NC0086312_Regional Office Physical File Scan Up To 1/15/2021

.Uc&-e . f-Z 7-qg
Mc
A S S O C
October 30, 1998
Mr. Dave Goodrich, Supervisoiii
NPDES Permits Group / Division of Water Quality
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Rorx ; -Tom f1/Pq 0
eye; NC006 631 Z-
��1- djt°✓�J
I s7 �l e
dot, !,4 & -/ ,n io
RE: Application for NPDES Permit
Application Number NCO086312
Former All American Homes Facility
Ellenboro, North Carolina, Rutherford County
Dear Dave:
co
We are re -submitting the application returned by you on September 28, 1998. SinAthe ,..<n +. .
C),-,,
initial application was submitted the facility has been sold., The new owner can only utilize a
portion of the manufacturing facility due to lack of, adequate waste treatment capability. 0 `
--I ; n
Additionally, the County hopes to encourage other industrial development in the surrounding aaa. UP
Therefore, Rutherford County has elected to be the applicant and permit holder for the Ater
treatment facility. I have enclosed a revised application form completed by Rutherford County
and signed by John Lewis, County Manager. Four (4) copies of all new information are enclosed
along with the package that was returned to Neil Syaers of All American Homes.
Mary Cabe requested the information detailed on the attached letter in conjunction with
her review of the subject permit application. The requested information is presented herein is in
the order which her comments were listed in the letter dated -June 9, 1998.
♦ Two letters from James P. Black, Executive Director of Rutherford County Economic
Development Commission are attached. These letters address the request for a system capable
of serving 300 employees. As described in the letters, several firms have expressed an interest
-in the property if- as many as 300 employees could be accommodated. Construction of a
wastewater system capable of serving 300 employees will maximize both the economic
viability of the site and the potential employment opportunities.
♦ A letter from Fred Matthews, Environmental Health Supervisor, Rutherford -Polk -McDowell
District Health. Department is attached. This letter details the Health Departments position
with respect to the existing on-sitesystem and indicates that the repaired on -site system can
serve no more than 40 employees.
E n g i n e e r i n g • P l a n n i n g • F i n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 FAX [phone]

♦ The LTAR does apply to the new portions of the subsurface system but does not apply to the
existing portions of the subsurface system per Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health
Department and North Carolina Health Commission requirements. The District Health
Department has indicated that the existing system can accept a maximum of 750 gallons per
day after repairs have been completed.
♦ As discussed in a telephone conversation with Mary Cabe, the length of dripper line required
for Alternative 5A is calculated by:
4,750 GPD Waste flow — 750 GPD to existing system = 4,000 GPD to drippers
4,000 GPD = 0.6 GPD/ft2 (LTAR w/ pretreatment) = 6,666.67 ft2 dripper area required
6,666.67 ft2 _ 3 ft dripper line spacing = 2,222.22 ft of dripper line
Round 2,222.22 ft to 2,250 ft for design purposes
♦ -The rails have been removed from the rail line adjacent to the facility and the line was quit
claimed to Rutherford County by Norfolk Southern in 1997. Rutherford County has filed an
affidavit of intent to preserve the rights of way associated with the rail line. The County, as
holder of the right of way, has indicated that a bore and jack under the rail bed for the effluent
pipeline will be allowed.
♦ ' The Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department has indicated that current
regulations do not allow them to consider construction of �a new or expanded system in fill
material. The one -acre area reviewed by the soil scientist is the only available non -fill area
and the usable portion of this area is further reduced due to setback requirements.
The off -site property referred to in Alternative 3 is a portion of a larger tract. All viable land in
the vicinity of the .All American Homes site is under one ownership and, as mentioned in
Alternative 3, the owner is only willing to sell in large parcels. Additionally, the applicant
would be required to obtain an easement from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation to construct a pipe line under State Road 1982. This seems unlikely to be
approved by the DOT. As mentioned in Alternative 3, all negotiations were conducted
verbally and additional documentation is unavailable.
Please advise me if you need any additional information to assist you in your review of this
'matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
DANA J. BOLDEN, E.I.T.
Enclosures
cc: John Lewis
Glenn Rhodes

Mate or INUI Ln �arouna
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of -Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes; General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
A-
D E N R
MILL ASSOC. o FILE COPY
RECEiVED
June 9, 1998 uuiN 1 S 1998
Project �#
File #
Subject: NPDES Permit Request
Permit No. NCO086312
Former All American Homes
Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
The Division's regional office has prepared a staff report on the above facility.
Additional information is needed prior to continued review.
•' The question of why 300 employees are required is still unanswered. There were
125.people employed at the former All American Homes facility; the facility was to
employ.between 300 and 350 employees only after a 235% expansion of the building.
Are negotiations for the sale of the property based on 300 employees? . If so, a
statement stating this should be submitted from the company.
Information from the Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department
reducing the treatable volume from 3000 gpd to 750 gpd was not submitted. There is
an improvement permit listing a*design waste flow of 750 gpd. Please submit
documentation reducing the treatable volume, why the system cannot be restored, and a
cost estimate of restoring the system.
• In alternative 3A, why does the LTAR not apply to the existing system? If it did,
this would provide flow for 220 employees.
• In alternative 5A, what is the calculation used to determine that 2250 linear feet of
dripper line is required? Is there enough land available for 11251inear feet (0.6
gpd/ft2)?
• In alternative 8, is there documentation that boring under the railroad will be
allowed?
The soil report states that the fill material is old enough to act like soil and that a
conservative application rate of 0.35 gal/ft2/day is applicable. This would require
21,430 ft2 plus setbacks. Only one acre, 43,560 ft2, was reviewed in the soil scientist
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone 919-733=5083 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

RUTHERFORD COUNTY
ECONOMIC --DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
622Air ,grt Road) i Suite 100
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
C Telephone[phone] Fox(828)287-1231
July 7, 1998
Mr. Glenn Rhodes
Community Development Coordinator
Isothermal Planning & Development Commission
Re:i Ellenboro Waste Treatment Package Plant Permit
Dear Mr. Rhodes:
It is.my understanding that DEHNR is questioning *the size of subject facility.
My office has been heavily involved in the planning and economic development of the
South/East end of Rutherford County since 1995. This area of the,County bounded by SR120,
Highway 74 Business, Highway 74, and SR1920 provides the best potential for future extensive
economic development.
• Geographic Location:
a. Charlotte/Douglas Int'I Airport = 53 miles
b. Greenville/Spartanburg Int'I Airport = 48 miles
c. Asheville Airport = 55 miles
Topography of land is good
• Four Lane Highways are in place to Charlotte, Greenville and Asheville.
Highway numbers 74, 1-85, 1-26
• Relatively large tracts of land are available at low cost. (An example would
be a 150 acre tract between Webb Road and Highway 74 for $3500 acre.)
• A rail corridor easement running through the area was quitclaimed to
Rutherford County by Norfolk Southern Railroad in 1997.
• A ten inch water main serves the area.
• A PSNC natural gas tap lays within one mile of the designated area.
The -only infrastructure item literally missing for the area is a waste treatment system. Such a
system would immediately complete the existing potential for future development, plus it could
-reduce sub -surface systems currently in .use at the Thieman Metal Technological plant (up to 40-
50 employees) and the R&R Plastics plant (up to 63 employees in peak times).
It is extremely important that the Ellenboro Waste Treatment system be permitted as soon as
possible to allow us to complete our plans and perform sales to create additional economic
development.
Pcerely,fNmes P. Black
Executive Director
Rutherford County Economic Development Commission

RUTHERFORD COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
622 Airport Road, Suite 100
' Rutherfordton, NC' 28139
Telephone[phone] Fax[phone]
July 8, 1998
Mr. Glenn Rhodes
Community Development Coordinator
Isotkermal Planning & Development Commission
Re: Ellenboro Waste Treatment System
All American Homes Facility
Dear Mr. Rhodes:
All American Homes of N.C. vacated their 68,000 sq,' manufacturing plant on Webb Road in
November 1966, and moved into an expansion plant. Our office took an active role in
presenting the vacated facility to perspective clients as follows:
1. Patriot Homes, Inc.... November/December, 1996... 250 potential employees. Due
- diligence identified waste discharge problem with the sub surface system. The company
optioned land in Cleveland County.
2. PTS Intertech, Inc.... January/November 1997... 300 potential employees. Rutherford '
County acquired quitclaim from Southern Railroad and funding from NC DOT, NC House of
Representatives and NC Senate to build industrial railspur. An offer -to purchase was
withdrawn due to the inability to guarantee permitting/completion of a waste treatment
package system.
3. Thieman Metal Technologies, Inc. purchased building in June 1998 to employ 40 - 50
employees. Other ancillary industrial firms have negotiated with Thieman to locate on their
plantsite.
Other firms, not listed, had indicated an interest in the vacant building. The waste.treatment
issue was in all cases the deciding detrimental factorwhich'killed interest.
In order to properly serve Thieman and other industrial plants in the Ellenboro area, as well as
develop the full potential of this area, we must have an adequate waste treatment facility.
V•
James P. Black.
Executive Director
Rutherford County Economic Development Commission
- Chairman
. Board of Directors
Tim H. Bishop
County Commissioners
Vice Chairman
G. Robert Luckadoo, Chairman
Max Lehner
J. Franklin Goode
Secretary
Charles Hill
Robert W. Morgan
Amy Jenkins
FXecutiveDirecrar
r_-._ n nt_ _r.
- David Odom
Advlrory Board
Joey Allen Charles A Cobb
Timothy Gordon R. Bruce Hoyle
Nathan Odom Thomas M. Robbins
Jack A Wofford

A
March 18, 1998
RUTHERFORD-POLK-McDOWELL
DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Jim Black
Economic Development Director
622 Airport Road, Suite 100
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Leonard L. Wood, MS, MPH
District Health Director
Dear. Jim:
At jyour request please let me clarify the health department's
position on the existing septic tank system at the previous All
American facility on Race Path Church -Road in Ellenboro, North
Carolina. This system was failing prior to the abandonment by All
American Homes at their daily water usage of 1700 gallon/day. Keith.
Webb with McGill and Associates in Asheville designed a repair for
the system to improve 'distribution - by replacing the old dosing
syphons with an approved pump tank -and pump. This would insure that
,all drainfield trenches. are getting. a. share of the waste effluent.
With . corrections done according.- to the.. design. by : -Mr. Webb our
position was to .permit the repaired on -site system for -750-1000
gallons./day, or. 30-40 employees at 25 GPD/employee, with no
industrial process waste. It is. impossible to effectively evaluate,
this existing system,. even .in a repaired state, and its future
performance. A system this old'develops a biological mat tending to
clog the system. There is an area to pump to should the existing,
repaired system expire. I have'a copy of the repair design I will be
glad to share with anyone of -need..
Best regards,.
t—
Fred Matthews
Environmental Health Supervisor
FM/pjm
Rutherford County Health Department
203 Callahan-Koon Road
Spindale, NC 28160
704-287-6100•Health Dept
704.287-6101-Administration
704-287.6059-HD FAX.
7nd_9A7.An9A.Nnmw Health
Polk County Health Department
212 Walker Street
Columbus, NC 28722
704-894-8271-Health Dept
704-894-8678-HD FAX
704-894-5395-H9me Health
704-894-2055-HFI F.AX'
McGILLASSCC, o FILE COPY
RiECE- YED
t.N 13 1998
Projoci #
File #
McDowell Health Department
140 Spaulding Road
Marion, NC 28752
704-652-6811-Health Dect
704-652-9376-HD FAX
704-659-6901-Home Health
704-659-6401-HH FAX

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT/ WATER QUALITY SECTION
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELI IINAMON SYSTEM
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DISCHARGE - SHORT FORM D
TO BE FILED ONLY BY DISCHARGES OF 100% DOMESTIC WASTE (< 1 MGD FLOW).
Current North Carolina NPDES No.
(if known)
1. Mailing address of applicant:
OMMUMMMMMI
Please print or type.
Facility Name Former All American Homes Facility
Owner .Name _Rutherford County
Street Address 461.—North - Main Street
City Rutherfordton.
State North Caroli6a
ZIP Code, 28139
Telephone No. :2$7-6060
qzIff
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Name (If different from above)
'Facility Contact Person
Street Address or State Road
Same as Above
John Lewis 'County Manager
531 Webb Road
City El"l enboro.
County - Rutherford
Telephone No.` Nnn6'
3. This NPDES Permit Application applies to which of the following (please indicate flow);
Expansion/Modification * Existing Unpermitted Discharge.:
New Facility Renewal � _ � Y
• Please provide a description of the expansion/modification:
4. - Please provide a description of the existing treatment.facilities, if applicable. -
Existing on -site -system has failed and can not be used to allow ful'1• .
employment'at.facility. See attached information.
A

.4
5. Please indicate the source of wastewater from the description of facilities listed (check where
applicable). -
Source of wastewater
Industrial X Number of Employees
Commercial Number of Employees
Residential Number of Homes
School _ . Number of Students/Staff
Other
• Please describe source of wastewater:
Former manufacturing facility. Waste treatment will allow facility to be re-o tined.
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipes/wastewater• outfalls (if applicable):
One (1)
7. Name of receiving water or waters: (Please provide a map showing the exact location of discharge)
Hills Creek
I certify .that I am familiar; with- the information"contained in the application and:.
that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information is true,_ complete.. and
accurate..
John Lewis
Printed name of Person Signing =
County_Manager,.Rutherford County
Title
Date- plic tion Signed
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6(b)(V provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any
false- statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other
document files or required to be maintained under Article 21' or regulations of the Environmental
Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained
under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission implementing that
Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by imprisonment
not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more
than $10,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both for a similar offense.)

McGM
�` v
October 30, 1998
Mr. Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Permits Group / Division of Water Quality
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dave:
Mn/ f
ole- : l /1 f s
j0S O er? r&145JI A f'Gt
RE: ;_Application for NPDES Permit
Application Number NC008.6312"
Former All American Homes Facility
Ellenboro, North Carolina, Rutherford County
We are re -submitting the application returned by you on September 28, 1998. Since the
initial application was submitted the facility has been sold:.,. The new owner can only utilize a
portion of the manufacturing facility due to lack of adequate waste treatment capability.
Additionally, the County hopes to encourage other industrial development in the surrounding area.
Therefore, Rutherford County has elected to be the applicant and permit holder for the waste
treatment. facility. - I have enclosed a revised application form completed by .Rutherford County
and signed by John Lewis, County Manager o Four (4) copies of all new information are enclosed
along with the package that was returned to Neil Syaers of All American Homes.
Mary Cabe requested the information detailed on the attached letter in conjunction with
her review of the subject permit application. The requested information is presented herein is in
the order which her comments were listed in the letter dated'June 9, 1998.
♦ Two letters from James P. Black, Executive Director of Rutherford- County Economic
Development Commission are attached. These letters address the request for a system capable
of serving 300 employees. As described in the letters, several firms have expressed an interest
-in the property if as many as 300 employees could be accommodated. Construction of a
wastewater system capable of serving 300 employees will maximize both the economic
viability of the site and the potential employment opportunities.
♦ A letter from Fred Matthews, Environmental Health Supervisor, Rutherford -Polk -McDowell
District Health Department is attached. This letter details the -Health Departments position
with respect to the existing on -site system and indicates that- the repaired'on-site system can
serve no more than 40 employees.
61998
IiIL , L` -_
VVUA9 f7Y SECiIUN
MY REGIONAL �i�F{C� -1
E n g i n e e r i n g • P l a n n i n g • F i n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

♦ The LTAR does apply to the new portions of the subsurface system but does not apply to the
existing portions of the subsurface system per Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health
Department and North Carolina Health Commission requirements. The District Health
Department has indicated that the existing system can accept a maximum of 750 gallons per
day after repairs have been completed.
♦ As discussed in a telephone conversation with Mary Cabe, the length of dripper line required
for Alternative 5A is calculated by:
4,750 GPD Waste flow — 750 GPD to existing system = 4,000 GPD to drippers
4,000 GPD - 0.6 GPD/ft2 (LTAR w/ pretreatment) = 6,666.67 ft2 dripper area required
6,666.67 ft2 _ 3 ft dripper line spacing = 2,222.22 ft of dripper line
Round 2,222.22 ft to 2,250 ft for design purposes
♦ The rails have been removed from the rail line adjacent to the facility and the line was quit
claimed to Rutherford County by Norfolk Southern in 1997. Rutherford County has filed an
affidavit of intent to preserve the rights of way associated with the rail line. The County, as
holder of the right of way, has indicated that a bore and jack under the rail bed for the effluent
pipeline will be allowed.
♦ The Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department has indicated that current
regulations do not allow them to consider construction of 'a new or expanded system in fill
material. The one -acre area reviewed by the soil scientist is the only available non -fill area
and the usable portion of this area is further reduced due to setback requirements.
♦ The off -site property referred to in Alternative 3 is a portion of a larger tract. All viable land in
the vicinity of the All American Homes site is under one ownership and, as mentioned in
Alternative 3, the owner is only willing to sell in large parcels. Additionally, the applicant
would be required to obtain an easement from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation to construct a pipe line under State Road 1982. This seems unlikely to be
approved by the DOT. As mentioned in Alternative 3, all negotiations were conducted
verbally and additional documentation is unavailable.
Please advise me if you need any additional information to assist you in your review of this
matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
DANA J. BOLDEN, E.I.T.
Enclosures
cc: John Lewis
Glenn Rhodes

VLCIIC VI IVVI LI I VCII VIII ICi
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of -Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes, General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
/••
New
D E. N R
McGILLASSOC.. FILE COPY
RECEIVED
9,1998 Al 15 1998
Project #
File #
Subject: NPDES Permit Request
Permit No. NCO086312
Former All American Homes
Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
The Division's regional office has prepared a staff report on the above facility.
Additional information is needed prior to continued review.
•` The question of why 300 employees,.are required is still unanswered. There were
125.people employed at the former All American Homes facility; the facility was to
employ between 300 and 350 employees only after a 235% expansion of the building.
Are negotiations for the sale of the property based on 300 employees? . If so, a
statement stating this should be submitted from the company.
Information from the Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department
reducing the treatable volume from 3000 gpd to 750 gpd was not submitted. There is
an improvement permit listing a-desigri'waste flow of 750 gpd. Please submit
documentation reducing the treatable volume, why the system cannot be restored, and a
cost estimate of restoring the system.
• In alternative 3A, why does the LTAR not apply to the existing system? If it did,
this would provide flow for 220 employees.
• In alternative 5A, what is the calculation used to determine that 2250 linear feet of
dripper line is required? Is there enough land available for 1125 linear feet (0.6
gpd/ft2)?
• In alternative 8, is there documentation that boring under the railroad will be
allowed? ;
• The soil report states that the fill material is old enough to act like soil and that a
conservative application rate of 0.35 gal/ft2/day is applicable. This would require .
21,430 ft2 plus setbacks. Only one acre, 43,560 ft2, was reviewed in the soil scientist
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

RUTHERFORD COUNTY
ECONOMIC-.DEVEL�-,PMENT COMMISSION
— 622-Airport Road, Suite 100
Rutherfordton, NBC 28139
/Telephonel828) 207-7341 Fox(828)287-1231
.July 7, 1998 --
Mr. Glenn Rhodes
Community Development Coordinator
Isothermal Planning 8, Development Commission
RCGI CIICr7PofV RgSIr ICY1n ¢n, rYV0.YYC rnaw c�
Deor Mr. Rhodes:
It is my understanding that DEHNR is questioninc
My office has been heavily involved in the plan
South/East end of Rutherford County since 1995.
Highway 74 Business, Highway 74, and SR1920 p
economic development.
• Geographic Location:
a. Charlotte/Douglas Int'I Airpc
b. Greenville/Spartanburg Int'I
c. Asheville Airport = 55 miles
• Topography of land is good
• Four Lane Highways are in place to Chadot
Highway numbers 74, 1-85, 1-26
Relatively large tracts of land are a4ailable
be a 150 acre tract between Webb Road c
• A rail corridor easement running through ft
Rutherford County by Norfolk Southern Railn
• " A ten inch water main serves the area.
• A PSNC natural gas tap Bays within one mile
f
The -only infrastructure item literally missing for if
system would immediately complete the existfr
-reduce sub -surface systems -currently in use at tl
50 employees) and the RS,R Plastics plant (up tr
It is extremely important that the-Ellenboro Wa:
possible to allow us to complete our plans and
development_
cerely, R.
ames P. Black
Executive Director
Rutherford County Economic Development
'the size of subject facility.
ling and economic development of the
This area of the County bounded by SR120,
wides the best potential for future extensive
= 53 miles -
'Dort = 48 miles
Greenville and Asheville.
it low cost. (An example would
id Highway 74 for $3500 acre.)
area was quitclaimed to
❑d in 1997. -
of the designated area.
e area is a waste treatment system. Such a
g potential for future development, plus it could
ie Thieman Metal Technological plant_(up to 40-
63 employees in peak times).
'e Treatment System be permitted as soon as
perform sales to create additional economic

RUTH ER F(
ECONOMIC DEVE l
622 Airport
' Rutherforc
Telephone[phone]
July 8, 1998
Mr. Glenn Rhodes
Community Development Coordinator
is! 6rmal Planning & Development Cc
Re: Ellenboro Waste Treatment System
All American Homes Facility
Dear Mr. Rhodes:
All American Homes of N.C. vacated their 68,1
November 1966, and moved into an expansio
presenting the vacated facility to perspective
1.. Patriot Homes, Inc.... November/Decemt
diligence identified waste discharge prof
optioned land in Cleveland County.
2. , PTS Intertech, Inc.... January/November 1
County acquired quitclaim from Southern
Representatives and NC Senate to build it
Withdrawn due to the inability to guarant,
package system.
3. Thieman Metal Technologies, Inc. purcha!
employees. Other ancillary industrial firm!
plantsite.
Other .firms, not listed, had indicated an intere
issue was in all cases the deciding detriments
In order to properly serve Thieman and other 1i
develop the full potential of this area, we mu.,
. S'ncerely,
James P. Black.
Executive Director
Rutherford County Economic Development
Chairman
Board ofDiirec
Jnn H. Bishop
County Commissi
Ytce Chairman
G. Robert Luckadoo, C
Max Lehner
I Franklin coo
Secretary
Charles Hill
Robert W. Morgan
Amy knkins
Moecudve Director
I--.- n ns. e.
- David Odom
)RD COUNTY
OPMENT COMMISSION
Road, Suite 100
ton, NC' 28139
f ax(828)287-1231
7n
JO sq.' manufacturing plant on Webb Road in
plant. Our office took an active role in
clients as follows:
.r, 1996... 250 potential employees. Due
ern with the sub surface system. The company
'... 300 potential employees. Rutherford
ilroad and funding from NC DOT. NC House of
istrial railspur. An offer. to purchase was
permitting/completion of a waste treatment
building in June 1998 to employ 40 -r 50
ive negotiated with Thieman to locate on their
t in the vacant building. The waste. treatment
factorwhich:killed interest.
Justrial plants in the Ellenboro area, as well as
have an adequate waste treatment facility.
mission
AddroryBoard
Joey Allen Charles A Cobb
r=othy Gordon R. Bruce Hoyle
Nathan Odom Thomas M. Robbins
]ads A. Wofford

