
• Demonstrate that the facility is capable of operating properly at both the
current and design flows.
• Provide a detailed cost estimate for the proposed design and the 20-year
design. These cost estimates will be used to develop a Reserve Capacity
Cost Ratio (RCCR) factor which is applied to the total project cost to
determine the total,eli ible cost.
37. The SOC milestone dates need to be updated to correspond with the SRF project
schedule.
38. Environmental Assessment comments will be forwarded to the town upon their
receipt by the Construction Grants and Loans Section.
39. Additional comments from the Mooresville Regional Office will be forwarded to
the town upon their receipt by the Construction Grants and Loans Section.

ATTACHMENT 1
BOILING SPRINGS POPULATION PROJECTIONS
1980
1990
1995
2000
2016
2020
Cleveland County
83435
84713
89136
89916
88300
87737
Boiling Springs
2381
1 2445
1 2802
1(2830)
1(3150)
1(3230)
Please be advised that the town's projections do not consider any future
annexations. Any anticipated annexations or growth at Gardner Webb University
should be documented and added to the above projections.

ATTACHMENT 2
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
TABLE FOR THE CALCULATION OF
CURRENT WASTEWATER FLOWS
Residential Wastewater Usage* mgd
Commercial Wastewater Usage** mgd
Industrial Wastewater Usage*** mgd
Gardner -Webb University Wastewater Usage**** mgd
CURRENT 1996 WASTEWATER ADF (excluding I/I) mgd
Current Non -Excessive Infiltration mgd
Current Non -Excessive Inflow mgd
CURRENT 1996 WASTEWATER AVERAGE DAILY FLOW mgd
* (Based on residential water billing records minus a 10% consumptive loss)
** (Based on commercial water billing records minus a 10% consumptive loss)
*** (Based on industrial water billing records minus a consumptive loss)
*** (Based on university water billing records minus a consumptive loss)
TABLE FOR THE CALCULATION OF
FUTURE WASTEWATER FLOW PROJECTIONS
Current 1996 Wastewater Average Daily Flow (excluding I/I) mgd
10% Industrial Reserve (10% of Current Wastewater ADF excluding I/I) mgd
Residential 20-year Increase (Residential Increase x 70 gpd/capita) mgd
Commercial 20-year Increase (Residential Increase x 15 gpd/capita) mgd
Gardner -Webb University Increase mgd
20-year Industrial Commitment mgd
Subtotal mgd
Current Non -Excessive Infiltration mgd
Current Non -Excessive Inflow mgd
FINAL 20-YEAR DESIGN FLOW mgd

ATTACHMENT 3
PRESENT WORTH ANALYSIS
A present worth analysis of all feasible alternatives must be performed.
The present worth of a system equals the sum of the capital cost plus the present worth of
the estimated annual operation and maintenance cost minus the present worth of salvage
value.
Total Present Worth = (Capital Cost) + (PW of Annual O&M) - (PW of Salvage Value)
The present worth of an annual cost equals the annual cost multiplied by the uniform
series present worth factor at 7.75% interest for 20 years.
Uniform Series Present Worth (USPW):
USPW = 1+i °-1
i(l+i)°
USPW = 4.45-1
0.345
USPW = 10.004
The present worth of the salvage value is calculated by multiplying the estimated salvage
value of the system at the end of the 20 year planning period times the single payment
present worth factor at 7.75% for 20 years.
Single Payment Present Worth (SPPW):
SPPW = (1+i)-°
SPPW = 0.2247

0 A G v t of e,1_ 1 r,$.s
o Off pipe storage to reduce pe
flow is feasible; and
o Appropriate peak flow factors
that decrease as average daily flow to
be conveyed increases have been used.
6.11
MULTIPLE A multiple purpose
PURPOSE PROJECTS project is a project
designed to meet
the enforceable requirements of the
CWA (i.e., NPDES permit or ground-
water criteria), but which also has
components designed to serve. other
functions as well (e.g., agricultural,
municipal, or industrial water
supply, sludge management using
codisposal of solid waste, or energy
production). Appendix 0 contains
additional information on cost
allocation for multiple purpose
projects.
Projects designed only to meet an
enforceable requirement are considered
single purpose. Thus, a project
that includes land application as
an integral part of a wastewater
treatment system to meet effluent
limitations is considered single
.purpose. An agricultural reuse
project that uses effluent that
normally would be discharged to a
stream, i.e., discharge meets NPDES
limitations, is. considered multiple
purpose.
To reduce costs and conserve energy,
the facilities plan may contain a
broad examination of structural and
nonstructural alternatives that
include multiple purpose options.
Section 7.1.3 discusses the identifi-
cation of allowable costs for multiple
Purpose projects.
r-•
53
ATTACHMENT 4
CHAPTER 7
EVALUATION OF PRINCIPAL
ALTERNATIVES AND PLAN ADOPTION
7.0
ALTERNATIVE After developing
EVALUATION f e a s i b l e al ter -
natives as described
in Chapter 6, systematically screen
them to identify those capable
of meeting Federal, State and
local criteria (Section 6.7).
Analyze the resulting principal
alternatives to identify those which
are potentially cost-effective.
Principal alternatives selected
through this screening process will
undergo a thorough cost-effectiveness
analysis. The level of detail in your
analysis depends upon the size and
complexity of your project. In the
facilities plan discuss the reasons
for the selection of a preferred
alternative and the reasons for the
elimination of other alternatives.
The following sections describe in
greater detail the screening criteria
for plan selection.
7.1
EVALUATION OF Calculate present
MONETARY COSTS worth or equivalent
r, uniform annual costs
for each principal alternative in
order to make a valid comparison of
future capital and operation and
maintenance (0&M). "Present worth" is
the sum which, if invested now at a
given rate, would provide exactly the
funds required to make all .future
payments. "Equivalent uniform
annual cost" is the expression of a
nonuniform series of expenditures
as a uniform annual amount. Since
both methods produce equivalent
results, either may be used. Several

examples employing these methods of
cost analysis are given in Appendix E.
Detailed procedures for making these
calculations are explained in most
engineering economics textbooks.
The discount rate expected to.be used
for facilities planning begun in
fiscal year 1985 (October 1, 1984 to
September 30, 1985) is :.percent.
The rate changes each year; check with
your project reviewer. `;7 775 ova
You should calculate costs on the
basis of market prices prevailing at
the time of your cost-effectiveness
analysis. The analysis should not
allow for inflation of wages an'd
prices, except those for land and
energy (Section 7.1.2). This is based
on the assumption that prices for
resources involved in treatment works
construction and operation, other than
the exceptions, will tend to change
over time by approximately the same
percentage. It is the differences in
cost among alternatives that are
important in the screening process as
these differences will help identify
the most cost-effective alternative.
Later an updated or perhaps more
detailed cost estimate of the selected
plan can be made since it is this
cost estimate that will be used in
evaluating your community's financial
capability.
Your analysis should include all costs
(capital, annual and other direct
costs such as disruption of business
due to street work or opportunity
costs such as the market value
of publicly owned land that could
be used for purposes other than
wastewater treatment) that are
attributable to the building and
operation of your treatment works.
Some examples of capital costs
are: building the wastewater
54
treatment facility (including sludge
management), interceptor sewers, pump
stations, 'collection sewers; lease,
easement or acquisition of sites or
rights -of -way; and relocation. Costs
that may not be grant eligible, such
as house laterals on conventional
collectors, should also be included.
Costs for 0&M (e.g., labor, utilities,
materials, outside services, expenses,
and replacement of equipment and parts
to ensure effective' and dependable
operation during the planning
period) must be included in the cost-
effectiveness analysis. These costs
usually include both fixed and
variable costs, the latter generally
depending on the quantity of waste-
water collected and treated.
If necessary and appropriate, interest
during construction may be computed in
one of two ways. If expenditures are
uniform and the construction period
is less than 4 years, interest is
computed by taking one-half of
the product of the construction
period (years), the total capital
expenditures ($) and the discount
rate. Otherwise, the interest
should be calculated on a year -by -year
basis.
The revenue which you may receive from
the sale of treatment by-products
(e.g., methane gas, crops, sludge or
compost, etc.) is generally reflected
in the cost-effectiveness analysis
(Section 7.1.3). You should subtract
any revenue from the annual 0&M cost
in your cost-effectiveness analysis.
Your cost-effectiveness analysis
should also consider the salvage value
of the treatment works at the end of
the planning period. This value is
based on a straight-line .depreciation
from the initial cost at the time of
analysis to the end of the planning

