Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
NC0021946_Permit (Issuance)_20060510
NPDES DOCIMENT :;CANNING COVER SHEET NPDES Permit: NC0021946 Rosman WWTP Document Type: ; Permit Issuance Wasteload Allocation Authorization to Construct (AtC) Permit Modification Complete File - Historical Engineering Alternatives (EAA) Correspondence Owner Name Change Special Order by Consent Instream Assessment (67b) Speculative Limits Environmental Assessment (EA) Document Date: May 10, 2006 This document is printed on reuise paper - ignore aziy content on the reizerse side 4,174 NCDENR Michael F. Easley Govemor William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director Division of Water Quality May 10, 2006 The Honorable Johnny H. Rogers, Mayor Town of Rosman P.O. Box 636 Rosman, North Carolina 28772-0636 . Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance Permit No. NC0021946 Rosman WWTP Transylvania County Dear Mayor Rogers: Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently amended). The permit authorizes the City of Rosman to discharge up to 0.090 MGD of treated wastewater from the Rosman WWTP to the French Broad River, a class B water in the French Broad River Basin. Upon receipt of an authorization to construct the facility can discharge up to 0.250 MGD and the plans for expansion will include the addition of tertiary filters and ultraviolet disinfection. The permit includes discharge limitations /or monitoring for flow, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform bacteria, and total residual chlorine. The following modification has been made in this permit: ■ The addition of an effluent page for 0.250 MGD upon receipt of authorization to construct and discharge of wasteflow above 0.090 MGD. It should be noted that comments were received from the Wildlife Resource Commission expressing concern over potential impacts of ammonia toxicity on downstream aquatic life. The upgraded Rosman WWTP will have tertiary filters in addition to a reclaimed water system. In addition, the plant will have an instream waste concentration of less than 1% under 7Q10 flow conditions. If there is a change to the ammonia water quality standard or if a site -specific management strategy is developed, the Division will reevaluate the ammonia discharge requirements for this One Caro ' nz discharger. 1vOaturaIIij North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone (919) 733-7015 Customer Service Internet: www.ncwatergualieurg Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax (919) 733-2496 623-6748 1-877- An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper Letter to Mayor Rogers Page 2 If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding. Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. The Division may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits, which may be required by the Division of Water Quality, or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act, or any other Federal or Local governmental permits may be required. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Jacquelyn Nowell at telephone number (919) 733-5083, extension 512. Sincerely, f,p!Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Attachments cc: Asheville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Ken Pohlig/ Construction Grants and Loans Brian L. Tripp/WK Dickson 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte NC 28205 David McHenry/Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Permit File Central Files Permit NC0021946 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY PERMIT TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, the Town of Rosman is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the Rosman WWTP NCSR 1156 Transylvania County to receiving waters designated as the French Broad River in the French Broad River Basin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and Iv hereof. This permit shall become effective June 1, 2006. This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on September 30, 2010. Signed this day May 10, 2006. Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director Division of Water Quality By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission Permit NC0021946 SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked, and as of this issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein. The Town of Rosman is hereby authorized to: 1. Continue to operate an existing 0.09 MGD wastewater treatment facility with the following components: • Bar screen • Dual aeration tanks • Dual clarifiers • Chlorine disinfection equipment • Flow meter • Aerobic sludge digester with drying beds This facility is located at the Rosman WWTP on NCSR 1156 in Transylvania County. 2. Upon issuance of an Authorization to Construct permit from the Division of Water Quality and submission of the engineer's certification for expansion, operate a wastewater treatment facility up to a design flow of 0.250 MGD and 3. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into the French Broad River, classified C-Trout waters in the French Broad River Basin. Town of Rosman WWTP Latitude: 35°08'10" State Grid/Quad: G 7 NE / Rosman, NC Longitude: 82' 49' 0S' Permitted Flow: 0.09 MGD Receiving Stream: French Broad River Drainage Basin: French Broad River Stream Class: C-Trout Subbasin: 40301 NPDES Permit No. NC0021946 Transylvania County Permit NC0021946 A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS — FINAL During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expansion above 0.090 MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below: EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum Measurement Frequency Sample Type Sample Locationl Flow 0.09 MGD Continuous Recording Influent or Effluent BOD, 5 day (209C) 2 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent Total Suspended Solids2 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent NH3 as N 2/Month Composite Effluent Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 mL 400/100 mL Weekly Grab Effluent, Upstream & Downstream Total Residual Chlorine 28 ug/L 2/Week Grab Effluent Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Semi-annually Composite Effluent Total Phosphorus Semi-annually Composite Effluent Temperature (2C) Weekly Grab Effluent pH3 Weekly Grab Effluent Footnotes: 1. Upstream = at least 100 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at least 300 feet downstream from the outfall. 2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal) 3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. Permit NC0021946 A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS — FINAL During the period upon expansion above 0.090 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below: EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monthly Average Weekly Average Daily Maximum Measurement Frequency . Sample Type SampleLocationf '. Flow 0.25 MGD Continuous Recording Influent or Effluent BOD, 5 day (20°C) 2 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent Total Suspended Solids2 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent NH3 as N 2/Month Composite Effluent Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 mL 400/100 mL Weekly Grab Effluent, Upstream & Downstream Total Residual Chlorine 28 p g/L 2/Week Grab Effluent Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Semi-annually Composite Effluent Total Phosphorus Semi-annually Composite Effluent Temperature (2C) Weekly Grab Effluent pH2 Weekly Grab Effluent Footnotes: 1. Upstream = at least 100 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at least 300 feet downstream from the outfall. 2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal) 3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. ',PR 1 C North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission MEMORANDUM TO: Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director Susan A. Wilson, Supervisor Western NPDES Program Division of Water Quality FROM: Dave McHenry, Habitat Conservation Biologist DATE: April 5, 2006 SUBJECT: Proposed Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) flow expansion, Town of Rosman (NC0021946), Transylvania County Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed the proposed NPDES flow expansion for the Town of Rosman's wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Comments from the NCWRC are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d), North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.), and the North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 10I.0102. The French Broad River downstream of the WWTP supports the creeper (Strophitus undulatus, State Threatened) and slippershell (Alasmidonta viridis, State Endangered) mussels. The Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana, Federal and State Endangered) has recently been found in the river as well. The WWTP is new and will use tertiary treatment and UV disinfection. This treatment technology should help conserve the sensitive resources in the river. Nevertheless, freshwater mussels are among the most sensitive aquatic organisms to ammonia, which may be a limiting factor for unionids (Augspurger et al., 2003). Recent research by Augspurger et al. (2003) found that ammonia concentrations that may be protective of freshwater mussels range from 0.3 to 1.0 mg/L total ammonia as N at pH 8. Therefore, the NCWRC requests that you consider this information and, if necessary, adjust the limits of the new permit accordingly. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this permit action. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at (828)452-2546 extension 24. Literature cited Tom Augspurger, Anne E. Keller, Marsha C. Black, W. Gregory Cope and F. James Dwyer. 2003: WATER QUALITY GUIDANCE FOR PROTECTION OF FRESHWATER MUSSELS (UNIONIDAE) FROM AMMONIA EXPOSURE. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: Vol. 22, No. 11, pp. 2569-2575. cc: Mr. Bryan Tompkins, USFWS Asheville Mrs. Sarah McRae, Natural Heritage Program Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721 Telephone: (919) 707-0220 • Fax: (919) 707-0028 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION / NPDES UNIT 1617 MAIL SERVICE • CENTER RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617 NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A NPDES WASTEWATER <• i .;PERMIT. On the basis of thorough staff 'review and appli cation of NC General Statute 143.21, Public law 92.500 and other lawful standards and regulations, the North Carolina . Environmen tal Management- Corn mission .proposes to is sue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the Person(s) listed .below effective 45 days from the publish date of this notice. ' Written comments re garding the . proposed permit will be accepted until 30 days after the Publish . date of this. no tice. All commentsre ceived prior to that date are considered in the fi nal determinations re garding 'the proposed permit. The Director of the NC Division of Wa ter Quality may decide to hold a public meeting for the proposed permit should the Division re ceive, a significant de gree of public interest. Copies of the draft per mit and other support ing information on file used to determine con ditlons -present in the draft . permit are avail able' upon request and payment of the costs of reproduction. Mail com ments and/or requests for information to the NC Division of 'Water Quality at the above ad dress or call the Point Source Branch at (919) 733-5083, extension 520 '-or 363. Please; include the NPDES permit number (attached) in any communication.. In terested persons may also visit. the Division of Water Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street, Ra leigh, NC 27604-1148 be tween the hours of 8:00 a.m.and 5:00 P.M. to re view information on file. NPDES Permit Num ber NC0021946, Town of Rosman, ' 'Transylvania County, has applied for a flow- expansion of its permit for a facility dis charging treated do mestic wastewater to the French Broad River in the French Broad River Basin. Currently fecal coliform and total residual chlorine are water quality limited. This discharge mayof fect future allocations in this portion of the re ceiving stream. MSD . of Buncombe County (2028 Riverside Drive, Asheville, NC 28804) has applied for renewal of NPDES per mit NC0024911 for the French Broad River WRF in - Buncombe County. This permitted facility discharges 40 MGD treated wastewa ter to -the French Broad River in the French Broad River Basin. Cur rently total residual chlorine and cyanide 'are .water quality lim lied. This discharge .may . affect future alto cations in this portion of the French Broad River Basin. ' AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION BUNCOMBE COUNTY SS. NORTH CAROLINA Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State, duly commissioned, qualified and authorized by law to administer oaths, personally appeared Velene Fagan, who, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that she is the Legal Billing Clerk of The Asheville Citizen -Times, engaged in publication of a newspaper known as The Asheville Citizen -Times, published, issued, and entered as second class mail in the City of Asheville, in said County and State; that she is authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy of which is attached hereto, was published in The Asheville Citizen - Times on the following date: March 24th , 2006. And that the said newspaper in which said notice, paper, document or legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every publication, a newspaper meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statues of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section 1-597 of the General Statues of North Carolina. SirY a this 24day of March, 2006 Zr'tgnature of person r ung affidavit) Sworn to and subscribe • befo a me the 24th day of March (Notary Pu My C 2008. ic) mission expires the 3rd day 013H4i14p,,, March 24, 2006 (2165) C Ccnunent/DWQ Response UJRC respm'f Subject: WRC Comment/DWQ Response From: Tom Belnick <tom.belnick@ncmail.net> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:30:36 -0500 To: Charles Weaver <Charles.Weaver@ncmail.net>, Karen Rust <karen.rust@ncmail.net>, Bob Sledge <Bob.Sledge@ncmail.net>, Susan A Wilson <Susan.A. Wilson@ncmail.net> r Hello folks- I got a call back from Ron Linville today about the WRC comments to four draft permits in the NPDES West region. Ron isn't contesting these permits, and is ok with some simple language to the permittee that addresses WRC concerns. I've generated some language below which could be placed in the final cover letter. Let me know if you have questions/comments. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) provided comments on the draft NPDES permit, expressing concern over potential impacts to downstream aquatic life from this wastewater discharge. Specifically, WRC expressed concerns over the use of chlorine and its potential toxicity to aquatic life. In response, DWQ encourages the permittee to avoid overdosing during chlorination, and to consider UV disinfection as a treatment alternative if economically and technically feasible. The WRC also expressed a concern about the reliability of the treatment plant, and DWQ responded that standby power is. a requirement for all new and expanding facilities. The WRC recommended that this facility connect to a pubicly owned treatment works (POTW) when available, and DWQ responded that smaller facilities are encouraged to connect to regional facilities when economically and technically feasible. Finally, WRC expressed concerns about ammonia toxicity, and DWQ responded that ammonia limitations will be reevaluated if there is a change to the ammonia water quality standard or if a site specific management strategy (per 15A NCAC 2B.0110) is developed for federally -listed threatened/endangered aquatic species in this area. tom.belnick@ncmail.net N.C. DENR/DWQ/NPDES 919-733-5083,ext. 543 1 of 1 3/14/2005 4:42 PM .01_r.-2006 14:30 FROM-IYK DICKSON & CO. INC T0433400T8 7-221 P.002 F-T46 Attachment A. Local Government Review Form GeneraLitatute Overview: North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c)(6) allows input from local governments in the issuance of NPDES Permits for non -municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the Environmental ental Management Commission (EMC) may not act an as application for a new non -municipal 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 faciliry and its appurtenances are to be located. The written statement shall document whether the city or county has a zoning oz subdivision ordinance in effect and (if such an ordinance is in effect) whether the proposed facility is consistent with the ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has determined to be inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ozdinanccs unless the approval of such application is determined to have statewide significance and is in the beet interest of the Stare. Instructions to the Applicant: Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit fat a proposed facility, the applicant shall request that both the nearby city and county government complete this form. The applicant must: ▪ Submit a copy of the permit application (with a written request for this form to be completed) ro the clerk of the city and the county by certified mail, return receipt requegted. ■ If either (or both) local government(s) fail(s) to mail the completed form, as evidenced by the postmark on the certified nsali card(s), within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant may submit the application to the NPDES Unit. • As evidence to the Commission that the local govemrnent(s) failed to respond within 15 days, the applicant shall submit a copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local governinent(s) failed to respond within the 15-day period. 1nsnvctio ss to the Local Government. The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over any part of the lard On which the proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this forth to the applicant within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized. Name of local government Cv ©f ___Xl�t� y���7 (City/County) Does the city/ " ty have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are to be located? Yes [ 4 No [ ] If no, please sign this form, have it notarized, and return it cc the applicant. Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes 06 No If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes No( Date Si Manager bounty Manager) State of 4,14 '1 4' County of ieLtir/ (44 On this __ /e/ day of /4 ii/A 4'°‘', personally appeared before me, be said .�JoA,AlA j -q ez,' name to me known and known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing document and he (or she) acknowledged that he (or she) executed the same and being duly sworn by me, made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true. My Commission expires 00 420 .(Signatuuc of Notary Public) EA.A Guidance Document Version: June 23, 2005 Page 8 of 8 Rosman . Subject: Rosman From: Larry Horton <larry.horton@ncmail.net> Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 08:42:40 -0500 To: Jackie Nowell <Jackie.Nowell@ncmail.net> CC: Ken Pohlig <Ken.Pohlig@ncmail.net>, Cecil Madden <Cecil.Madden@ncmail.net> Jackie, The plans and specifications for the Rosman project have been submitted to CG&L. Ken Pohlig of the Design Management Unit completed a review and sent comments to the town and their consultant on 2-22-05. Ken has not received a response to his comments yet. Let me know if you need additional information. I hope you had a great holiday & vacation! Happy New Year! Larryeo-turi4 stictik-f OZ -r iff4e rc,,,i7.4.3 /1.40,1/AA— r L /90 / let/ike,v/a, 1 of 1 1/3/2006 9:11 AM NC0021946 Rosman's Monthly Flows Year 2005 2004 2003 0.0720 0.0794 0.0738 0.0811 0.0717 0.0714 0.0770 0.0726 0.0717 0.0760 0.0739 0.0722 0.0755 0.0728 0.0680 0.0712 0.0726 0.0680 0.0717 0.0751 0.0730 0.0721 0.0746 0.0925 0.0751 0.0709 0.0731 0.0744 0.0739 0.0795 0.0781 0.0739 0.0712 0.0719 Average 0.0732 0.0739 0.0753 Permitted Qw 0.09 0.09 0.09 of Qw 0.81 0.82 0.84 CG&L File Notes and Background on Rosman EA Per telecom with Larry Horton, 12/21/2004 4/16/2002 - Returned package 1/23/2003 — Rec'd EA (2 copies) 7/29/2003 — Hannah sent 10 copies to Melba for DENR August 2003 — Sent amendments of Melba 8/2003 Alex Marks asked about the project October 2, 2003 got comments back from Melba. NPDES is still reviewing. Will contact applicant **October 23, 2003 — Alex M'ks says "NPDES has no comments. Everything taken care of in a phone conference." 5/2004 — Sent additional comments. Rec'd revised copy of eng. Report **If agency comments are resolved, they don't send revised copies to them. 7/14/2004 - Alex gets revised copy 8/2/04 - Rec'd concurrence from Alex. Wildlife Resources — US Fish & Wildlife had comments that held up the process. Project was getting STAG funding (Pork barrel $) This goes through the NEPA process. EPA issues the FONSI. Cg&L drafts the FONSI. In 3/2005 send to EPA. EPA revises and makes sure that agencies are satisfied. FONSI published 6/22/2005. Env. Review closed on 9/16/2005 CG&L also reviews the alternatives analysis to make sure that it makes sense. Rosman got creative with the folks that would be connected. CG&L went round and round with them on the flow justification and CG&L finally agreed that the EAA was okay. Rosman WWTP jmn Request for expansion to 250,000 GPD Existing plant = 90,000 GPD, built in 1969 Average wasteflow is currently 75,000 GPD with inflow and infiltration problems. During high rainfall events, flows exceed 200,000 GPD. Will replace the sludge drying beds to prevent flooding, since a drainage channel to the French Broad River is nearby. Clarifier inadequately designed. Flow splitter does not work. Outfall pipe does not discharge directly to the French Broad, but to marshy ditch 50 feet from the mainstem of the French Broad. The existing plant needs to be abandoned for more a reliable treatment plant, which will be protected from flooding. Wasteflow projections Pop 1990 — 385 Pop. 2000 — 490 2.44% annually over 10 years Projected Pop. In 2020 — 794—Increase of 304 people in 20 years 794 + 391 - additional residents from proposed 168 unit condo complex, made up of retirees, different demographic from 304 persons increase in 2020 projected population. Used a multiplier of 2.33 persons to calculate residents. Is this too high given the number of people that will live in each apartment. Maybe 1-2 persons as retirees 794+391= 1185 persons Annexation of 650 acres, outside of existing Town limits — 780 add. Residential sewer connections — 650 ac*40% developed * 3 people/ac - Actually only 280 acres will have residents. 1185 persons + 780 residents = 1475 residents * 70 GPD/Capita = 103, 250 gpd Commercial /Industrial flow Commercial flow = 15 gpd per capita 1475 residents * 15 gpd per capita = 22,125 GPD Domestic flow = 103,250 gpd + 22,125 gpd = 125,375 gpd Existing dom, comm., industrial flow = 75000 GPD (p.13) 10% of 75000 = 7500 GPD 1 125,375 + 7500 GPD = 132, 875 GPD Add avg .existing flow of 75000 GPD 132875 + 75000 GPD = 207,875 GPD Proposing to extend sewer along Old US Hwy 64. additional 41,805 GPD will come from that, in addition to the eliminating four existing NPDES permit holders and consolidating eliminating up to 4 point source dischargers. 207875 GPD + 41805 GPD = 249, 680 GPD ??? Please breakdown the 41, 805 GPD that will come from this sewer extension. How many residents will this include, where will they come from. Is this different from the 780 add. Residential sewer connections. Found the answer to this — will tie in existing septic tanks systems that will connect to new Rosman plant - What are the four existing NPDES permit holders, dischargers that will be eliminated or consolidated with this extention? Conoco Convenience Store — NC0085031 - 0.010 MGD D*D catfist resort — NC0086223 — 0.035 MGD Morgan Mills resorts — NC0081001 — 0.010 MGD DOT Rosman Mainten. - NC0085979- 0.028 MGD Total design flow from these four permits - 0.083 MGD ? Coats American at 0.015 MGD 207875 GPD + 83000 GPD = 290875 GPD > 250000 plant to be built. Please review the commercial and industrial flow section that was submitted, There is a math error regarding the existing domestic, commercial and industrial flow. Cost Comparison of Alternative Options Report indicated that aside from the no action option, it had been determined that only other options available were: 1. Connection to Brevard — Capital Cost - $5,493,800 Present Worth Cost — 7,334,077 Two pumps in Brevard would have to be upgraded to receive the Rosman wastewater,and the cost of upgrading was not included in the cost. Also, the Rosman plant is nearly 9 miles away, environmental factors must be considered. The cost estimates are probably too low if these other factors are considered. 2 2. New Plant with River and Land Disposal — Capital Cost - $5,449,800. Present Worth Cost — $6,364,753 Difference between PW costs - $969,324 , about a 13 % difference in cost. Probably higher if other factors from Option 1 are included. Conclusion: The primary concern of the review of the alternatives analysis is the flow justification. There may have been some manipulation of the projected population of Rosman with the addition of residents from the proposed retirement housing. A recent email from the consultant indicated that this project will only be built if the expansion request is approved. Also the annexation of surrounding areas may be long term. Also by my calculations, the possibility of connection of 4 existing NPDES dischargers will exceed the design capacity of this plant. It may require another expansion for the addition of potentially 83,000 GPD. However, the positive aspects are that the outdated plant will be replaced and upgraded, and there is the potential for elimination of other dischargers in the basin. Funding is already established for construction. Based on this information, the expansion of the Rosman WWTP is recommended. 3 RE: RE:.Rosman NPDES Permit flC cto zi?9 Subject: RE: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit From: "Brian Tripp" <btripp@wkdickson.com> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 13:00:51 -0500 To: "Jackie Nowell" <jackie.nowell@ncmail.net> Jackie, Please see my responses below. Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns. Thanks. Question # 1: In the section, Residential Additional Flows: On p. 13, it was noted that a retiree's condominium will be constructed and that the 391 residents would not be included in the projected population for 2020 because of their demographics. Please provide more information on this project. When is construction planned? Is there an overestimation in the number of proposed residents, if the household will consist of retirees, there may be only 1 -2 persons per household? The estimation of 2.33 per household for retiree condos may be too high.