RUTHERFORD-POLK-McDOWELL
DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
hk;oow 11
Rutherford
Leonard L Wood, MS, MPH
Pak District Health Director
March 18, 1998
Jim Black
Economic Development Director
622 Airport Road, Suite 100
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
Dear Jim:
At 'your request please let me clarify the health department's
position on the existing septic tank system at the -previous All
American facility on Race Path Church Road in Ellenboro, North
Carolina. This system was failing prior to the abandonment by All
American Homes at their daily water usage of 1700 gallon/day. Keith
Webb with McGill and Associates in Asheville designed!a repair for
the system to improve'distribution ,by replacing the old dosing
syphons with an approved pump tank -and pump. This would insure that
,all drainfield trenches are getting . a .share of. the waste effluent.
With corrections done according- to .the.. design. by -'Mr. Webb our
position was to -permit the repaired' on -site system for 750-1000
gallons/day, or. 30-40 employees at 25 GPD/employee, with no
.industrial process waste. It is impossible to effectively evaluate'
this existing system,. -even in a repaired state, and its future
performance. A system this old develops a biological mat tending to
clog the system. There is an area to pump to should the existing,
repaired system expire. I have a copy of the repair design I will be.
glad 'to share with anyone of .need..l
Best regards,.
Fred. Matthews
Environmental Health Supervisor
., FM/pJm
Rutherford County Health Department
203 Callahan-Koon Road
Spindale, NC 28160
704-287-6100-Health Dept
704-287-6101'-Administration
704-287-6059-HD FAX.
7nd_99k7_Rn9R_Hmmn Haalth
Polk County Health Department
212 Walker Street
Columbus, NC 28722
704-894-8271-Health Dept
704-894-8678-HD FAX
704-894-5395-Home Health
704-894.2055-HFI FAX
McGILL ASSOC." FILE COPY
REGENED
r.uG 13 1998
Projocr
File #
McDowell Health Department
140 Spaulding Road
Marion, NC 28752
704-652-6811-Health Dect
704-652-9376-HD FAX
704-659-6901-Home Health
704-659-6401-HH FAX

__NUK"lj-1l;AxuLi.-4^Lir ru......:,................---------.------ --
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT/ WATER QUALITY SECTION
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT' TO DISCHARGE - SHORT FORM D
TO BE FILED ONLY BY DISCHARGES OF 100% DOMESTIC WASTE (< 1 MGD FLOW).
Current North Carolina NPDES No.
(if known)
1. Mailing address of applicant:
Please print or type.
Facility Name Former All American Homes Faci 1 i t
Owner Name Rutherford County
Street Address -6&1—North Main Street
City Rutherfordton
State North Caroli6a -
ZIP Code, 28139
Telephone No. 287-6060
2. Location.of facility producing discharge: t
Name (If different from above) Same as *Above
Facility Contact Person John Lewis. 'County Manager _ .
Street -Address or State Road 531 Webb Road
Cify E1lenboro.
y
COunty - Rutherford
Telephone No.'_ Nina
3. This NPDES Permit Application applies to which of the following (please indicate flow);
Expansion/Modification * Existing .Unpermitted Discharge.:,,
New
. Renewal Facility
* Please provide. a description of the expansion/modification:
4. Please provide a description of the existing treatment.facilities, if applicable:
Existing on -site -system has failed and can not be used to allow full•
employment at,.facility. See attached information.
a

. y-
5. Please indicate the source of wastewater from the description of facilities listed (check where
applicable):
Source owastewater
Industrial
Commercial
Residential
School
Other
X Number of Employees
Number of Employees
Number of Homes
Number of Students/Staff
• Please describe source of wastewater:
Former manufacturing facility. Waste treatment will allow facility to be re -opened.
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipes/wastewater outfalls (if applicable):
One (1)
7. Name of receiving water or waters: (Please provide a'map showing the exact location of discharge)
Hills,Creek
I certify .that I am familiar_ withthe information contained in the application and:_
that to the best of my knowledge anbelie` such information is true, complete, and
accurate..
Sign*re of Applicant' i
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6(b)(Vprovides that: Any person who knowingly makes any
false'statement representation, or certification, in any application, record, report, plan, or other
document files or required to be maintained under Article 21' or regulations of the Environmental
Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained
under Article 21 'or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission implementing that
''Article,' shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by imprisonment
not to exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more
-than $10,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both for a similar offense.)

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes, General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
1410
D E N R
June 9, 1998 D
JUN 1 z
1998 � i
Subject: NPDES Permit Request
Permit No. NCO086312
Former'Al1=Americai�Hofnes
Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
The Division's regional office has prepared a staff report on the above facility.
Additional information is needed prior to continued review.
• The question of why 300 employees are required is still unanswered. There were
125 people employed at the former All American Homes facility; the facility was to
employ between 300 and 350 employees only after a 235% expansion of the building.
Are negotiations for the sale of the property based on 300 employees? . If so, a
statement stating this should be submitted from the company.
• Information from the Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department
reducing the treatable volume from 3000 gpd to 750 gpd was not submitted. There is
an improvement permit listing a design waste flow of 750 gpd. Please submit
documentation reducing the treatable volume, why the system cannot be restored, and a
cost estimate of restoring the system.
• In alternative 3A, why does the LTAR not apply to the existing system? If it did,
this would provide flow for 220 employees.
• In alternative 5A, what is the calculation used to determine that 2250 linear feet of
dripper line is required? Is there enough land available for 1125 linear feet (0.6
gpd/ft2)?
• In alternative 8, is there documentation that boring under the railroad will be
allowed?
• The soil report states that the fill material is old enough to act like soil and that a
conservative application rate of 0.35 gal/ft2/day is applicable. This would require
21,430 ft2 plus setbacks. Only one acre, 43,560 ft2, was reviewed in the soil scientist
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

report. Is this the only land available? The report was written with the intent to keep
the flow below 3000 gpd. If there is not enough available land for 7500 gpd, please
submit a statement from the soil scientist to this effect.
• Is the property referred to in alternative 3 (page 12) the only property available for
purchase? If so, please submit additional documentation to this effect.
It seems that if the soil scientist report was amended to consider increased flow on
the fill area, that alternative 5, drip irrigation, would be the most economical option. If you
have any questions, I can be contacted at [phone], extension 518.
Sincerely,
Mary L. Cabe
cc: Asheville Regional -Of cie /-Water ality=S_ eecction
NPDES Unit
Mr. Dana Bolden, E.I.T.
McGill Associates
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
0
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Mary L. Cabe
DATE: May 26, 1998
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
PERMIT NUMBER NCO086312
PART-!- - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: �11_Amer_ican_Homes1`
Mailing: P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
2. Date of Investigation: May 14, 1998
3. Report Prepared'By: Roger IC. Edwards
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: I contacted no one on the
date of the site visit.
S. Directions to Site: Hwy 74 to Ellenboro exit; turn left travel
approximately .75 miles; turn right on' Webb Road travel
approximately 1.0 mile former All American Homes located on the
left.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 350 18' 12" Longitude: 810 45' 53"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. ' U.S.G.S. Quad Name Forest City, NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
_ Yes _X_ No If No, explain: this is not clear in the
application. We need some documentation as to the availability of land
for a non- ischarging system..
Page 1

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): above 100 year
flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: 500 ,yards
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Hill Creek
a. Classification: WS-IV
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Broad 030802
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
uses: agriculture, wildlife habitat
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted 0.0075 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? 750 gpd septic tank nitrification lines.
The volume of flow was reduced form 3000 gpd to 750 by the
local health departmept.
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity 750 gpd
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct 'issued in the previous two years:
N/A
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: See above.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: Two sand filters each capable of treating 7500 gpd.
Twenty-five percent of the flow flows to chlorine contact tank
remaining flow returns to the pump tank. The chlorinated
effluent flows through a de -chlorinator and discharges to Hill
Creek.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Minimal, restroom
waste.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
in development approved
should be required not needed
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ Permit
Page 2

Number
Residuals Contractor
Telephone Number
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP PFRP OTHER
C. Landfill:
d. other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify): Septic hauler
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet):
Grade I
4. SIC Codes (s) :
Primary 4952 Secondary
Main Treatment Unit Code:
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or
are any public monies involved. (municipals only)? N/A
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
ammonia nitrogen twice per month. Total nitrogen and total
phosphorus quarterly.
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please indicate)
N/A
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated -all of
the non -discharge options available. Please provide regional
perspective for each option evaluated.
Spray Irrigation: Not certain that property is not available.
Connection to Regional Sewer System: Long term this is best choice.
Subsurface:,Not certain that property is not available.
Other disposal options:
5. Other Special Items:
Page 3

PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This application package has unanswered questions as to the proposed
wastewater disposal methods recommended. Following are the questions I
pose:
1) Why 300 employees? Are negations for the sell of this facility
hinged on 300 employees? If so, we need a statement from the Company to
that fact. This was address in the letter to Mr. Sayers dated January
12, 1998. The letter for Rutherford County Economic Development
Commission states they are working with clients to purchase this
facility. The employee projections of the clients are 175 to 250.
2) Is the property referred to on Page 12 (alternative 3) the only
property available for purchase? If so, we need more than a statement
from the engineer that all dealings were verbal.
When these questions are answered we can support a discharge to Hill
Creek.
Sign ture of Report Preparer
;Wate?rQuali y Regional Supervisor
Date
Page 4

�i}I�'��. y H (( .,...� ` �� o •(moo°• I ° (\ , L\�• ��zY't„ t \
0 'C's+^ ,..n O'zF11 � II A �. I -, .� � \( .. :•si/�'1
lz
\{ \� x°. -. �d •� ` II � 1\\ •^'' •q ��: t C M ����`�\ _�.:. j �y'a vt `O I � ST � o•\ •© �+�
"' 0•`1 Qom, t% - o �I �.�' ,r .r�� O � \�\� �.1.:l it ^�_ L
1/ i>-`' y ° fl 1 .-.t .4: _,� �a "t- '� 1 �� VII / j��/ J �-J -- �(� F`� �! �•'
1,1231.
900
/ � "... - -' ° -= � � � - .., Liar~., �w ,g ..\ \ J ��. ' ! \ � ./q! ��� •.� `'1�. _ l � .
_- 1P' � •ra °�\9��t� // ° /may ��r-°� �
� � �4 � Y / �. •/� .�I 'I - �� S�c \4 aq�' ,�_ � ~�\ "Y� t.• v�'�S \i a: ri
%-' yr y - I•.-, •-,��!�\ 4 t �ac. '., �� � 1/ ° �� .! e? :{- •' �- � ..�
Gbh C r'ti��JI- �` ' - �� .. \ - +_�._.:.: - •'' ,@ y�
. `' :ram. �� I ' � � 4 � l�' I � l . ��/_ i ��1^ �/, It � 1 •

RATING SCALE FOR CLASSIFICATION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
Name of Facility:
Owner or Contact Person: 4rl -r C&EWca2 to -
Mailing Address: 13�x 9-7%�u �`icrt%/�tiy z8 /39
County: ck't'!i aa,rzcl Telephone: fS? �' 2y5-1�1c7
Present Classification: New Facility Existing Facility
NPDES Per. No. NC003i7_ Nondisc. Per. No.WQ Health Dept.Per No.
Rated by: c-.ti4 C• Telephone: Sr2$-,Z.5-/-6ZG`Se Date:
Reviewed bye: Health Dept. Telephone:
Regional Office Telephone:
Central Office Telephone:
ORC: Grade: Telephone:
Check Classification(s): Subsurface Spray Irrigation Land Ap lication
Wastewater Classification: (Circle One) it III IV Total Points:
-------------------------------------------------------------
If�PLA►tirT PROCESSES AND REI ATED CONTROL EQUIPMENT WHK>i ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION CALL%AALL NOT BE
CONSIDERED WASTE TREATMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLASSIFICATION ALSO SEPTIC TANK SYSTEMS CONSISTING ONLY OF SEPTIC TANK
AND GRAVITY NrrRIFIC"TION LINES ARE EXEMPT FROM CLASSIFICATION
SUBSURFACE CLASSIFICATION
(check all units that apply)
1. septic tanks
2. pump tanks
3. siphon or pump -dosing systems
4. sand filters
5. grease trapfinterceptor
6. oillwateir separators
7. gravity subsurface treatment and disposal:
8. pressure subsurface treatment and disposal:
SPRAY IRRIGATION CLASSIFICATION
(check all units that apply)
1.
preliminary treatment (definition no. 32 )
2.
lagoons
3.
septic tanks
4.
pump tanks
5.
pumps
6.
sand filters
7.
grease trap/interceptor
8,
oil/water separators
9.
disinfection
10.
chemical addition for nutrient/algae control
11.
spray irrigation of wastewater
In addition to the above classifications, pretreatment of wastewater In excess of these components shell
be rated using the point rating system and will require an operator with an appropriate dual certification.
LAND APPLICATION/RESIDUALS CLASSIFICATION (Applies only to permit holder)
1. Land application of biosolids, residuals or contaminated soils on a designated site.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY CLASSIFICATION
The following systems shall be assigned a Class I classification, unless the flow is of a significant quantity or the technology is unusually
complex, to require consideration by the Commission on a case -by -case basis: (Check 9 Appropriate)
1. iUwater Separator Systems consisting only of physical separation, pumps and disposal;
2. ✓ Septic Tank/Sand Filter Systems consisting only ofseptic tanks, dosing apparatus, pumps,sand filters, disinfection
and direct discharge;
3. Lagoon Systems consisting only of preliminary treatment, lagoons, pumps, disinfection, necessary chemical treatment for
algae or nutrient control, and direct discharge;
4. Closed -loop Recycle Systems;
5. Groundwater Remediation Systems consisting only of oil/water separators, pumps, air -stripping, carbon adsorption, disinfection
and disposal;
6. Aquacufture operations with discharge to surface waters;
7. Water Plant sludge handling and back -wash water treatment;.
8. Seafood processing consisting of screening and disposal.
9. Single-family discharging systems, with the exception of Aerobic Treatment Units, will be classified H permitted after July 1,
1993 or it upon inspection by the Division, it is found that the system is not being adequately operated or maintained. Such
systems will be notified of the classification or reclassification by the Commission, in writing.

The following scale is used for rating wastewater treatment facilities: (circle appropriate points)
REM POINTS
(1) Industrial Pretreatment Units or Industrial Pretreatment Program (see definition No. 33)...................................................4 .
(2) DESIGN FLOW OF PLANT IN gpd [rot applicable to non -contaminated cooling waters, sludge handling facilities for
water purification plants, totally closed cycle systems(see definition No. 11). and facilities consisting only of hem
(4)(d) or
Items (4)(d) and (11)(d)]
0 - 20,000................................................................................................................................................1
20,001 - 50,000......................................................................................................................................2
50,001 - 100.000.....................................................................................................................................3
100,001 - 250,000...................................................................................................................................4
250,001- 500,000..................................................................................................................................5
500,001 - 1,000.000................................................................................................................................8
1.000.001 - 2.000,000...........................................................................................................................10
2,000.001 (and up) rate 1 point additional for each 200,000 gpd capacity up to a maximum of .................30
Design Flow (gpd)
(3) PRELIMINARY
UNITS/PROCESSES (see definition No.32)
(a)
Bar Screens...............................................................................................................................................1
or
(b)
Mechanical Screens, Static Screens or Comminuting Devices..........................................................................2
(c)
Grit Removal..............................................................................................................................................1
or
(d)
Mechanical or Aerated Grit Removal.............................................................................................................2
(0)
Flow Measuring Device................................................................................................................................1
or
(f )
Instrumented Flow Measurement................................................................................................................2
(g)
Preaeration...............................................................................................................................................2
(h)
Influent Flow Equalization..........................................................................................................................2
(i)
Grease or Oil Separators - Gravity.................................................................................................................2
Mechanical................................................................................................................................................3
DissolvedAir Flotation................................................................................................................................8
(1)
Prechlorinallon..........................................................................................................................................5
(4)' PRIMARYTRFATMENTIJVRS/PROCESSES
(a)
Septic Tank (see definition No. 43).............................:..............................................................................2
(b)
Imhoff Tank..............................................................................................................................................5
(c)
Primary Clarifiers.........................................................................................................................................5
(d)
Settling Ponds or Settling Tanks for Inorganic Non -toxic Materials (sludge handling facilities for water
purification plants, sand, gravel, stone, and other mining operations except recreational activities such as gem
orgold mining)........................................................................................................................................2
(5) SECONDARYTREATMENTUNITWROCESSES
(a)
Carbonaceous Stage
(1) Aeritlon-High Purity Oxygen System...............................................................................20
DiffusedAir System.......................................................................................................10
Mechanical Air System (fixed, floating or rotor)..................................................................e
SeparateSludge Reaeration.............................................................................................3
(li) Trickling Filter
HighRate.......................................................................................................................7
StandardRate...............................................................................................................5
PackedTower................................................................................................................5
fill) Biological Aerated Flier or Aerated Biological Filter............................................................1 0
(iv) Aerated Lagoons..........................................................................................................10
(v) Rotating Biological Contactors.......:..............................................................................10
(vi) Sand Filters -intermittent biological..................................................................................2
Recirculatingbiological....................................................................................................3
(vil) Stabilization Lagoons ... :.................................................................................................
(vill) Clarifier..........................................................................................................................5
(ix) Single stage system for combined carbonaceous removal of BOD and nitrogenous removal by
nitrification (see definition No. 12)(Points for this item have to be in addition to hems
(5)(a)(1) through (5)(a)(viii),
utilizing the extended aeration process (see definition No.3a)..........................................2
ut)lizing other than the extended aeration process............................................................8
(x) Nutrient additions to enhance BOD removal......................................................................5
(xi) Biological Culture ('Super Bugs')addhion........................................................................5
(b)
Nitrogenous Stage
(I) Aeration - High Purity Oxygen System.............................................................................20
DiffusedAir System.......................................................................................................1 0
Mechanical Air System (fixed, floating or rotor).................I...............................................8
SeparateSludge Reaeration.............................................................................................3
(11) Trickling Filter -High Rate...................................................................................................7
StandardRate...............................................................................................................5
PackedTower................................................................................................................5
(ill) Biological Aerated Filter or Aerated Biological Fiher.............................................................10
(IV) Rotating Biological Contactors ......................................................................................10
(v) Sand Filter - Intermittent biological...................................................................................2
Recirculatingbiological....................................................................................................3
(vi) Clarifisr..........................................................................................................................5
(6) TERTiARYORADVANCEDTREATMB4TLNnWROCESSES
(a)
Activated Carbon Beds -
withoutcarbon regeneration...................................................................................................5
withcarbon regeneration.......................................................................................................15
(b)
Powdered or Granular Activated Carbon Feed -
withoutcarbon regeneration.................................................................................................5
withcarbon regeneration.....................................................................................................15
(c)
Air stripping.............................................................................................................................................5
(d)
Denitrfflcatbn Process..............................................................................................................................10
(e)
Electrodialysis............................................................................................................................................5
(f)
Foam Separation.......................................................................................................................................5
(g)
Ion Exchange............................................................................................................................................5
(h)
Land Application of Treated Effluent (see definition No. 22b) (not applicable for sand, gravel, stone
and other similar mining operations) by high rate infiltration..........................................................................4
(1)
Mlcroscreens.............................................................................................................................................5
(1)
Phosphorous Removal by Biological Processes (See definition No. 26)........................................................20
(k)
Polishing Ponds - without aeration ................ ............................................................................................
withaeration...:.............................................................................................................5