period (except for land as noted in
Section 7.1.2). You should use the
following periods for the design life
of the treatment works components:
o Land --permanent;
o Wastewater conveyance structures
(collection systems, outfall pipes,
interceptors, force mains, tunnels,
etc.)--50 years;
o Other structures (plant
buildings, concrete tankage, basins,
lift station structures, etc.)--30 to
50 years;
o Process equipment--15 to 20
years;
o.Auxiliary equipment--10 to 15
years.
For interim facilities with _an
anticipated useful life of less than
20 years, salvage value should be
based on demonstrated resale or
reuse opportunities at the end of the
interim period.
Once the present worth or equivalent
uniform annual cost is determined
for each principal alternative, the
alternative which is cost-effective
can be identified.
There is also a cost preference for
Innovative or alternative technology
projects. Section 6.7.4 provides
additional guidance and summarizes the
procedures for application of the cost
Preference.
7.1.1
SUNK COSTS Any investments or
financial commit-
ments made before or during facilities
Planning are regarded as sunk costs.
As sunk costs they should not be
included in the cost-effectiveness
analysis because they have already
55
been committed regardless of
the alternative selected. Such
investments and commitments include:
o Investments in existing
wastewater treatment facilities
and associated lands even though
incorporated in the plan;
o Outstanding bond indebtedness;
and
o Costs for preparing the
faciliti-es plan.
7.1.2
COST ESCALATION Energy prices may be
FACTORS FOR escalated for the
ENERGY USE AND appropriate fuel if
LAND historical data for
your area show that
energy prices have been increasing at
a faster rate than building and OV
costs other than energy. You should
consider the applicable provisions of
existing State energy plans which
effect energy costs but should not
delay if a plan is not available.
Land prices should be escalated at a
uniform rate of 3 percent per year
except for right-of-way easements.
7.1.3
ALLOCATION OF M u 1 ti pl a purpose
COSTS FOR projects combine
MULTIPLE water pol 1 uti on
PURPOSE PROJECTS control practices
meeting the enforce-
able requirements of the CWA with
other purposes (e.g., agricultural,
energy generation or recreation).
Generally, when projects involve
multiple purposes (Section 6.11) and
cost more than an alternative single
purpose project designed for municipal
pollution control only, the allocation
of costs to each purpose will be
based on the Alternative Justifiable
Expenditure (AJE) method as described
in Appendix 0.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary p E H N A Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
S
January 16, 1997
A.LliL
MEMORANDUM JAr�J �, „ `s0-97
I� TO: Rex Gleason, Regional Water Quality Supervisor Mooresville Regional Office ,;tier
r.� ._ _ ., ;
'/��I�'111IIIfff FROM: Ryan Scruggs, Project Manager S .
Facilities Evaluation Unit
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Transmitted herewith is one copy of the above subject facility plan update for your files.
Please return your comments to this office before Friday, February 21, 1997.
RMS/kc
Attachment
cc: FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section ���� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/ 10% post -consumer paper

State. of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, N. C. 28017
Dear Mr. Howell:
od"*
1DEi-iNR
January 22, 1997 N.C.
r1 c_a_
dlo'3d9V 26 j997
SUBJECT: SRF Funding
Project No. CS370757-02
Boiling Springs, NC
In response to your letter of January 14, please be advised that funding for your project is
scheduled to be available from EPA around July 1, 1997, which should coincide with the
approval of the facilities plan. It should be noted, however, that the loan funds cannot actually
be disbursed until after construction contracts have been awarded.
These dates have been discussed with Mr. Rex Gleason of the Mooresville Regional
Office, and I hope that this information will be beneficial to both of you in finalizing the SOC
date.
If this office may be of additional assistance, please advise.
Sincerely,
R. BloWe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
BB/nw
cc: Rex Gleason
Jerry Twiggs, West & Associates
Allen Wahab
Jay Lucas
Cecil Madden
Construction Grants & Loans Section �`�� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 M r ra 500k recycles/10°k post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division 'of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 16, 1997
Mr. Rick Howell, Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
Post Office Box 1014
Boiling Springs, North Carolina 28017-1014
SUBJECT: Town of Boiling Springs
201 Facilities Plan Update
Project No. CS370757-02
Dear Mr. Howell:
This is to acknowledge receipt of the subject 201 Facilities Plan and the revised
Environmental Assessment. Review of the document has been initiated, and we will notify
you and your engineer upon completion of our review.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ryan M. Scruggs, Project Manager
Facilities Evaluation Unit
RMS/kc
cc: West & Associates
IMR -99r, s i� l R gio alb ffice�
DMU
PMB
FEU
SRF
Construction Grants & Loans Section FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579NiIiCAn Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 - 50% recycles/ 10% post -consumer paper

IF
th Carolina
t of Environment,
Natural Resources
iter Quality
t, Jr., Governor
Juncainan rs. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
September 17, 1996
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
Town of Boiling Springs
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017-1014
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Howell:
"AA
AN ft
EDEHNR
I4,C. D3i;PT. OF
g,K R()i,jP r,,NT, HEALTM
& NATURAL RESOURCES
SEP 19 1996
jMSIDPI of [MIRCIat9EhIiAL PRAHAGEMEKT
MCRRESVELLE REGIONAL flffEGE
Town of Boiling Springs
Municipal Compliance Initiatives
This is to confirm our telephone conversation on September 16, 1996, that the Town of
Boiling Springs has agreed for.the Construction Grants and Loans Section to perform a
Municipal Compliance Initiatives (MCI) audit for your wastewater treatment facility.
We should arrive around noon on September 23, 1996, and attempt to complete the
necessary work that afternoon. If not successful, we will complete it the next morning.
We would like to thank you for the interest shown and are looking forward to working
with you in the program. By supplying this office with the requested data, the MCI report should
be much more comprehensive.
Should you have any questions concerning the program, please contact me at (919) 715-
6200.
Sincerely,
Felton E. (Gene) son, P.E.
MCI Coordinator
GJ/pe
cc: Bobby Blowe
Allen Wahab
Moore-s-v-ille-Regiona-i 0ffce--
M'CI`File
Construction Grants & Loans Section ���� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �f An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

-state of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
_. .r
Mr. J. Richard Howell, Jr.
Town Administrator
P. O. Box 1014
Boiling Springs, NC 28017-1014
Dear Mr. Howell:
IDEHNR
August 9, 1996 N.C. DEFT. OF
ENVIRONMENT, HEATTI-;
& NATURAL RESOURC +•,S
AUG 12 1996
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGULNI
MOGRESVA.LE REGIONAL OFFICE.
SUBJECT: Municipal Compliance
Initiatives Program
Boiling Springs, North Carolina
This is a follow-up per our telecom to confirm the wastewater treatment system
evaluation through our Municipal Compliance Initiatives (MCI) Program. We would like
to thank you for your interest in the program.
I will call next week to schedule a visit to the Town of Boiling Springs. It is
requested that the following information be available for our evaluation:
1. Plans and Specifications of the wastewater treatment plant.
2. O & M Manual.
Treatment flow charts, influent flow charts beginning January 1995 to
present.
4. Rainfall data from the treatment plant, city or nearest weather station for the
period of January 1995 to present.
5. Water use records including residential, commercial, institutional,
industrial, etc. to correspond with the treatment plant flow records.
a) Total water billed, by month.
b) Total industrial and commercial water use, by month.
c) Daily flow rates for industries would be most helpful, if available.
Construction Grants & Loans Section ���� FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 29579, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0579 �An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-6900 50°6 recycles/10% post -consumer paper

a
d) Number of industrial, commercial, and domestic connections.
Include the categories of water and sewer, water only, and sewer
only.
e) Volume of water pumped from the water treatment plant or
purchased, by month.
6. Budget for the wastewater treatment system and user charges.
a) annual sewer budget and breakdown
b) sewer use charges per 1000 gallons
c) amount of sewer funds generated annually
7. The following plant monitoring data:
a MLSS and MLVSS in aeration basin and digester
b) % solids of return/waste activated sludge
c) Estimated volume of waste sludge
8. Length of sewer lines by line size in the total service area.
9• Copies of any infiltration/inflow studies prepared by the town's consulting
engineer.
If you should have any questions regarding the evaluation, please do not hesitate to
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Felton E. (Gene) Johnson, P.E.
MCI Coordinator
FEJ/pe
cc: Mooresville Regional Office
Bobby Blowe