* Response # 1: This project is still in the planning stage. However, I was in conversation with the proposed developer this past Friday (2/3/06). He is planning on making a presentation to Council later this month concerning his proposed development. Development can not and will not proceed unless the plant is expanded. If a revised NPDES permit for expanded flow and a construction permit for a new WWTP are issued, then developer then intends to build his project / request an allocation at the proposed WWTP. Therefore, at the earliest, the developer could have units ready for occupancy in the summer of 2007 provided that the revised NPDES permit is issued ASAP and construction of the new plant is completed by the summer of 2007.• At this time, it is the opinion of WKD that there isn't an overestimation of the number of proposed residents. WKD feels the 2.33 residents per unit is a safe assumption due to the fact that the proposed developer has not stated to our or the Town's 100% satisfaction that the proposed project will be strictly for retirees. Question # 2: Please provide any additional information on the status of the annexation plans. (p. 14) If some annexation areas are "currently under development", has it already been included in the projected population. for Rosman? Please detail the difference between these 680 acres and the area along US Highway 64 that will provide an additional 41,805 GPD. * Response # 2: No, the proposed annexation areas that are currently being studied for development have not been included in the project population of Rosman. The project population of Rosman primarily focused on normal growth in and around the existing Town limits. The area along US Hwy 64 is yet another potential growth area. Please see the Town of Rosman Sewer Study for Wastewater Collection System Improvements in Appendix S for additional information. Appendix B of the aforementioned report includes the wastewater flow justification (i.e. the explanation of the additional 41,805 GPD). Question # 3: Please review the section on Commercial and Industrial flow and provide corrections on the total of existing domestic, commercial, and industrial flow.* 1 of 4 2/6/2006 10:18 AM RE: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit Response # 3: Please clarify. We believe our calculations are factual and correct. Question # 4: Please clarify the flow of 41805 GPD that will be coming to the expanded plant. Also, which specific NPDES discharges will be eliminated/consolidated and what is their total flow? Is their flow included in the 41805 GPD? Response # 4: See the response to Question # 2 above for additional information regarding the 41,805 GPD. In addition, please see page # 3 of Appendix S, the Town of Rosman Sewer Study for Wastewater Collection System Improvements, for a list of potential NPDES discharges that may be eliminated consolidated once the plant is expanded and the collection system is extended. The discharges could include but are not limited to the following: Facility Permitted Capacity Permit # Receiving Stream Conoco Convenience Store Mill Creek D & D Catfish Resort Morgan Mills Resort, Inc. Mill Creek NCDOT Rosman Maint. Facility Broad River 10,000 gpd NC0085031 35,000 gpd NC0086223 10,000 gpd NC0081001 28,000 gpd NC0085979 Morgan Morgan French Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns. Have a nice weekend. Brian L. Tripp, PE, DEE W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc. Community Infrastructure Consultants 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, NC 28205 Phone - (704) 334-5348 Direct - (704) 227-3408 Cell - (704) 517-5656 Fax - (704) 334-0078 Email - btripp@wkdickson.com www.wkdickson.com Original Message From: Jackie Nowell [mailto:jackie.nowell@ncmail.net] Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 11:58 AM To: Brian Tripp Subject: Re: Possibly spam: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit Brian Tripp wrote: Jackie, Attached please find a scanned copy of the Local Government Review Form for the aforementioned project. A hard copy will be placed in the mail to you tomorrow. Please let me know if you need anything else. Also, if you could give us an idea on the time frames involved in obtaining a revised / amended permit, we would greatly appreciate it. We appreciate DENR's support on this important project for the Town of Rosman. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks. 2 of 4 2/6/2006 10:18 AM RE: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit */Brian L. Tripp, PE, DEE/* *W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.* */Community Infrastructure Consultants/* 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, NC 28205 Phone - (704) 334-5348 Direct - (704) 227-3408 Cell - (704) 517-5656 Fax - (704) 334-0078 Email - _btripp@wkdickson.com_ www.wkdickson.com *From:* Brian Tripp *Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2006 12:41 PM *To:* jackie.nowell@ncmail.net *Subject:* Rosman NPDES Permit Jackie, Thank you for the message Friday afternoon. I am overnighting you the project PER (as approved by the Construction Grants & Loan section) which ultimately contains an EAA for the project. Hopefully you should receive it tomorrow. I'm faxing a copy of the Local Government Review Form to the Town today for execution. As soon as I receive an executed copy, I'll forward it to you. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your assistance on this important project. * /Brian L. Tripp, PE, DEE/* *W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.* */Community Infrastructure Consultants/* 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, NC 28205 Phone - (704) 334-5348 Direct - (704) 227-3408 Cell - (704) 517-5656 Fax - (704) 334-0078 Email - _btripp@wkdickson.com_ 3 of 4 2/6/2006 10:18 AM RE: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit www.wkdickson.com Hello Brian, We received the copy of the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) for the wastewater system improvements for the Town of Rosman. Please be aware that all expanding dischargers are required to provide an engineering alternatives analysis (in triplicate) upon request for expansion. While some of the information is provided in the PER, it is not in the same format as requested in the EAA, and the review takes more time. We have reviewed the options and costs included in the PER. The sections of the PER on the wastewater flow projections and alternatives have been reviewed and the following items need additional clarification. Please review these items and provide the needed information: *1. **In the section, Residential Additional Flows: On p. 13, it was noted that a retiree's condominium will be constructed and that the 391 residents would not be included in the projected population for 2020 because of their demographics. Please provide more information on this project. When is construction planned? Is there an overestimation in the number of proposed residents, if the household will consist of retirees, there may be only 1 -2 persons per household? The estimation of 2.33 per household for retiree condos may be too high.* *2. **Please provide any additional information on the status of the annexation plans. (p. 14) If some annexation areas are "currently under development", has it already been included in the projected population for Rosman? Please detail the difference between these 680 acres and the area along US Highway 64 that will provide an additional 41,805 GPD. * *3. **Please review the section on Commercial and Industrial flow and provide corrections on the total of existing domestic, commercial, and industrial flow.* *4. **Please clarify the flow of 41805 GPD that will be coming to the expanded plant. Also, which specific NPDES discharges will be eliminated/consolidated and what is their total flow? Is their flow included in the 41805 GPD? * ** Upon receipt and a satisfactory review of the responses to the above items, we hope to be able to proceed with the permitting process. After drafting the permit, it goes to public notice for 45 days. If there are no adverse comments or requests for public hearing, we should be able to proceed with finalization of the permit. The probable effective date of the permit, if there are no comments on the permit would be May 1 or June 1 2006. Thank you Jackie Nowell 4 of 4 2/6/2006 10:18 AM 2cfe,c1— t- s 73 did(/ O)ir j L (63 croa G.,rQ Z2 / cf-e� 117z �? ) stifes p —7 Z 5 0 u j (, 6 o'3 c� c, ayvc.17rr- 4=9 L Itz 41-/ /, Qf 4f1 f u/if --P dA--r � ( V / S v,� ,r)11 ‘244 al* rNs 300 000 Gf 0 VaT '? kl.47/ r zz s- s :Tr skt 1 r if_ 8 ids PID la Wu Z is 4g z6 / 76P ' -/--- /a 1 ,r "" x' C/1" 0 6,2 Adel, AT / 4,4 l 1 14- so k_ /sue P 12-06-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 001 F-285 t n cs 1 ter• s—t UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 4 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 61 FORSYTH STREET ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 2. Honorable Johnny Rogers Mayor, Town of Rosman P.O. Box 636 Rosman, NC 28772-0636 1 s zppB Reck, 844 cows • zoos 1 StJBJ: Finding of No Significant Impact Rosman Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Reuse Facilities Town of Rosman Project No.. E-SGR T-02-0131 Thirty -Day Comment Period Dear Mayor Rogers: The Finding of No Significant Impact for the Rosman Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Reuse Facilities Project was issued on June 22, 2005. The thirty day comment period has now expired with no adverse comments received. The environmental review for this project is therefore complete. If you have any questions, please contact your EPA project officer, Arthur O. Buff, at (404) 562-9336. cc: John R. Blowe NCDWQ Sincerely, Dorothy L. ayfield, Chief Construction and Technical Assistance Section Water Management Division Post-I�It' Fax Note 7671 To `Jjde4e- 140p4 Co./0op12 a a Phan° 11 Fax # 733 -Q 117 Date1Zr' o's'4x P isfos► 1sy From L,-v 1 Ho,r-�ri►�•- Phone Or 71' - 6 Z Z 5 Fax it Internet Address (URL) http://www.epa,gov RecyctsNRocyctsb!e - Pnmed with Vagorablo 00 BaSeb Inks on Recydod Paper (Minimum 30% Postconvlmer) 12-88-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 002 F-285 tir `"c. 'rc vaoi� UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 4 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 6l FORSYTH STREET ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 JUN 2 2 2005 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Rosman Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Reuse Facilities Project No. E--SRG-T-02-0131 Town of Rosman. North Carolina 5TA4 Pi le The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to determine whether a proposed major agency action will significantly affect the environment. One such major action is the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) for the construction of publicly owned treatment works. Based on a review of the Environmental Information Document and other supporting documents submitted by the Town of Rosman, EPA determined that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is issuing this Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI). The objectives of the proposed project are to replace and repair sections of deteriorating sewer lines in downtown Rosman, provide sewer service to those in town and nearby areas currently on septic systems, construct a new wastewater treatment plant, construct an effluent discharge line directly to the French Broad River, and construct wastewater reuse facilities. The estimated cost of the project is $5,030,200. The Town of Rosman received STAG appropriations in Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 and FY 2003 for a total of $1,367,900. The State of North Carolina's Revolving Loan Program will provide $2,911,300 for the project. An additional $350,000 will be provided by an Environmental Program Management Grant and $400,000 will be obtained through a North Carolina Rural Center Supplemental Grant . Attached is an environmental assessment containing detailed information supposing this action in the following sections: A) Proposed Facilities and Actions, Grant Status; B) Existing Environment; C) Existing Wastewater Facilities; D) Need for Proposed Facilities and Actions; E) Alternatives Analysis; F) Environmental Consequences, Mitigative Measures; and G) Public Participation, Sources Consulted. Comments concerning this determination may be addressed to Mr. Bob Freeman, P.E., Construction and Technical Assistance Section, Water Management Division, EPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA, 30303, or sent by fax to (404) 562-8692, or by email to freeman.bob@ena.gov. Internet Address (URL) • http:/lwww.epa.gov Rocycled/Rocyclablo . Printed with Vegotabld 011 Based Inks on Recycles' Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumorl 12-0,8-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 003 F-285 Comments received within 30 days of the date of this FNSI will be evaluated before a final decision is made to proceed. Sincerely, j-Nd7)1- J. I. Palmer, Jr_ Regional Administrator Attachment 12-D8-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 004 F-285 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A. Proposed Facilities and Actions, Grant Status Figures la, lb, and lc identify the location of the proposed wastewater treatment facilities. New Treatment