•
(1)
Post Aeration - cascade..............................................................................................................................0
diffusedor mechanical........................................................................................................2
(m)
Reverse Osmosis.........................................................................................................................................5
(n)
Sand or Mixed -Media Filters - low rate..........................................................................................................2
highrate......................................................................5
(o)
Treatment processes for removal o1 metal or cyanide...................................................................................15
(p)
treatment processes for removal of toxic materials other than metal or cyanide..............................................1 5
(7)
SUIDGETREATMENi-
(a)
Sludge Digestion Tank - Heated (anaerobic)...............................................................................................10
Aerobic..............................................................................................................................................5
Unheated(anaerobic)................................................................................................................................3
(b)
Sludge Stabilization (chemical or thermal)....................................................................................................5
(c)
Sludge Drying Beds - Gravity......................................................................................................................2
VacuumAssisted......................................................................................................................................5
(d)
Sludge Elutdatlon.....................................................................................................................................5
(a)
Sludge Conditioner (chemical or thermal).....................................................................................................5
(f)
Sludge Thickener (gravity).........................................................................................................................5
(g)
Dissolved Air Flotation Unit [not applicable to a unit rated as(3)(i)].............................................................8
(h)
Sludge Gas Utilization (including gas storage).............................................................................................2
(1)
Sludge Holding Tank - Aerated...................................................................................................................5
Non-aerated.............................................................................................................................................2
(j)
Sludge Incinerator (not Including activated carbon regeneration)................................................................10
(k)
Vacuum Filter, Centrifuge, or Filter Press or other similar dewatering devices...................................................10
(8)
RESIDUALS UTILIZATIOWDISPOSAL (including incinerated ash)
(a)
Lagoons..................................................................................................................................................2
(b)
Land Application (surface and subsurface) (see definition 22a)
by contracting to a land application operator or landfill operator who holds the land application permit
orlandfill permit........................................................................................................................................2
(c)
Dedicated Landfill(burlal) by the permittee of the wastewater treatment facility...............................................5
(9)
DIS FECr1CN
(a)
Chlorination..............................................................................................................................................5
(b)
Dechlorination..........................................................................................................................................5
(c)
Ozone......................................................................................................................................................5
(d)
Radiation.................................................................................................................................................5
(10)
CHEMICAL ADDITION SYSTEM(S) ( see definition No. 9) [not applicable to chemical additions rated as item (3)(1),
(5)(a)(xi),
(6)(a), (6)(b), (7)(b), (7)(e). (9a), (9)(b) or (9)(c) 5 points each:
List....................................................................................................................................5
.................................................................................................................................. 5
...................................................................................................................................5
........................................................................................................................5
(1 1)
MISCELLANEOUS UNrrs(PR)CEsSEs
(a)
Holding Ponds, Holding Tanks or Settling Ponds for Organic or Toxic Materials Including wastes from mining
operations containing nitrogen or phosphorus compounds in amounts significantly greater than is common
fordomestic wastewater............................................................................................................................4
(b)
Effluent Flow Equalization (fat applicable to storage basins which ale inherent In land application systems).....2
(c)
Stage Discharge (not applicable to storage basins Inherent in land application systems)..................................5
(d)
Pumps.....................................................................................................................................................3
(a)
Stand -By Power Supply.............v.............................................................................................................3
(f)
Thermal Pollution Contmi Device................................................................................................................3
TOTALPOINTS..........................................................................
CLASSIFICATION
ClassI...........................................................................................................5-25 Points
Class11.........................................................................................................26-50 Points
classIII ........................................................................................................51-65 Points
-----------------------------------------------------------
ClassN.................................... :.................................................................. 66-Up Points
Facilities having a rating of one through four points, Inclusive, do not require a certified operator.
Facilities having an activated sludge process will be assigned a minimum classification of Class II.
Facilities having treatment processes for the removal of metal or cyanide will be assigned a minimum classification of Class 11.
Faclhies having treatment processes for the biological removal of phosphorus will be assigned a minimum classification of Class III.
.0004 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply throughout this Subchapter.
(1) Activated Carbon Beds. A physical/chemical method for reducing soluble organic material from wastewater effluent; The column -type beds used in this
method will have a flow rate varying from two to eight gallons per minute per square foot and may be either upflow or downffow carbon beds. Carbon may or
may not be regenerated on the wastewater treatment plant site;
(2) Aerated Lagoons. A basin in which all solids are maintained In suspension and by which biological oxidation or organic matter is reduced through artificially
accelerated transfer of oxygen on a flow -through basis;
(3) Aeration. A process of bringing about Intimate contact between air or high purity oxygen In a liquid by spraying, agitation or diffuslon;(3a) Extended
Aeration. An activated sludge process, utilizing a minimum hydraulic detention time of 18 hours.
(4) Agriculturally managed site. Any she on which a crop is produced, managed, and harvested (Crop includes grasses, grains, tress, etc.);
(5) Air Stripping. A process by which the ammonium Ion is first convened to dissolved ammonia (pH adjustment) with the ammonia then released to the
atmosphere by physical means; or other similar processes which remove petroleum products such as benzene, toluene, and xylene;
(6) Carbon Regeneration. The regeneration of exhausted carbon by the use of a furnace to provide extremely high temperatures which volatilize and oxidize the
absorbed impurities;
(7) Carbonaceous Stage. A stage of wastewater treatment designed to achieve "secondary* effluent limits;
(8) Centrifuge. A mechanical device in which centrifugal force is used to separate solids from liquids or to separate liquids of different densitias;
(9) Chemical Addition Systems- The addition of chemicals) to wastewater at an application point for purposes of Improving solids removal, pH adjustment,
alkalinity control, etc.; the capability to experiment with different chemicals and different application points to achieve a specific result will be considered one
system; the capability to add chemical(s) to dual units will be rated as one system; capability to add a chemical at a different application points for different
purposes will result In the systems being rated as separate systems;
(10) Chemical Sludge Conditioning. The addition of a chemical compound such as lime, ferric chloride, or a polymer to wet sludge to coalesce the mass prior to
its application to a dewaterIng device;
(11) Closed Cycle Systems. Use of holding ponds or holding tanks for containment of wastewater containing Inorganic, non -toxic materials from sand, gravel,
crushed stone or other similar operations. Such systems shall carry a maximum of two points regardless of pumping facilities or any other appurtenances;
(12) Combined Removal of Carbonaceous BOD and Nitrogenous Removal by Nitrification- A single stage system required to achieve permit effluent limits on BOD
and ammonia nitrogen within the same biological reactor,
(13) Dechiorinatlom The partial or complete reduction of residual chlorine in a liquid by any chemical or physical process;
(14) Denhrtfication Process. The conversion of nitrate -nitrogen to nitrogen gas;

(15) Electrodialysls. Process for removing Ionized salts from water through the use of Ion -selective Ion -exchange membranes;
(16) Filter Press. A process operated mechanically for partially dewatering sludge;
(17) Foam Separation. The planned frothing of wastewater or wastewater effluent as a means of removing excessive amounts of detergent materials through
the introduction of air in the form of line bubbles; also called loam fractionation;
(18) Grit Removal. The process of removing grit and other heavy mineral matter from wastewater;
(19) Imhoff Tank. A deep two story wastewater tank consisting of an upper sedimentation chamber and a lower sludge digestion chamber.
(20) Instrumented Flow Measurement. A device which Indicates and records rate of flow;
(21) Ion Exchange. A chemical process in which Ions from two different molecules are exchanged;
(22) Land application:
(a) Sludge Disposal. A final sludge disposal method by which wet sludge may be applied to land either by spraying on the surface or by subsurface injection
(i.e., chisel plow); [not applicable for types of sludge described In (11) of this Rule];
(b) Treated Effluent. The process of spraying treated wastewater onto a land area or other methods of application of wastewater onto a land area as a
means of final disposal or treatment;
(23) Microscreen. A low speed, continuously back -washed, rotating drum filter operating under gravity conditions as a polishing method for removing
suspended solids from effluent;
(24) Nitrification Process. The biochemical conversion of unoxidized nitrogen (ammonia and organic nitrogen) to oxidized nitrogen (usually nitrate);
(25) Nitrogenous Stage. A separate stage of wastewater treatment designed for the specific purpose of converting ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen;
(26) Phosphate Removal, Biological. The removal of phosphorus from wastewater by an oxic/anoxic process designed to enhance luxury uptake of phosphorus
by the microorganisms;
(27) Polishing Pond. A holding pond following secondary treatment with sufficient detention time to allow settling of finely suspended solids;
(28) Post Aeration. Aeration following conventional secondary treatment units to Increase effluent D.O. or for any other purpose;
(29) Post Aeration. (Cascade) A polishing method by which dissolved oxygen is added to the effluent by a nonmechanical, gravity means of flowing down a
series of steps or weirs; The flow occurring across the steps or weirs moves in a fairly thin layer and the operation of the cascade requires no operator
adjustment; thus, zero points are assigned even though this Is an essential step to meeting the limits of the discharge permit-
(30) Powdered to Granular Activated Carbon Feed. A biophysical carbon process that utilizes biological activity and organic absorption by using powdered or
granular activated carbon; Virgin or regenerated carbon is feed controlled into the system;
(31) Preaeration. A tank constructed to provide aeration prior to primary treatment;
(32) Preliminary Units. Unit operations in the treatment process, such as screening and comminution, that prepare the liquor for subsequent major operations;
(33) Industrial Pretreatment.
(a) Pre-treatment Unit, Industrial. The conditioning of a waste at its source before discharge, to remove or to neutralize substances Injurious to sewers and
treatment processes or to effect a partial reduction in load on the treatment process which is operated by the same governing body as the wastewater
treatment plantbeing rated'.
b) Pre-treatment Program, Industrial - must be a State or EPA required program to receive points on the rating sheet;
(34) Primary Clarifiers. The first settling tanks through which wastewater is passed in a treatment works for the purpose of removing settleable and suspended
solids and BOD which is associated with the solids;
(35) Pumps. All influent, effluent and in -plant pumps;
(36) Radiation. Disinfection or sterilization process utilizing devices emitting ultraviolet or gamma rays;
(37) Reverse Osmosis. A treatment process in which a heavy contaminated liquid Is pressurized through a membrane forming nearly pure liquid free from
suspended solids;
(38) Rotating Biological Contractors. A fixed biological growth process in which wastewater flows through tanks in which a series of partially submerged circular
surfaces are rotated;
(39) Sand Filters: .
(a) Intermittent Biological. Filtration of effluent following septic tanks, lagoons, or some other treatment process In which further biodecompositlon is
expected to produce desired effluents; Hydraulic loading rates on these filters are computed In gpd/ac and have a resulting low gpm/sf (less than one);
b) Recirculating biological - the same type of sand filter as defined'in Subparagraph (39) (a) of this Rule with the added capability to recycle effluent back
through the sand filter,
(40) Sand or Mixed -Media Filters. A polishing process by which effluent limits are achieved through a further reduction of suspended solids;
(a) low rate--{graviy, hydraulically loaded filter with loading rates In the one to three gpm/sf range;
(b) high rate — a pressure, hydraulically loaded filter with loading rates in the five gpm/sf range- At any rate, the loading rate will exceed three gpmnsf;
(41) Secondary Clarifiers. A tank which follows the biological unit of treatment plant and which has the purpose of removing sludges associated with the
biological treatment units;
(42) Separate Sludge Reaeration. A part of the contact stabilization process where the activated sludge is transferred to a tank and aerated before returning It
to the contact basin;
(43) Septic Tank A single -story settling tank in which settled sludge is in contact with the wastewater flowing through the tank; shall not be applicable for
septic tank systems serving single family residences having capacity of 2,000 gallons or less which discharge to a nitrification field;
(44) Sludge Digestion. The process by which organic or volatile matter and sludge is gasified, liquefied, mineralized or converted into more stable organic matter
through the activity of living organisms, which Includes aerated holding tanks;
(45) Sludge Drying Beds. An area comprising natural or artificial layers of porous materials upon which digested sewage sludge Is dried by drainage and
evaporation;
(46) Sludge �Elutriation. A process of sludge conditioning In which certain constituents are removed by successive washings with fresh water or plant effluent;
(47) Sludge Gas Utilization. The process of using sewage gas for the purpose of heating buildings, driving engiries, etc.;
(48) Sludge Holding Tank (Aerated and Nonaerated). A tank utilized for small wastewater treatment plants not containing a digester In which sludge may be
kept fresh, and supernatant withdrawn prior to a drying method (i.e. sludge drying beds); This may be done. by adding a small amount of air simply to keep the
sludge fresh, but not necessarily an amount that would be required to achieve stabilization of organic matter. A nonaerated tank would simply be used to
decant sludge prior to dewatering and would not allow long periods (several days of detention) without resulting odor problems;
(49) Sludge Incinerators. A furnace designed to bum sludge and to remove all moisture, and combustible materials and reduce the sludge to a sterile ash;
(50) Sludge Stabilization (Chemical or Thermal). A process to make treated sludge less odorous and putrescUe, and to reduce the pathogenic organism
content; This may be done by pH adjustment, chlorine dosing, or by heat treatment;
.(51) Sludge Thickener. A type of sedimentation tank In which the sludge Is permitted to settle and thicken through agitation and gravity;
(52) Stabilization Lagoon. A type of oxidation lagoon in which biological oxidation of organic matter Is effected by natural transfer of oxygen to the water from
air (not a polishing pond);
(53) Stand -By Power Supply. On site or portable electrical generating equipment;
(54) Static Screens. A stationary screen designed to remove solids, including non -biodegradable particulate (floatable solids, suspended solids and BOD
reduction) from municipal and Industrial wastewater treatment systems;
(55) Tertiary Treatment. A. stage of treatment following secondary which is primarily for the purpose of effluent polishing; A settling lagoon or sand or coal filter
might be employed for this purpose;
(56) Thermal Pollution Control Device. A device providing for the transfer of heat from a fluid flowing In tubes to another fluid outside the tubes, or vice versa;
or other means of regulating liquid temperatures;
(57) Thermal Sludge Conditioner. A conditioning process by which heat Is added for a protracted period of time to Improve the dewaterabillty of sludge by the
solubilizing and hydrauilzing of the smaller and more highly hydrated sludge particles;
(58) Toxic Materials. Those wastes or combinations of wastes, including disease -causing agents which after discharge and upon exposure, Ingestion, Inhalation
or assimilation into any organism, either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through food chains, will cause death, disease, behavioral
abnormalities. cancer, genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions (Including malfunctions In reproduction) or physical deformations, in such organisms or their
offspring; Toxic materials Include, by way of Illustration and not limitation: lead, cadmium, chromium, mercury, vanadium, arsenic, zinc, ortho-nhro-chlorobenzene
(ONCB), polychlorinated biphenyis (PCBs) and dichlorodiphenyl ldchloroethane (DDT); and any other materials that have or may hereafter be determined to have
toxic properties;
(59) Trickling Filter. A biological treatment unit consisting of a material such as broken stone or rock over which wastewater is distributed; A high rate trickling
fitter Is one which operated at between 10 and 30 mgd per acre. A low rate trickling filter is one which is designed to operate at one to four mgd per acre;
(60) Trickling Fllter (Packed Tower). A plug flow type of operation In which wastewater flows down through successive layers of media or filtrate material; Organic
material Is removed contlnually by the act" biological fixed growth in each successive layer. This method may produce 'secondary' quality effluent, or may be
adapted to produce a nitrffled effluent;
(61) Vacuum Filter, Centrifuges, or Filter Presses. Devices which are designed to remove excess water from either digested or undigested sludge prior to disposal
or further treatment.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division- of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary.
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes, General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
ZA4
AM
D E N R
September 28, 1998
OCT - 51990 ",_, iz �41
Iti_= i
Subject: NPDES Permit Request Return
All American Homes Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
Return #2015
The Division has performed a review of your second submittal for the proposed former All
American Homes site waste treatment facility. An additional information request letter was sent to you
June 9, 1998. Mary Cabe;: -of my staff, spoke with .Mr. Dana Bolden, McGill Associates, on July 9,
1998 to answer questions pertaining to this request. She called Mr. Bolden on August 25, 1998, to
inform him that the.Division has.still not received the additional information that was requested.
As a result of not receiving the above requested additional information, the proposed project is
being returned with this letter. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact David
Goodrich of my staff at telephone number (919)7733-5083, extension 517.
Sincerely,
Preston Howard, r., P.E.
Attachment
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit
16sheVilFe—;RegionalOff ce /-Mr:_Roger Edwards
Mr. M. Keith Webb, P.E. / McGill Associates
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh,; North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone.[phone] FAX-919=733-0719
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Caroliih._ '
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
October 20, 1997
JOHN W LEWIS
RUTHERFORD CO -ALL AMERICAN HO
601 NORTH MAIN STREET
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139
Subject:
Dear Permittee:
A&4
EDEHNI�
CERTIFICATE OF COMP ETION
PERMIT NO. WQ0012794 ,, '-' " '' ' `
RUTHERFORD CO -ALL AMERICAN HO
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
On September 19, 1996 the Division of Environmental Management issued you the subject permit. One of
the conditions of the -subject permit read as follows:
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 requirements of this permit and the
approved plans and specifications. Mail certification to the Permits and Engineering
Unit, P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh N.C., 27626-0535.
To date, our records show that no certification has been received for the subject permit. If the permitted
facility has been constructed and placed into operation please submit the required certification immediately.
Operation of the treatment system prior to submission of the required certification -is in violation of your
permit and is subject to enforcement action. If you have any questions, please .contact consulting engineer
for this project, MCGELL ASSOCIATES, P.A. at [phone]. If the facility has not been constructed,
please contact the Asheville Regional Office at [phone], so that they can update their records.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Since ely,
C/`� l� `ram �{�'�1✓�/"
VV�.YY'
Kim H. Colson, P.E., Supervisor
D State Engineering Review Group
cc: A, skg vi_R—R—ggionalrOffice
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

, Aa-�-
j1h
I

1 , �/ V�' �j State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
Y and Natural Resources
V Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes, General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
IN1.9;WA
ID E N 1=?L
April 20, 1998
r, 9C9
Subject: NPDES Permit Request
Permit No. NCO086312
Former All American Homes
Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
The Division acknowledges receipt of your NPDES Permit Request and alternatives report,
in triplicate, and check #23456 for $400 received on March 17, 1998 for the above referenced
facility.
Be aware that the Division's regional office, copied below, must provide recommendations
from the Regional Supervisor for this project prior to final action by the Division. You will be
advised of any comments, recommendations, questions, or other information necessary for the
Authorization to Construct review.
I am by copy of this letter, -requesting that the regional office prepare a staff�repor
containing recommendations regarding this construction. This request has been assigned tome for
review. If you have any questions, I can be contacted at [phone], extension 518.
Sincerely,
L. Cabe
`��
cc: Asheville -Regional -Office / Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit
Mr. Dana Bolden, E.I.T.
McGill Associates
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802
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

@McGill
A S S O C I A T E S
March 12, 1997
Mr. Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Permits Group
North Carolina Department of Environment,
and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: Application for NPDES Permit
Former All American Homes Facility
Ellenboro, North Carolina, Rutherford County
Dear Dave:
On behalf of All American Homes of North Carolina, we hereby make application for a permit to discharge.
Please find enclosed three (3) copies of the "NPDES Application for Permit to Discharge - Short Form D" for the
above referenced project, three (3) copies of the Preliminary Engineering Report, and a check in the amount of $400.
The application was originally submitted on November 13, 1997. The application was returned by letter dated
January 12, 1998 (Return #901) and additional information was requested. The Preliminary Engineering Report has
been revised to provide the additional required information. Additionally, the "Local Government Review" form has
been completed by Rutherford County and is included. The "Local Government Review" form was also mailed to the
Town of Ellenboro (copy of certified receipt attached) but no response has been received to date.
All American Homes of North Carolina owns a facility in Ellenboro, North Carolina that until the Fall of
1996 was used to manufacture modular homes. The facility is currently unoccupied and is offered for sale.
However, due to insufficient wastewater treatment capacity available on -site, the sale of this facility has become
impossible. All American Homes is proposing to construct a new wastewater treatment facility with a stream
discharge in order to enable the sale of this facility. Please expedite the processing of this application as any delay
could adversely affect the currently ongoing sales negotiations.
Please advise me if you need any additional information to assist you in your review of this matter. If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
MCGILL ASSOCIATES P.A.
"V� -
DANA J. BOLDEN, E.I.T.
Enclosures
cc: Neil Sayers
Jim Black, Rutherford County EDC
E n g i n e e r i n g P l a n n i n g F i n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

@McGiff
A S S O C I A T E S
November 13, 1997
Mr. Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Permit Group
North Carolina Department of Environment,
and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
POINT SOURCE BRANC: `
RE: Application for Permit to Discharge
Former All American Homes Facility
Ellenboro, North Carolina
Rutherford County
On behalf of All American Homes of North Carolina, we hereby make application for a permit to
discharge. Please find enclosed three (3) copies of the "NPDES Application for Permit to Discharge - Short Form
D" for the above referenced project, three (3) copies of the Preliminary Engineering Report, and a check in the
amount of $400.
All American Homes of North Carolina owns a facility in Ellenboro, North Carolina that until the Fall of
1996 was used to manufacture modular homes. The facility is currently unoccupied and is offered for sale.
However, due to insufficient wastewater treatment capacity available on -site, the sale of this facility has become
impossible. All American Homes is proposing to construct a new wastewater treatment facility with a stream
discharge in order to enable the sale of this facility.
Please advise us if you need any additional information to assist you in your review of this matter. If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
M. KEITH WEBB, P.E.
MKW/ MTD
Enclosures
cc: Neil Sayers w/encl.
/orsillo/temp/dg 13nov7. doc
E n g i n e e r i n g • P l a n n i n g • F i n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

{ State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
V and Natural Resources
Division 'of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Neil ,Sayers
All American Homes; General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Dear Mr. Sayers:
FILE. COPY
January 12,1998 cj 7 Lod o I
Project #
File# z�
Subject NPDES Permit Request Return.
Application Return
All American Homes Manufacturing Facility
Rutherford County
Return #901
The Division has performed a preliminary review of the proposed former All American Homes site waste
treatment facility. Based on this review and due to the increased number of proposed projects and their
impact on receiving waters, the Division requires that more information be provided regarding possible
alternatives to discharge.
As outlined in the Division's Guidance for Evaluation of Wastewater Disposal Alternatives (copy
attached); the analysis of subsurface and irrigation disposal systems must include a preliminary report from a
soil scientist. To adequately evaluate subsurface and irrigation disposal systems, an on -site soils analysis
needs.to be performed and submitted. A soil investigation was referenced, but not submitted. This evaluation
should include:
• a: copy of field notes and boring log information,
• a soils site map overlain on a topographic map,
• description of soil characteristics to include texture, structure, soil wetness and mineralogy,
• characterization of the depth of soil to 48 " or to a restrictive horizon, and
• soil loading rate recommendations.
The on -site soil survey should include enough soil borings to adequately characterize the site.
Additionally, justification should be provided on the number and location of soil borings completed. The
generalized county soil survey maps are not adequate for the .evaluation, but may be used as a reference tool
to plan the field work required for the evaluation.
If however, after further review, soils are found to be inadequate to treat the entire proposed flow of 7,500
gpd, please provide information on what percentage of the flow could be diverted to a subsurface or irrigation
disposal system and the costs associated with partial discharge and nondischarge alternatives. Based on the
limited mapping information provided, it appears that the wastewater needs of the system may be able to be
addressed through construction of several smaller subsurface disposal systems to service the facility.
Please be advised that the Division needs documentation regarding the developers' attempts to purchase
adjacent land for the purpose of wastewater disposal. Also, the loading rates used to calculate the amount of
land necessary should be submitted.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycledt 10% post -consumer paper