Town of BoilingSpnngs
P.O. BOX 1014
BOILING SPRINGS, N.C. 2801 �e•c. �r-..�'''.
704-434-2357 NiTF +•`,`:,;'.;;'; ?t eLT�1,
COMMISSIONERS
ROBERT B. HAMRICK, MAYOR PRO-TEM
CLINE HAMRICK
WILLIAM K. ELLIOTT
BILL ELLIS
ALBERT GLENN February 14, 1996
Mr. D. Rex Gleason
Division of Environmental Management
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
Dear Mr. Gleason:
MAX HAMRICK
Mayor
F O 1 J 1996 RICK HOWELL
Town Administrator
DIVISION OF ENVIRON : JAL MANA6EML'%RGRETTA McKEE
MOORESVILLE REUONAL OFFICE Clerk
Re: Town of Boiling Springs
NPDES Permit: NCO071943
Cleveland County
WWTP Report/SOC Appl. Request
This letter is a follow up to our telephone conversation on February. .�3,,'>1996
regarding the town' s effort to bring the above referenced,: facility' �,in`�, a'
compliance with the subject permit. The following is a -chronological "siui>ary .
of actions taken by the town.
November 13, 1995_ - Town employed ORC was removed from duties relating to the
wastewater system.. Hydrologic, Inc._ (now Culligan Operating Services, Inc) was
retained through a temporary agreement to operate the,WWTP..
November 14, 1995 --Town employed ORC was suspended indefinitely. Internal
review of WWTP operation and administration continues from October.
December 5, 1995 - Town employed ORC is dismissed from employment.
Representatives from Hydrologic, Inc. make a presentation to the Board on the
existing conditions at the plant and plan of action to achieve compliance.
Town Board authorizes Administrator to negotiate contract agreement with
Hydrologic, Inc. to operate the wastewater system. Town Board also authorizes
Administrator to accelerate additional I/I study and work.
December 18-22, 1995 - Mr. Chester West (West and Assoc.) continues work on
I/I study. Smoke and dye testing undertaken. Physical inspection of
collection system continues.
December 28-29, 1995 - Town continues physical inspection of collection system
identifying I/I problems.
January 2, 1996 - Town Board is informed of ongoing I/I work. Authorizes
Administrator to make application on behalf of town to the State for emergency
loan/grant-funds for plant expansion and other system improvements. Board
authorizes Mr. West to continue engineering work on system improvements. Board
is also informed that negotiations with Hydrologic, Inc. are continuing.

Page 2 - R. Gleason
2/14/96
January 1996 - Recommended improvements and work at WWTP are implemented. This
work includes reseeding of plant, updating recording keeping and SDP's,
replacement of automatic backwash computer keypad, repair of chlorine feed
system, installation of automatic timers for blowers, cleaning of chlorine
contact chambers, improvements to existing influent splitter box to prevent
spills during high flows, air line repairs, etc...
February 6, 1996 - Town Board is given status report on WWTP operations,
engineering progress, and I/I study. Town Board approves one (1) year
agreement with Hydrologic, Inc. to operate the wastewater system facilities
subject to necessary regulatory approval.
assistance is appreciated. If you have qu
assistance please feel free to contact me.
;Sincere
J. c ZHoAere .
Town Administrator
cc: Mayor and Board of Commissioners
Mr. Chester R. West - West and Assoc.
File

'JAN 2 31. N97
TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
201 FACILITIES PLAN UPDATE ,
BOILING SPRINGS, NORTH CAROLINA
NO"v'EMBER, 1996
BENJAMIN B. THOMAS, P.E.
WEST AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MORGANTON, NORTH CAROLINA
sf,1619100of
�k CAW(
nle
I pl,
Y
1996

A. SUMA24RY
The original. 201 plan for Greater Cleveland County which was submitted by I W.
Pease Associates, in 1976 included the Town of Boiling Springs. A subsequent update of the
Boiling Springs portion of this plan was submitted in February, 1986, by West and Avery
Associates, P.A.
The 1986 update was for the purpose of upgrading the Boiling Springs wastewater
treatment facilities. The 1986 update resulted in the abandonment of two existing wastewater
treatment plants and the construction of a new facility at the site of the abandoned Westside
plant A pumping station was constructed at the site of the abandoned Eastside Plant which
pumps wastewater into the gravity lines flowing to the new treatment facility.
The new treatment facility constructed was a 300,000 GPD Aero-Mod package plant.
The average daily flow into the Boiling Springs plant has increased to the point that the Town
of Boiling Springs must now expand the existing plant to accommodate the increased flow.
As part of this update, we evaluated the existing facilities and considered alternatives available
to the Town of Boiling Springs.
Based on our evaluation of each option available to the Town, we have concluded that
the most cost effective solution is to upgrade and expand the existing plant.
r

B. CURRENT SITUATION
1. Plant
The existing wastewater treatment plant is a 300, 000 GPD Aero-Mod
wastewater treatment system which was constructed in 1988. Having
been operated only nine years, the plant is generally in good condition.
There are specific treatment units, however, i.e. diffusers and flexible
piping, which are in need of major maintenance. For the past year the
plant has been operated by Culligen Operating Sen7ces and during this
time, Culligen personnel have made a special ettort to replace or repair
any non-functioning equipment. Culligen Services now has in place
a comprehensive maintenance program for the plant.
During periods of time when the hydraulic flow is below the design
capacity, the plant produces an excellent effluent. Over the past ten
years, however, the Aero-Mod system has been modified to improve
the operational efficiency and once the new portion of the plant is in
place, modifications can be made to the existing plant.
2. The Gravity Collection System
Line
Length (ft.)
Inch -Miles
Year Installed
8"
4,800
7
1932
8"
96,800
145
1965-1967
8"
2,000
3
1987-1996
12"
4,900
11
1987
12"
6,000
14
1965-1967
15"
4,000
11
1987
Total: 191 inch -miles of gravity system
The wastewater collection system is comprised of approximately
107,000 LF of 8" and 12" clay pipe and approximately 11,000 LF of
8112 12", and 15" PVC and ductile iron pipe. Figure 1 illustrates the
existing sanitary sewer system for the Town of Boiling Springs. The
majority of the sewer system was constructed between 1965 and 1967.
The older and original collection system, located within the campus of
Gardner -Webb University was constructed by the WPA in 1932.
Much of the original system has been replaced in recent years due to
excessive inflow.
Pumping Stations
The Town of Boiling Springs operates four pumping stations as part
of the collection system.

Lyman Street Pump Station: The Lyman Street Pump
Station is located on the site of the original Eastside
Wastewater Treatment Plant which was abandoned in 1987.
The pump station is the largest station in the system and serves
the majority of the eastern Boiling Springs. The Lyman Street
Pump Station was constructed in 1988 and has two- 30 Hp
pumps. Culligen Operation Services has conducted major
maintenance on this station in the past year.
Philips Village Pg= Station: Phillips Village Pump Station
is located off Patrick Avenue in the southern part of the Town.
This pump station serves approximately 25 homes in Phillips
Village. Phillips Village Pump Station which was constructed
in 1988 has two 15 Hp submersible pumps. This station was
completely upgraded in 1991.
Dellwood Drive Pm= Station: Dellwood Drive Pump
Station serves northeast Boiling Springs. The Dellwood Drive
Pump Station is a Cantex unit with two 15 HP motors. This
station was completely rebuilt in 1994.
Ramsgate Drive Pump Station: 12amsgate Drive Pump
Station is located off North Main Street near the Town Limits.
This pump station constructed in 1989 serves approximately
30 homes. This station is in good condition.
3. OverflowDypasses
During the last year, Culligen Operating Services reported two
overflows at Dellwood .Pump Station and two overflows at
Lyman Pump Station. The overflows at Lyman Street Pump
Station occurred as a result of an electrical storm and heavy
rain. The Dellwood overflows occurred as a result of power
outages during an electrical storm. No records of any other
overflows were available.
There have been no bypasses of any pump stations or
treatment plant.
4. Unserved Areas within the Town Limit
The majority of the developed area within the Town limits has
sewer available. The High Point area and Homestead area in