Facilities: The existing Rosman 0.09 million gallons per day (NMGD) wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) will be abandoned and a new upgraded and expanded 0.250 million gallons per day plant built adjacent to the existing site. The project will include a new influent pump station; a new rotary screen and a new manual bar screen; a sequencing batch reactor treatment unit including two reactors with mixers, diffused air and decanters, an equalization basin upstream of the tertiary filters; a tertiary, disc type effluent filter; and an ultraviolet light disinfection system. Also included will be a 60 degree V-notch weir and splitter box; a flow meter; a cascade aerator; a sampling manhole; a sludge digester; a sludge belt filter press; sludge storage; sludge belt filter press wash water storage; lab/off ce building; a blower building; and a maintenance shop/sludge building. Standby power source and fuel storage will be added at the site. In addition, an effluent pump station and 4,600 Linear Feet (LF) of 4-inch force main will convey reuse quality effluent to a proposed application site consisting of approximately 17.6 usable acres and approximately 125 spray nozzles fed by a network of 8,400 LF 4-inch, 3-inch, & 2-inch piping. The remainder of the effluent will be discharged to the French Broad River. New Collection Facilities: New collection lines will be constructed to extend service to currently unsewered portions of the town and nearby areas. Included will be 11,800 LF of 8-inch gravity line, approximately 72 services, 4,550 LF of 4-inch force main, and one (1) pump station. Rehabilitation: Deteriorated sections of the collection system will be repaired to remove extraneous flow. This will involve the following: cleaning, televising, and relining 3800 LF of 8- inch line; regrouting of 40 vertical LF of 4-foot diameter manholes; performing 7 point repairs; and making 25 service line repairs. B. Existing Environment Topography and Soils: The proposed project is located at the western edge of the Chauga lithological belt in the mountain physiographic region of North Carolina. Elevations in the project area range from 2,175 feet above mean sea level along the French Broad River to 2,400 feet in northern Rosman. The elevation at the proposed WWTP site is approximately 2,180 feet and the average elevation at the proposed spray field is 2,177 feet. The elevation in downtown Rosman ranges between 2,180 and 2,200 feet above mean sea level. Soil surface types at the WWTP are Suncook loamy sand and Rosman fine sandy loam. Soil surface types at the spray field site are Rosman fine sandy loam, Transylvania silt loam, and Toxaway silt loam. The main soil types found along the interceptor route are Tusquitee loam, Rosman fine sandy loam, Brevard loam, Delanco fine sandy loam, Augusta fine sandy loam (cool variant), and 12-08-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 005 F-285 2 Transylvania silt loam. The proposed WWTP site and the proposed irrigation fields are within the 100-year floodplain of the French Broad River. Surface Water: The proposed project is located in the French Broad River basin. The water quality classifications of the river in the Rosman area range from Class B to Class C. The Class B ranking denotes freshwaters protected for primary recreation and other uses suitable for Class C. Primary recreational activities include frequent and/or organized swimming and other human contact such as skin diving and water skiing. Class C uses include fishing, irrigation, boating, aquatic life propagation and survival, and other uses. There are designated trout waters in the Rosman area. This supplemental classification designates an area intended to protect freshwaters for natural trout propagation and survival of stocked trout. There is not a designated water supply watershed in the Rosman area. There are no known public health threats in the French Broad River due to the discharge of the Rosman WWTP. Water Supply: The town of Rosman obtains its water from three groundwater wells in the Gneiss-Felsic hydrogeologic unit. The water obtained from this source is of good quality and receives no treatment other than chlorination. C. Existing Wastewater Facilities Rosman's sewer collection system includes approximately 3.5 miles of 8-inch or smaller sewer mains and two wastewater pump stations. The Rosman WWTP was constructed in 1969 and has since been upgraded several times. However, many of the basic structures within the plant are degraded and obsolete. The 0.09 MGD WWTP currently utilizes a bar screen, dual aeration tanks, dual clarifiers, chlorine disinfection equipment, a flow meter, and an aerobic sludge digester with drying beds. This wastewater treatment facility discharges its effluent to the French Broad River. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) limits for the Rosman WWTP are: Parameter Flow BOD5 (monthly average/weekly average) Total Suspended Residue (monthly average/weekly average) Fecal Coliform (monthly average/weekly average) Total Residual Chlorine (daily maximum) Limit 0.09 MGD 30.0/45.0 mg/L 30.0/45.0 mg/L 200.0/400.0 Count 100 ML 28 µg/L D. Need for Proposed Facilities and Actions The wastewater lines in downtown Rosman are comprised of vitrified clay that is in very poor condition. There are large amounts of inflow and infiltration (MI) entering the wastewater flow in this area of town. During periods of wet weather, the flow to the WWTP can exceed twice its permitted capacity. Also, shards of broken clay pipe have damaged the WWTP's influent pumps. 12-08-2005 04:49PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 006/015 F-285 3 There are several areas within the town of Rosman that do not currently have access to public sewer service and rely on septic systems for the treatment and disposal of domestic wastewater. The groundwater table in the Rosman area is very near the surface. The shallow depth to the water table increases the risk for septic system failures, leading to pollution of both local groundwater. and surface water resources. The town desires to extend service to these areas to reduce the need for individual septic systems in this region. Portions of Rosman's WWTP are dilapidated and/or obsolete. Due to the age of portions of the WWTP, operators are required to perform hazardous maintenance that would not be required were the plant equipped with current treatment technologies. It is necessary to abandon the current WWTP and replace it with the proposed WWTP so that the town of Rosman is provided with a more reliable and enhanced wastewater treatment facility to maintain water quality in the trout waters of the French Broad River. Dual components in the wastewater treatment process will prevent system failure if one treatment module is under repair. Without changing the way that wastewater is treated in Rosman, the aquatic life downstream of the WWTP will continue to be exposed to chlorine disinfectant, which is no longer necessary with ultra -violet (UV) disinfection methods. The treatment level at the proposed WWTP has been designed to comply with reclaimed water standards to reduce the impacts of direct discharge on the French Broad River, which is protected as a Class B-trout streann. Five percent of the total annual flow will be diverted from direct discharge to the river and will be land applied. The reuse portion o t_is project is needed to prevent discharge in o ifie French.Broad River during low flow conditions, when -the river is more susceptible to pollution from a direct. discharge' because ofiow^dissolved oxygen concentrations:- - • �.._ Reuse standards require the treatment process to produce a tertiary quality effluent in accordance with the following limitations: • Monthly average TSS <_ 5 mg/1 with a daily maximum < 10 mg/1 • MonthIy Mean Fecal Coliform < 14/100 ml with a daily maximum < 25/ 100 ml • Monthly Average BOD5 < 10 mg/1 with a daily maximum < 15 mg/I • Monthly Average NH3 < 4 mg/1 with a daily maximum <_ 6 mg/1 The current discharge for the WWTP empties into a marshy ditch that is approximately 50 feet from the French Broad River. This arrangement can allow solids to settle in the ditch and accumulate over time. These particulates are likely to enter the flow of the river during heavy rains, resulting in a slug loading. It is necessary to construct an outfall line that will discharge directly into the main stream channel to eliminate this problem. E. Alternatives Analysis An alternatives analysis was performed to select a 20-year lean to meet the town of Rosman's needs, A total of seven options for the proposed project were considered: (1) the "no action" alternative; (2) the optimization of the existing treatment facilities; (3) regionalization by connection to the town of Brevard; (4) a new Rosman WWTP with direct discharge to the French Broad River and land disposal of treated effluent; (5) implementing water conservation 12-08-2005 04:49PM FROM —Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 007/015 F-285 4 measures; (6) reducing I&I into the wastewater stream; and (7) wastewater collection system alternatives. The first alternative considered, the "no action" alternative, was determined to be unacceptable because it would cause the town of Rosman to rely on a dilapidated and obsolete wastewater collection and treatment system. By not taking action to modify the current means of wastewater treatment and disposal in Rosman, those residences that currently rely on septic systems for wastewater treatment and disposal will not be able to connect to the public sewer system which could lead to the deterioration of the local environment. Without an expansion in wastewater treatment capacity, the future development of Rosman will be severely restricted due to limited areas with suitable soil types for new septic systems. While new package WWTPs might be permitted in such areas, this would be inconsistent with the North Carolina Division of Water QuaIity's (DWQ) goal of consolidating wastewater treatment facilities with advanced wastewater management techniques. The "no action" alternative was determined to be infeasible and was rejected. The second alternative considered was optimizing the use of the existing facilities. Even if the sewer lines downtown were repaired to eliminate I&I into the wastewater flow, the current . WWTP would not have sufficient capacity to handle the amount of flow generated by the inhabitants of Rosman in the 20-year planning period. Since the existing WWTP is not capable of accommodating the flow from the projected population of the town of Rosman, the option of optimizing the use of the existing facilities was rejected. A third alternative of creating a regional wastewater treatment facility by sending Rosman's flow to the town of Brevard was considered. This alternative would require the addition of a pump station at the existing WWTP, the construction of approximately 46,500 feet of forcemain, and Brevard's Gallimore Road and Neely Road pump stations would have to be expanded to handle the additional flow from Rosman. Since this is not the most cost-effective alternative and this option is not the most -environmentally -sound option because the installation of the forcemain requires such a large amount of ground disturbance and several stream crossings, it was eliminated from further consideration. The fourth alternative considered was constructing a new 025 MGD WWTP providing tertiary treatment, the construction of an outfall line to allow effluent to be directly discharged to the French Broad River, and the construction of facilities for land application of a portion of the effluent. This alternative also includes providing sewer.service to currently unserved portions of Rosman and nearby areas. The total resent worth cost of this alternative is approximately $6.4 million. The construction of a ne WWTP for Rosman will have less of a negative impact on tfie vironment than transferring all of Rosman's wastewater flow to the town of Brevard since it would require less total land disturbance. Since this option is the less environmentally damaging and is the more cost-effective alternative, it is the preferred solution for the town of Rosman. pD The fifth alternative considered was imple nting water conservation measures to reduce the total flow to the WWTP. The current (ye 2000) daily flow to the Rosman facility is approximately 68,000 gallons per day (GAD), and the projected daily flow in the year 2020 is approximately 255,000 GPD. If the town implemented water conservation measures, the wastewater flow would not be reduced enough to allow the current WWTP to meet its NPDES 12-88--2005 04:50PM FROM —Construction Grants And Loans 9107156229 T-687 P 008/015 F-285 5 permit limits. The option of implementing water conservation measures to avoid constructing a new WWTP was rejected. The sixth alternative considered for this project was to reduce I&I to reduce the total flow to the WWTP. On an average day, it is estimated that I&I comprises approximately 6,000 gallons (9%) of the total flow to the plant, and it is estimated that during heavy rain events that J&I accounts for approximately 28,000 gallons (31%) of the town's total wastewater flow. Lf I& I could be reduced by 50%, this would only have a limited impact on the total amount of flow to the WWTP. Therefore, the option of reducing I&I to avoid constructing a new WWTP was rejected. It is necessary to replace and repair, by slip lining, sections