Application Return
All American Homes Manufacturing Facility
j Return #901
January 12,1998 .
Page 2
As part of the alternatives analysis, please note that a detailed present value evaluation must be
conducted which includes detailed capital, operation and maintenance costs. Such an analysis must be
performed assuming a 20-year project lifespan and should be performed for all possible alternatives.
For any future submittal, please clarify -the following from this submittal:
• Alternative 3 - It is not clear that there is insufficient land area on the 24.3 acre parcel. There is no
scale, property lines, or North arrow on the site map, and again, the referenced soil investigation was
not submitted. - - - ` '
• Alternative 4 -Please state the elevations in the area and where the plant would • d be located- off site:
• Any documentation about the 'general acceptablility' of the site requiring 30D employees. (All
American Homes had only about 125 employees.) Justification and demonstration of need should be
provided for expected flow volumes including any flow reductions realized through the use of flow
restricting
• Information from the Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department reducing the treatable
volume from 3000 gpd to 750 gpd and why the system cannot be restored.
• A written statement from the local government that the proposed project is consistent with any zoning
or subdivision ordinance in effect, prior to issuance of an NPDES permit. Attached for your inform-
ation and use is a form which should be completed, signed by the local government and submitted
with the application.
Your submittal of stream flow information may assist the Division in expediting this project. This
information may be obtained from the United States Geological Survey. However, positive streamflow does
not guarantee that a discharge will be allowed. In a situation in which multiple disposal options are
practicable, the'Division considers a direct discharge to the-surface'watecs'of the State to be the least
desirable environmental alternative.
If a permit is granted, an Authorization to Construct request will need to be submitted. Enclosed is a
guidance document for this process for your planning purposes. .
As a result of the potential time consumption of the above requests, the proposed project is being returned
with this letter. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Mary Cabe of my staff at
telephone number (919)-733-5083, extension 518.
Sincerely,
ELAA1
�A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Attachments
cc Central Files
NPDES Unit
Asheville Regional Office / Water Quality Section
Mr. M. Keith Webb, P.E. / McGill Associates (with attachments)
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802

f4
to
m
•
tSAM
t
�
L
1 I
�
a
0
n.
ON
N
N
u1 0
Q
V
N co
N to
W
Gl
co
ii
_—
b U z
°mu
CO
ai
o21 ,
A m •► a►
W
W
co
in
c
•
H-10-H
o� °•
c
as i 43 4)
�yHJ
U
`
V
c
-x O ttoo
% a 1
5
a
N
Q
-
N
g
a
A eg 4die°ea ujn4
1
.q
av
Q
> w
�
w m
00
O
r
M m
i
!�!++ q
m
(D v
3 q Q
q m
o
° El
q
❑
E
w o
_ .-
s
N c
U
Z
o
m
as Bulsn jol nog( )jueyl
v
0
m
a
a CD
q
Q
w
m C t
V 0 - `
O r
_
5 vac
1
Co --
❑❑w
O�
m
m
a -
Q •m --
f••
q n
U® m y
C f)
q6.
I
rl
W
U
ul
W
V
co
W
o v z m= a n v �_ ca
°' cc : i w 0 Q
s .
a �,.
4 .
pp
3 OLnaa •-
�.
a o
w 0 m
f $4 O $
a� g z
S
g ¢ E1 r-i N m 0
o c a 3 m .-i .0 v �-•
ri o S RL v° W g •-
o E¢ Q A 4-1 44
m m
r E (dOO o
ga Ja
o 3 �� ° €
Im °
N N a
ua3 �j O O O
K
qs•esJeneJ OW uo pelejduioo -tidal/ Na(113 »� s4

IMMcGM
A S S O C VA T E S
February 6, 1998
Honorable Teresa Wood,_ Mayor
Town of Ellenboro
Post Office Box 456
Ellenboro, North Carolina 28040
Dear Mayor Wood:
FILE COPY
Project # 77Z09!
File # 2.3
RE: NPDES Permit Application .
Former All American Homes Facility
Ellenboro, North Carolina
Rutherford County
As you may be aware, McGill Associates, on behalf All American Homes is submitting
an application for an NPDES discharge permit for a new wastewater treatment facility to serve
the former All American Homes facility.
This process requires that nearby city and county government officials complete a form
concerning jurisdiction and zoning as they relate to the subject property. Please complete the
enclosed form and return it to our office.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MIKE T. DOWD, E.I.T.
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Neil Sayers
/orsillo/97209.10/j 16feb8.oc
Engineering • Planning • Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. - P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 - 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 - FAX [phone]

Focal Government Review
: Requirements for the Issuance of New
Nonmunicipal Domestic wastewater Discharge Permits
Qeneral Statute Overview
On October 1, 1989, an amendment to North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, denoted as 143-215.1
(c) (6), became effective. The amendment allows input from local governments in the issuance of NPDES
Permits for nonmunicipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. The new language requires that the
Commission (Environmental Management Commission) shall not act on an application for a -new
nonmunicipal domestic wastewater discharge facility until it has received a written statement from each
city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the proposed facility
and its appurtenances are to be located . The written statement shall state whether the city or county has
in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance and, if such an ordinance is in effect, whether the proposed
facility is consistent with the ordinance. The Commision shall not approve a permit application for any
facility which a city or county has determined to be inconsistent with its zoning or subdivision ordinance
unless it determines that.the approval of such application has statewide significance and is in the best
Interest of the State.
Instructions to the Applicant
Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for a proposed project, the applicant shall request
that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The applicant must submit a copy
of the draft permit application and shall make a written request for this form to be completed to the clerk
of the city and county by certified mail, return receipt requested. If a (or both) local government(s) fail(s)
to mail the completed form,'as evidenced by the postmark on the certified mail card(s), within 15 days
after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant may submit the application for a discharge
permit. Asevidenceto the Commission that the local government(s) failed to respond within 15 dayg, the
applicant shall submit a copy of the certified mail card along .:with a notarized letter -stating that the local
government(s) failed to respond within the 15 day period.
Instructions to the Local Government
The nearby city or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over any part of the lands on
which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local -government It, 141flEX FORTO l., 0 [t Al 7
(City/Count
Does the city/county have jurisdiction over -an art of the lands on which the proposed facility and its
appurtenances � are to be located? Yes ' No � If no, please sign_ this form, have it notarized, and
return it to.the applicant.
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning o subdivision ordinance? Yes No l__l
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinancf in effect, is the plan for the proposed facility consistent,witlh
the ordinance? Yes [] No ❑/�' `
Date _-3'�F 111 Signature
City Manager/Countyl-ianager)
State of , County of
On this `7 day , 19, pers nnally appea.red before me,
the said name to me known and known to me to be
the person des ibed in and who executed the f6regoing instrument and he (or she) acknowledged that lie
(or she) executed the same and being duly sworn by me, made oath that the statements the foregoing
Instrument at true.
My Commision expires' qla 7 19_U. (Signature of NotaryPubli
Notary PubIiC (O'If 1rial Se?1)

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE hLIM► NAuv," 01'7"-'.-
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DISCHARGE - SHORT FORM D
TO BE FILED ONLY BY DISCHARGES OF 100% DOMES71C WASTE (< 1 MGD FLO{M.
North Carolina NPDES Permit No.
(if known)
1. Mailing address of applicant:
Please print or type
Facility Name All American Homes Manufacturing Facility (Formerly)
Owner Name All American -Homes, Neil Sayers, General _Manager
Street Address post Office Box 929
City Rutherfordton
State
ZIP Code 2 g 13 g
Telephone No. (7 0 4) 2 4 5- 214 0
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Name (If different from above)
Facility Contact Person
Street Address or State Road
City. .
County
Telephone No.
Neil -Sayers
531 Webb Road
Ellenboro
r
( ) Facility is unoccupied
3. This NPDES Permit Application applies to which of the following:
Expansion/Modification Existing Unpermitted Discharge
Renewal New Facility _ x
* Please provide a description of the expansion/modification: ,
4. Please provide a description of the existing treatment facilities,:
N/A
Page 1 of 2
Version 1/95

_Tune of Facility Generatin¢ Wastewater
Industrial x
Commercial
Residential
School
Other
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
Number of Homes
Number of Students/Staff
" Please describe source of wastewater (example: subdivision, mobile home park, etc.):
Former mobile home manufacturing facility.
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipeslwastewater outfalls (if applicable):
N/A
% if separate discharge pipes, describe the sources) of wastewater for each pipe:
N A
S. Name of receiving water or waters: (Please provide a map showing the exact location of discharge)
I certify that I am familiar with .the information contained in the applicatibn and
that to the best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and
accurate. '
Neil Sayers
Printed Name of Person Signing
Vice President General-Mana er
Title
Ale ✓ /?-
Date ApplicS
Signed.
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6(b)(2) provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any
false statement representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other
document files or required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental
Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring device or method required to be operated or maintained
under' Article 21. or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission implementing that
Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $10,000, or by imprisonment
not to exceed six months, or by both. - (18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more
than $10,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both for a similar offense.)
Version 1/95
Page 2 of 2

liWi•
• - - `i � �' 1Q07
F71EI�BORO `
19171920 / / , •.
All
FORMER'. L
AMEg(CA HON
.`. r 19$2
•�: ti•,%';:•., .. � •• �- ..• � � ;_yes
J.
JOB NO.: .97209.01 :' WASTEWATER DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVE umq AnsTy=
OAT- JJLr. '1997 aHVMZA NC
ALL AMERICAN HOMES As
scion 1'-1/2 W� es Q" 2s2-0575
REVISON FAX(y6�232.25"
_ RUTHERFORD COUNTY A S S o t
97209J1
RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLWA ENGINEERING- PLANK
i

PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
FOR
ALL AMERICAN HOMES MANUFACTURING FACILITY
TOWN OF ELLENBORO
RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
M. KEITH WEBB, P. E.
MCCill
ASSOCIATES
Engineering • Planning a Finance
Post Office Box 2259
Asheville, North Carolina 28802
JANUARY 1998

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
II. DESCRIPTION OF NEEDS
III. WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

I. INTRODUCTION,
All American Homes of North Carolina, a subsidiary of Coachman Industries .
Incorporated owns a manufacturing facility south of the current municipal limits of
the Town of Ellenboro in Rutherford County, North Carolina. The facility was the
home for All American Homes until the fall of 1996. The facility contains a
65,000 square. foot manufacturing building, a 5,000 square foot office complex
and a 3,200 square foot shop area. The manufacturing facility is located on a
22.6 acre parcel on Webb Road (a.k.a. Bugger Hollow Road) south of the Town of
Ellenboro.
The manufacturing facility is currently unoccupied and All American Homes desires
to improve the facility to allow for the sale and occupancy of the facility. While
operated by All American Homes, the facility employed approximately 125
employees who manufactured modular homes. All American Homes was
developing plans to expand the current building from the 65,000 square feet to
153,000 square feet. The new facility was to employ between 300 and 350
employees.
During the process of evaluating cost for construction of the facility it was
discovered that the existing wastewater treatment and disposal system for the
facility was not capable of handling the projected wastewater flow associated with
the increased employment. Alternatives were evaluated to allow the facility to
treat the wastewater flow on -site at the existing facility. However due to the lack
of suitable land and pressure to develop the additional manufacturing space All
American Homes made the decision to purchase property at a new location and
construct a new manufacturing facility.
1

With the construction of the new facility All American Homes desires to sell the
existing facility. The lack of adequate wastewater treatment facilities makes the
occupancy of the Ellenboro facility impossible. This study evaluates alternatives
for the treatment and disposal of wastewater from the Ellenboro facility. The
alternatives have been evaluated on an estimated construction cost basis as well
as a present worth basis over a twenty-year operational period. The results of this
evaluation are described in the following sections of this report:
Section II - Description of Needs
Section III - Wastewater Treatment Alternatives
The alternatives that have been evaluated are:
• No Action
• Connection to a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) or a
privately owned treatment works
• Individual subsurface systems
• Community subsurface systems
• Drip Irrigation — surface and subsurface
• Spray Irrigation
• Reuse
• Surface Water Discharge through the NPDES program
Section IV - Conclusions and Recommendations
2

II. DESCRIPTION OF NEEDS
Wastewater generated by the Ellenboro facility has historically been treated and
disposed of via a conventional septic system. The system consists of three (3)
1200 gallon septic tanks in series, one (1) 400 gallon siphon dose tank, and two
(2) drain fields consisting of 10-100 foot nitrification lines each (see Figure 11.1).
There is also an area designated as a repair area for this system which has been
determined to be unsuitable for a septic system due to the fact that it is located
entirely in fill material.
Recently, this system has shown signs of failure prompting the Rutherford -Polk -
McDowell District Health Department to reduce the treatable volume of
wastewater by this system from 3,000 gallons per day (GPD) to 750 GPD.
Additionally, significant improvements would be required before even this minimal
flow rate could be treated.
The required improvements to the existing system include the replacement of the
existing siphon with a pump system, the replacement of the existing concrete
distribution box with two (2) pressure manifolds, the placement of 6" of fill
material on top of the existing drain field, and the installation of a diversion ditch
to divert run-off away from the drain field. Correspondence relating to this issue is
attached in Appendix A. The reduction in treatable flow from 3000 GPD to 750
GPD is due primarily to the fact that the drain field is located in fill material which
is not permissible under current regulations governing sub -surface wastewater
disposal systems. In short, this system would not have been permitted for any
flow had today's regulations been in place when it was designed and built over 10
years ago.
3

NJ
ml
v a

------aLr-
r•4----- --
1
1
1
I
1
1
I*.
90
''
•Mm" Ito -:�?
to - towummoWac

According to State of North Carolina Regulations governing septic systems,
treatment capacity equal to 25 GPD per employee must be provided by any on -site
system serving a facility like that in Ellenboro. Consequently, even if the needed
repairs are made to the existing septic system, a maximum of 30 employees could
occupy the facility at any given time. As a result, the sale of this facility has
become impossible.
In order to successfully market and sell this facility, it is generally accepted that it
should be able to house a minimum of 300 employees. This is the employee level
that All American Homes desired to have at this facility, but was forced to move
to a new site due in large part to the inadequate wastewater system. Therefore,
wastewater treatment capacity equal to 7,500 GPD would need to be available.
Efforts to assist in the sale of the facility by the Rutherford County Economic
Development Commission have proven fruitless due to the inadequate septic
system (see Appendix B). In the following section of this report, the various
alternatives for meeting this flow requirement are analyzed for technical and
economic viability.
5

III. WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
The following is a discussion of the alternatives available to the owners of the
Ellenboro facility. Included in this discussion are estimates of the capital costs of
each alternative as well as a present worth analysis for a 20 year planning horizon.
These figures will be used to compare the various alternatives and to make
recommendations.
ALTERNATIVE 1 - NO ACTION
As the name implies, this alternative consists of no action to be taken by All
American Homes to remedy the wastewater treatment problem at the Ellenboro
facility. As stated in the previous section, the sale of the facility has become
impossible given the state of the existing septic system. Therefore, this is not an
acceptable alternative and will not be discussed further.
C.

ALTERNATIVE 2 — CONNECTION TO A POTW OR PRIVATELY OWNED
TREATMENT WORKS
The nearest treatment works, public or private, to the All American Homes facility
is that of the Town of Forest City. This alternative therefore, consists of installing
a pump station and a sufficient length of sanitary force main to pump the
wastewater generated by the Ellenboro facility to the Town of Forest City's
collection system.
The nearest point in the Town of Forest City's collection system is located on U.S.
74 near its intersection with the Second Broad River (see Figure 111.1). The
distance to this point from the Ellenboro facility is approximately 5 miles.
The pump station would consist of a concrete wet well with two (2) submersible
solids handling pumps, a control panel, a standby generator and a chain link fence.
The force main would be constructed of 2" diameter PVC SDR 21 pipe. The
standby generator would be a diesel -powered generator with an automatic transfer
switch.
The following Table 111.1 provides an estimate of the capital cost associated with
Alternative 2.

All
%
loop
1007
ELLJ34BORO
1919
1917
JOB NO-. 972M.0
" WASTEWATER DISPOSAL. ALTERNA
DATE DULY. 1997 , TiVE
SC&C' 1'-1,12 MILE ALL AMEMAN HOMES
Ftm3ope
BUTFFERRFFOBD COONIY
"�OM COMM MR7M CAR '
oum
I
m
Snm
A
=-Ml
cGl"ll
A S. S 0 C I A T E S
ENGINEERINGePLANNING.FINANCE

TABLE 111.1 - ESTIMATE OF CAPITAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE 2
x
Iti TEM
~Qi'k,Y
UNIT
tNl�TOTh
L�
Mobilization
-----
LS
-----
$11,000
Duplex Pump Station (Complete, incl.wet
-----
LS
-----
$175,000*
well, pumps and controls, generator and
fencing)
2" Diam. PVC Force Main
26,900
LF
$7.50
$201,750
Y.� '�,
Rns T.S,ubtotal�
$387,,750
s� �,
$ 3 8, 800
a�Engmeenngandl`nspection
$50,000
yid
$476/ 550
* Based on recent bid results from similar pump station
The annual 0&M costs for this alternative would consist of the power costs of the
pump station and the maintenance costs of the pump station and the force main.
Table 111.2 provides an estimate of the annual O&M costs for Alternative 2.
TABLE 111.4 - ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL O&M COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE 2
Power Requirements $450.00*
Pump Station Maintenance $200.00
Force Main Maintenance (5mi. @ $411 /mi/yr) * * 1 $2,055.00
* Power costs based on $.08/kw-hr
* * Source: EPA Publication 43019-78-009
9

The 20-year present worth cost of Alternative 2, using a discount rate of 10% is
as follows:
PW = $476,55O + $2,705 x (P/A, 10%, 20 yr.)
PW = $476,550 + $2,705 x 8.514
PW = $499,580.37
10

ALTERNATIVE 3 — INDIVIDUAL SUBSURFACE SYSTEM
This alternative consists of repairing and expanding the existing septic system to
provide treatment capacity equal to 7,500 GPD. Based on soil investigations on
the property occupied by the facility, a maximum of 2000 GPD additional
treatment capacity is available on site (See Appendix C for complete soil report).
This, in addition to the 750 GPD capacity of the, repaired existing system gives a
total treatment capacity of 2,750 GPD, which correlates to 110 employees.
Repairs and upgrade of the existing system would consist of: 1) the installation of
a new pump tank with two submersible pumps and controls to replace the existing
dosing siphon; 2) the replacement of the existing distribution box with two (2)
pressure manifolds; 3) the placement of 6" of fill material on top of the existing
drain fields; 4) the installation of approximately 2,250 linear feet of new
nitrification trench 5) the installation of two (2) pressure manifolds to serve the
two new drain fields (to be fed by the new pumps mentioned above).
As this exact job has already been bid, the cost of these repairs is a known
quantity. The low, bid amount for this job was $82,000 (lump sum bid). Annual
O&M costs for this alternative would. consist of the cost of the power required to
run the pumps, the cost of a certified operator and miscellaneous maintenance on
the pumps. As this system would be classified as a Type IV system as defined by
15A NCAC 18A .196, an operator would only be required to inspect it every 6
months. Assuming the operator spends 1 hour each visit at a cost of $45/hour,
the annual cost of the certified operator is $90. Additionally, the operator would
be required to prepare and submit biannual reports. These reports are assumed to
take 4 hours each for the purpose of this analysis.
Table 111.5 provides an estimate of the annual O&M costs for this alternative.
11

TABLE 111.5 — ESTIMATED ANNUAL O&M COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE 3
Power Requirements
Misc. Pump Maintenance
$100
$200.00
Certified Operator (10 hrs. @ $45/hr) J $450.00
Clean Septic Tanks
Power costs based on $.08/kw-hr
$750.00
The 20-year present worth of Alternative 3 is as follows:
PW = $82,000 + ($1,500 x (P/A, 10%, 20 yrs.))
PW = $82,000 + ($1,500 x 8.514)
PW = $94,771.00
In order to provide treatment capacity for the desired number of employees (300),
additional land would'need to be acquired. All American Homes, before deciding
to move to their new location, explored this option: They investigated purchasing
land directly across the street from the facility (see Figure 111.2). The owner of this
property stated that he would sell a minimum of 20 acres at a cost of $15,000 per
acre for a total cost of $300,000. Unfortunately, all dealings with the adjacent
property owner were verbal and therefore no documentation supporting these
figures is available. It should be noted however, that even if the purchase of this
land were economically feasible, the possibility of any private entity obtaining an
encroachment agreement from the North Carolina Department of Transportation to
install a sewer line under the road would be slight.
12

ALTERNATIVE 3A — INDIVIDUAL SUBSURFACE SYSTEM WITH PRE-TREATMENT
This alternative consists of the items described for Alternative 3 with the addition
of a recirculating sand filter for pre-treatment of the wastewater prior to
subsurface disposal. This addition would allow the long term acceptance rate
(LTAR) for the site to be doubled from 0.3 gpd/ft2 to 0.6 gpd/ft2 (this does not
apply to the existing system) As a result, the proposed drain field discussed
previously could accept 4,000 gpd of wastewater, making the total treatable
volume for the site 4,750 gpd. At 25 gpd/employee, this would allow for190
employees.
The sand filter would be designed using a surface, loading rate of 4 gpd/ft2, making
the required surface area approximately 1,200 ft2. The filter box would be
constructed of concrete and would be installed above grade to eliminate the need
for any. excavation. The filter media would consist of 24 inches of coarse filter
sand (ES 0.8-1.5; UC<2.5) on top of a 6-inch layer of washed stone. Distribution
and collection piping would be PVC.
The following Table 111.3 provides an estimate of the capital cost of this alternative.
14

TABLE 111.3 — ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE 3A
ITEM��sE T
QTY.
4
UNT
U ITSTQ
A.
i' � yx'Ax � Y ' � k 3 "S 9s� F� {-�31�� "� 4 t„" .?'�✓ 'r�.. +��' �Y
Y� ��
,� C �
3
$� '� �,;b' �w
� COOST
v� �i��, �' .
v+t
P
Mobilization
----
LS
------
$3,500
Repair and Upgrade Existing Septic System
----
LS
------
$82,000*
Recirculating Sand Filter
- Concrete
60
CY
$300
$18,000
- Distribution and Collection Piping
----
LS
------
$2,000
- 20 mil HDPE Liner for Cover
1600
SF
$1.00
$1,600
- Sand
90
CY
$ 20
$1,800
- Washed Stone
40
TON
$15
$600
�
�„ �F����
$106,000
z�Subtotal�. X
,�,.
��
...�
ehe
ME F
$10,600°
� �"t�* Y F" nY'✓ P.ti Y w»'r` i' �� $.dio-d»..r ia�^-'s ba�`b.'.
s �� Etigireer�rtg3and Inslecti9n�
.a.
w 3
L �Y5- 4'T' - � tr
$16,000
Total
*Actual low bid amount
The annual operation and maintenance costs for this alternative consist of the
power to run the pumps as well as the cost of a certified operator. The operator
will be required to inspect the system once every month as this is a Type Va
system as defined by 15A NCAC 18A .1961. For the purpose of this analysis it
will be assumed that the operator will spend approximately 1 hour inspecting and
maintaining the system during each visit at a cost of $45/hour. Additionally, the
operator would be required to prepare and submit semi-annual reports. For this
analysis it is assumed that this will add approximately 8 hours of the operators
time to the yearly cost. The following Table 111.4 provides an estimate of the
annual operation and maintenance costs of this alternative.
15

TABLE 111.4 - ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL O&M COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE 3A
Certified Operator (20 hrs. @ $45/hr.) $900.00
Power Requirements - Pumps 1 $125.00*
Misc. Maintenance - Pump Station 1 $200.00
Misc. Maintenance — Sand Filter 1 $200.00
* Power costs based on $.08/kw-hr
The 20-year present worth of this alternative is as follows:
PW = $132,600 + ($1,065 x (P/A, 10%, 20 yrs.))
PW = $132,600 + ($1,065 x 8.514)
PW = $141,667.41
16

ALTERNATIVE 4 — COMMUNITY SUBSURFACE SYSTEM
As this is an existing facility and not part of a planned development, this
alternative is not applicable. The surrounding community is presently served by
individual septic systems and would probably not be inclined to abandon their
suitable, working systems.
17

ALTERNATIVE 5 — DRIP IRRIGATION
Subsurface drip irrigation consists of disposing of septic tank effluent via small
diameter tubing placed at shallow depths. The drip irrigation tubing is typically
spaced at 3 feet on center compared to 9 feet for conventional septic systems.
The system is controlled and operated by a central control unit. Currently, one
manufacturer, Wastewater Systems, Inc., has state approval for a drip irrigation
system. Their system is called the Perc-Rite system@.
This alternative consists of installing a drip irrigation system on the site of the All
American Homes facility. The system would consist of a Perc-RiteO unit (pumps,
controls, valves and accessories), a 5,000 gallon pump tank, drip irrigation tubing
and a building to house the Perc-RiteO unit. Under this alternative, the area
identified by the soil scientist for expansion of the existing system would be used
for the drip irrigation system, while the existing system would be repaired to allow
it to be used as a conventional, pressure dosed septic system.
Using the same application rate stated previously of 0.30 gpd/ft2, and given that
the dripper lines can be spaced at 3 foot intervals, approximately 2,250 linear feet
of dripper line would be required (2000 gpd / 0.30 gpd/ft2 / 3 foot spacing).
Table 111.6 provides a capital cost estimate for this alternative.