the northern part of the town are unserved and the Highland
Pines Acres area in the souther part of the City is not served
with sewer.
Treatment System Description
The Town of Boiling Springs currently has one wastewater treatment plant which
serves the entire municipality. The plant discharges its effluent into Sandy Run Creek
under NPDES Permit No. NC 0071943, which has a flow limitation of 0.3 MGD.
The existing facility is an extended aeration, activated sludge, secondary plant
manufactured by Aeromod, Inc. Pretreatment consists of a manual bar screen and grit
chamber.
Due to excessive hydraulic loading, the plant has been unable to meet the NPDES
permit limits. The problem with this plant is a hydraulic overload situation more than
a deficiency with the treatment units.
Population and Demoaaplucs
Total Population
1970
2,284
1980
2,381
1990
2,445
1991
2,476
1993
2,502
1995
2,802
1996
3,000
Service Population 1996 - 2,707
Service Population at Start-up of New Facility - 3,000
At the present time 96% of the citizens within the town limits are being served with
sewer. The areas which are not served were voluntary annexations with an agreement
that sewer would not be provided at the present time.
Infiltration/Inflow
During the past year, West and Associates, P.A., conducted smoke testing for the
Town of Boiling Springs. Several problem areas were ide t- ed and corrections were
made. Most of the problems were within the campus of Gardner -Webb University.
The Town currently has a contract let to replace 978 LF of sewer line and 695 LF of
storm drainage pipe located on the University campus. This project, which will be
completed by March, 1997, will eliminate a large portion of the remaining inflow.

During the month of October, Boiling Springs had a 1" rain on October 9th and a .9"
rain on October loth.
The average daily flow in October was 252,000 GPD. The flow on the 9th was
392,000 gallons and the flow on the loth was 320,000 gallons.
Total Avg. Daily
Consumption Comsumption
Water Consumption for 1996 January
8,874,000
286,258
February_
7,258,800
250,303
?".4arch
8, 483, 600
273,664
April
8,468,000
May
8,075,200
June
9,069,900
July
8,423,000
August
8,853,000
September
10,837,400
October
7,863,900
253,674
Inflow
October 9th (after 1" rain)
Non -industrial Instantaneous Peak
700,000 gpd
Expected Flow (253,674 - 25,400)
22&247 gpd
Inflow
471,725 gpd
Population Served 3,000
3,000 x 275 gpd/capita = 825,000
Since the inflow of 471,725 gpd is less than the 825,000 gpd considered excessive, the
inflow would be considered non -excessive.
Infiltration
The wettest consecutive months: January, 1996
February, 1996
March, 1996

Expected Flow
Avg.
Monthly Water
Monthly Water
I/I -
Month
D& Flow
Consumption
(Less 10%)
Expected
January
345,000
286,000
257,400
88,000
February
379,000
250,000
225,000
154,000
March
284,000
273,000
245,700
39,000
Average Infiltration 88,000 + 154,000 + 39.000 = 93.666 gpd
3
Boiling Springs Gravity Lines = 191 inch -miles
Infiltration Rate 93,666 gpd
191 inch -miles = 490 gpd per inch -mile
Since the 490 gallons per day per inch -mile is less than the 3,000 gallons per day per
inch -mile considered excessive the infiltration is considered non -excessive.
C. FUTURE SITUATION
Population
In 1990, the population of Boiling Springs was 2,445, in 1996, the population is slightly over
3,000 people. This gives us an average growth rate over the past six years of 93 persons per
year. Projecting this average over 20 years, the population in 2016 would be 4,860 people.
There are immediate requests for additional capacity for anew dormitory at Gardner -Webb
Urmm* elderly housing, new apartments and new subdivisions which will add 450 addition
people.
1. Cwrent flows including non -excessive UI - 274,000/gpd
(274,000/3,000 = 91.33 gpdpc)
2. 20 Year Residential Growth
2016 Projected Population 4, 860 + 450 = 5,310
Average Daily Flow
5,310 @ 91 gpcpd = 483,210
3. 20 Year Commercial Growth
5,310 x 15 gpd = 79,650 gpd
r` 4. 10% Industrial Reserve
Current Flow 274,000 gpd
274,000 gpd x .10 = 27,400

Total Plart Capacity 483,210
79,650
27.400
590,260 gpd
D. ALTERNATTVES ANALYSIS
It is proposed to expand the Town's WWTP and to discharge up to 0.6 MGD into
Sandy Run Creek. The estimated cost for this proposal is $1.059 million (see attached
estimate). The following options are considered as alternatives to this proposal.
Spa�Iirigation
This alternative would involve the purchase of a large tract of undeveloped land on
which wastewater would be applied for slow rate infiltration and evapotranspiration.
If a suitable site could be obtained near the WWTP, then the WWTP could be
modified for pretreatment. Using an assumed application rate of 0.20 gpd/sf, 69 acres
would be required not including buffers. Therefore, an 80-85 acre tract would be
needed. A detention pond or lagoon would be required for periods of wet weather
and to allow for resting time for the land. A lift station would most likely be needed
to transport the WWTP effluent to the lagoon and then another pumping station to
pressurize the irrigation lines. Other costs would include sprinkler heads, standby
diesel generator, monitoring wells, and perimeter fencing to prevent public access.
In terms of environmental benefit, it may or may not be preferred to discharge to
surface waters depending on the assessment of impact on groundwaters and their
classification.

Costs are as follows:
Land
Lagoon wiLiner
Modifv WWTP
h- igation Lutes
Sprinlders
Monitoring Wells
Lift Station
85 AC @ $5,000.00/AC
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
80,000 LF @ $5.00/LF
1,300 (. $50.00/EA
20 @ $5,000.00/EA
Lump Sum
Pumping Station Lump Sum
Fencing 10, 000 LF @ $10.00/LF
Diesel Generator Lump Sum
Design, Administration, Etc. (15%)
Total
2. Subsurface Disposal
$ 425,000.00
100,000.00
200, 000.00
400, 000.00
65, 000.00
100, 000.00
75, 000.00
100, 000.00
100, 000.00
50,000.00
240, 000.00
$1, 855, 000.00
This alternative would also involve the purchase of a large tract or tracts of land on
which wastewater would be discharged below grade for absorption and nitrification.
Pretreatment could be provided by the existing wastewater plant. For an assumed
application rate of 0.30 gpd/sf, and for 100% repair area, 275 acres would be required
for a 0.6 MGD application. Unusable space and buffers added would then mean that
approximately 300 acres would be needed. One or more lift stations and pump
stations would be required in order to lift the wastewater to various fields and then to
pressurize the lines.
Again, depending on assessment of impact on groundwaters, this alternative may or
may not have a less significant impact on the environment than discharge to surface
waters. Also, it is doubtful that a suitable site of this size could be found.
Estimated cost:
Land 300 AC @ $3,000.00/AC $ 900,000.00
Nitrification Trenches 670,000 LF @ $3.00/LF 2, 010, 000.00
WWTP Modifications Lump Sum 200,000.00
Pumping Stations 5 @ $75,000.00/EA 375,000.00
Diesel Generators 3 @ $40,000.00/EA 120,000.00
Design, Administration, Etc. (10%) 360,000.00
Total $3,9655000.00

0
3. Transport Wastewater to City of Shelb
This alternative would be to pump the Town's wastewater to the City of Shelby's
WWTP for treatment and disposal. Shelby also discharges to surface waters,
therefore, this option does not represent a reduced environmental impact unless
discharge to Sandy Run Creek was determined to be worse than discharge to the First
Broad River.
Estimated cost:
12" Force Main 50,000 LF @ $25.00/LF $1,250,000.00
Pumping Station Lump Sum 1009000.00
Diesel Generator Lump Sum 50,000.00
Expand Shelby WWTP Lump Sum 500,000.00
Design, Administration, Etc. (15%) 285,000.00
Total $2,185,000.00
4. Take No Action
To take no action would be a violation of 15A NCAC 2H.0223(2) since current
annual average flow is in excess of 90% of the permit limit. In addition, flows are
expected to increasingly exceed the permit limit as time goes on, thus potentially
costing $25,000.00 per day in violation fees. At this rate, the cost of expansion to 0.6
MGD would be exceeded in 45 days. This is not a viable option.
Summary/Conclusion
Present
Capital Cost Worth Cost
Spray Irrigation $1,855,000.00 $ 3,834,370.00
Subsurface Disposal $3,965,000.00 $ 5,808,459.00
Transport to Shelby $2,18 5, 000.00 $, 5, 626, 511.00
Expansion of Existing Plant $1,059,600.00 $ 3,248,681.00
Based on the above estimates, the two best options are spray irrigation and expansion
of existing plant_ Due to the significant cost difference, the expanansion of the existing plant
and continued discharge to Sandy Run Creek is concluded to be the most reasonable, cost
, Or
effective, and environmentally sound option.