of the aged sewer lines in downtown Rosman due to their frequent failure. This should eliminate surcharges at the WWTP during high rainfall events. Vacuum sewer and septic tank effluent pumps (STEP) systems were considered alternatives to laying new gravity sewer line in unserved areas of Rosman. The topography in this area would make vacuum sewer systems difficult to maintain and operate. Also, to be cost-effective, vacuum sewer systems require a population density of 75 to 100 users per station. This condition is not met in Rosman's proposed expanded service area. For similar reasons, STEP systems were determined not to be a feasible solution. Gravity sewers are the chosen alternative. Several placement alternatives were also considered for the new gravity sewer lines in the currently unserved areas of Rosman and the most cost-effective placement alternative was selected. F. Environmental Consequences, Mitigative Measures Environmental Consequences: No significant land use changes are expected as a direct result of the proposed project. Demolition of the old WWTP and the construction of the new facility will impact approximately two acres. The installation of the sewer lines will directly impact approximately 10 acres. Although the proposed spray field occupies 17 acres, the installation of the irrigation infrastructure will disturb no more than 0.2 acre. The project will convert two acres of fallow agricultural Iand to public utility use, and the old WWTP will be demolished and this site will be revegetated. Most of the sewer line installation will occur in public rights -of -way. Where the proposed infrastructure crosses agricultural fields and lawns, uses will continue upon completion of construction. The current grazing activities on the proposed spray fields will be temporarily disturbed during the installation of the spray distribution piping and spray heads, but will resume on a rotation basis when effluent is not being sprayed. Indirect impacts, such as residential growth, resulting from the increased capacity of the proposed facility are possible. Segments of the proposed collection system will cross prime farmland soils north of the Coats America pump station. Since the line will be buried, it will not interfere with the future agricultural utilization of this area. The proposed WWTP site and the proposed spray irrigation fields are located within the 100- year floodplain because the town was unable to locate an economically feasible alternative. 12-88-2005 04:50PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 009/015 F-285 6 Approximately 1,800 cubic yards of imported fill material will be used to elevate selected portions of the WWTP site to prevent flooding of the new facilities. The new WWTP will not • significantly raise the 100-year flood elevation in this area, and the project has obtained a No -Rise Certification. The proposed WWTP will operate continuously during 100-year flood events. All of the proposed sewer line infrastructure will be buried below existing grade and therefore will not result in a hydrologic effect. The effluent spray heads will have a negligible hydrological effect in the spray field. No direct impact is anticipated on local archaeological or historical resources as a result of the proposed project. The proposed project will not directly impact any formal public lands or scenic, recreational, or state natural areas. However, since the proposed WWTP will discharge higher quality effluent than the current WWTP serving Rosman and will use UV radiation rather than chlorine for disinfection, this should benefit the local aquatic environment and recreational uses of the French Broad River. Sewer line construction will cross one wetland arca and three streams by trenching. A short segment (20 feet or less) of the bank of the French Broad River will be directly impacted by the construction of an effluent outfal] structure. Riparian vegetation will be reestablished along this corridor following construction, except for a 10-foot wide permanent access corridor that will be maintained by periodic mowing. There may be temporary, localized water quality impacts to the French Broad River during construction including increased turbidity, sediment load, and construction vehicle fluids and emissions. Where sewer lines must be installed along waterways, they will be installed as far from the stream as practicable in order to minimize impacts to riparian vegetation. A 50-foot buffer of natural vegetation will be preserved at the WWTP site, except for a narrow corridor that will be impacted for the installation of the effluent outfall. The spray field site will maintain at least 100-foot buffers along the river. Effluent will be applied at seasonally appropriate agronomic rates. Following construction, the disturbed areas will be stabilized and revegetated. There should be no direct negative environmental impact on water quality once the proposed WWTP and sewer lines are installed and operating. The local aquatic environment will be positively impacted since this proposed project will allow over three hundred septic systems and one non -process industrial WWTP to be retired. The proposed project will also discourage any future septic systems and package treatment systems in its expanded service area. The wetland areas that border the spray irrigation field will not be affected. Although there will be erosion and sedimentation control measures in place during construction, there may be some runoff of pollutants and increased sedimentation into the immediate watercourses, which may temporarily reduce the local populations of fish and other aquatic life. However, due to the small area of impact, these species will likely recover in a short period. The effluent quality of the proposed WWTP will be superior to the effluent that is currently discharged, so the aquatic species in the French Broad River will benefit by having a more pristine habitat. Sewer lines that cross streams will be buried below the stream bed and therefore will not pose a barrier to movement once construction is complete. There will be a slight impact on wildlife habitat where roadside clearing is necessary for the installation of sewer lines. It is quality, wildlife and aquatic fauna and their habitats, and air quality will be minimized by the preceding regulations. An erosion and sedimentation control plan will be submitted at least thirty days prior to construction. Contractors will be required to observe proper equipment maintenance and collection and disposal of all used vehicle fluids to lessen the possibility of contaminating the soil. Impacts to streams and wetland areas will be permitted following the conditions specified in Corps of Engineers (COE) Nationwide Permit 12 and its corresponding DWQ General Water Quality Certification 3374. Local surface waters will be further protected from adverse impact by Section 404/401 Permit requirements. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be consulted regarding any wetland impact and their comments, if any, will be addressed prior to initiating construction. 12-88-2005 04:50PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 0187156229 T-687 P 010/015 F-285 7 estimated that less than one acre will be cleared, and these corridors will be mowed every few years to provide maintenance access and prevent root damage. Impacts to the local wildlife population is not expected to be especially harmful since there are vast areas of National Forests and other undeveloped lands Locally available for habitation. No significant impacts to air quality are expected from the proposed project. During construction, there will be an increase in airborne particulates form land disturbing activities as well as exhaust emissions from construction equipment. These impacts will be temporary and localized in nature and will not pose a public health threat. Odor control mechanisms will be in place at the proposed WWTP to reduce the impact of odors emitted during bacterial metabolism. Such odors will be similar to or less offending than the odors emitted by the current WWTP. There may be in an increase in airborne particulates when the emergency generators are used during power outages. Noise related to the construction of the proposed project will be limited to daylight hours in accordance with local ordinances to minimize adverse impact to residents. Occasional operation of the emergency generators will produce short-term, localized nuisance noise. The proposed project should not release any substances of a hazardous nature during construction that will pose a risk to humans or local fauna. Mitigative Measures: Local land use ordinances regulating such actions as floodplain development, the establishment of subdivisions, stream buffer protection, and wastewater connection policies will guide any future growth that may indirectly result from the proposed project. Rosman has instituted non - disturbance, natural vegetation buffers of 100-foot along the French Broad River and 50-foot along other Natural Resource Conservation Service -mapped streams, and this rule applies to any new development in Transylvania County beyond Rosman's town limits that will be served by Rosman's sewer system. This non -disturbance, natural vegetation buffer requirement will be incorporated into the STAG grant as a grant condition. Transylvania County and Rosman control development in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard areas according to a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance that meets FEMA standards. Indirect impacts on water quality, wildlife and aquatic fauna and their habitats, and air quality will be minimized by the preceding regulations. An erosion and sedimentation control plan will be submitted at least thirty days prior to construction. Contractors will be required to observe proper equipment maintenance and collection and disposal of all used vehicle fluids to lessen the possibility of contaminating the soil. Impacts to streams and wetland areas will be permitted following the conditions specified in Corps of Engineers (COE) Nationwide Permit 12 and its corresponding DWQ General Water Quality Certification 3374. Local surface waters will be further protected from adverse impact by Section 404/401 Permit requirements. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be consulted regarding any wetland impact and their comments, if any, will be addressed prior to initiating construction. 12-68-2005 04:50PM1 FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 8197156229 T-687 P 011/015 F-285 8 Air quality impacts will be minimized by proper vehicle maintenance, wetting of exposed soil, and soil stabilization measures following construction. The North Carolina Division of Environmental Health, the Planning Branch of DWQ, and the DWQ Asheville Regional Office concur with the proposed project. The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources is not aware of any properties of architectural, historical, or archaeological significance that would be affected by the project. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service requested that the town of Rosman use the Guidance Memorandum to Address and Mitigate Secondary and Cumulative Impacts to Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Waver Quality" (Guidance) to minimize the potential indirect impacts of the proposed project on forested stream buffers, filling and development of floodplains, and stormwater controls. The town of Rosman is aware of the recommendations for implementing these measures in the future growth of the town. G. Public Participation, Sources Consulted A public hearing was held on Thursday, January 20, 2004, on the proposed project. The proposed project will not require the town of Rosman to increase its rates for sewer service. No opposition to the plan was presented at the public hearing. Sources consulted about this project for information or concurrence included: 1) The town of Rosman 2) Transylvania County 3) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources -Wildlife Resources Commission -Division of Environmental Health -Division of Water Quality — Planning Branch - DWQ Asheville Regional Office - Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs 4) North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources 5) North Carolina State Clearinghouse 6) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 7) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wetlands H. Special Grant Conditions to be incorporated in the EPA STAG A 100-foot undisturbed natural vegetation buffer on both banks of the French Broad River will be maintained for all properties outside the Rosman Town limits as they exist as of the issue date of this FNSI and that. are in the Town of Rosman's wastewater collection/treatment service area; a 50-foot undisturbed natural vegetation buffer will be maintained along both 12-08-2005 04:50PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 012/015 F-285 9 banks of all other streams shown on the NRCS Soils Maps of Transylvania County for all properties outside the Rosman Town limits as they exist as of the issue date of this FNSI and that are in the Town of Rosman's wastewater collection/treatment service area. 1248-2005 04:50PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans 9197156229 T-687 P 013/015 F-285 A' • • • ''•••• . _ .\ ; • -J.—, der -- ,vo• • 7. 'es... I • li • ) • • • • , , • • t • ..•‘,•-•••.• • fs.:-/-:.