TABLE 111.6 — ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE 5
��'R
�« w �TEM�,�
rt 0 �
4t.,- �.wrrk.,,�'z�''`���..�
iY �'
QTY
n
�UNITr
lJN T�
'r. 7
{TOTA1
vz
+�•"` `-p9�sz""x ,t* 2 y�'Ec�,�i x.,.;R,7Aga,iw z,'.0 a^ '��`a rF`':-y-
"
Y'�k`"l
'p-3o- ,4•.,
GtE �d� ,x�
-',.
kt '�, t"+f
�.' rg
0".'k£`..r��""
Mobilization
----
LS
-----
$1,800
Repair Existing Septic System
- Replace distribution box with two (2)
pressure manifolds
2
EA
$2,000
$4,000
- Place 6" of fill on drain field
475
CY
$8
$3,800
- Install diversion ditch
----
LS
------
$500
Pump Tank (5,000 GAL)
1
EA
$7,000
$7,000
Perc-Rite system, installed
----
LS
------
$40,000
Drip irrigation tubing
2,250
LF
$1.50
$3,375
Misc. piping,
----
LS
-----
$2,000
y'$ ix.-�i'r%' '"a...
X,k Subtotal
1
,
`as�"s
$62 475
4 � It
-h.��.Yw.„ ,+ .m �?. _s,... ,�--.x;.w ..��.+°.._�'xv°.F�'`we-.s;zv $�3.�»r.�.
Y
.�.:��-`�:..�fw..r
— ..;.a+.
�
h1°0°lo Construct�onCont�ngency�
$6 300
,.�4. u ar" tf�+ z's, � 'r..' thv� �^'"+y we ,: .�...y'+-x kt ?6i'au.7..,''� s y 4$'
En.gineermg andlnspectwn
-`^y�.�Arffr•��i_. f'a�� 4 '�$F xa!zAt�S
°
$ 9,400
rw
,. -
" Tota(�,
$ 78,17 5
Annual O&M costs associated with this alternative would consist of the power
costs of the pump unit, miscellaneous maintenance on the system, and the cost of
a certified operator. This system would be classified as a Type IV system per
NCAC 15A .1961 and would therefore require an operator to visit and inspect the
system twice a year and prepare and submit biannual reports. As was the case
with Alternative 3, these reports are assumed to require 4 hours each.
Table 111.7 provides an estimate of the annual 0&M costs for this alternative.
W

TABLE 111.7 - ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL O&M COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE 5
Certified Operator (10 hrs. @ $45/hr.) $450.00
Power Requirements - Pumps $125.00 *
Misc. System Maintenance $500.00
*Power costs based on $.081kw-hr
The 20-year present worth of Alternative 5 is determined as follows:
PW = $78,175 + (($1,075 x (P/A, 10%, 20 yrs.))
PW = $78,175 + ($1,075 x 8.514)
PW = $87,327.55
As was the case with Alternative 3, if the entire required flow of 7,500 gpd were
to be treated by this system, additional land would be required.
20

ALTERNATIVE 5A — DRIP IRRIGATION WITH SAND FILTER PRE-TREATMENT
This alternative consists of the same items listed for Alternative 5 with the
addition of a recirculating sand filter for pre-treatment. The addition of a sand
filter would allow the treatable flow to be increased to 4,750 gpd (190
employees).
The sand filter would be constructed the same as previously described. The
addition of a sand filter will require a more sophisticated Perc-Rite unit to handle
the dosing of both the sand filter and the drip field.
Table 111.8 provides an estimate of the capital cost of this alternative.
21

TABLE 111.8 — ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE 5A
.�lITEM L r y
QTYryUNIT'
lr��F'�'s
a f L
��.IJNtTj,
"+F y,
i�. `ib yyy
TOTAyy�;
1�
�#
^�Ta Y �
i.�riF'di+3=i`-1�"�^�
��
Ti3k"tiX,+
.,..r$a5r, m»d�..
kro
Mobilization
----
LS
------
$2,700
Repair Existing Septic System
- Replace distribution box with two (2)
pressure manifolds
2
EA
$2,000
$4,000
- Place 6" of fill on drain field
475
CY
$8
$3,800
- Install diversion ditch
1
LS
------
$500
Pump Tank (5,000 GAL)
1
EA
$7,000
$7,000
Perc-Rite system, installed
----
LS
------
$45,000
Drip irrigation tubing
2,250
LF
$1..50
$3,375
Recirculating Sand Filter, installed
----
LS
------
$24,000
Misc. piping
----
LS
------
$2,000
$92 375
{�a�.r^
�r fr410°Io Construction Corwt�ngenay
�.y
$9,000
ineering andtnspectiori,
��r�.�;
��
$13 900
,
t_
Total
Annual O&M costs for this alternative would be similar to those of Alternative 5.
The only difference being the cost of the certified operator. As this system would
be a Type Va system, the operator would be required to visit and inspect the site
once a month and prepare and submit biannual reports.
Table 111.9 provides an estimate of the annual O&M costs of this alternative.
22

TABLE 111.9 - ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL O&M COSTS FOR ALTERNATIVE 5A
ITEMM4
�`..''L _. ... :�a,.?>�k. :'w,. ��r'." e'�..�a �.:.j t'¢::'�sKa'�.b � �, :�k:..o-ro.. A; i�v.ta j> /'�.3��rd3�s'S �c'.: .+� ��.
i "y
; COST,/rYEARa
��" "h �3:r�aak�v�^"'`F•. � k ,.3
Certified Operator (20 hrs. @ $45/hr.)
$900.00
Power Requirements - Pumps
$125.00*
Misc. System Maintenance
$500.00
* Power costs based on $.08/kw-hr
The 20-year present worth of Alternative 5A is as follows:
PW = $115,275 + (($1,525 + (P/A, 10%, 20 yrs.))
PW = .$115,275 + ($1,525 x 8.514)
PW = $128,258.85
23

ALTERNATIVE 6 — SPRAY IRRIGATION
This alternative consists of the construction of an on -site wastewater treatment
system and the installation of a spray irrigation system for ultimate disposal of the
treated wastewater. The treatment system would consist of a recirculating sand
filter.
Wastewater would be collected in a 5,000 gallon pump tank from where it would
be applied to the recirculating sand filter. Filter effluent would then be spit so that
25% of the flow was collected in a separate irrigation pump tank. This flow
would be chlorinated prior to entry Into the tank via a tablet chlorinator. The
remaining 75% of the flow would be returned to the pump tank for subsequent
dosing of the sand filter.
The spray irrigation system would be comprised of a series of sprinkler heads
connected to a pressurized distribution network of 2-inch pipe and appurtenances.
Additionally a storage pond of adequate capacity to store 30 days of flow would
be required.
Based on an assumed application rate of '/2 " per acre per week, the area required
for the spray irrigation field would be approximately 4 acres for a flow of 7,500
GPD ( [(1004 ft3/day x 7 day/week) / 0.041 ft.] / 43,560 ft2/acre] ). However, the
spray irrigation field can be located no closer than 400 feet from any habitable
residence or place of public assembly under separate ownership and 150 feet from
any property line. As was discussed previously, the only suitable soils on the site
are located between Webb Road and the fence line at the South end of the
property (see Figure 11.1). Given the setbacks stated above, there is clearly
insufficient land on site for this system, for any flow rate.
24

As stated previously, the cost of the property across the street from the facility is
excessively high, making the off -site installation of a spray irrigation system
economically unfeasible.
25

ALTERNATIVE 7 — REUSE
This alternative involves reusing all or a portion of the wastewater generated by
the facility to minimize or eliminate the need for disposal. Current reuse options
include spray irrigation, use of reclaimed water for toilet flushing, process or
cooling water etc., and closed loop or recycle systems. From the discussion of
Alternative 6, it is evident that spray irrigation is not a feasible option.
In order to use reclaimed water, you must first have a source of reclaimed water.
The only option for this facility would be to re -plumb the building to use reclaimed
water for toilet and urinal flushing and provide treatment for this wastewater prior
to putting it back into the system. This would involve re -plumbing the entire
facility, in addition to the installation of a treatment system. This option is
therefore, not economically feasible.
26

ALTERNATIVE 8 — SURFACE WATER DISCHARGE THROUGH THE NPDES
PERMIT SYSTEM
This alternative consists of the installation of a treatment facility on -site with
effluent disposal into nearby Hill Creek. The treatment facility could either be a
sand filter system or a package wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). From
Alternative 3A, the cost of a recirculating sand filter is approximately $24,000.
Given the fact that stream discharges require, at minimum, dual train treatment
processes, this option would require the construction of two (2) sand filters for a
total cost of $48,000. Data provided by a package treatment plant manufacturer
indicates that the cost of treatment plants is approximately $4.60/gallon for
10,0000 gpd plants and $2.83/gallon for 20,000 gpd plants. Therefore, a 15,000
gpd plant would cost approximately $3.72/gallon or $55,800.
The most economical option based on capital cost is the recirculating sand filter.
This option would also require a Grade I operator with weekly visits compared to
the package plant which would require a Grade II operator with 5 visits per week.
Additionally, a package plant would certainly cost more to run due to the power
required by the blowers for the aeration basin. Therefore, a recirculating sand filter
is the most economical option for treatment.
The two (2) sand filters would each be capable of treating 7,500 gpd and would
be constructed as described in Alternative 3A. Filter effluent would be split so
that 25% of the flow is routed to a chlorine contact chamber and the remaining
flow returns to the pump tank. The chlorine contact chamber would consist of a
standard 1,000 gallon two compartment septic tank. Chlorinated effluent would
flow out of the tank via an 8-inch sewer line to which a tablet de -chlorinator would
be attached. De -chlorinated wastewater would then continue to flow by gravity to
the discharge point via an 8-inch ductile iron sewer line. This pipe would have to
27

cross an existing railroad track and would therefore require a horizontal bore of
approximately 100 linear feet.
Table 111.10 provides a capital cost estimate for Alternative 8.
TABLE 111.10 — ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST OF ALTERNATIVE 8
% z'''¢ Y�" ^s.-. 'CS'ix w- r,,,. d �. ` r,
QTY
F E '''
4v.�
"•-�" +t t
iTDT A
� ���Fsl� �t i� �'�� Y�
°ki �* R f �
{6^-�1
1f� i��(�.. Ai Y"�. '9✓}�X �'i6:�s
1.d'�'�.c .�'«r=K+X'%:.Y:"..`: �:l. S.'tr E':..... ✓ z�v`f...#.�'l�i�:'.'.., zx�+�"�.��Qt�f.�a �am&�
#tM`f t-. 1$
Tn1dA'$.. X.� �...s'
i
v��"ary _
a���°'3i.� x�vv§+�r`,
_J _�s
iY�:. s''�a'a4Tf'...Y
Mobilization
---
LS
------
$3,600
Pump Tank (5,000 GAL)
1
EA
$7,000
$7,000
Pumps and Controls
---
LS
------
$6,000
Two (2) Recirculating Sand Filters, installed
---
LS
------
$48,000*
1,000 Gal. Septic Tank (chlorine contact)
1
EA
$1,500
$1,500
Tablet Chlorinator
1
EA
$500
$500
Tablet De -chlorinator
1
EA
$500
$500
8" Diam. D.I. outfall
1000
LF
$45
$45,000
Bore under railroad for outfall
100
LF
$100
$10,000
Misc. Piping
---
LS
------
$2,000
p 9
Subtotalll-WI
yy
t£3 MOVE
$124 100
,
10%Consf�uctionContiri
enc t
$12,400
s
r�
~.
rEnginee i gandspec on �.
$18,600
�� .. .r�T
$155,100
See Figure N.3 for breakdown of cost
Annual O&M costs for this alternative consist of the power required to run the
pumps, the cost of a certified operator and miscellaneous maintenance on the
system. A Grade I treatment facility requires weekly visits by a certified operator.
If it were assumed that each visit takes one hour, and the operator's time is worth
$45/hour, the yearly cost would be $2,340.
28

Table 111.1 1 provides an estimate of the annual 0&M cost of this alternative
_ °��COST/YEAR
s�k
%2�,
�`w '.NJ<,�, `�'�F��+�
� �
3dww3�+»•'a
y-W
x-�
Certified Operator
$2,340.00
Power Requirements - Pumps
$125.00 *
Misc. System Maintenance
$500.00
965 0 ME v8
* Power costs based on $.08/kw-hr
The 20-year present worth of Alternative 8 is determined as follows:
PW = $155,100 + ($2,965 x (P/A, 10%, 20 yrs.))
PW $155,100 + ($2,965 x %514)
PW = $180,344.01
we

IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Ten (10) alternatives were examined for treatment and disposal of wastewater
generated by the All American Homes facility in Ellenboro, North Carolina. The
following table summarizes the results of the cost analyses performed on these
alternatives.
TABLE IV.1 - SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC ANALYSES
� AfIter -ative �� �� 4
A"'A�k-*i�£ �`✓r"dia�' e x�33 49 - .,,� `n 3 rrt%T,„b",Y..'f
'r
;X ,,Xl'£A'K�y 3�i.."$��# �•c'yL.cR&ny^ js �'
.+U•Gu�i.,. .A.' ��kdRre yr ,. �: -Y,� ,1., r,.,s =�� .&.,u�,Sii ,,,� Sz T,-,:-.�., .. ,'k�.-.+at%�� 3:; ��:
,Capi#al
5 i�l'STV..�a�.u�
�x'�Fi.�i' » w, .�. _.r..;R
Ainnual a
£- 4 '".��'�
44'3a�..... i. ,+.
z�. �'`y .t
�Ea�v..��".'tSaL"�vZn-,H,.x,-.,
ZU Yr _
�£ F" q�'�
�re��l�stf'
...utS�..,,. i4:xraRi,�Y$.�
1 — No Action
NF
NF
NF
2 — Connection to a POTW or Privately
$476,550
$2,705
$499,580
Owned Treatment Works
3 — Individual Subsurface System
$82,000
$1,500
$94,771
3A — Individual Subsurface System with
$132,600
$1,065
$141,667
Sand Filter Pre -Treatment
4 — Community Subsurface System
NF
NF
NF
5 — Drip Irrigation
$78,175
$1,075
$ i 7,328
5A — Drip Irrigation with Sand Filter Pre-
$115,276
$1,525
$1 8,259
Treatment
6 — Spray Irrigation
NF
NF
NF
7 — Reuse
NF
NF
NF
8 — Stream Discharge
$155,100
$2,965
$180,344
NF — Not Feasible
From the above Table IVA , Alternative 5 appears to be the most economical
alternative. However, Alternative 5 only offers a treatable flow of 4,750 gpd. As
30

the desired flow rate is 7,500 gpd, this Alternative represents a loss of 2,750 gpd
of treatment capacity and more importantly, the loss of 110 potential employees.
Of the ten alternatives considered, only Alternatives 2 and 8 offer the ability to
staff the facility at the desired level of 300 employees.
To fairly compare the alternatives, one must account for the differences in
capacity, and the corresponding differences in potential employees. One way to
do this is to calculate an adjusted 20-year present worth cost using a multiplication
factor. This factor would be computed by dividing the desired flow rate of 7,500
gpd by the flow rate provided by each alternative. Each 20-year present worth
cost is then multiplied by this factor to give an adjusted present worth. Table IV.2
shows the results of this analysis (Note: those alternatives indicated as NF in Table
IVA are not included in this analysis)
TABLE IV.2 — ADJUSTED 20-YEAR PRESENT WORTH COSTS BASED ON FLOW
ALTERNATIVE
} f
20 YEAR
" PRESENT
WO;fiTH
PROVIDED,
CAPACITY �=
GPD
; , PW
ADUSTMENT
k FACTOR* $ `
ADJUSTED'
PRESENT ;fix.
WORTH
2
$499,580
7500
1.0
$499,580
3
$94,771
2750
2.7
$255,882
3A
$141,667
4750
1.6
$226,667
5
$87,328
2750
2.7
$235,789
5A
$128,259
4750
1.6
$205,214
8
$180,344
7500
1.0
$180,344
* PW Adjustment Factor = desired capacity (7500 gpd) 1 provided capacity
From Table IV.2 it is clear that Alternative 8 is the most economical alternative.
This alternative will provide the facility with sufficient wastewater treatment and
disposal capacity to handle a staff of 300 employees. Therefore, Alternative 8 is
the recommended alternative.
31

RUTHERFORD-POLK-McDOWELL
DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
203 KOONE ROAD
SPINDALE, NC 28160
December 5, 1996
Mr. Mike Dowd
McGill Associates, P.A.
P. 0. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802
Dear Mike:
Please find enclosed the necessary repair permit. to make the
correction to the All American Homes facility septic tank system in
Rutherford County. Repair work may proceed as indicated in your
letter/design dated November 22, 1996.
Best regards.
Fred Matthews
Environmental Health Supervisor.
FM/Pjm
Enclosure
i } C.

- y ►N,.r - ly . . .
tw 4=
Repair APPLICATION # 960895
❑ Addition Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department
., r.
Improvement Permit (No Expiration Date)
(No expiration date, permit subject to reyocation If site plans or Intended use change)
Owner or Legal Agent: NEIL SAYERS d/b/a ALL;" AMERICAN TWunty: Rutherford
Property Address: 531 Webb Road, Ellenboro, NC 28040
Home Phone #: Work Phone #: [phone]
Directions to property -State Road No. and Name:iuT�YtSE
AAZ jk-
Type of water supply: ❑ Private well L! Public or community water system ❑ Spring
Type of Facility; Ming IrLnufa ,•ring Fyi i ty Type of Wastewater System: 7N le 1
Design Waste Flow: C� . G.P.D. L.T,A.R. _Tank Capacity (min.) �,, Y% gallons
No. of Trenches .'fin Trench Length - ADM Ft. - Trench Width 3 Ft Max. Trench Depth in.
Conditions/Comments: rti,A-1) -r— a�=- _
Issued
NOT DRAWN TO SCALE ' 'SITE PLAN WITH SYSTEM DETAILS' 05t-ca
4.
Noe, A2J
1
Specialist
Date:
AUTHORIZATIONFOR WASTEWATER SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION
Construction of the wastewater (VOID AFTER 5 YEARS)
Improvement permit has been designed and can be Installed and operated in compliance with herebyit,. Indicated above Is l euthol l of Chapteed. The �130A of thstewater eGeneralStatutes of e
C. and Rules adopted pursuant to this article. Any alteration of the site or soil conditions, changes to the proposed facility to be served, or submission of
false Information may subject the permit and authorization to suspension or revocation.
Conditions/Comments: —
O
a
m
0
r—
m
cQ
g
D
fQ
0
Issued By: �Date:
Environme tgatth_Speclall'stWTE - OWNERrAGENT PINK - BLDG. INSPECTOR MANILLA- HEALTH DEPT.
LP-513