•
•
PRESENT WORTH FOR
EXPANSION OF EXISTING PLANT
I. Capital Cost
Plant Construction
Engineering
Administrative/Legal
Land
Closing Cost (2% of 800,000 Loan)
II. Sewer Operating Maintenance Cost 1995-96 $167,211.00
Additional Cost with New Plant 66,000.00
Total Operating Cost $233,211.00
Present Worth Factor
P/A = + 1)-- 1
i0+if
n=20
i = 7.75%
P/A = a + .0775)20 - 1 = 10.0035
.0775 (1 + .0775f
$233,211 x 10.0035 = $2,332,932
III. Salvage Value
$865,000.00
86, 500.00
21,600.00
0
16,000.00
$989,100.00
Estimated plant life of 30 years.
Using straight line depreciation the value at 20 years is $326,403 (989,100 x .33).
Salvage Factor = I_ = 1 = .2247
(1 + i)r (1 + .0775P
i = .0775
n=20
it Salvage Value = $326,403 x .2247 = $73,351

IV. Present Worth Value for Expanding Existing Plant
Capital Cost
989,100.00
O & M Present Worth
2,332,932.00
Less Salvage Value
( 73,351.00)
Cost of this Alternative
S 3,248,681.00
r

C�
ALTERNATIVE # 1 - SPRAY IRRIGATION
I. Capital Cost $1,855,000.00
H. Operating and Maintenance Cost
This alternative continues to operate the existing WWTP as a pretreatment plant and
we will, therefore, have the cost to operate the existing plant as well as the additional cost for
the irrigation system.
Cost for Operating Plant $167,211.00
Cost for One Additional Operator 36,361.00
Additional Utility Cost for Spray System 7,000.00
Testing Wells 1,000.00
Total Operation and Maintenance $211, 577.00
Present Worth Factor = 10.0035
$211,572 x 10.0035 = $2,116,460.00
M. Salvage Value
Estimate Life of 30 Years
Straight Line Depreciation after 20 Years
($1,855,000 x .33) $612,150.00
$612,150 x .2247 = $137,550
IV. Present Worth for Spray Irrigation
Capital $ 1,855,000.00
Operation and Maintenance 2,116, 460.00
Less Salvage Value ( 137,550,00)
Total Cost for Spray Irrigation $ 3,834,370.00

CJ
•
ALTERNATIVE #2 - SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL
This alternative would continue to use the existing WWTP as a pretreatment plant and we
would, therefore, have the cost of operating the existing plant as well as the additional cost for the
subsurface disposal system. -
I. Capital Cost
II. Cost of Operating Plant
Cost for One Additional Operator
Additional Utility Cost for Pump Station
Total Operation and Maintenance
Present Worth of O & M
$213,572 x 10.0035 = $2,136,467.00
III. Salvage Value
Estimate Life of 30 Years
Straight Line Depreciation after 20 Years
($3,965,000 x .33) $1,308,450.00
Salvage Value
$1,308,450 x .2247 = $294,008
IV. Present Worth for Subsurface Disposal
Capital Cost $ 3,965,000
O & M Present Worth 2,136,467
Less Salvage Value ( 294,008)
Cost of This Alternative $ 5,807,459
$3,965,000.00
$1675211.00
36,361.00
10,000.00
$213, 572.00

n
u
n
�J
ALTERNATIVE #3 - TRANSPORT WASTEWATER TO CITY OF SBELBY
I. Capital Cost
II. O & M Cost
$2,185,000.00
To eliminate the existing package plant and pump to Shelby, we would reduce the
annual cost by the following.
Total Sewer Cost 1995-96 $167,211
Utility Cost for Plant ( 14,900)
Laboratory Testing ( 10,000)
Suppliers ( 3,100)
Operator 3( 6,361)
$102, 839
Additional Cost for Major Pump Station
Utility $ 9,600
Maintenance Person 24.226
$ 33, 826
Annual Treatment Cost to Shelby
250,000 GPD @ $2.45/1,000 $223,562
Total for O & M
$360,227 x 10.0035 = $3,603,531
III. Salvage Value
Estimate Life of 30 Years
Straight Line Depreciation after 20 Years
($2,185,000 x .33) $721,050.00
Salvage Value
$721,050 x .2247 = $162,020
IV. Present Worth for Transporting to Shelby
Capital Cost $2,185,000
O & M Present Worth 3,603,531
-it Less Salvage Value ( 162,020)
Cost of This Alternative $ 5, 626, 511

E. RESIDUALS NIANAGEI1dENT PLAIN
At present, residuals from the Boiling Springs VA7)7v'TP are land applied to a field
owned by the Town and permitted under WQ 0006827. Sludge is aerobically digested as a
process to significantly reduce pathogens (PSRP). This play, could be continued and more
land acquired. However, the current site is not desirable because groundwater contamination
from pre-existing conditions makes assessment of groundwater irrpacts difficult. Therefore,
it is planned to begin transferring residuals to the City of Shelby's composting facility for
continued treatment and final disposal. The City of Shelby has agreed to this, as the following
letter indicates. Some modifications of the Shelby facility will be made in order to receive the
liquid sludge from the Town's truck.

CITE' OF' SHELBY
8OX 207 - WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. - SHELBY NORTH CAROLINA 28151 - 0207
Mr. Rick Howell September 27, 1996
Town Manager
Town of Boiling Springs
421 East College Avenue
Shelby, North Carolina 28152
Dear Rick:
This letter is to confirm to you that the City of Shelby will
accept digested Bio-Solids from the Town of Boiling Springs for an
undetermined length of time upon completion of an unloading
facility.
Fees will be determined at a later date.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at
[phone].
Sinc ely,
Don Rhom
Treatment Plant Superintendent
DFR : j wh
Copy: Bob Gidney, Director of Utilities
Benjie Thomas, West & Associates

Permit No. NCO071943
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Boiling Springs WWTP
2556 Rockford Road
Boiling Springs
Cleveland County
to receiving waters designated as Sandy Run Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective April 1, 1993
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on February 28, 1995
Signed this day March 19, 1993
zzi Z�-
(��.ston Howard, Jr., Acting Director
Division of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0071943
_. ... SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Boiling Springs
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.300 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting of manual bar
screen, grit chamber, extented aeration basin, clarifier, aerobic sludge digestors, chlorine contact
tank with gas chlorination, and sludge holding tank located at Boiling Springs WWTP, 2556
Rockford Road, Boiling Springs, Cleveland County (See Part III of this Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Sandy
Run Creek which is classified Class C waters in the Broad River Basin.

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NCO071943
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characterlstic.
Flow
BOD, 5 day, 20ob—
Total Suspended Residue"
NH3 asN
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
Discharge Uraltatlut
Monthly Avg Weekly Avg.
0.300
30.0 mg/1 45.0 mg/I
30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/1
200.0 /100 ml 400.0 /100 ml
Monitoring
Begu rement9
Measurement
sample
*Samb ..
Dally Max Fre uency
Tyne
Location
Continuous
Recording
I or E
2/Month
Composite
E, I
2/Month
Composite
E, I
Monthly
Composite
E
2/Month
Grab
E
Daily
Grab
E
Weekly
Grab
E
Semi-annually
Composite
E
Semi-annually
Composite
E
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I.- Influent
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective influent value (85
% removal).
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored 21month at the effluent by grab
sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

TOWN OF BOILING SPRINGS
COST ESTRQLATE. UPDATE
(8/5/96)
1. Paul Jackson, Interstate Utilities
Davco Equipment only
60,000 gal. Equalization
300,000 Aeration
45,000 Digester
45,000 Sludge Holding $295,000.00
Installation 73, 000.00
Paint 30, 000.00
$398, 000.00
Traveling Bridge 70,000.00
$468; 000.00
2. Aero-IvMod-Equipment.
Quote 10/ 18/95
same per John McNeillis Aero-Mod (8/2/96) $493,000.00
3. Hickory Construction Company
Quote on entire job 9/18/95 ($823,080)
Change per Curt Eckard 8/2/96, 5% increase $865,000.00
COST (rev. 8/5/96)
Plant Cost $ 865,000.00
Engineering 86, 500.00
Contingencies 86, 500.00
Administrative 215600.00
Closing Cost -0-
Total Cost $1,059,600.00
REVENUES
Revolving Loan $ 795,000.00
High Unit Cost Chant
Local Revenue 264,000.00
Total Revenue $1,059,000.00

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COKMIISSION
COUNTY OF CLEVELAND
IN THE MATTER OF )
NORTH CAROLINA } SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT
NPDES PERMIT } EMC WQ N0, 96-15
NO. NCO071943 }
HELD BY THE TOWN )
OF BOILING SPRINGS }
Pursuant to provisions of North Carolina General Statutes (G.S.)
143-215.2 and 143-215.67, this Special Order by Consent is entered
into by the Town of Boiling Springs, hereinafter referred to as the
Town, and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission,
an agency of the State of North Carolina created by G.S. 143E-262,
and hereinafter referred to as the Commission:
The Town and the Commission hereby stipulate the following:
(a) That the Town holds North Carolina NPDES Permit No.
NCO071943 for operation of an existing wastewater
treatment works and for making an outlet therefrom for
treated wastewater to Sandy Run Creek, Class C waters of
this State in the Broad River Basin, but is unable to
comply with the final effluent limitations for Flow,
SODS, TSR, and Fecal Coliform as set forth in the Permit
for Outfall 001. Compliance will require the Town to
prepare plans and specifications for the construction of
additional treatment works, plus improvements and
modifications to the existing wastewater treatment and
collection system.
(b) That noncompliance with final effluent limitations
constitutes causing and contributing to pollution of the
waters of this State named above, and the Town is within
the jurisdiction of the Commission as set forth in G.S.
Chapter 143, Article 21.
(c) That the Town desires to cause or allow the discharge of
200,000 gpd of additional wastewater to the treatment
works, and that the discharge of such additional
wastewater will not result in any significant degradation
of the quality of any waters.
(d) That the Town has secured or will secure financing
for planning and construction for treatment works which,
when constructed and operated, will be sufficient to
adequately treat the wastewater presently being
discharged and the additional wastewater desired to be
discharged, to the extent that the Town will be able to
comply with final permit effluent limitations.

SOC EMC WQ 96-15
Page Two
(e) Since this Special Order is by Consent, _neither party
will file a petition for a contested case or for judicial
review concerning its terms.
2. The Town agrees to pay the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources the sum of $16,770
in full settlement for violations of G.S. 143-215.1 and NPDES
Permit No. NC0071943. The payment shall be submitted to the
Director of the Division of Water Quality, Post Office Box
29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535, within thirty (30)
days of the signing of this document by the Town. The Town
agrees to waive its right to an Administrative Hearing or
remission of civil penalties for the above settlement amount.
This settlement covers violations accruing subsequent to May,
1995.
3. The Town, desiring to comply with the permit identified in
paragraph 1(a) above, hereby agrees to do the following:
(a) Comply with all terms and conditions of the NPDES permit
except those effluent limitations identified in paragraph
1(a) above and 3(e) below. Should the permit be modified
or renewed during the period this Special order is in
effect, then comply with all terms and conditions of the
permit except those effluent limitations that have been
modified, as identified in paragraph 3(e) below. See
Attachments A for all current monitoring requirements and
effluent limitations. The Town may also be required to
monitor for other parameters as deemed necessary by the
Director in future permits or administrative letters.
(b) Undertake the following activities in accordance with the
indicated time schedule:
1) Submit plans and specifications for the new
facility by December 31, 1996.
2) After receiving appropriate permits from the
Division, begin construction of a 0.300 MGD WWT
plant parallel to the existing facility by May 31,
1997.
3) Complete construction of parallel Aero-Mod
treatment units, complete repairs and modifications
to the existing system, and complete inflow/
infiltration work on the collection system (as
outlined in the October 4, 1995 letter for fiscal
year 1996-1997) by March 31, 1998.

SOC EMC WQ 96-15
Page Three
4) Attain compliance with final effluent limitations
by June 30, 1998.
(c) Submit to the Mooresville Regional Office, located at 919
North Main Street, Mooresville, North Carolina 28115,
monthly progress reports relative to activities
identified in paragraph 3(b) above. The first report is
due on May 15, 1997, with similar reports due the
fifteenth (15) day of each subsequent month.
(d) Comply with all terms and conditions of the permit except
those effluent limitations identified in paragraph 1(a)
above. See Attachment A for all monitoring requirements
and effluent limitations. The permittee may also be
required to monitor for other parameters as deemed
necessary by the Director in future permits or
administrative letters.
(e) During the time in which this Special Order by Consent is
effective, comply with the interim effluent limitations
contained in Attachments A, except as provided for in
paragraph 3(a) above should the permit be modified or
renewed. The following reflects only the limitations
that have been modified from NPDES requirements by this
Order:
Out#all Serial No. 001:
Permit
Limits
Modified
Limits
Parameters
Mon. Avg.
Weekly
Avg. Mon. Avg. Weekly Avg.
Flow
0.300 MGD
N/A
0.500 MGD
N/A
BOD5
30.0 mg/1
45.0
m9/1 40.0 mg/l
60.0 mg/1
TSR
30.0 mg/1
45.0
mg/1 50.0 mg/1
65.0 mg/1
Fecal Coliform
Monitoring Only
(f) No later than 14 calendar days after any date
identified for accomplishment of = activity listed in
3(b) above, submit to the Director of the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality DW written notice of
compliance or noncompliance therewith. In the case of
noncompliance, the notice shall include a statement of
the reason(s) for noncompliance, remedial actions)
taken, and a statement identifying the extent to which
subsequent dates or times for accomplishment of listed
act vities ma— be affected.

SOC EMC WQ 96-15
Page Four
(g) Enforce the water conservation provisions, of the State
Building Code as it applies to new residential
construction (Volume II -Plumbing, Chapter 9, 901 General
Requirements - Materials, 901.2 Water Conservation, and
Table 901.2.2 - Maximum Allowable Water Usage For
Plumbing Fixtures).
4. The Town agrees that unless excused under paragraph 5, the
Company will pay the Director of DWQ, by check payable to the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, according to the following schedule for failure to
meet the deadlines set out in paragraphs 3(b) and 3(f), or
failure to attain compliance with the effluent limitations/
monitoring requirements contained in Attachments A, except as
provided for in paragraph 3(a) above.
Failure to meet a schedule date $100/day for the
first 7 days;
$500/day thereafter
violation of any limit modified
by this Order
Monitoring frequency violations
Failure to submit progress reports
identified in paragraph 3(c).
Failure to achieve compliance with
final effluent limits at final
compliance deadline
$1000 per violation
$100 per emitted
value per parameter
$50/day for the
first 7 days;
$250/day thereafter
$2000
5. The Town and the Commission agree that the stipulated
penalties are not due if the Town satisfies the DWQ that
noncompliance was caused solely by:
a. An act of God;
b. An act of war;
C. An intentional act or omission of a third party, but this
defense shall not be available if the act or omission is
that of an employee or agent of the Town or if the act or
omission occurs in connection with a contractual
relationship with the Town;