- TOTAL PAYMENT ADJ. BALANCE
DA
DESCRIPTION FEE CREDITS I-
fMI�r
MEMBER
L<t:� ,V • "<r •
� re
.
►r <Y rr��<• �
• • <►� • • a • • •. "� fr • ''>• i <�. • ".4Tv`�q�ra • •Y (t{e '•p•<r (•?;m'
�►,►
•'�.<mj
• • <► • <) • el'e i'<• • • l) t Lae L •><t L <L • •' m►
< • t • �<raal j
+l < ♦
• jt..V.r�l lam 1a�re : T: •mlri: a Yyµaflr�,♦�•'.r,
•• f ,a►- O • 1•�►f< • •[yam►� • ♦ Iy<�•! • O A_f;�iy,<
rY♦ aiF •VT • "� i • � • • ♦ •a i • • �♦ i • �<i
K
••'•'t"Y'T^
.�.
iYF ♦--y'.y� 11'{`�yr 1YY'frr}^Y•• V�-h"i^ -,>-. Y < L+�1'`
• a► • •Y <1�•�
i•♦j►
• • {• • •}al • r}J• • • a► o <Y•a. s • a►' a •}ar • ,• 6► •
?;<
< ar L • <► • ar erice.fr
�: •iz• •
♦ •
r v ' R UT RFOp i o
a."
o •
".:'POLtf♦MCDONVELi.
► • •h�h;ice• ry.►n•n•A`•
a ♦ • • f ► • • < r • • IS7RIG a GAT-•• ARTIN J 4 ♦�L�< r • • a r o •a r • � ea r
'�
• Y < ♦
1-��.c�v
'. e.<r
•
"�'3 (t` ��`I�OO�I�ROAD�-w a i <L O • >f<, ..-•
♦,. t�,._ a •Yv<n• . <.'a •' • r `< ���`
<
^�y"•�G,iZ.`hh c... ..n Ya• • a { ty..��ti�*%*�
PIN87, tG<�
_
SQ :1NQ �i'CAR01.7NA . y<r • y���ca
l s�f.
•O 'y''<�L •a •a�• • �♦ • '• l►T • ♦ l►T • TG �< t • TY♦.6 a YQ •�5t � te.^��a4P{
1 �.it Y.
T<e�.• • A4x'Y1V a • ► r
a •�
< <r_ • • [rr • •Y.<r' e • `y
O rea,K,<
�c"ar
.~�<►'
Y�•,Y•.yta.
• acY<r o �t?►,r '<r • •Y•<wtr • >�<�Y.4�
¢ a �+ 6 �r7Y <LT�,(t j�<f�►4 • a ". PT ► <Y a1♦ • • •a 4r • e �a}►T ! m '" L < ,J.,~�ll<+.I,Lv, t ►�v'• ak <<.. att
chi ti'<'•cl <r-•(•. tk+
1s.�.�
v<► • •• a < <r • • a• < ar •. • <r < ,<t` •
y;�f-♦f ��..�4(j .!�. rY}�. v'K Y'r <""v Y�w•Y[Y v+h r'a''�<��'�Y1�ed'�.<'� < a�
Y< Y. i♦ • <•� • a a►,{O x•i aL. < a •cth •�<.
.�� <'ele•
a` ►a
`'r'r'
• +� n-<l�e a ya�e�_~
NMEN
o • •e'0 �A �i `•P�NiN r • ><.�✓aG,-ENVI>RONMENTA{�HEATH
r •. <. < A— ON i ,.� two s br <r r •�
f �`►•<► i Br Y : <4>'"} ate'.' ► •`Y`�-`AN1MA5HECTER-<. :S <L H=OTHE
MISCER-SERVIC+ESt[ LvaL • o <i'.c
• e+eaaT •
• "'7. a r
EO +. ..•y�����
< • • • �� 7-�, • • ' • +� <� ♦ m a r'•S • ti LIANU$ •^��.
E:+`y+'J<;4.:" • <L • • <e a h<L
a •
<
-._,�'�t
.M
a► • r a►J(► a •►{• a <• • t tf • • 1e•{.•�y L.m tr{L i,<� Y<t •
/<r{• '-T-[,nY- ; e rr<}[1 me f Yfl • • tY r;�t
O • } a •• • • [ •e • Y <r'•<• f�•Vr •�"--`+J-)�(}ems y�'l�,.�L �.�''-(1 y_�,�Sy�-2�`sYtr_t .+-�< ^'-j_y,
l{-��++.'\��+'`�''� 1��V4d•-••"• T"�r '_•V ♦'nr♦ t Y.P{M"tw�Tr•�`iT l�'�'�- YWr ft
• (► • flat t '•I !•<► • �aL b .al<tiL . •.<Y 1r�_(Ly`_Pj-{< fT�`1� <L le < •tea •, ;+�•_
. t.ti•• f♦ ♦ i I.f�r�►� • • ale • fr • • ► • • ♦ • <♦ [1a<�Y Lac <t'f<)Vtaawr• • f"'"��'` 'yaa
♦_; • a_a s.�. ��,+,[a < L • A.fta. ). L-�V•'u',<"���'rLr+i ,�X M1� Y: L:�<.r _ - _
".''•, i •iiv • • •-T.<,jLT • •L•i►{•a <Li0 • <r • Y.lFry♦ •�T^a^W • • J<�L�-..<..J�L�.1a. �_:1_... ±Sc><L�c^ti,,!'k:-,'.C! .. _
' _wyr` • • Y�e • a oe • T M< a t .�lY<, ♦ < e. t • .. a •. e6<��� �� et • l'L`.-�a;.� rj�" -<' _ - -
a�'�
► a >a►•'<L <► • <Y<► a<><r • •a to • <Ya O.<r ��rc`� r,:,`«�•.yy
•f0 •• e � • • <• • • a• e • • O • f• aI. • fo < < ♦ • <r • < <r i�M �e <<��� �; -_ _ - .
a L •c s �.<w.1�j y
:<�Ya <►�o�• '+L. '•—a <► 1�{'7'fdj�il�_`�xY7- _'�-DATE'�l^ �•�a`;DA�_ i^XTj`-T1M6 .. -- .. - _ .- .
_ _ __ _ • � .�..t-,.`♦ Y T''CF-.'!":'Y"!'_?"': e_"r):.gY"�'�...Ti�.[r r .Y.. _!, S� t L < L.{ }A•l t - . - - - _ .

McGill
A S S O C I A T E S
November 22, .1996
Mr. Fred Matthews
Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department
1210 State Street
Marion, North Carolina 28752
RE: Septic System.Repairs
All American Homes
Ellenboro, North Carolina
Dear Fred:
I have enclosed the plans and specs for the repairs to the existing septic system at the All American
Homes Manufacturing facility in Ellenboro. This same package was also sent .to several contractors for bids
with a bid date of November 29, 1996.
I believe these improvements include everything that was discussed and agreed upon during our
visit to the site last week. It is our goal to award this contract on November 29, 1996, with an expected
completion date of December 31, 1996. If you have any questions or comments please let me know as soon
as possible so that I may pass on any changes to the prospective contractors.
I look forward to your timely approval of these plans and specs and the issuance of a repair. permit.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
MCGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MIKE T. DOWD, E.I.T.
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Neil Sayers
Mr. Jody Fulford
. /webb/96153.01 /fm22nov6. doc
Engineering • Planning • Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville. NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street. Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

LoI
a
nl
N o 0
Ali —nw
0
F 7
. L �o i 1•��NS
i

mcUffi
ASSOCIA
Engineering 0 Planning 9 Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. - P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802
55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801704-252-0575 - FAX [phone]
------------ - -- - --- --
7-
--pplqN- �--
wo 1W,
Q Ate& LWL (k!-
P� 15
I LTA-
---- I SHEET NO. (Q r%
CALCULATED BY DATE
DESCRIPTION
SCALE PROJECT NO.
(q q.. L-i 16 MOD 1
4 1 N"It 04 1
7-
-4
7
--7
7
ML �jW Mu, Fmigl
mace
BE- - 14 WI
GftDE:
7

umcuill
A S S O C I A T E S
Engineering • Planning • Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802
55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801.704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]
SHEET NO. OF
CALCULATED BY M "T - DATE c1�
DESCRIPTION-RK)HP'Ard- DrM911-5-
SCALE N(314(5- PROJECTNO.
I
•
sE�nc; Tn'�lK wC-
,,
L) si,,,401.E PH :12.o i1 Co
T --
CZi; U X 2: KEcztic
i
i of
—--�--L-- -
- - —
sY:ERS
i I t''� `V � � !
—
; H6 3
i � �4�LV F.PI'r � V � i--
i _ _ _
I ; F+ —
_ _ _ •-L> --�--i -
i j ! o BPPRe� i I
p EoJA
----i—_i
I iS�Pnc�iq�JK
�l1Iace Hd, d;
I�
pE
Fi�t.fl
!
—�! Z ! ! 1
I ! —
i
NOTE_ n.• Ed�i �5 ._s_« �! YAwA s _ --
NESo
-'' -- ! - - = - -'�Z d P-e+ c ►s_ P.a -'--� —;— T-- -
- - -! - ' - - --
I'rl GX
— --' --
fiiTu .► !!
-! ! I i !� ppt�C��z1z_P-^���
L2_) act ,4a 31% �(/�LJES
; I 4
N t1
t t ! �.•IS ' ' -
- Td' BE�su tl �D�i-----}Cf'-j
'R.l' �,E2.9S 3 d`i E s i i
i � I � ' Mom- i i � i i �
_�M ►'v7u2t �?r'�IP
Art
1 i
.:
►_`E�S)iy'-
-;
I� �► i
j i i Ao6 Ft6LAS Id 2•i^':c2 !
i
i:-
i�j RE ( NPpet
---
i
�D>r>L_�rtia�
' `--'
-! - --- -
- --- --
! ! I • ��� tp- gls�t �, cs. ; i
i
� i � I i 's ! ! ! ! ! ! f I
•--i--- `----�--=--
i C1� 2ttucJatJ6 G= ° __ -- er 4 -- --
------- -
! i
fb HATCff EL pF;CA4TFOL
01wi K�'% j
— i -- •`sfA�ifSS I- ---i ta�s�ppuE+,3�(! _! __;__ � -
Wf'nnLiGFjc,Sr►rlG+SePnc
--=--=-------•--�-- � ---
,_-�
Pr?E i
� i , I
--:------
DR-Ii.�- �021:.1S77et�1fi10�i
i I
!
oF-DlscrlRQ6E p�p.c..•.p.r E-----
i Y
— -. - — - s
;
Tvf3�SEtiI.ED w�dYD(�luu�
v i it2uu���L7. ! -----C
R�4Tal?•SfA`L
___.1fLG!L.
i • _
_ _ __ _ _ _-_
j �. Lpu.�-t.� Q•-1. ; -� '; -
1 ;
_.__ _T _ -_
� Irl�ttr) or L o�
S) E PE 1ti 3LC
,
Ir-=--
,
1 f
if
F
I [ 1
_
1 I

=1
L -j o h �.+s
y f j-f)7roWf1-nU Got s i n H-+ 1 s 6- s-
�n°f - "` 9M-M-$0L O,L XKbZ olliaS SWOU WOO Wd $i � it 96-£i-ii

11-13-96 11:43 AM FROM AACME SEPTIC TANK TO 704-252-2518 ruq
ALL- 04MC�ttlq'4
MNUFACTURBD BY s
e T k eryice.
inc•
13 Monticello
Weaverville NC 28�sT
704 645-6296
Dann Youn
TWO-PIECE, TWO -COMPARTMENT PUMP TANK
name, state serial number (if applicable), address
Manufacturer'simprinted to the left of the
(it applioable), and liquid capacity
Knockout on the outlet end'of tank.
LIQUID CAPACITY: 2,650 Gallons
LIQUID gEPTHi ilia
FREEBOARDI N
LENGTH TO WIDTH RATIO:
NUMBER OP INLETS: 3
1 .
NUMBER OF OUTLETSs• '
OUT&ST MANUOLE= •) 22" or 24" s oC
*• 24" or 26" a .
i
Me ole 41 s Wei ht 109
INLET MANHOLE i 18" minim m s uare a Yen
lbs. Llttin handles Tut --rite or #3 rebar
INLET TEE OR BAFFLES N A
OUTI•RT TER OR BAFFLE: H�A
OR WAI.Lo Baltly: With two 4" holes iZ" maximum from
BAFFLE OR PARTITI
the bottom of tank
CONCRRTR i 3500 PSI
all
REINFORCYND i- 61lx6"x10 au a wire a c n e
1 d
baffle Wall in con unction with #3 rebar run h rizOBtal and
do al reinforcing
to bottom an ,As=o.179 Adds
vertical 9" on center each Wa in walla and ends '
and Width of the tank
With mesh #3 rebar�12" ° it ton me and center run roove ointline run
e length
top and bottom •
SEALANTS: 1°xi" Butyl Rubber Mastic
draulic cement or mortar m
contiix plastered inside and -outside
nvoue with h - .-
9

11-13-96 11:43 AM FROM AACME SEPTIC TANK
Wufactured Bys
135 Monticello Road
weaverville, jC 29.787,�...
704 645-6296 Dann Youn
MA WIZ RISER FO8 PW- TANK
nct'e : 3500 PSI
Reinforcer i NIA
Manhole: 24" Min. Sq, C1ear=Q
Manhole Lid: With 43 Reba' Handle
(145 lba.). or Tuf-Tits
Wandli
TO 704-Z5Z-'151d
A-1 A= c0CA1 AtH6S
Sys2z- t 915ffil (-
5g-5�� Cs 'D F- 7
24}+ 251"
24;"
251"
• •. 274
251"
• :•
" "
2i -•-*• • �1" Thick
Above round - •.� 1 I..
' If •
.� Ad"justabld Heights •I
Underground, I'
To suit Grade
Piago 2
rue
. 2 8 " 2" Thick
Sealed Waterti ht With 1" 32" Plastered with
—____�,_, �hyd. cement or
But 1 Rubber Mastic Sealant k - 2fi `" mortar mix
• --� —: • . TYPE 1 OPENING
T,a�k •Top : .
- 2 4 JL
;
• • • •' .' . ! ; TYPE 2 OPENING •
• • ' • •Pump .Tank Top ' •• ' ' '
. "
Type Standard Opening 261,
Type 2- Reverse Opening
. ' ; • 'ram/.

9
e7
A
el
. n
xNvi 311JRS RW3VV WOO WV I I 96-£I-I I

APPENDIX B

RUTHERFORD COUNTY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
622 Airport Road, Suite 100
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
[phone] .
Thursday, January 22,1998
Mr. Mike Dowd
McGill Associates, P.A.
38 Orange Street
PO Box 2259
Asheville, North Carolina 28802
RE: All American Homes Vacant Facility
Ellenboro, NC
Dear Mike:
The vicinity of subject industrial building is considered by this office as having the highest
potential for development in Rutherford County. The reasons are topography, access to a new
major four lane highway (Highway 74), and location relative to Greenville/Spartanburg and
Gastonia/Chadotte.
In November,1996, we showed subject to a client interested in a quick start up operation. The
lack of aseptic system capable. of handling one hundred seventy-five (175) to two hundred
twenty-five (225) employees cost our county the client 41ch located in Cleveland County about
thirty (30) miles away. The potential was eliminated only after extensive engineering and soil
studies on site.
In March,1997 through November,1997, we worked with another client which needed rail
service, natural gas and waste treatment with a capacity for three hundred (300) employees.
While this office developed the natural gas and rail to an acceptable position for this client to
purchase the building, the lack of a waste treatment system Id place, or permitted to be in place,
forced the client to reverse position on a letter of intent to purchase.
In order not to lose additional clients we requested All American Hones proceed with the
permitting process on a waste treatment system. The best result would be a system which could
handle the All American Homes building discharge as well as other industries which would locate
to the vicinity.
Chak-grr
Board ofDiredons
A&soryBoard
R. Braee ffoyls
County Commissioners
Joey Allen Charles A Cobb
Pce Chdrrrlan
O. Robert l,udmc oo, Chairman
Max Lehoa Robert W. Morgan
Jim ri Bishop
L Franklin Goode
Nathan Odom Thomas M. Robbins
Smwary
Chutes Hill
Jack A. Wofford
Timothy Gordon
Amy Jenkim
ExecudwDJnretor
David Odom
Jam= P. Bb*

At the present time we are working with two clients interested in subject facility. One with
employee projections at one hundred fifty (150), and the other with two hundred fifty (250)..The
tatter of these Is designing an upfiiting plan which would approximately double the size of the
existing facility, taking in much of the areas specified as suitable for additional subsurface
treatment fields.
A package waste treatment system designed to accommodate the All -American Homes p¢tential
plus additional manufacturing employees with other industries must be permitted as soon as
possible and before we loose additional clients due to the same problem.
Sincerely,
James P. Black
Executive Director
JPB/kg

APPENDIX C

SOIL AND SITE EVALUATION
FOR ON-SI.TE WASTE DISPOSAL AREA
FOR THE FORMER ALL AMERICAN HOMES PLANT
ELLENBORO, RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
by
Toney C. Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
Consulting Soil Scientists
168 Broadbill Drive
Mooresville, N. C. 28115
April 8, 1997
submitted to-"�r- Keith Webb, P.E.
McGill Associates
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, N. C. 28802
Mr. Fred Matthews, R.S.
Rutherford County Environmental Health
203 Koone Road
Spindale, N. C. 28160
OF NOIRV�
V. Jacobs, L:t'Ib

Soil and Site Evaluation for On -Site Waste Disposal Area
For the Former All American Homes Plant - Ellenboro
Introduction
- This evaluation was made to fulfill County and State requirements and to advise
the wastewater engineer of the soil resources and feasibility of an addition and
upgrade to the existing on -site ground absorption septic system, site specific loading
rate for the new system, and soil or site specifics to consider in system design. It also
addresses soil and site criteria for permitting through NCDEHNR-DEH (T 15A. 1 BA.
.1900). Since the beginning of this work anew and expanded protocol for large
systems has been adopted by the DEH staff. This has been reviewed and incorporated
as possible. Also, since this work began and because of limited areas for the added
drainfield, the decision was made to keep the system under 3000 GPD design flow.
The area of this report will be used to the maximum and permitted by the local health
department. The Rutherford County Health Department (RCHD) worked on the original
failing system and the newly proposed area(s). The on -site system would be both
retrofit and a new permit for < 3000 gallons per day from domestic sewage. The
design flow was provided by Mike Dowd and Keith Webb, engineers with McGill
Associates. At a site meeting on November 18, 1966 it was discussed that new rules
were in effect and accurate flow data would be required for optimal design flow. At that
time the plan was to maximize employee flow (> 3000 GPD). Since that time the plans
are to keep flow and permitting below 3000 GPD and use all available area. The
proposed system drainfield is in an open area in front of the fenced storage yard.
There are no indications of old abandoned homesites on the property associated with
the drainfield areas. Initial fieldwork for this investigation was done on November 18,
1996 with Fred Matthews and Stuart Black on pit evaluations on November 27,
1996. Additional areas were evaluated without county review. As pits were opened
and examined they were described and logged for this report. This work also involved
Ksat measurements and soil sampling. On the first day of site work 12 pits were
opened. On Nov. 27 eight pits were open, two below the existing field and six adjoining
the previously investigated area, but inside the fence. Pits were simultaneously
described by Toney C. Jacobs & Associates and Mr. Black on the first day. During the
first day of pit investigations the health department reviewed the area, observed field
procedures, participated in the evaluation, and reviewed or discussed recommended
loading rates. This work is an effort to optimize design and workability with a limited

;E
area. It was explained that septic siting is much more than designating an area and
trying to make it "work", as we were in this case. This effort hopefully includes sound
design that is incorporated into the overall site plan. This site specific investigation
reviewed approximately 1 acre for use. Most of this area was reviewed intensely with
an approximate 50' x 100' grid. Soil depth across much of the site is deep, but
subject to minor inclusions of PS saprolite at shallow depths. Although a Low Pressure
Pipe or Drip irrigation system can be used in less space, soil criteria and design flow to
be permitted does not mandate these more complex, more maintenance intensive,
and more costly systems over a conventional system.
The recommendation for an on -site ground absorption system is based on a
combination of factors, including, but not limited to 1) topography and landscape
positions, 2) soil characteristics, 3) wetness conditions, 4) soil depth, 5) soil restrictive
horizons, and 6) available space. Generally, some of these conditions which may limit
site use can be compensated for by modifying the system design; however, some
factors cannot be remediated. It is with this philosophy that this report is prepared.
This report is a supplement to an engineering design by Keith Webb and Mike
Dowd of McGill Associates of Asheville. Parts of this work may be or may have been
modified to best fit the engineer's work, as this is a holistic effort. Many details
required of that permit request have been omitted from this work. Some site specifics
are referred to the design engineer and so noted in this report. Specifically included in
this is the coordination of a survey of soil pits for best system fit.
Site
The existing plant is located approximately 0.6 miles south of Ellenboro, N. C. on
Bugger Follow Rd. (Figure 1). The area is dominated by the western Piedmont and
foothills topography with long, wide, rolling interfluves and scenic mountain views to the
west. The area around the site is suburban and agricultural. The proposed drainfield
area, both initial and repair, is currently lawn for the plant. The site plan has the area
as parking, but it was never used for this purpose. There is one home south and
houses to the east of the drainfield. Any wells associated with these residential units
should be located by the engineer and proper setbacks followed.
The proposed primary and repair system area is adjacent to Bugger Hollow
Road. The drainage slope for the area is very limited (Fig. 2). There should be no
required subsurface drain. There 'are also minor topographic variations because of

3
prior grading and a ditch that is in the area. Average slope was approximately 2-50/6,
as measured with a handheld clinometer. A site specific 1' interval topo map was
available during the fieldwork. This was used for reference and to plot holes while in the
field. Citing of wells on adjoining property is referred to the design engineer.
Soils.
The area has not been :mapped by USDASCS. The Soil Systems in North
Carolina (Daniels et al, 1984) has the area mapped as Felsic crystalline system. The
site specific evaluation placed 25 backhoe pits on the site. Many of these were for
reconnaissance only and were not specifically described by profile. In the area to be
used there was generally about 10-1 B" of fill over sandy clay loam and heavy clay loam
red Bt horizon. Soil depth to saprolite and highly weathered rock (HWR) was variable,
but below the 48" control section for a subsurface system. The area considered for
the drainfield is a deep, well -drained, weak to 'moderately structured mostly red clay
loam soil formed from residual weathered acid crystalline material. Structure gradually
decreased with depth as did clay content to a heavy loam.
The following description is from pit 4 in the proposed field and is considered
typical for most of that area.
Pit #4
inches
0-10 brown (7.5YR 4/4) sandy loam/sandy clay loam/clay fill; granular to
clods; clear smooth boundary. ,
10-21 olive yellow clay loam, strong to medium fine subangular blocky structure
(SAB), some areas almost platy from compaction, ss, sp. gradual wavy.
21-55 mostly red, clay loam to heavy loam, weak fine SAB to
massive, friable, ss, sp, few inclusions saprolite and HWR in soil.
The eight pits in the primary area were described to 5+ feet and one pit was
described to 12 feet. In the area recommended for the drainfield there was no
consolidated rock to break through in the upper 5' of the profile. At the deep pit,
excavation was easily achieved. Free water was not observed in any holes and mottling
of 2 chroma or less was not described in any pits.
Overall, color indicated that the soils in the area were highly oxidized and well
drained. Initially holes were described with medium antecedent moisture conditions;
however, steady rains made the soils moist throughout all horizons. Water was added
to get accurate texture and consistencies while doing field descriptions. Structure was

0
usually moderately well developed in the B horizons and consistencies indicated a low
shrink -swell potential. Mineralogy for the site is 1:1 or kaolinitic clay derived from acid
crystalline rock. All descriptions are included in Appendix 1.
Four site specific hydraulic conductivity measurements [Ksats) were made
during the evaluation using Compact Constant -Head Permeameters, similar to that
described by Amoozegar, 1989. The decision for the 4 locations of measurements
was made after review of the uniformity of B and BC horizon material. Measurements
were made at pits 4, 7, and 8. Steady state conditions came relatively quick in all holes.
Average Ksat for the subsurface (B) horizon at 30-40 inches where the wastewaters
will be discharged was 14 in/day. Ksat at the 70-80" depth was 22"/day. These
values are consistent to low with the SCS published values for this soil. In the
recommended area there were no restrictive horizons in soil profiles which would
significantly limit or expedite vertical conductivity of one over another. The fill material is
old enough to act as soil. Wastewater placed at approximately 36 inches below the
surface (trench bottom) should have sufficient movement to prevent a hydraulic
overload and should be slow enough to receive adequate treatment. The published
waste application range for this type soil, which is a clay, is 0.1-0.4 gal/ftz/d for
conventional lines.
Five composite soil samples were collected from the site and submitted to the
NCDA lab for soil test analysis of cation exchange capacity [CEC] and pH values. CEC
ranged from 2.3 - 7.3 meq/ 100 cm'. Soil pH is 4.3-5.1. Variations were believed to
be from natural soil changes, changes in past farming practices, and from site
development activities. Base saturation varied between fertilized horizons, but all values
were normal for the piedmont continuum. The soil consistency evaluation, classified by

5
feel, indicated a very low shrink/swell potential for these soils. This is confirmed by the
low CEC values which indicate Kaolinitic clay mineralogy. The NCDA soil test sheet is
included in Appendix 2 of this report.
In evaluating soils in both the piedmont and foothills, sometimes the firmness of
the clay peds is noteworthy. Because of some experiences with extremely hard digging.
on some sites (both backhoe and auger), we have begun measuring the sidewall
unconfined compressive strength. The readings for the firmest B horizon ranged from
around 4.0 to 4.5+ tons/fe for these soils (Table 2). Penetrometer readings are very
moisture dependent and these soils were moist when tested. Compared to other
recent readings on Cecil soils, these are firmer than average. As a data base is
developed, these readings may take on relevance to application rates.
P I" T N O.. D E P T H (INCHES) R E A D 1 N 0 S-(TONS/SO.Ff.) C O M M ENT S
4:
30 - 40
4.25
'. 4.25
4.50+
moist
30 - 40 ....
4.25
4.0.
4.5 :.
moist.- .::.;::..:..
8 . ; :.
70 - 80 ::
2.5
2.0 .:....
2.75
....
moist :.:
Because fieldwork was done outside the "new procedures" for large systems,
there was not a fifty -foot gridding for backhoe pits as now required. Pit number and
citing was concurred with by Matthews and Black. Pits were identified by numbers on
pin flags so that the engineer or surveyor could accurately locate these in a survey for
site plan development should this be required.
Discussion - -
Traditionally in Rutherford County soils on this site would have an application
rate much higher than the .published mid -range value for Group IV soils. Soils with
these colors, textures, and structure have a history of good service with few
complaints or failures. In conversation with Fred Matthews and Stuart Black, both
indicated this soil would be permitted at approximately 0.4 gal/ftf/d for single family
residential on this landscape. Generally, large on -site waste systems have a much
poorer performance record than single family systems with the same soil and site
criteria. However, on this site areal loading is somewhat similar to residential with an
expected six or seven parallel line design. The large systems also have much stricter

soil and site evaluation requirements, including evaluations by a consulting soil scientist,
State, and County personnel. The engineering is also much more comprehensive.
Those paying for the site evaluation, engineering design, and installation have a difficult
time accepting the difference between these. large systems and residential systems. A
high and almost extreme density for a residential community is 2 lots per acre. With
two 4- bedroom houses, design loading is 960 gallons per acre for the subdivision.
With this plant site, considering all land dedicated to the waste system Jincluding
repair), the hydraulic loading will be approximately two and one-half times greater than
the extreme residential loading. Compared to many large systems this is very
conservative. If the area was maximized at the 0.35 gal/fe/d loading, it would sustain
approximately 4200 GPD.
The area which bests suits the design engineer, and site plan development is
provisionally suitable for normally (24-30" trench bottom) placed conventional lines.
Overall, the initial site has a regular topography and a deep soil profile. There is one
draw on the west end. There are no other minor features to be designed around. The
soil has moderate profile development, thickness, and soil textural characteristics.
Except for very minor discontinuous inclusions and wavy boundaries, at least 3.0 feet of
soil exists over slightly sticky and slightly plastic to non sticky, non plastic
saprolite/HWR for the primary drainfield area evaluated. In many pits, 4-5' of soil was
described. A conservative application rate for conventional design would be 0.3-0.35
gal/fe/d. This is just above mid -range of the Type IV clay texture soil. System size will
also dictate an equal dose system which can be achieved by a pressure manifold
design (Berkowitz, 1986). An application rate of 0.3-0.35 gal/ft!/d should have a
good expectation of service without being over -designed: At 0.35 gal/ftz/d, 0.56"/d of
wastewater would be applied to the trench bottom. Five percent of the measured Ksat
(.05)(14") is 0.70". Also, a recommendation of expanded lineal and aerial loading
should make the rate very workable. Traditionally we would include the Hoopes, 1981
model for justification; however, with measured Ksats greater than loading rates and
design flow, this would not result in a mound. There are no described boundaries, or
abrupt textural changes which would cause saturated zones to occur. With described
conditions most if not all movement should be vertical. With low loading rates and
unsaturated soil (not referring to trench slime layer); bacteria and viruses should be
trapped very close to the trench interface. We expect many feet of unsaturated soil

Ire
from trench bottom to watertable. The concentration of primary nutrients (NPK) from
this facility should not exceed soil capabilities. Some N will be used by grass on the
field. Phosphorous will be tied up in the clay fraction of the soil and K should be below
soil test limits. Using "standard' waste characterization, the system will place less
fertilizer nutrients in the drainfield than is called for in NCDA Soil Test
recommendations (Appendix 2). If system is spread out over a 400' window as
covered in discussion, then nutrient loading would be even less of a possibility.
As with any large system, required periodic management inspections should be
aggressively conducted to assure the best operation and possibly eliminate premature
failure. There is no indication of a seasonal watertable or confinement that would
prevent a satisfactory conventional dosed design with accepted (Berkowitz, 1986) type
distribution. With existing profile development, measured Ksat, and history of this soil
material, the application rate of 0.35 gal/fC/d is certainly applicable.
A conventional system can be installed with 3' wide trenches on 9' centers. The
trench bottoms should be level (not more that 0.21 % grade) and may vary slightly
below the surface. Because of the slight irregularities. on the surface (minor complex
topography) the workability of the system will be enhanced by spreading the lines wider
than 9 feet on center for some line segments. Trench depth can be varied slightly, but
use about 36" placement when possible. As engineering plans are developed the
following are offered as suggestions:
* System field should be shaped to shed water as -rapidly as possible.
Existing landscape makes this easy.
* Any minor surface depression should be filled with light clay loam topsoil and
compacted to look like other surface. Pay special attention to old pits.
* Lines shall not have differential loading.
* The finished field should be fertilized and limed according to NCDA
recommendations, seeded and mulched to protect from further erosion.
Upslope site plan should direct all surface waters away from the drainfield.
Also, any low areas should be eliminated (filled) to stop infiltration which would
result in subsurface lateral movement. Make sure DOT road ditch is clean and
graded for maximum runoff.
* Piezometers should be installed in at least 2 locations on each manifold to
facilitate monitoring. These pipes also effectively mark the drainfield.

XI
* Use of subsurface interceptors only if required monitoring indicates such a
need. With existing site plan there is very limited infiltrative surface upgradient
of the system.
As a final plan is prepared I would recommend that each line be identified in the
field on an exact contour. This can be done with alternating colors of pin flags. If the
application rate of 0.35 gal/fe/d is accepted and flow is 3000 GPD, then 2857 lineal
feet of conventional line is needed. My field assessment of the topo is that lines should
be located and contours accurately established before final site plan is drawn. Figure
3 has a suggested design pattern which should have a high expectancy of success.
This is only a suggestion and not meant to restrain engineer.
Until drainfield construction, the site should be maintained undisturbed, except
for necessary clearing for septic layout and design. There should also be special
conditions imposed on the contractor installing the drainfield system. This includes
prohibiting any work while the site is wet. Attention should be given to avoid the
smearing of sidewalls in trenches during construction and should this occur, there
should be raking or pulling off of the smeared area with hand tools. If there is enough
moisture in these soils to smear the sidewalls, construction should be halted and those
areas raked off. During preconstruction meeting, the sanitarian and engineer should
explain and caution installer that the system will not pass final inspection unless this
condition is met. Also, the installation work should be done in small increments to
avoid exposing large areas to unpredicted inclement Weather. This will require more
effort by the RCHD, but should be beneficial to system workability. After construction,
the surface over the trenches should be shaped to allow good surface drainage and_
prevent settling which would pond surface water on trenches. Also, good turf cover
should be maintained to promote soil structure and prevent erosion. Grass must be
mowed short, like a lawn, to maximize surface runoff and minimize infiltration into the
soil around the trenches. During construction if any type of berm is formed at the
lower edge of the field, this must be removed to prevent downslope ponding.
Should changes be considered, or if I can be of help with the application system,
would welcome the opportunity to work with the project engineer. If there are any
questions about this paper or my recommendations, please contact me. As with any
subsurface investigation, both natural and manmade features may be concealed at the
time of the investigation. Should such be exposed during construction, or at any later

Cr
date, the soil scientist reserves the privilege to review findings and modify conclusions.
Thank you for this opportunity to serve.

10
REFERENCES CITED
Amoozegar, Aziz. 1989. A Compact Constant -Head Permeameter for Measuring
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity of the Vadose Zone. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.
53:1356-1361.
Berkowitz, S.J. 1986. Pressure Manifold Design for Ground Absorption Sewage
Systems. NCDEHNR, Raleigh, N. C.
Daniels et al, 1984. Soil Systems of North Carolina. NCDEHNR-DEM Agricultural
Research Service, Bulletin 467. Raleigh, N.C.

Area Locator Toney C Jacobs & Associates, Inc. Figure 1
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 28115

• • , . • , . • , . - • � . - - Asa::>::-:��.,:: ,.
:I::i:..:•::::.
X.
CY
Vic.-; •'� -' .T —N.
' ; .4 — — —
If
: i
i' :i;'�'
1
N
i
•Y
/
i
♦
n
♦
/
\
\, I
1 I \ \ \
\
I
1
1
1
I
\ 1
1 \•
N.
Uj
t
1
i
I
w
o \ /mow
La -
cc w O \\
:. ti'X.
�, 1
Old Site Plan Toney C Jacobs & Associates, Inc. Figure 2
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 28115

CO
a
.0 V-
W
Vy"
,�\ _ O ,1 I i � .�ti
Suggested Line Pattern Toney C Jacobs & Associates, Inc.
168 Broadbill Dr.
Mooresville, NC 28115
Figure 3

APPENDIX
1. Soil notes
2. NCDA Soil Test results

JOB:'
LOCATION:
PROPOSEDITAal
WEATHER.i'it4�,
Ile
II
.7
SITE It S.
PIN.-
-WAM SUPPLW On-SltcA
—.WMCEDWr MOISTURE:_'
3. tHONF,
PublicL EVA
T i
DAM.'
PROPERTY slzp—,: '
110N.- And B9ctt-- pli2f.
FACTIC)PA
PROFILE 4r
PROFILE
PROFILE_
PROT-lt-k :Q-
A
LANDSCAPE POSTI64"-".
jo
oFe
HORIZON I DEITH•
-4 1 —
X
'f7 j'c'r
j
Than
th
:Am
A
. tle!
g
4
HORIZON DEM 11 1
C,Aw Wrml
Tcatum
M40"
d Wy
v
a.LA
LA.,;
i kp�A fl) fr�.
LI
V
t.
W.
L&M
tt
4.il74
. . . . I
s 36
HORIZON Ill DgrrH
.
N-NC
Color - 11,114
m T
H-M
cc - cc
CV: Cc
T To
AAA%,V
p Flo
45M40
M
.4
M4
A
NO. I
Noluzom IV DEvm
sc,
TC"M
Vk-
Mod"
N. - -I
0 i;fo-�o'
Np:
sp-I
P-F
VP
Omnd
41
Al
lil - rl
-1011-WEMINVIS
AIA
efi
REsTRicnvp mogizom
SIR
SAPROM
LTAR
-8--d
cr-CI
ncA'nON
Pei.
Pr - pi
7
A

1Pl,
00
'G
F?
v
�
Y
Kai'
o 0
N
.
O O
TiTs.
O O
o 0
0
V
>c
R O O
N
N
W "
o
�>
O
O
O
r-1
?
Cq
Cq o
V
ihah
t
6
C
Nv
W .�
4
C
E d
c
C�7 C-D
CD
d
O
aai
w ri
'�
ci; w
O
b
�iri
U �yi N
M
U H N
M
'
z
�+
N
...
O
iz
r> o
z
t>-
lEF:
r
~ C.4
c-
h N t#
NE; N
U
E
9 "
N d0 � vv
f r'; rti O
1 TES, o .-.4
cq
M
R55 O O
M .F
o
N
'S'y53
rx _Nl O
O ��h
V N
-Ilk
xa i
�1 C-A
� N
"O
Q+ 0 0
00 w w
O Col-
o
?w 'C7
o .,
��iaV
u �
M r�r C
E
s
C !.v4
O
o`
q s RS
O Vi
cll x
qon;z,-� w �o
a(,epy°
RR
4 i
r
t'.
A.a>
x
y h 00
lr % —4
r 4)
V--I O o � C�
�a
rw ko
is N
N o O N
ti �.
Nam€ O NN
Irs
N
h O O
rr O N
O ^ .r
Er
�i' tf% N N
E-�
N Ki O
'y3a3
_ oe
m
s„>
segz `
ti —c r Cl
�o
�v
p V V
C1 00
(mil is f7 O�
QC N.�
.sr
..r
�U�jj M wU M
�r
q a.
Vz`djyM�Q�"U
n1 N
—4 —4
r--=-3
NlUa- "fos
O%
M
O�
M
k
o
O O
N
O N ~ O
00 O
O\ CD
w cq
E e
0 0 Q+
V V
b v
V .yr N `4 rti
e
cq Cl
O C) co
WU �
v �C;
o
a
O
O
U
y F h

McGM
A S S O C I A T E S
December 9, 1997
Mr. A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
North Carolina Department of Environment,
and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
RE: Sewer sytem Extension
All_American_iomes-_:�;7
Permit No. WQ0012794
Rutherford County
Dear Mr. Howard:
Work on the project entitled "Sewer System Extension, All American Homes" in
Rutherford County, permit number WQ0012794 has.been completed. The project consists of
the installation of approximately 1,195 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer, an 85 gpm pump
- - - -station with- duplex -pumps, -and 7,840—linear feet -of -4 -inch force main._ The following
certification is therefore provided.
"I Melvin Keith Webb, as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, having been authorized to .observe the construction on a periodic basis for the project
entitled "Sewer system extension for All American Homes in Rutherford County" for the
permittee, Rutherford County, hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that construction was observed
1997 �
_ ARViL.LE REGIONAL OFFICE
En g-i n'e e r i n g • P l a n n i n g Fi n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

Mr. A. Preston Howard
December 9, 1997
Page 2
to be built within substantial compliance and intent of this permit, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting materials."
Signature
Registration Number
Date
Sincerely, 12.9' 9�
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
M. KEITH WEBB, P.E.
MKW/drj
Enclosure
cc: John Lewis
Roger Edwards
Glenn Rhodes
95325.01/ph09dec7.doc

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and -Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 12,1998
Mr. Neil Sayers
All American Homes, General Manager
P.O. Box 929
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
Subject: NPDES Permit Request Return
Application Return
A11_American Homes_Manufa`cturing-Facility
Rutherford County,
Return #901
Dear Mr. Sayers:
The Division has performed a preliminary review of the proposed former All American Homes site waste
treatment facility. Based on this review and due to the increased number of proposed projects and their
impact on receiving waters, the Division requires that' more information be provided regarding possible
alternatives to discharge.
As outlined in the Division's Guidance for Evaluation of Wastewater Disposal Alternatives (copy
attached), the analysis of subsurface and irrigation disposal systems must include a preliminary report from a
soil scientist. To adequately evaluate subsurface and irrigation disposal systems, an on -site soils analysis
needs to be performed and submitted. A soil investigation was referenced, but not submitted. This evaluation .
should include:
• a copy of field notes and boring log information,
• a soils site map overlain on a topographic map,
• description of soil characteristics to include texture, structure, soil wetness and mineralogy,
• characterization of the depth of soil to 48 " or to a restrictive horizon, and
• soil loading rate recommendations.
The on -site soil survey should include enough soil borings to adequately characterize the site.
Additionally, justification should be provided on the number and location of soil borings completed. The
generalized county soil survey maps are not adequate for the evaluation, but may be used as a reference tool
to plan the field work required for the evaluation.
If however, after further review, soils are found to be inadequate to treat the entire proposed flow of 7,500
gpd, please provide information on what percentage of the flow could be diverted to a subsurface or irrigation
disposal system and the costs associated with partial discharge and nondischarge alternatives. Based on the
limited mapping information provided, it appears that the wastewater needs of the system may be able to be
addressed through construction of several smaller subsurface disposal systems to service the facility.
Please be advised that the Division needs documentation regarding the developers' attempts to purchase
adjacent land for the purpose of wastewater disposal. Also, the loading rates used to calculate the amount of
land necessary should be submitted.
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

Application Return
All American Homes Manufacturing Facility
Return #901
January 12,1998
A� Vtj�.l of ;'& 4'alternatives analysis, please note that a detailed present value evaluation must be
conducted which includes detailed capital, operation and maintenance costs. Such an analysis must be
performed assuming a 20-year project lifespan and should be performed for all possible alternatives.
For any future submittal, please clarify the following from this submittal:
• Alternative 3 - It is not clear that there is insufficient land area on the 24.3 acre parcel. There is no
scale, property lines, or North arrow on the site map, and again, the referenced soil investigation was
not submitted.
• Alternative 4 - Please state the elevations in the area and where the plant would be located off site.
• Any documentation about the 'general acceptablility' of the site requiring 300 employees. (All
American Homes had only about 125 employees.) Justification and demonstration of need should be
provided for expected flow volumes including any flow reductions realized through the use of flow
restricting devices.
• Information from the Rutherford -Polk -McDowell District Health Department reducing the treatable
volume from 3000 gpd to 750 gpd and why the system cannot be restored.
• A written statement from the local government that the proposed project is consistent with any zoning
or subdivision ordinance in effect, prior to issuance of an NPDES permit. Attached for your inform-
ation and use is a form which should be completed, signed by the local government and submitted
with the application.
Your submittal of stream flow information may assist the Division in expediting this project. This
information may be obtained from the United States Geological Survey. However, positive streamflow does
not guarantee that a discharge will be allowed. In a situation in which multiple disposal options are
practicable, the Division considers a direct discharge to the surface waters of the State to be the least
desirable environmental alternative.
If a permit is granted, an Authorization to Construct request will need to be submitted. Enclosed is a
guidance document for this process for your planning purposes.
As a result of the potential time consumption of the above requests, the proposed project is being returned
with this letter. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Mary Cabe of my staff at
telephone number (919)-733-5083, extension 518.
Sincerely,
�A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Attachments
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit
Ashes ville Regional Office /Water Quality Sectioriv
Mr. M. Keith Webb, P.E. / McGill Associates (with attachments)
P.O. Box 2259
Asheville, NC 28802

1 CUlu.
A S S O C I A T E S
V
December 9, 1997
Mr. A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
North Carolina Department of Environment,
and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Howard:
JAN 16 1998
RE: Sewer sytem Extension
(All7American_H6-m—es----7
Permit No. WQ0012794
Rutherford County
Work on the project entitled "Sewer System Extension, All American Homes" in
Rutherford County, permit number WQ0012794 has been completed. The project consists of
the installation of approximately 1,195 linear feet of 8-inch gravity sewer, an 85 gpm pump
station with duplex pumps, and 7,840 linear feet of 4 inch force main. The following
certification is therefore provided.
"I Melvin Keith Webb; as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North
Carolina, having been authorized to observe the construction on a periodic basis for the project
entitled "Sewer system extension for All American Homes in Rutherford County" for the
permittee, Rutherford County, hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that construction was observed
'Tbe Division, of ;Vater Quality hereby
.ack nowledges.receipt and acceptance of this Engineers
Certification
E n g i n e e r i n g • P l a n n i n g • F i n a n c e
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

Mr. A. Preston Howard
December 9, 1997
Page 2 '
to be built within substantial compliance and intent of this . permit, the approved plans, and
specifications, and other supporting materials." ,�r,,,�•�Fre,ag��P
CA PM,
Signature
Registration Number
Date
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A. .
M. KEiTH WEBB; P.E.
MKW/drj
Enclosure
cc: John Lewis
Roger Edwards .
Glenn . Rhodes
95325.01/ph09deO.doc

{,4/`PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE
{ } SITE VISIT
THAT THIS FACILITY NO LONGER NEEDS THE ABOVE
REFERENCED PERMIT BECAUSE THE FACILITY. WAS
{ } . NEVER CONSTRUCTED {,i}10THER (PLEASE SPECIFY)
{ } ABANDONED
—THIS PERMIT SHOULD BE DELETED FROM THE PERMIT
TRACKING SYSTEM AND THE DIVISION BILLING SYSTEM
AND IF NECESSARY. INACTIVATED ON THE COMPLIANCE
MONITORING SYSTEM.
CERTIFIER'S NAME . �f Per
DATE e[

LEST
911
Permit No.
WQ0012825
Project Name
Ellenboro Site
Type of Project'
Pump & Haul
Title
MR.
First Name
NEIL
Last Name
SAYERS
Applicant
ALL AMERICAN HOMES
Address
PO BOX 1150
City
ELLENBORO
State
NORTH CAROLINA
Zip-
28040 ..
Consulting
Mcgill Associates
Date Received
August 9 1996
Acknowledgement
August 19, 1996
. Payor
McGillAssoc.
Fee Received'
400.
Check No.
20540
Reg. /C.Q: Dep.
C.O.
County-
Rutherford
Region — x-.
- she�ille,
R-evietarer
oresEWestall,
Vnm,rrroni z.
>; —R`o Edwards: ReVsewer
S