SOC EMC WQ 96-15
Page Five
d. An extraordinary event beyond the Town's control.
Contractor delays or failure to obtain funding will not
be considered as events beyond the Town's control; or
e. Any combination of the above causes.
Failure within 30 days of receipt of written demand to pay the
penalties, or challenge them by a contested case petition
pursuant to G.S. 150E-23, will be grounds for a collection
action, which the Attorney General is hereby authorized to
initiate. The only issue in such an action will be whether the
thirty 30 days has elapsed.
In accordance with the provisions of G.S. 143-215.67(b) the
Commission allows the Town to accept the additional waste
specified below to its waste disposal system:
200,000 gpd of additional wastewater. The nature of the
additional flows is such that the waste characteristics do not
exceed those generally associated with domestic waste or are
pretreated to domestic strengths. Waste of greater than
domestic strength may be accepted if the parameter(s) that
exceed normal domestic strength wastewater are not those for
which interim limitations have been developed and it can be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director that the
additional waste will not adversely affect the treatment
efficiency of the treatment system for any modified parameter
or result in the violation of any other permit limitation.
All new and proposed industrial waste tributary to the system
must be controlled using all needed mechanisms including, but
not limited to, adoption and implementation of industrial
waste control and pretreatment ordinances. No wastewater can
be accepted which will add toxic pollutants in quantities not
generally associated with domestic wastewater characteristics,
unless the acceptance of the additional wastewater can be
supported through appropriate analyses acceptable to the
Director.
7. Noncompliance with the terms of this Special Order by Consent
is subject to enforcement action in addition to the above
stipulations, including injunctive relief pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6C.
S. This Special Order by Consent and any terms, conditions and
interim effluent limitations contained herein, hereby
supersede any and all previous Special Orders and Enforcement
Compliance Schedule Letters, and terms, conditions and
limitations contained therein issued in connection with NPDES
Permit No. NC0071943. In the event of an NPDES permit
modification or renewal, any effluent limitations or

SOC E14C WQ 96-15
Paqe Six
monitoring requirements contained therein shall supersede
those contained in Attachment A of this Special Order by
Consent, except as modified and contained in'paragraph 3(e)
above.
9. The Town, upon signing the Special Order by Consent, will be
expected to comply with all schedule dates, terms, and
conditions of this document.
10. This Special Order by Consent shall expire on September 30,
1998
For the Town of Boiling Springs:
Signature)
Date
itle)
For the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission
Date
Chair of the Commission

ATTACHMENT A
SOC EMC WQ NO. 96-15
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -Interim
NPDES PERMIT NO. NCO371943
During the period beginning on the effective date of this Special Order and lasting until January 31, 1998, the
Company is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number 001. Such discharge shall be limited and
monitored by the company as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitationa
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
Sample
` Sample
Monthly
Avg. weekly Avg. Daily Max.
Frequency
Type
Location
Flow
0.500 MD
Continuous
Recorder
I or B
BOD, 5 Day, 2ulc**
40.0 mg11
60_Weekly
B to
R I
Total Suspended Residue**
50.0
1 65.0
Weekly
s to
,
NH3 as H
2/Month
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean)
Monitoring OnIX
Weeks
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine
wook
Grab
E
Temperature, •C
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
semi -Annually
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annually
Composite
E
* Sample locations: E -
Effluent,
I - Influent
** The monthly average effluent ROD. and Total Suspended Residue r_oncentratzons shall not exceed 15% of the reapective
influent value (85% removal).
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard unite nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored
weekly at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Note: Parameters noted in bold underlined lettering above are the only parameters modified as part of this SOC.

Estimated Cost. of Plant
Less Local Monies
Requested Loan Amount
USER CHARGES
$1,059,000.00
259,000.00
$ 800, 000.00
New Debt Services on 20 Year Loan @ 4% $ 72,000.00/Year
Additional Operating Expenses 66.000.00/Yex
New Debt/Year $138,000.00
Gardner -Webb University to Pay 20 x $13 8, 000 = $ 27, 600. 00
800 Customers to Pay .80 x $138,000.00 = $110,400.00
Residential Customers Additional Cost per Month $110,400.00 = $9,200.00/1_Vtonth
12
9$ ,200.00 = $11.50/TVlonth Additional Cost per Customer
800
Current Sewer Bill for 5, 000 Gallons:
First 3,000 gal. $ 6.21
Next 2,000 gal. 4.14
$10.35 Sewer Bill
Current Water Bill for 5,000 Gallons:
First 3,000 gal. $10.00
Next 2,000 gal. 5.90
$15.90 `Water Bill
Water and Sewer Bill at New Rates
Existing Sewer Bill $10.35
Additional Cost for Expansion 11.50
$21.85
Existing Water Bill 15.90
Water & Sewer Bill After Expansion $37.75

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
I. EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
The area to be developed is located on the site of the
existing wastewater treatment plant. The new construction will
disturb approximately .5 acre of the 14 acre site owned by the Town
of Boiling Springs. The property slopes from a high elevation of
725 at the southeast corner to a low elevation of 688 along the
western property line. The western property line generally follows
Sandy Run Creek.
There is an existing 300,000 gallons per day wastewater
treatment plant on the site. This plant was constructed in 1988
with the knowledge that a future expansion would be necessary. The
original site plan made provisions for a future expansion of the
• plant.. The area reserved for the plant expansion was rough graded
and grassed.
II. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
Boiling Springs is located in the southeastern quadrant of
Cleveland County. The topography of the Boiling Springs area and
the remainder of Cleveland County consists of a series of rounded
hills and rolling ridges with a general southerly trend.
The surface has a gentle, southeastward slope with an
elevation of about 1600 feet in the northern part of the county and
dropping to about 600 feet in the southern part. Interstream areas
are generally broad and have a gently -undulating surface with
moderate relief. However, streams have incised the valleys through
is
which they flow until they are usually more than 100 feet below the

general level of the interstream areas. Thus, the resulting
• topography is characterized largely by low, generally rounded hills
with gently to moderately steep slopes.
There are prominent peaks, or monadnocks, that rise several
hundred feet above the upland surface. Most of these peaks are
composed of rocks more resistant to erosion than those of the
surrounding peneplain. In the northern part of the county these
peaks, Carpenter Knob, No Business Mountain, and others, are
underlain by massive, poorly fractured quartz-biotite gneiss. The
highest elevation of the county is in the northwest corner where
Benn Knob rises to an elevation of 2,894 feet.
In the southeastern corner of the county, beds of quartzite
and quartz conglomerate form the Kings Mountain Range. The range
itself, extends from South Carolina in the south across Cleveland,
® Gaston, and Lincoln counties and into Catawba County in North
Carolina.
III. SURFACE GEOLOGY
As illustrated in Figure C-1, there are four lithological
units within Cleveland County: the Cherryville quartz monzonite,
the Tuluca quartz monzonite, the Kings Mountain group, and the mica
schist -gneiss complex. Outcropping in irregular and complex
patterns the mica schist and gneiss complex is the most widespread
of these four units and probably underlies as much as 75 percent of
the total land area in Cleveland County. The Boiling Springs
vicinity is characterized by this mica schist and gneiss complex
The mica schist and gneiss complex represent metamorphosed
4
sedimentary and pyroclastic volcanic rocks generally regarded as

0
Figure C-1 Surface Geology of Cleveland County
i
Boi1Sng Springs
®Toluca quartz mon-
zonite
Kings Mountain
group
I jL� 4tl,
Cherryville quartz
Monzonite
Mica schist and
gneiss complex
- Greater Cleveland County
Shelby Facility Planning
Area
i
SHELBY
i
� J�

late Precambrian or early Paleozoic in age. These rocks consist of
• an immense series of mica schist, mica gneiss, and granitoid
layers, in which mica schist usually predominates. Locally,
however, more gneissic rocks may predominate. The gneissic rocks
are light to dark gray, and weather to dull gray, yellow and
various shades of red. Bands and lenses of mica gneiss, composed
of quartz, feldspar, with biotite and muscovite in varying amounts,
with the biotite predominant at most localities, are also common in
the unit. Also occurring in many places are thin, interbedded
layers of hornblende gneiss and schist. Included in the complex
are decidedly younger bodies of quartz monzonite, gabbro, and dikes
and lenses of pegmatite.
The mica schist and gneiss complex is deeply weathered at most
areas and is covered by a thick layer of residual clay containing
. fragments and layers of the parent material. The soil cover
overlying the thick residual clay and weather rock is usually light
and thin.
The mica gneiss -schist group is the main producer of ground
and scrap mica and good quality sheet mica comes from pegmatitic
quarries operating in Cleveland County. Stone, clays, and sand and
gravel are mined in several localities of this group. Limestone is
mined for cement manufacturing in the county, clay is produced from
shales, metashales, slates, and weather rocks, and sand and gravel
come from alluvial deposits.
IV. WATER RESOURCES
As shown in Figure D-1, Cleveland County is drained by the
• Broad River and four of its major tributaries: The Sandy Creek,

• Figure p-1 Cleveland County Drainage System
i Courty-
'lanrina PreG
0

First Broad River, Buffalo Creek, and Kings Creek. Boiling Springs
lies in the Sandy Run Creek Basin. The river is approximately 15
miles in length and has its headwaters on the south eastern slope
of the South Mountains near the Rutherford County'line. Sandy Run
Creek is classified as a Class C stream with a seven year low flow
of /' #" MGD .
V. GROUND WATER SUPPLY
Ground water is an important resource of Cleveland County.
Much of Cleveland County is dependent upon subsurface sources of
water supplies. Smaller towns, individual residences, and
industries are characteristically served by a single well. Still,
ground -water resources of the County have been developed only to a
very limited extent. It has been estimated that the average annual
county
use of
3 billion gallons is less than 7 percent of the
•
assumed
total
recharge.
Ground -water supplies of at least a few thousand gallons per
day are adequate for domestic and similar purposes and can be
obtained almost anywhere in the area from individual wells tapping
the bedrock aquifers. The average well will yield about 1800 GPD.
Moderate to large supplies of ground water --sufficient for
most industrial, commercial, and municipal uses --can be obtained
from most of the geologic formations of Cleveland County.
Differences in well -yields are usually a function of variation
in weathering or fracturing. Each rock unit normally has
distinctive fracturing and weathering characteristics and thus
indirectly influences well yields.
There
are three major rock
•
types in the lithological unit most
common
in Cleveland

County: (1) schist, (2) gneiss, and (3) gneiss and schist. Schist
• is the predominate rock and has the largest number of wells. Their
average depth is about 190 feet ranging from 42 to 750 feet. Their
yields vary from 0 to 150 gallons per minute (GPM), averaging about
25 GPM. wells drilled into gneiss have an average depth of 226
feet; range in depth from 61 to 1,213 feet; have a yield which
ranges from 0 to 200 GPM; and have an average yield of 35 GPM.
Most drilled wells in gneiss and schist obtain adequate supplies
for domestic and farm use at depths ranging from 100 to 200 feet.
VI. NEED
The Town of Boiling Springs currently has a .3 MGD wastewater
treatment plant. The average daily flow into the plant for the
month of September was 257,000 gallons per day or 85.67% of the
plant capacity. Due to the heavy hydraulic loading of the plant,
there have been several times during the past year that the town
has failed to meet the NPDES limits. In order to address their
wastewater treatment needs, the town has entered into a SOC which
requires the town to have the plant upgraded by March 31, 1998.
The need for a plant upgrade is justified by the hydraulic
loading on the existing plant and the fact that the town is under
a Special Order of Consent.
VII. ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
In addition to expanding and upgrading the existing plant,
four alternatives were considered. These alternatives were: spray
irrigation, subsurface disposal, pumping the wastewater generated
in Boiling Springs to Shelby for treatment, and making no change in
0 the existing system.

After an evaluation of the options available to the town, it
• was determined that the most effective and environmentally sound
method of treating the wastewater generated in Boiling Springs is
to expand and upgrade the existing plant.
A more detailed evaluation of the alternatives are shown in a
previous section of this report.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
1. Changes in Land
The proposed plant expansion is to be located on a site which
was developed for this purpose in 1988. The only changes in the
land will be some minor grading to lower the site to a finished
grade.
2. Wetlands
There are no wetlands located on the proposed site and the
• finished grade of site is well above the floodplain level.
3. Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands
There are no agricultural lands of any kind to be disturbed as
a result of this project.
4. Public Lands
The 14 acre site owned by the town is solely for wastewater
treatment plant purposes. There are no park areas on the site.
5. Scenic and Recreational Areas
No scenic or recreational areas are in the project area.
6. Areas of Archeological or Historical Value
No archeological or historical sites are in the project area.
r�L

7., Air Quality/Nuisance
• The site has an existing 300,000 gallons per day wastewater
treatment plant which has been in operation for the past eight
years. Prior to the 1988 plant there was another wastewater
treatment plant which had been there over 20 years. There has
been no odor or air quality complaints as a result of wastewater
treatment plants.
8. Ground Water Quality
This project will have no impact on ground water.
9. Water Supplies
The plant effluent is currently being discharged in Sandy Run
Creek north of its confluence with Broad River. There are no
surface water plants located in the Sandy Run Creek Basin or the
Broad River Basin in North Carolina. The effluent quality of the
new plant will be such that there will be no impact on any water
supplies in the Sandy Run Creek or Broad River Basins.
10. Shellfish or Fish Habitat
The discharge of the current plant has no adverse impact on
the shellfish or fish habitat of Sandy Run Creek and Broad River.
The effluent quality of the new plant will be better than the
current discharge and will not cause a degradation of the fish
habitat.
Adequate erosion control measures will be taken to prevent
siltation deposits from causing any damage to shellfish or fish
habitat.

11. Wildlife Habitat
The approximately .5 acre site to be disturbed as a result of
this project is located in an area which has been cleared for at
least 30 years. There are no wildlife habitats' located on the
site.
12. Toxic Substances
The Town of Boiling Springs has no industry discharging into
the wastewater system and as a result there are no heavy metals or
toxic substances introduced from this source. Toxins introduced
from domestic sources do not create a toxicity problem in the plant
effluent.
The effluent clarity of the plant is such that the use of
ultraviolet disinfection is being considered. If chlorine is used
as disinfectant then we will dechlorinate to prevent any toxicity
• problems.
13. Receiving Stream
The Boiling Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant discharges
into Sandy Run Creek a Class C stream in the Broad River Basin.
The Sandy Run Creek Basin is approximately 15 miles long and
has its headwaters in the southwestern portion of Cleveland County.
There are no impoundments on Sandy Run Creek and there is a steady
flow which averages 66— MGD.
14. Indirect Measures
The plant capacity will increase from .3 MGD to .6 MGD and the
increased flow in the future could possibly have some indirect
impact on the receiving stream, however, since the discharge is so
•.

small compared to the stream flow and the quality of the plant
• effluent will improve, the impact should be negligible.
IX. MITIGATIVE MEASURES
In order to avoid any adverse environmental impacts, the
following actions were taken:
1. Proper erosion control measures to reduce site siltation.
2. Use of ultraviolet disinfection to eliminate the use of
chlorine is being considered.
3. Improved treatment process will improve effluent discharged
into Sandy Run Creek.
**NOTE: Portions of environmental report are from a study by Dr.
James W. Clay for Cleveland County and Boiling Springs.
n
LJ
n
U

• � ``- _-�---+ �•-.-�-�.,_ ----- _ moo"`\ �\ \ r / vo�✓EZ, �'
Ar-
,\ f i '•- -'�" . .�,tT __=►, ...Vr •..: ti.� Y'I '-� c,�r Z>r viraci'pvt '
� ® l oy9� �D`�G'Y -rim .•�! `j) `�\ \\ \\ `♦ \\ \ 1\
i I - / irk � 44 � " f � �.•. \\\ I I \ \\ \ �\ \ \ \ � SG!/GK� S./r
F I ` �•o�
`\\�• � �`\• _ `\ .. � �� _•- � ,� �1 �:' � � \\ � \^ram•*/:. �- �� i - _
ra .. - __..._--._ _ _ �- � � �` � � .�< •,ya+.� ems. � ly � \ \�'\ ,, � _ _ . _ .
A,-.r sir: sr� \ \ ♦ \ -
<.•