NON NPDE
9CILITY AND.PERMIT
DATA
.0/22/96
13:51:18
UPDP.TE
OPTION
TRXID
5OU KE,Y WQ0012825
PERSONAL
DATA FACILITY
APPLYING
FOR PERMIT RPP/PERMIT
FEE-$ 400.00
REGION
FACILITY
NAME> ALL
AMERICAN
HOMES-ELLENBORO 7
COUNTY>
RUTHERFORD
01
ADDRESS:
MAILING (REQUIRED)
ENGINEER:
MCGILL
& ASSOCIATES
STREET:
PO BOX 1150
STREET:
PO BOX
2259
CITY:
ELLENBORO
ST
NC ZIP 28040 CITY:
ASHEVILLE
ST NC
ZIP 28802
TELEPHONE 704 453
0711
TELEPHONE:
704 252
0575
STATE CONTACT>
WESTALL/RE
FACILITY
CONTACT
NEIL SAYERS
TYPE OF PROJECT>
PUMP & HAUL
LAT:
LONG:
DATE RPP
RCVD
08/09/96
N=NEW,M=MODIFICRTION,R=REISSUE>
N
DATE ACKNOWLEDGED
08/19/96
DATE REVIEWED
08/19%96
RETURN DATE
REG COMM
REQS
/ /
DATE DENIED
/ /
NPDES #- __
REG COMM
RCVD
/ /
DATE RETURNED
/ /
TRIB Q
0000 MGD
ADD INFO
REQS
08/12/96
OT AG COM REQS
/ /
TRIB DATE-
ADD INFO
RCVD
08/19/96
OT AG COM RCVD
/ /
END STAT
APP P
11/17/96
DATE ISSUED
/ /
DATE EXPIRE
FEE CODE( 3)1=(>1MGD),2=(>10KGD),3=()1KGD),4=(<1K'GD+SF),5=(S>300R),6=(S<=300R),'
7=(SENDEL),8=CSEDEL),9=(CLREC),0=CNO FEE) DISC CODES 02 ASN/CHG PRMT;
ENG CERT DATE / / LAST NOV DATE / / CONBIL'LC )
COMMENTS: 5,000 GPD>>MCGILL ASSOC;#20540;$400>>
MESSAGE: *** DATA ADDED SUCCESSFULLY ***

State of North Caroifna
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
August 19, 1996
MR. NEIL SAYERS
ALL AMERICAN HOMES
PO BOX 1150
-E ; �NBORO, NORTH CAROLINA. 28040
a J.0
Dear MR. SAYERS:
Subject: Application No. WQUU12825
Ellentaoro Site
Pump & Haul
Rutherford County
The Division's Permits and Engineering Unit acknowledges receipt of your permit application and
supporting materials on August 9, 1996. This application has been assigned the number listed above.
Your project has been assigned to Forest Westall for a detailed engineering review. Should there be any
questions concerning your project, the reviewer will contact you with a request for additional
information.
Be aware that the Division's regional office, copied below, must provide recommendations from the
Regional Supervisor or a Procedure Four -Evaluation for this project, prior to final action by the
Division.
If you have any questions, please contact Forest Westall at [phone] extension n/a. If the engineer
is unavailable, you may leave a message on their voice mail and they will respond promptly.
PLEASE REFER TO THE ABOVE APPLICATION NUMBER WHEN MAKING
INQUIRIES ON THIS PROJECT.
cc: Asheville Regional Office
Mcgill Associates
SiAaro
erely,
yn D�cCaskill
upervisor, State Engineering Review Group
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

State of North Carol fla
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
WMAI
�EHNFz1
August 19, 1996
MR. NEIL SAYERS
ALL AMERICAN HOMES
PO BOX 1.150
:,rr>TBQR:O, NORTH CAR.OLINA 28040
Dear MR. SAYERS:
Subject: Application No. WQ0012825
Ellenboro Site
Pump & Haul
Rutherford County
The Division's Permits and Engineering Unit acknowledges receipt of your permit application and
supporting materials on August 9, 1996. This application has been assigned the number listed above.
Your project has been assigned to Forest Westall for a detailed engineering review. Should there be any
questions concerning your project, the reviewer will contact you with a request for additional
information.
Be aware that the Division's regional office, copied below, must provide recommendations from -the
Regional Supervisor or a Procedure Four Evaluation for this -project, prior to final action by the
Division.
If you have -any questions, please contact Forest Westall at [phone] extension n/a. If the engineer
is unavailable, you may leave a message on their voice mail and they will respond promptly.
PLEASE REFER TO THE ABOVE APPLICATION NUMBER WHEN MAKING
INQUIRIES ON THIS PROJECT.
cc: Asheville Regional Office
Mcgill Associates
Sincerely,
4axolyn D./McCaskill
Supervisor, State Engineering Review Group
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

State of North Carol; nA.
` Department of Envirc, i,,ent, �, r rr
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality '
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary- � N
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director N R
August 23, 1996
Mr. Neil Sayer, Vice President
Post Office Box 1150
Ellenboro, North Carolina 28040
Subject: Permit Number WQ0012825
All American -Homes
Pump and Haul Disposal
Rutherford County
Dear Mr. Sayer:
In accordance with your application received August 9, 1996,
we are forwarding herewith Permit No. WQ0012825, dated August 23,
1996,-to November -1, 1996 for the pump and haul disposal -of
.:wastewaeer from All American Homes.
This permit shall be effective from the date'of issuance
until November 1, 1996, and shall be subject to the conditions --
and limitations as specified therein. Please pay particular '-
attention to the monitoring requirements in -this permit. Failure
to establish an adequate system for collecting and maintaining
the required operational information will result in future
compliance problems.
If any.parts, requirements, -or limitations contained.in-
this permit are unacceptable to.you, you. have- the right to
request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within 30
days following receipt of this permit.- The -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,-P. O. Box.27447,_Raleigh, N. C. 27611-
7447. Unless such demands are -made, this permit shall be final
and binding.
- P:O: Box 29535, - Ni
4).Raleigh, North. Carolina 27626-0535 �
Telephone [phone]
f
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmotive Action, Employer
50% recycles/10% post -consumer oanow

Mr. Sayer
August 23, 199G
Page Two
One set of approved plans and specifications is being
forwarded to you. If you need additional information concerning
this matter, please -contact Mr. Roger Edwards at 704/251-G208.
Sincerely,
rK
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Enclosure
xc: Rutherford County Health Department
Jeff McCracker, E.I.T., McGill Assoc.
Don Safrit
Roger C. Edwards

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,.HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH
PUMP.AND HAUL PERMIT
In accordance with the''provisions'of Article 21 of Chapter 143,
General Statutes of North Carolina
Laws, -Rules, and Regulations as amended, and other applicable
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED To -
All American Homes
Ellenboro,-North Carolina
Rutherford County
FOR THE
Pump and Haul Disposal operation of wastewater,to serve -All American
Homes with no'discharge of wastes.to the surface waters,. pursuant to -the
application received -August 9, 199G'and in conformity ,with the.project
plan, specifications,'. and other supporting data subsequently filed and
approved by the Department of Environme_nt,.Health,, and Natural Resources
Environment,, -
and cc'
onsidered-a part.of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the'date of issuance.until
November 1, 1996, and shall be subject`to the -following specified
.conditions and limitations:
1• ..This permit shall become'voidable-unless the
subject -pump and haul'activities are carried out. in '
a manner which has been approved by..this D`ivisiori..
2.. This permit is effectivb—only with respect to'the'.
nature and volume of -.wastes described in the
application and other supporting data.,
3.. The facilities ;shall be properly maintained and
operated,at all times.
4. 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 .
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.

S. No type of wastewater other than that from All
American Homes shall be included in the pump and
haul activities.
6. The permit shall become voidable unless the
agreement between All American Homes, and Harris
Septic Tank Service for the collection,
transportation, and ultimate disposal of the
wastewater is in full force and effect.
7. In the event that the facilities fail to perform
satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance
conditions, the Permittee shall cease operation of
all pump and haul activities and take such
immediate corrective action as may be required by
this Division.
8. This Pump and Haul Permit shall not be renewed.
9. The sewage and wastewater collected by this'system
shall be treated in the Town of Rutherfordton
Wastewater Treatment Facility prior to being
discharged into the receiving stream.
10. The Asheville Regional Office, telephone number
704/251-6208, shall be notified at least forty-
eight (48) hours in advance of operation of the
pump and haul activities so that an in -place
inspection can be made. Such notification to the
regional supervisor shall be made during the normal
office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on
Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays.
11. The Permittee is liable for any damages caused by a
spill or failure of the pump and haul operations.
12. Adequate inspection, maintenance, and cleaning
shall be provided by the Permittee to insure proper
operation of the subject facilities.
13. The Permittee or his designee shall inspect the All
American Home collection facilities to prevent
malfunctions and deterioration, operator errors and
discharges which may cause or lead to the release
of wastes to the environment, a threat to human
health, or a nuisance. The Permittee shall keep an
inspection log or summary including at least the
date and time of inspection, observations made, and
any maintenance, repairs, or corrective actions
taken by the Permittee. This log of inspections
shall be maintained by the Permittee for as long as
the pump and haul activities are being conducted
and shall be made available upon request to the
Division of Water Quality or other permitting
authority.
-2-

14. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or
representative of the Division of Water Quality
may, upon presentation of credentials, enter and
inspect any property, premises or place on or
related to the All American Home collection
facilities at any reasonable time for the purpose
of determining compliance with this permit; may
inspect or copy any records that must be kept under
the terms and conditions of this permit; and may
obtain samples.
15. An accurate record of'the monthly pump and haul
activities -must be maintained by the Permittee,
indicating:
a) date wastewater is removed from the facility,
b) name of facility from which wastewater is removed,
c) name of facility receiving wastewater,
d) volume of wastewater removed, and
e) status of permanent disposal option.
These records shall be submitted to the Asheville Regional Office
on or before the fifteenth (15) day of the following month.
16. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations
contained in this permit may subject the Permittee
to an enforcement action by the Division of Water
Quality in accordance with North Carolina General
Statute 143-215.6..
17. 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.
18. The Permittee shall provide for the installation
and maintenance of an audible and visual high
water alarm.
19. A leakage test shall be performed on the septic
tank and dosing tank to insure that any
exfiltration occurs at a rate which does not
exceed twenty (20) gallons per twenty-four (24)
hour per 1,000 gallons of tank capacity. The
engineer's certification will serve as proof'of
compliance with this condition.
20. A copy of the approved plans and specifications
shall be maintained on file by the Permittee for
the life of the project.
-3-

21. Non -Compliance Notification:
The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Asheville Regional
Office, at telephone number 704/251-6208, 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 any of the
following:'
a. Any process unit failure, due to known or unknown reasons,
that render the facility incapable of adequate wastewater
treatment such as mechanical or electrical failure of pumps.
aerators, compressors, etc.
b. Any failure of a pumping station, sewer line, etc. 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 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.
22. Upon completion of construction and prior to
operation of the subject pump and haul activities,
a certification must be received form a
professional engineer certifying that the
permitted facilities have been installed in
accordance with this permit, the approved plans
.,and specifications. Mail the certification to the
Permits and Engineering Unit, Post Office Box
29535, Raleigh, N. C. 27626-0535.
23. The annual administering and compliance fee must
be paid by the Permittee within thirty (30) days
after being billed by the Division. Failure to
pay the fee accordingly may cause the Division to
initiate action to revoke this permit as specified
by 15 NCAC 2H.0205 (c) (4) .
Permit issued this the 23 day of August, 1996.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
a," -f,6-7
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
-4-

Permit Number WQ0012825
v
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.
(Name of Location)
the Perrimittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due
care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction
such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
V
Signature
Date
Registration No.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Non -Discharge Permit Application
(THIS FORM b!A Y BE PHOTOCOPIED FOR USE AS AN ORIGINAL)
PUMP AND HAUL DISPOSAL SYSTEM
I: GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Applicant (corporation, individual, or other ): All American Homes
2. Print Owners or Signing Official's Name and Title (the person who is legally
responsible for the facility and its compliance): Neil Sayers
Vice President and General Manager
3. Mailing Address: Post Office Box 1150
City: ' Ellenboro State. North Carolina Zip: 28040
Telephone No.:( 7( 04 ) 453-0711
4. Project Name (subdivision, facility, or establishment name - should be consistent with
project name on plans/specs., letters of flow acceptance, Operational Agreements, etc.):
A11 American Homes Waste Water Collection System
5. Application Date: 6. Fee Submitted: $ 400.00
7. County where project is'located: Rutherford
8. Latitude: N 35018' 32" Longitude: W 81 °54' 48" of facility being pumped
II. PERMIT INFORMATION:
1. Permit No. (will be completed by DEM):
2. If this application is being submitted as a result of a modification to an existing
permit, list the existing permit number N/A and issue date - N/A
3. Specify whether flit applicant is public or X pri%'ate.
FORM: I'111)S 4/91
11•11"C I of 0

PUMP AND HAUL DISPOSAL,
PAGE 2 (4/9 l )
Ill. 1NFOIZN1A"rION ON NVASrEWATEIZ:
1. Nature of Wastewater: % Domestic; 100 % Commercial;
% Industrial; % Other waste (specify):
2. Please provide a one or two word description specifying the origin of -tile wastewater,
such As school, subdivision, hospital, commercial, industrial, apartments, etc.:
Manufactured Home Plant
3. If wastewater is not domestic in nature, what level of pretreatment has been provided
to ensure protection of the receiving wastewater treatment facility?
None
4. Volume of wastewater to be pumped & hauled: 5,000 gallons per day
5. Explanation of how wastewater volume was determined: (150 Employees T 29 gd)
+ 1,250 gallorns wash water
- a
IV. TREATMENT FACILITY INFORMATION:
1. Name of wastewater treatment facility receiving wastewater: Rutherford County
2. Treatment facility permit no.: NCO025909
,.. 3. Treatment facility contact person and telephone no: Karen An rewg
[phone]
4. 'County where treatment facility is located: Rutherford
5. Distance to treatment facility: Four (4) miles
V. OTHER INFORMATION:
Brief pridject description: All American Homes new manufactured housing
facility waste water collection system
2. Explanation of why a pump &haul permit is being requested (be specific & explain if an
environmental emergency exists ): Temporary pumped haul is being requested
for all American Homes to allow them to open while pump station and
force main are being constructed
3. Specify how long pomp & haul pernlit needed (shall not exceed 6 months): 2 months
4. What will be. the permanent method of wastewater disposal once the pump & haul
activities Gravity sewer to pump station to force main to _
existing gravity sewer
5. Date that pcn»anent disposal -method will l-n- available: No later than November 1. _1996
2 of

PUMP AND HAUL DISPOSAL
PAGE 3 of G (4/91)
6." I -lave permits/approvals for permanent disposal method been obtained?
- — Yes; Permit No. Perrnitting Agency
X No; Pending Permit No. Penmitting Agency NCDEHMR
7. Describe how the wastewater will be transported (truck, rail car, etc.) and provide the
typical hauling volume of the vehicle providing the hauling: Waste water will be
hauled in a truck with a capacity of 1,500 gallons
8. Name of owner of transpordng vehicle: Tom Harris (Harris Septic Tank' Service)
9. Mailing Address of Hauler:1103 E. US 74 .Hwy. Business
City: Ellenboro State: NC Zip: 28040
Telephone No.: [phone]
10. What type of tank or other container will the wastewater be pumped from and what is the
volume.of this container? The tank will be pre -cast concrete wet -well with
a 3,088-gallon capacity
11. Was :the tank or container already in place or will it be uistalled for these activities? .
The wet well will be installed for this purpose
12. What type of high water alann does the container have?
X audible and visual X auto dialer
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE
- DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT UNLESS ALL OF
THE APPLICABLE ITEMS ARE INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL
Required Irents
a. One original and two copies of the completed and appropriately executed application form.
b. Thiee sets of detailed plans and specifications signed and sealed by a North Carolina
Professional Engineer. The plans/specifications must include a general location map, a plan
view of cite storage facility and its relationship to property lines, and details showing the high
water alarms (provide either audible and visual or an auto dialer). Each sheet of the plans and
the first page of the specifications must be signed and sealed..
C. The appropriate permit processing fee, in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0205(c)(5).
d. A letter must be provided from the owner/authority of the wastewater treatment facility
stating that the wastewater will be accepted and specifying tile. volume that will be accepted.
The letter should be a recent letter and should refer to the project by the same name as that
identified on the application and the plans/specifications.
C. A copy of the contract or agreement between the wastewater hauler and the.applicant and a
snap indicating tic haul rruitc
f. The application package should be sent to the appropriate regional office, according to the
attached listinI" on page 4, which provides the regional responsibility by county. If there are
any fl!;estions contact the appropriate regional office.

DIVISION OF'ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGIONAL OhFICES (4/91)
Asheville Regional WQ Super.
59 Wood rin Place
Asheville, NC 28802
704/251-6208
Avery
Macon
Buncombe
Madison
Burke
McDowell
Caldwell
Mitchell
Cherokee
Polk
Clay
Rutherford
Graham "
Swain
Haywood
Transylvania
Henderson
' Yancy
Jackson
Fayetteville Regional WQ Super.
Wachovia Building, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301
9191486-1541
Anson Moore
Bladen Robeson
Cumberland Richmond
Hamett• Sampson
Hoke Scotland
Montgomery
Washington Regional WQ Super.
P O Box 1507
Washington, NC 27889
919/946-6481 '
Beaurort Jones
Bertie
Lenoir
Camden
Martin
Chowan
Pamlico
Craven
Pasquotarik
Currituck
Perquimans"
Dare
Pitt
Gates
Tyrell
Greene
Washington _
Hertford
Wayne
Hyde
Raleigh Regional WQ Super.
3800 Barrett Dr.,''Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
919/733-2314
Chatham Nash
Durham Northampton
Edgecombe Orange
Franklin Person
Granville ' Vance
Halifax Wake
Johnston Warren
Lee Wilson
Mooresville Regional WQ Super. Wilmington Region: WQ Super.
919 North Main Street .127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Mooresville, NC 28115 Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
7041663-1699 919/305-3900
Alexander
Mecklenburg
Cabarrus
Rowan
Catawba
Stanly
Gaston
Union
lmdcll
Cleveland
Lincoln
Winston-Salem Regional WQ Super.
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
919l761-2351
Alamance Rockingham
Alleghany Randolph
Ashe
Stokes
Caswell
Surry
Davidson
Watauga
Davie
Wilkes
Forsyth
Yadkin
Guilrord
Brunswick New Hanover
Carteret Onslow .
Columbus Pcnder
Duplin
4 of 6

r 1'� P AND t-IAUL DISPOSAL
IP�dC-' S (4/9 I )
Name and Complete Address of.Enginccring Firi»: McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
55 BROAD STREET.
City:' ASHEVILLE Stale: NORTH CAROLINA Zip: 28801
Telephone No.
Professional Engineer's Certification:
M. KEITH WEBB ` , attest that this application for Waste Water "'Collection
System All. American. Homes has-been reviewed by me and is accurate
and complete to the best of my knowledge..I further attest that to the best of my knowledge the
proposed design has been prepared in accordance with the applicable regulations. Although certain
.portions of,this submittal package may have been developed by other professionals, inclusion of
these materials under my signature and seal signifies that I have reviewed this materialland have
judged it to be consistent with the proposed design.
North. Carolina Professional Engineer's Registration No. 12809
Print Name of Engineer M. KEITH WEBB ���taQtrsr�,
o sS
Seal and Signature. (specify date):
Applicant's Certification: "t*tl f 30t-or
96
I, Neil; SAYERS , attest that this application Waste Water Collection
Svstem:' All American Homes
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand
that if all required'parts of this application are not completed arid that if all required supporting
information and att ments are, not -inclu e.d, .this application package will be returned as
incomplete. .
Signature Date 3
5of6

PUMP
AND i IAUL DISPOSAL
_
PAGE G (4/91)
PL'RMIT AI'1'LICATION
PROCESSING FEES
(effective October 1, 1990)
CATEGORY
NEW APPLICAI1ONSL
RENEWALS WFITIOUT
• •
MODMICATIONS
MODMICATIONS
> 1,000,000 GPD
Industrial
$400
$300 .
Domestic/Cooling Water
$400
$300
10,001 - 1,000,000 GPD
Industrial
$400
$250
Domestic/Cooling Water
$400
$250
1,001 - 10,000 GPD
Industrial
$400
$200
Domestic/Cooling Water
$400
$200
< or = 1,000 GPD and
Single Family Dwelling
$240
$120
- - Sludge < or = 300 Acres
$400
$250
Sludge > 300 Acres
$400
$250
Sewer Extensions
(nondelegated)
$400
0
Sewer Extensions
(delegated)
$200
0
Closed -Loop Recycle
or Evaporative
$400
$200
NOTE: The -Fees for Soil Remedia-tion-Projects
are (lie
same as for Sludges.
Under (lie Sewer Extension
Fcc, "delegated (o iminicipalilics" applies
only to those governmental
jurisdictions 111M
have specific delegation
review authority,
as granted by the Division
of E'nvironmen(al
Management.
•
646

State of North Ca,,:,lina
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
TO:
December 4, 1996
4 �or�est'�Vestall Regional Wate��u y�.upex�iso
Asheville Regional Office
FROM: Robert Farmer dep-
Facilities Assessment
Compliance Group
SUBJECT: Expiration of Permit
All American Homes - Ellenboro
WQ0012825
Rutherford County
Pump & Haul Permit
r .�4.q•
j
Upon the recommendation of the Asheville Regional Office, this permit is being
allowed to expire, by DWQ, effective immediately. The Asheville Regional Office has
determined that this Pump & Haul Permit is no longer needed. The permit will be removed
from our computer tracking systems, effective immediately.
By copy of this memo, I am requesting the Budget Office to clear all pending billings
from the billing file for the subject facility.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 91gn33-5083, ext. 531.
cc: Rutherford County Health Department
Asheville Regional Office
Permits & Engineering Unit - Carolyn McCaskill - w/attachments
Fran McPherson, DEM Budget Office
Operator Training and Certification
Facilities Assessment Unit - Robert Farmer - w/attachments
Facilities Assessment - Non Discharge Unit - Lou Polletta - w/attachments
Central Files - w/attachments
P.D. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 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 Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
September 19, 1996
Memorandum
To: Preston Howard
Through: Steve Tedder
From: Rick Moor Ie
l
Subject: Industrial Project
Revenue Bonds
Environmental Certification
All American Homes
Rutherford County
On June 18, 1996, Randy Kepler attended a revenue bond pre -application conference for All
American Homes. The amount of the bond funding being requested is $5 million.
All American Homes is a manufacturer of modular type homes. This process is not a generator of
an excess of wastewater. The wastewater will be domestic in nature and will be treated in the Town of
Spindale's wastewater treatment facility. The Town of Spindale has agreed to accept this wastewater and
All American Homes has applied for a non -discharge permit to construct a gravity -sewer, pump station and
force main to transport the wastewater to existing sewer lines. This permit was issued today.
The bond funds associated with this project are identified as an "industrial project." As required in
N. C. G. S. 159C-7, in the case of a proposed industrial project, this project will not have a materially
adverse effect on the environment.
It is recommended that the Environmental Certification for this "Industrial Project" be issued.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone], extension 527.
cc: . Asheville Regional Office, Water Quality
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