• • - • • • - "- . Figure la Rosman WW-TP and Sewer System Improvements, Transylvania County, NC. Southern Portion of Project Arca. ' f • • i• , • ••••wei •_ 2? ,..--'"-•%,„.. - —,—...,.........---.,,...1 .....-.---.. .0.1-....-. - —2.r.z----- • PROPOSED 110saual • 1:2:1• 0_25 NOD w.w.y.p. 9 ..,.."7.::: :--_-.._.••, 7- • UPGRADE (SEE ..1_ ,.../-r-4.,-..; ,..../ '-'''ScHEIAATIC FIG. 0) ' •••)8• •• ft 7" • . . ... . • • 13 roe, d. . . . • . w • • ••• ••••• • ••••••••,.' " . • • • - • ,. VVK DICKSON • Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS ----- US-61 8480 Garvey Drive, Raleigh NC 27616 : 1:-___ ) V , •••., ; ,. 7._,i,..%)-:...: ' ..0; % •••-.. • •... r : z --1 : , , ........, .•• i ... r• . 1 %---71, • -#e /'s 1 r \lf-' ' ... - .• %. I ... r...‘ vi i...) 1 #'-'1 • ,,. r'-'.:eel ‘' '1 ...i id i ..._. ,,.... ,." ( PROPOSED GRAVITY': '71' -- *.-__,= SEWER EXTDISION 1: . ;,(GRAVITY UNE B) ". ,e'm (Ra3.021.F) PROPOSED SPRAYFIELD FORCE tUJN • (4.507.65LF)_ RIE. INC INFORuaTiON SMOwN 0Pi THIS 081AINCO MIA MAPS PROviC)C0 8 rOR CONCEPTUAL PLANNING PU ••••-••• •• ••• 1$ A PPHOXiuATE ANO wAS POSNAN TwiS MAP IS INICNDCO SCS ONLY ; •••._ \ .'r PROPOSED I ,SEWER an 4"...1,(SEWER PR( fltili°A. .!8"1 (21501, OATS *MECAN ....... rp• ., 4 ,.„ ..,' ,,,, ,. . ....r.:••-7,,,,:,:,-.1.-1,-,.....57,,,:11,1z.,,:,,... . ..,.......,..: El-,,....., .. ,...,,-,,, .,i.--,,,.,,,,-..,,,;;;,,,:.•,-, vrv, ,1,7,t ..t_1:__.•,:j ,7d.0.4 ;;,....H,....,,,...t,....,...!•n.f.,.,,,m.1?.•.--..;4-, • ' liC ;•''''-'i..." i, . 7.. 1 ‘ • l'..:.1%-''.)117- '''''.:Vi'l'es;:`17:7.-...;ir . . 'V.:, ::),c. :',',`, --•.',... •• ,4, • 1,t;., ',,_, .2.„-..., -•,,•4;t:;;:iz., ,I.. -,.. ,....„-. ,t ' -‘-•" -il • '‘-‘ T :q.• Vti'VVI.,:. . ....• , ., ,,. :4.... „r•••••• ••• . t:'• • .0 , ''•:!,` .1.- y f .... ,• r , . le.•9'.41419, rt.. %! 1.4 e 1,11. *, ....i • • • . • ,:,:.•"' ''..:.r."*.1.1:::::.;,, w•,...71.•,,,, 1••••‘....41ct,.1:•:•;',4:aw,ti..Z..;',1,:' J!'..L.Z...f.:r''': • :::.1.,. ,. • , , ,-:., ,vr,,, r„ .-.1 ,,,, !?., ..„ , - r•-•-•,,, :";,,,') ••-.-•••,••/. ,' '11 v,..•••:7".....,,..t, ,,,;1:44l.i4,1;;I:eit'AL;.-,:f " ' •;.' .<4.7:!t:;;••-:'5' FDE.'.1 m.,7,,,,,..,'-'•",.• ,sk•iN...4":"...':''' '?1•`i'ci??';;I•',0 ".4jVi?'•'N.n.9't, ...-..•,,,, I I ••• ..4,.,„,,,,,,, •:••• IMMT1160 Will UFT STATION To RE ,ARANDONED (SEWER PROJECT c) -rRE1404 te-d •••••• e 'PODETC FOR J ,,.-% - ..., k_...sPRAyFIEW IRRIGATION _ T. ..-......*---. 7..../ • `.._.. %----....,---'`.\. i \-.... s- - • •••? —\,... ...--K120: — • 1% ----.„.... • ,..... •..1.,,,. . ..---• ..--_---1 --) jel . -'1--- '..-,••,,... #-.. • .,'""e- ,. , \'''':: - .... • • r' r ' RECEIVED 1.19 pAnc•• Av•(vItt.r.. C WO 04020 .1 I = 17 000 F T. FEB 2,, 2005 12-G8-2005 04:51PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans %,'• 1` l ;•, ♦`. i •e • ,r. •-% i PROPOSED GRAVRYI • r, : . j ' ' Y4�k r/ -- • siwER EMERSION ; `, `\• `_ .-:- i.(GRAVRI UNE N) • �.�� -!.'-- ��. • N• • ••*7♦• • j PROIo'031D GRAVITY n r 'r •t' • '\ . N'" . SEAMEN tXTDiS1ON . - .• _ • _j 1 ` ' .•:: .e• ' ; (SEWED PROJECT 0) • � � • • ' • �, . , .' ~ (2150ti) y , » •, . ► ,.. , • PROPOSED GRAVITY ` "•� r ; • •' - 1 '(GRAVITY UN( Al �"�-`\ r. • • 9197156229 T-687 P 014/015 F-285 • • •• `• •_• ``, • \\ • V' i\"(-• t. ,NloPOSEn A• roam mai S(SEMrR PROJECT C) ._i' •. fSL 7l (COATS AilEINCAN MF�G•. ' ., • ���� �~ Tom-• 1. • PROPOSED aRAVflT j EXTENSION (SDI= PROJECT C) S (1OSe"31uf) ,r �I PROPOSED SPRAmn o ioRCE MARL • • a- (4587.15I.7) • • THIS NAP 1S APPROXINAIT aNO WAS ICO 9Y ROSWAN. Y}115 NAP IS WENDED PURPOSES ON.Y. ?•r • ZN • i ��-ydr. , --• • J - "r-...ram t ., • �+ fo � �• PROPOSED SETBACK roR • A • _ _ SPRAYFZEID IRRIGATION-♦� 1 ' ),1 l= • r 1 '• -i -1 • •/fir 1,000 FT. , I' . . _ • • . •. �•� 1- •. . •, .. 1.1 r. Fr'1 rl.. 1 OUR COUNTRY STORI •: PROPOSED CRAM grot ocTlExs3o ••• (� PROJECT e'0171.1o11�'� ooms AYnacAN SEWAGE urt •4. STATION TO OE UPGRADED 1P (SEWER PRI1JECT c) . • • •v II • �r 1f1 k• `�. "'ROAD ....4.1.,-sr • • , •'• 1, / _ Figure Ib. Rosman WWTP and Sewer System Improvements, Transylvania County, NC. Central Portions of Project Area. Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS 8480 Garvey Drive, Raleigh NC 27616 • 12-08-2005 04:51PM FROM -Construction Grants And Loans ( ' tom: r. �. '• ' •-'1 J '1 . ..-.-1 _-711..e' '.. 1 f-) ((e /.. • .7:::). .,Z.4 i I i _;,,---- 1 / )\-... `• _ • ED GRAVITY OTTDiSION PROMO' 14 • • .-' ' , ct Ir•. -1-1:Nr 1 1,g) ). :. ' j1--� �• 1 1 ):. kircz- ,,,,, .. I• is ' 9197156220 f 1 , f • N. • . 1 %''' N '1PROP' amain' k r SOU EXTENSION Is = PROJ=CT c). r• (317L..1out BROAD; -I, 1 .• ♦ 'L TOwN OF ROS PRELIMINARY ENGINEER OPTION #? -• IMPROVE l SCHEMATIC OF PROPOSED ROSMA us= •�+ b'$ • 1 • • co SOME STATION T-687 P 015/015 F-285 • '• /;. 1 �• ' n~ /��• I• • ,• ••..,-0' ••• - • • .�.�'' t It t • _ _r ..ram • • je' • �. f. GENIE PRODUCTS �• • f r %, I 1 P • csJ\ it • �000-) � -/ IL u. 1 a 1 • S Figure l c. Rosman WWTP and Sewer System Improvements, Transylvania County, NC. Northern Portion of Project Area. Including Calven Road Service Arca. Robert J. Goldstein & Associates, Inc ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS L R480 Garvey Drives Raleigh NC 276l6 Re: Possibly spam: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit Subject: Re: Possibly spam: RE: Rosman NPDES Permit From: Jackie Nowell <jackie.nowell@ncmail.net> Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:57:36 -0500 To: Brian Tripp <btripp@wkdickson.com> Brian Tripp wrote: Jackie, Attached please find a scanned copy of the Local Government Review Form for the aforementioned project. A hard copy will be placed in the mail to you tomorrow. Please let me know if you need anything else. Also, if you could give us an idea on the time frames involved in obtaining a revised / amended permit, we would greatly appreciate it. We appreciate DENR's support on this important project for the Town of Rosman. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks. */Brian L. Tripp, PE, DEE/* *W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.* */Community Infrastructure Consultants/* 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, NC 28205 Phone - (704) 334-5348 Direct - (704) 227-3408 Cell - (704) 517-5656 Fax - (704) 334-0078 Email - _btripp@wkdickson.com www.wkdickson.com *From:* Brian Tripp *Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2006 12:41 PM *To:* jackie.nowe11cncmail.net *Subject:* Rosman NPDES Permit Jackie, Thank you for the message Friday afternoon. I am overnighting you the project PER (as approved by the Construction Grants & Loan section) which ultimately contains an EAA for the project. Hopefully you should receive it tomorrow. I'm faxing a copy of the Local Government Review Form to the Town today for execution. As soon as I receive an executed copy, I'll forward it to you. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your assistance on this important project. */Brian L. Tripp, PE, DEE/* *W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.* */Community Infrastructure Consultants/* 616 Colonnade Drive 1 of 3 2/3/2006 11:31 AM Some NPDES Files notes 10/14/2003 Telecon with Rob Brown - DAG, JMN, JC, Alex Marks Rob Brown CG&L wont' fund above $102, 000 DAG - Flow is still not justified from the NPDES Unit Rob - Line to Brevard may not be cost effective. Pump line and station pump. Brevard would have to increase costs and charge them a user fee. ** NPDES notes that tie in to Brevard and discharge to French Broad River/spring field is -10 % difference. Rob - we need to talk w/ Forrest to see what ARO thinks. Plant needs to be upgraded. 11/7/2003 - Letter from CG&L to Rosman - Letter regarding Preliminary Engineering Report and their review. Environmental concerns and issues need to be resolved. 3-4 pages . 12/11/2003 - NPDES returns Rosman's permit application pending resolution of issues with the Prelim Eng. Report. DICKSONPkW community infrastructure consultants August 25, 2005 Division of Water Quality NPDES Unit Attn: Bob Guerra 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 — 1617 Re: Rosman WWTP Expansion Rosman, North Carolina NPDES Permit # NC0021946 WKD # 10583.10.CL Dear Mr. Guerra: RECEIVED SEP� 2 2005 CONSTRUCTION GRANTS & LOAN SECTION AUG 3 0 2005 L J DEWR - WATER QUALITY POINT SOURCE BR,;ACH Enclosed for your consideration, please find three (3) NPDES Form 2A for the expansion of the Town of Rosman's WWTP from 90,000 gpd to 250,000 gpd. Please note that it is the intention of the Town to replace their existing plant with a new 250,000 gpd according to the plans and specifications on file and under review by NCDENR's Construction Grants & Loans Section. Also enclosed is a check in the amount of $400 to pay the applicable permit application fee. In addition, it should be noted that an EAA / PER with an Environmental Assessment has been reviewed and approved by the Department. We appreciate the opportunity to submit an NPDES Form 2A for the expansion of the Town of Rosman WWTP for your consideration and approval. We look forward to working with you and your staff on this important project. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at (704) 334-5348. Sincerely, W. K. Dickson & Co., Inc. Brian L. Tripp, PE Project Manager Enclosures Cc: File 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, NC 28205 Tel. 704.334.5348 Fax 704.334.0078 www.wkdickson.c om community infrastructure consultants August 25, 2005 Division of Water Quality NPDES Unit Attn: Frances Candelaria 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 — 1617 Re: Rosman WWTP Expansion Rosman, North Carolina NPDES Permit # NC0021946 WKD # 10583.10.CL Dear Frances: Enclosed please find a revised check for the aforementioned NPDES permit for the expansion of the Rosman WWTP in the amount of $215 as requested. We appreciate the opportunity to submit an NPDES Form 2A for the expansion of the Town of Rosman WWTP for your consideration and approval. We look forward to working with you and your staff on this important project. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at (704) 334-5348. Sincerely, W. K. Dickson & Co., Inc. Brian L. Tripp, PE Project Manager Enclosures Cc: File FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River FORM 2A NPDES FORM 2A APPLICATION OVERVIEW NPDES APPLICATION OVERVIEW Form 2A has been developed in a modular format and consists of a "Basic Application Information" packet and a "Supplemental Application Information" packet. The Basic Application Information packet is divided into two parts. All applicants must complete Parts A and C. Applicants with a design flow greater than or equal to 0.1 mgd must also complete Part B. Some applicants must also complete the Supplemental Application Information packet. The following items explain which parts of Form 2A you must complete. BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION: A. Basic Application Information for all Applicants. All applicants must complete questions A.1 through A.8. A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States must also answer questions A.9 through A.12. B. Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow z 0.1 mgd. All treatment works that have design flows greater than or equal to 0.1 million gallons per day must complete questions B.1 through B.6. C. Certification. All applicants must complete Part C (Certification). SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION: D. Expanded Effluent Testing Data. A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States and meets one or more of the following criteria must complete Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data): 1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd, 2. Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in place), or 3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to provide the information. E. Toxicity Testing Data. A treatment works that meets one or more of the following criteria must complete Part E (Toxicity Testing Data): 1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd, 2. Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in place), or 3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to submit results of toxicity testing. F. Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes. A treatment works that accepts process wastewater from any significant industrial users (Sills) or receives RCRA or CERCLA wastes must complete Part F (Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes). Sills are defined as: 1. All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 403.6 and 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N (see instructions); and 2. Any other industrial user that: a. Discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the treatment works (with certain exclusions); or b. Contributes a process wastestream that makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity of the treatment plant; or c. Is designated as an SIU by the control authority. G. Combined Sewer Systems. A treatment works that has a combined sewer system must complete Part G (Combined Sewer Systems). ALL APPLICANTS MUST COMPLETE PART C (CERTIFICATION) EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 1 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Rosman WVVTP, NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River BASIC APPLICATIONINFORMATION PART C. CERTIFICATION All applicants must complete the Certification Section. Refer to instructions to determine who is an officer for the purposes of this certificatlon. All applicants must complete all applicable sections of Form 2A, as explained In the Application Overview. Indicate below which parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting. By signing this certification statement, applicants confirm that they have reviewed Form 2A and have completed all sections that apply to the facility for which this application is submitted. Indicate which parts of Form 2A you have completed and X Basic Application Information packet Supplemental ❑ Part ❑ Part are submitting: Application Information packet: D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data) E (Toxicity Testing: Biomonitoring Data) (Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes) G (Combined Sewer Systems) • Part F ❑ Part ALL APPLICANTS MUST COMPLETE THE. FOLLOWING CERTIFICATION. I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations. Name and official title Johnny Rogers. Mayor Signature Telephone number (828) 884-6859 Date signed Upon request of the permitting authority, you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment works or identify appropriate permitting requirements. SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO: NCDENR/ DWQ Attn: NPDES Unit 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 9 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION PART `A.BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION FOR_.ALL APPLICANTS:. '.. All treatment works must complete questions A.1 through A.8 of this Basic Application Information Packet. A.1. Facility Information. Facility Name Town of Rosman WTP Mailing Address P.O. Box 636 Rosman. North Carolina 28772 Contact Person Wesley Roval Title Operator Telephone Number (828) 506-5572 Facility Address Main Street (no Street No.) (not P.O. Box) Rosman, North Carolina 28772 A.2. Applicant Information. If the applicant is different from the above, provide the following: Applicant Name W.K. Dickson & Co.. Inc. Mailing Address 616 Colonnade Drive Charlotte, North Carolina 28205 Contact Person Brian L. Tripp, PE Title Protect Manager Telephone Number (704) 334-5348 Is the applicant the owner or operator (or both) of the treatment works? owner N/A operator Consultant Indicate whether correspondence regarding this permit should be directed to the facility or the applicant. existing environmental permits that have been issued to the treatment works PSD • facility X applicant A.3. Existing Environmental Permits. Provide the permit number of any (include state -issued permits). NPDES NC0021946 UIC Other RCRA NIA Other A.4. Collection System information. Provide information on municipalities and areas served by the facility. Provide the name and population of each entity and, if known, provide information on the type of collection system (combined vs. separate) and its ownership (municipal, private, etc.). Name Population Served Type of Collection System Ownership Town of Rosman 498 Separate Municipal Total population served 498 EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 2 of 30 FACIUTY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC 0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River A.5. Indian Country. a. Is the treatment works located in Indian Country? ❑ Yes X No b. Does the treatment works discharge to a receiving water that is either in Indian Country or that is upstream from (and eventually flows through) Indian Country? ❑ Yes X No A.6. Flow. Indicate the design flow rate of the treatment plant (i.e., the wastewater flow rate that the plant was built to handle). Also provide the average daily flow rate and maximum daily flow rate for each of the last three years. Each year's data must be based on a 12-month time period with the 12th month of this year occurring no more than three months prior to this application submittal. a. Design flow rate 0.25 mgd Two Years Aao Last Year This Year b. Annual average daily flow rate 0.043 0.074 0.068 c. Maximum daily flow rate 0.197 0.143 0.090 A.7. Collection System. Indicate the type(s) of collection system(s) used by the treatment plant. Check all that apply. Also estimate the percent contribution (by miles) of each. X Separate sanitary sewer 100 ❑ Combined storm and sanitary sewer A.8. Discharges and Other Disposal Methods. a. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to waters of the U.S.? X Yes ❑ No If yes, list how many of each of the following types of discharge points the treatment works uses: i. Discharges of treated effluent 1 ii. Discharges of untreated or partially treated effluent 0 iii. Combined sewer overflow points 0 iv. Constructed emergency overflows (prior to the headworks) 0 v. Other NIA 0 b. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to basins, ponds, or other surface impoundments that do not have outlets for discharge to waters of the U.S.? 0 Yes If yes, provide the following for each surface impoundment: Location: NIA X No Annual average daily volume discharge to surface impoundment(s) 0 mgd Is discharge N/A ❑ continuous or N/A ❑ intermittent? c. Does the treatment works land -apply treated wastewater? ❑ Yes X No If yes, provide the following for each land application site: Location: Number of acres: Annual average daily volume applied to site: mgd Is land application ❑ continuous or 0 intermittent? d. Does the treatment works discharge or transport treated or untreated wastewater to another treatment works? 0 Yes X No EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 3 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River If yes, describe the mean(s) by which the wastewater from the treatment works is discharged or transported to the other treatment works (e.g., tank truck, pipe). NIA If transport is by a party other than the applicant, provide: Transporter Name NIA Mailing Address Contact Person NIA Title Telephone Number For each treatment works that receives this discharae, provide the following: Name N/A Mailing Address Contact Person Title Telephone Number If known, provide the NPDES permit number of the treatment works that receives this discharge Provide the average daily flow rate from the treatment works into the receiving facility. mgd e. Does the treatment works discharge or dispose of its wastewater in a manner not included in A.8. through A.8.d above (e.g., underground percolation, well injection): If yes, provide the following for each disposal method: Description of method (including location and size of site(s) if applicable): NIA ❑ Yes X No Annual daily volume disposed by this method: Is disposal through this method ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent? EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 4 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River WASTEWATER DISCHARGES: If you answered "Yes" to question A.8.a, complete questions A.9 through A.12 once for each outfall (including bypass points) through which effluent is discharged. Do not Include information on combined sewer overflows in this section. If you answered "No" to question, A.8.a, go to Part B, "Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow Greater than or Equal to 0.1 mgd." A.9. Description of Outfall. a. Outfall number NIA INC) b. Location Rosman 28771 (City or town, if applicable) Transylvania (Zip Code) North Carolina (County) N 35 08.17' (State) W82 49.17' (Latitude) (Longitude) c. Distance from shore (if applicable) ft. d. Depth below surface (if applicable) ft. e. Average daily flow rate 0.25 mgd f. Does this outfall have either an intermittent or a periodic discharge? ❑ Yes X No (go to A.9.g.) If yes, provide the following information: Number f times per year discharge occurs: NIA Average duration of each discharge: NIA Average flow per discharge: NIA mgd Months in which discharge occurs: N/A g. Is outfail equipped with a diffuser? ❑ Yes X No A.10. Description of Receiving Waters. a. Name of receiving water French Broad River b. Name of watershed (if known) United States Soil Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code (if known): c. Name of State Management/River Basin (if known): United States Geoiogical Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit code (if known): d. Critical low flow of receiving stream (if applicable) acute 300295 cfs chronic 701055 cfs e. Total hardness of receiving stream at critical low flow (if applicable): mgll of CaCO3 EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 5 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: A.11. Description of Treatment a. What level of treatment are provided? Check all that apply. • Primary • Secondary X Advanced ■ Other. Describe: Tertiary Treatment -Disk Filters b. Indicate the following removal rates (as applicable): Design BOD5 removal or Design CBOD5 removal 98 % Design SS removal 98 % Design P removal 90 % Design N removal 95 % Other NIA % c. What type of disinfection is used for the effluent from this outfall? If disinfection varies by season, please describe: UV disinfection wlstandbv UV unit If disinfection is by chlorination is dechlorination used for this outfall? ❑ Yes ■ No Does the treatment plant have post aeration? x Yes • No A.12. Effluent Testing Information. All Applicants that discharge to waters of the US must provide effluent testing data for the following parameters. Provide the indicated effluent testing required by the permitting authority for each outfall through which effluent is discharged. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows in this section. All information reported must be based on data collected through analysis conducted using 40 CFR Part 136 methods. In addition, this data must comply with QAIQC requirements of 40 CFR Part 136 and other appropriate QA!QC requirements for standard methods for analytes not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a minimum, effluent testing data must be based on at least three samples and must be no more than four and one-half years apart. Outfall number. NA -Proposed Plant • i• �.: e' I. . ..-. y, : .Futas3,r.. ,;. , s, e & !i1 '! s SP �}-" ,i;&, :.4 ��t ¢., ip ��`• .i 3"' .x j. ... e. f:"t1 µ. ;c.,,..+y.S.... .L 43. {... t � v+ 11M M 9. 1" 3 �..�.� P. •..�: .{ K. ,�.....,; rs.., s,,„1. ..•II t,tK4, t :/RAW .. i l.e-.. ,f .i.;6<. a4 -f u.,r . :i t tP..,.i. at: <+ �� �i R t ¢ t. tt.= i ? iR- K, k� R: t :S �. ':tt.:eYi X1i{:.A G ':.qD LY � �� �� • J{: 1 �`� ��'r[ a53 .t '`..c".'Y':'p'i '.. �'F� r '1 q1 .e.,.,. w.. a ay�` =�12 ? � a3 °`UE N;., A3 ,t _s , . 'a., �w.£nMf S` •�.,�, �.�3f±ik�". ' �1.Sy t-k y pl , t j eh`,M 1x "A :t } 0 h;.,. t t iy gypL�y, /.'. MM ,, .i �a:�.;?rY>.:fr4.+'stz���� 1tk i <i rv�i ` lk t.� . - + kti� .r�:a�'.".�� ; � .¢ iif`dry' Yjr } «t ifiL���a�� <'.k�t'� �� a l ire iF �" ,: q, t'att : § a i %lii e$'r4'r� °9l°�'N ^3U• n 6 .`4:. B r Y.i..:',Et tig".e,.st�.i%. .? t :;m .. lea.i.7.�,Fq•�� kA�#.tea: .s+��e�a �aY�. ,�r7aek��ft:'} +. pH (Minimum) s.u. `i., ��z,.,.£_;., d{ ,.,.'uw`.�:..`�. `E , pH (Maximum) s.u. '....... '� _,... n� �, A Flow Rate Temperature (Winter) Temperature (Summer) * For pH please report a minimum and a maximum daily value _ krII xr � a {� �� � c3 � �A� t:t .t �x� '<S ! rl �iaaG't $iy �:.. � r S '.r•v POLC[i'�'At ii' fS i'£' a i ..i,� 5 t $,. x d^i e i .,i € *. t f .:! j•s n .4 .:....:i" SS. 5 1 i. _ ? z , d.�. �.:.."C�tY- ..A �yi.y : f, 3�•... �' .}-,kn"�`., ,F> '=.:,.7-. a l.. � �IR.UMi �� . i ,..,:.. .rap , E ;a ;,f C GE `� 1.. A-4. ra l .s.;T ^...... - .[i4 � t+._.t='''� .sY.,. ' .r .�'`• r .' ' 1 VE GE DAILY DISC G, 1 �� `� �. � �• x, ,_ i � ".S.r 9,�-'.y' (1 'i 4t,1 ,r. .1.. i't [:. 3 k Fa�,"�. �9� �i..i-.e i f k« �«1St+d L _ � c�> � � � #-}�R�Y..Ya � tt 'F.t� nvP�i�.r4^' '�' _ i'`;. .6. , k t ETHOD . � fZ 4v i.. $21 S="i, 1 1.E..1 u*. • - °k rw �sr �i . �. t> G' ..q, r��,+e. �, }... '�..;+z:E .�.i'3 t i. t q� i ; i . ;L. k'�ertr.-..{ *c s3 • 4 n .... TJ .: 1 ,•i'T,.' , %i.! � {' 1:^ ;'.3 t :vrxtl'ro �yi;�li� �: v.:r'.; `-Y q. •:k oYr:�"aE L °tv'• t A; t:, .5F4rJ .+y�.. f•.t ,t ° 1., ...n'i�:... � .a ._<.�,a &. t,:...,,sld`{r?S�!i.i<. 'J «Y-7-7t.�..sl r 1 ttr;, � :t?'ij:'Zi ! .t U �. �i.ti..: t! � %..�}y t • ire 1. �. ti , Ntta t t i IIII F° : =L.t y� a .iit '1Yaf. - � .rt+w' a it < t a F 1 "ra�.,. : �,1?.. . rtF. i , :q5, 'Fi� .tL. S`� 6..P i.x.�'t3`�3:s-�3:, « � :+f !'.(7* } F" �s�`i..,4°-�:r t+. .I fir i' r.. , rer, � r ,< ii-:'�'t'M �i.{7.'�d_ if.. �..E.'x,..�'T{LT=+... >�e.. CONVENTIONAL AND NON CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (Report one) BOD5 CBOD5 FECAL COLIFORM TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS (TSS) END OFPART A. REFER THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS - OF : FORM 2A YOU- MUST COMPLETE EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 6 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman WWTP NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION.• PART, B. ADOlTlONAL APPIJCATION, NFORMTOW FOR APPLICANTS WITH A DESIGN FLOW=GREATER -MANOR EQUAL TO:01- MGD (100,000=rgallons " r da °: • I All applicants with a design flow rate z 0.1 mgd must answer questions B.1 through B.6. All others go to Part C (Certification). B.1. Inflow and Infiltration. Estimate the average number of gallons per day 24,000 gad that flow into the treatment works from inflow and/or infiltration. be rehabilitated wl installation of new proposed WWTP. Briefly explain any steps underway or planned to minimize inflow and infiltration. I&I Study has been performed. Damaged sewer lines will area extending at least one mile beyond facility property boundaries. This (You may submit more than one map if one map does not show the entire the treatment works and the pipes or other structures through which outfalls from bypass piping, if applicable. that are: 1) within' mile of the property boundaries of the treatment is stored, treated, or disposed. under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) by truck, rail, the treatment works and where it is treated, stored, and/or disposed. processes of the treatment plant, including all bypass piping and all balance showing all treatment units, Including disinfection (e.g., flow rates at influent and discharge points and approximate daily flow the diagram. and effluent quality) of the treatment works the responsibility of a and describe the contractor's responsibilities (attach additional Water Works, Inc. B.2. Topographic Map. Attach to this application a topographic map of the map must show the outline of the facility and the following information. area.) a. The area surrounding the treatment plant, including all unit processes. b. The major pipes or other structures through which wastewater enters treated wastewater is discharged from the treatment plant. Include c. Each well where wastewater from the treatment plant is injected underground. d. Wells, springs, other surface water bodies, and drinking water wells works, and 2) listed in public record or otherwise known to the applicant. e. Any areas where the sewage sludge produced by the treatment works f. If the treatment works receives waste that is classified as hazardous or special pipe, show on the map where the hazardous waste enters B.3. Process Flow Diagram or Schematic. Provide a diagram showing the backup power sources or redunancy in the system. Also provide a water chlorination and dechlorination). The water balance must show daily average rates between treatment units. Include a brief narrative description of B.4. OperationlMaintenance Performed by Contractor(s). Are any operational or maintenance aspects (related to wastewater treatment contractor? Yes No If yes, list the name, address, telephone number, and status of each contractor pages if necessary). Name: William Wesley Royal of Royal Mailing Address: P.O. Box 778 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Telephone Number: f828) 506-5572 office: (828) 889-9537 Responsibilities of Contractor. Complete O&M of Facility B.5. Scheduled improvements and Schedules of lmplementatlon. Provide information on any uncompleted implementation schedule or uncompleted plans for improvements that will affect the wastewater treatment, effluent quality, or design capacity of the treatment works. If the treatment works has several different implementation schedules or is planning several improvements, submit separate responses to question B.5 for each. (If none, go to question B.6.) a. List the outfall number (assigned in question A.9) for each outfall that is covered by this implementation schedule. N/A (NC) b. Indicate whether the planned improvements or implementation schedule are required by local, State, or Federal agencies. ❑ Yes X No EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 7 of 30 FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: Town of Rosman NC0021946 PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN: French Broad River c. If the answer to B.5.b is "Yes," briefly describe, including new maximum daily inflow rate (if applicable). NIA • d. Provide dates imposed applicable. For improvements applicable. Indicate Implementation Stage - Begin Construction - End Construction - Begin Discharge - Attain Operational e. Have appropriate Describe briefly: by any compliance schedule planned independently dates as accurately as possible. Level permits/clearances conceming other Construction Permits will be obtained or any actual dates of completion of local, State, or Federal agencies, Schedule MM/DD/YYYY for the implementation indicate Actual been obtained? steps listed planned or actual completion Completion MM/DD/YYYY below, as dates, as 9/6/05 requirements necessary. Yes 12/22/06 12/22/06 1/26/07 Federal/State when e No B.6. EFFLUENT TESTING DATA (GREATER THAN 0.1 MGD Applicants that discharge to waters of the US must effluent testing required by the permitting authority on combine sewer overflows In this section. All information using 40 CFR Part 136 methods. In addition, this data QAIQC requirements for standard methods for analytes based on at least three pollutant scans and must be Outfall Number: N/A — Proposed Plant ONLY). provide effluent testing data for the following parameters. Provide for each outfall through which effluent is discharged. Do not include the indicated information conducted other appropriate data must be reported must be based on data collected through analysis must comply with QAIQC requirements of 40 CFR Part 136 and not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a minimum effluent testing no more than four and on -half years old. 1� <FP. •. %,.t..' f , .a�.,4aC.F».=,.'.5�.'.fYt +.",.,�o'_.t:r.4.ti..1...s.r+,..FAr•:t.%t<,x.'.3 .a«7- A�.33'• ,I=✓�x;-rr- ..:. ,�rr._g.`rG.,,w,,..,`tAs rAr T ':.x�< . Y.r.:.,t.t.,.Ey; {• rimed' r ..AZF o a' .y#,Y wi..t 4 . T Allrt4SGti -P#.{;�. ''.t}7�t.:1tf.7...t A,sai J..xi„h,��-i(-•r:' • 3�- ;i.k•i£i}p' ,f 2�Sr'.,, v',.;.ta.'.,:I,Fa"t_'',trs i,.tE3t `€F ,exa q f ,�,T" E., x s t.t4.. �„t-KNsr1 u y.r„ a-.- : aF}E�"., 3iys s:,. „3Sddia.:� ,^vv„a. {.-dr6f1'^�.`tSr`.S"'jte:.3,?�£,�.£. {r. .£g. `i�"3' {.::£s.7�a..cax.:��,=a'i' Lpt •b�5� r �', Ar•{, .: '.a, r 4;• ' a • tyH;, ..:>,„„�• ., U.a:"'w,t e ril?:zCy- :.:...�<.�'..,@.t t.1 .aw.F <- S�r C ,p �- u),O m4 Sl24.A'i`„ ,ta �"u � ; 'F p{.#`" ,0 'll nH 1 ,i ,'4•;7<a�:M.°S 11 Q' 4!f-:,Flx CONVENTIONAL AND NON CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS AMMONIA (as N) 1 1 1 1 1 CHLORINE (TOTAL RESIDUAL, TRC) 1 1 1 1 1 1 DISSOLVED OXYGEN 1 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN (TKN) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 NITRATE PLUS NITRITE NITROGEN 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 OIL and GREASE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PHOSPHORUS (Total) 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 OTHER END OF PART B• .REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE '. EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 8 7550-22. Page 8 of 30 04/08/2005 13:27 828-884-4159 .101 YI rYYil Y0.41 raust.w& VltrOuit W. INC TOWN OF ROSMAN T0433400T8 PAGE 01 T-113 P.0C2 F-221 F-aC TY NAME AND PERMIT NUNBQ!!: Rosman WWTP, NC0021946 ::U*SIC.;*PPLtCh( 'IO,N' aNF� RM TIO . � J ;;;:;: ' Aar • .c: '4LRTIF2C.i0rT1©N:! An tORtiosRb nlu - . _•• • • •...... ...___ .... y;.. , .... .. . K oomsleto the Cembicauon Section. incisor to tnstruatJons to deter/Who wt,o Is an erfaear ter the -� certification. All app Laub must complete all appncodts seattom, at Pam 2 as ex craw to the Application OverviieIndicate� of Ns i parts of Perm YA you have oomptstsd end aro svhrrrttttin . eYhove a row which f.Parni 2A and have completed ell sections that a fa signing Vile certification appUc tfon le submitted. ■ itted. fs can!!rm that e,ey have ravtewled apply m the facility tar which this appUca cn is st,I n t . Indices which parts of Form ZA you Aave complatad sad are attbmitdng: x Basic Application Information packet SUpptamenta1 Appfoatian information packet. PBttMrr ACTION RaouliSreo: RIVeR IA$IN; French Broad River l' NT*;(yiusT: CO{liiP•1;:;TMIN4` ldiXOWINi,l AMMACATiO .. ' - ..;. - , :;, :. k -- for sorrily under penalty of law thatlH.document and all enactments f .- '-- • '��' '1,y; :,= designed to assure that qualified personel properly gather and evaluste the of information submitted. aeased n or a My yli n ui yaof Ole epa with ra systemeon ntanega the or ghost pergola dtrociy rsaponsibie forgathering die information: the information Is to the be f f my 1alo+tila parson end ne fie, accurate, and complete. I OM aware that [flora are significant penalties tar submitting info___.:__ ._' for knowing vioieticns. Na!ne and official title Signature Telephone number Date striae i�'JY Q5 Upon request of the permitting authority, you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment works or identity appraptlote permuting ramified -owns. In Pan 0 (Expandea Effluent 'resting Da:al Pan E (Toxicity Testing: Biomanandng Data) • Part F (industrial User Discharge. arid RCRA.ICERCW Wastes) © Pall G (Combined Sewer Systems) AMIMIlor SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO: NCDENRI DWQ Attn: NPDES Unit 1817 Mall Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 278Se•1617 EPA Farm 3510-PA (Rev. 1.90). Replaces EPA forme 7550.E tL 155a42. Pogo 9of30 \ `IB �1� l'•. -`i`t \f\N r J ����) �\ •N ' �, 1 V' ` \ ,t r`e• �/• 2 ,N35 �.ni=; ( 1, ,..�' Q `�. � in /'`—!� • U )( � ,..5 / k� �•:� f. ' os r. ••"..#tt•-ter�. fir oillt(�I/I, ` J1 , J� �, , \ .��b; ) Sip \ jl ��' -,9_3 -.V.7-1 oib; rl -•''mil l- . �� _ ,� r ) �e 5 'ft-- f ��-!j y tit L�� • --- +� 6.,1 ALVOO R.OSMAN � - : „‘."..: ) , • I 1 '�; .3 ' .1 ''-',... it / •IIP : ..._____-_ ‘.eAOrNO �n N3 / / / 7 / I 1 ..�f�1//) -1 r o �! ram} yy ,,�� .?/r_ l.S/ .f f If ( , ° �.,� J/ti A./. y, . ;' Rim. 1' RNi1. 1 mom--- eC: ,n i ,,• j 1( Mile , o ; t,l (�,% �� / a ` _ jf •1 ,c•�C, , . A., 0 7 ti \�' it 11i1` e� . • —� .( firr) / ,( r r' \; �! � n t ? -EASTATOE> - it `__ G� P '� - - s%'- - iff 1 �� 1l\-: , rt f ') )/, ;. /(.'', �' -vim 1 ; C r r- ! *� N r C�> , - Sl4 1 if - tr /ter' , • 1 i 1 'S `I A � _ 1 Y • �, -� f. ,r. +R' ., . -)'. `'\ �.,>'� M,f , ,,_ • ,;�r..�� � _� ;� J�� /- 1} 1� ;,7, I "' /Dr.-)) ,err `� D �--�: 3-D TopoQuads Copyright ©1999 DeLorme Yarmouth, M1'; 04096 Source Data: USGS 1000 ft Scale: 1 : 25,000 Detail: 13-0 Datum: WGS84 BLOWERS 13-1 �'..� L/ 2A 7 INFLUT CHARAC10RISTICS FLOW •EN 250 mg 0.75mgd BLOWER B-2 8-3 SBR BASINS 91 PUMP P-10 BDDa = /I BUILDING 4 CV-1 ---► BB'- 8'f 1S5 = !►♦ `-'_ OVERFLOW a SPRAY nap MAGNETIC METfR (WI-2) N = 40 ml mg/1 P •10' I i DECANTER D-1 TANK DRAIN L./C-4: To SPRAY FIELD pH - 8.0 1C 9.0 CV-7 is Ire 7O.PORARY FLIER BY-PASS LN E Flow - 315 of Yearly Flow 6.0 T CV-3 BODs - 10 m4/I L �C-11 MR �- 10 mg 79�.0 8.f EQUALIZAUON I, r pH • 8.0 To -eAeh� P-4 PUMP P-7 FMS- ,/c_a f POST WO 10'0 MURK(' 111R IYf INFLUENT i4 « EOUALZAILON j� B B•f I 1Cf i -IN--su ROTARY SCREEN f BASIN 0� 10'f ►� U UV UNIT !1 �. 1F-NOTE i ~ 8-f -� 10°0 ^ � P-S �-(�} FINAL F0.TER _� --pa.- WEIR (VN-1)H r 12.0 EFFLUENT 8'0 CV-4 1 ' EMAUZADON M AERATOR PUMP'S MANUAL -FAIR �F T PUMP P-8 FT-1 P-1 BAR 9CI4EEl1 P-2 P-3 CV-2 VERFLOW & TANK TANK 10.0 8'f DECANTER D-2 DRAIN I I EFFLUENT OIARACTORISIICS �1 -► TANK DRAIN I I I EFFwENr FLOW -Avg. 0.23mgd * es * •* SBR BASINS 92 ~ I RETURN 1SPLI TEMPORARY/ DRAIN V-NOTCH WEIR 7� • 30 g � SCRE IINTO T 00 L/C`r2B 1 Of BY-PASS LINE N - 1 /1 - 8. 70 9.0 (By Off) LL . d"f . 8 0 pH MR-C A;R g f + < 3 Z 8•0Ye eN Z L/C-6 DIGESTOR 'SLUDGE PUMP SLUDGE • g 4 f SLUDGE HOI.DI3 NG TANK , P-8 BELT { �.}�, OVERFLOW LAISTEWATRY/SANITAIiY WASTEWATER L/C-7 f PRESS peel BASIN AND DRAIN SLUDGE DIGESTER AND DRAIN 4'0 WASH WATER i t BELT PRESS 1 -AIR{� STORAGE SLUDGE PUMP PUMP P-9 (BY SLUDGE D-3 WASH WATER WASH WATER PUMP VENDER) PUMP P-12 STORAGE DEWATERED CV-5 t° 2•0 f VENDER) BASIN 01/ERROR AND DRAIN TO L�AIDFFILL (By Others) •S � B'f i 10.0 TANK DRAIN --..*- Vo TANK DRAIN 1 aa� SCHEMATIC FLOW PATH OF 0.25 MGD TREATMENT FACILITY NOT TO SCALE Rea Pumpem sll anon INTna 01111W Units Past Edslistawt FMId Fier Spahr Ids ••••• DIAmblesMloalkn �� •I • P• tidy Ols write belt Prosliedustir lb Find DYs avo Mesh 1110w Naas. Bud PI. P2 a P3 RF-t Slat tk In p a 82. P-4 & P-5 Peonps P-7 & P-4 Concrete FF-1 Pumps P-9, nw P-10 "" UV-1 a UV-2 Si* 0tgrtsr, P-8 BP-1 P-11 Slitter Boo "'; P-9 WA* Bon "••; P-10 P-12 TYPE Precast Concrete Relay 58Wr Scrip knit Win Connie Caoada Liga Raid.) Pao Bit Press - Concrsts Caseate Cameo Calvet Out matIc 11illZm E 1Obo x sr D an' Weds 37% 37t 10 lids 18-Y x 4tr-e't 10 Reds (Pis COO 11•-85e 1S-4% 10' Selo Contests 22'5% 12'x,tr Tills 1V 7 3/4x 31F-(x 1a' Ulm 1 mar 12'-ek 22m: 10 ow 13'-4•s 17e 10' Ilkle 1S-41 s 17* 10' Wks 12-7.rs 1S-7.5% 10' Wks N3LIME MVO 2.300 yd men 1B C00 irl mos 41.875 pi 2.500 gd 3' Illds 320 vol sa 5400 ell 330-815 b/hr (12 to 15X D.S.) 18.883 got 18,960 gd 149E0 gal 13,340 ell She 200 PtIliPS 3 e 300 9?m 1.5 HP Saw Ms 2-100 cps aim- 1.7hp 2-425 urn 2-3 aw RS WE ed.1.7ha 40 9Tm a 40 40 spin. 50R. 100 ges 01 HP 112 Sim a 1oOpr 30 pm a 203R Ful Shoo" 7.5 4' sod SNIP Rngs •• 11180s Ptnp 1-Drum 2 Rows 10100am 14' _ 1 U09 am Bens PimPP Soap Pump 550 a WEN 5 IN Esar Min 10112aas 19P IYm+r ssPot 30 goo (P12 100 ads i 49 pig ALAR110 l 2 inn a 291 palm each " 100 pain a 4.9 pr ('tired) MP* 0 4.9 pp 19174_ 100 scam a 4.9 prig 100 Alm a 49 p 100 scan a 49 pig Bakwh %stm 0.4 pig 1-15 HP Mow (] 4) aslaoh r/rron 1-333 scan a 0.7 pit Blow-df 3-20 or lamas (Cris Span Remote l/R/T 2 e 15 HP (Blows) By Vsldor 1 e 15 HP (8hes) Mows 1 e 15 HP (Sere) Blow 1 s 15 HP Owe) Mom 1 e 15 HP (Suss) Blown 2 De miwe a 0.5 HP Wad BAN 31p sr V-lletdt Bet Demote a 05 aP 1 015 HP ► COMM L/C -1 iicso ltnr 'alma* TinrftC 2A a 2B ljt-4 Ldt-4 FWF/T a 1pajT lined Earn 10 ldp�3 N0*Ul$ ID -I a 10 7 LC-4 LC.-5 a L�7 Lars end Timer Lt-7I�1 Autrnolb' 2 115 hop to 6mlyd Mani 1 e 2 Mau A WVj7Sods MN/ Purrs, 40 he0 Boras 4S 403 Control Panel 10 Ss ad �/3 oh �/3 cis � oh - 4I Ph 1450V js 4/y Ph 1, Phu@ pig V ph Vah ali V 3 d ph • Includes automatic control valves, automatic decanters and automatic equipment controls. •• Starters in belt press control panel ••• Includes power for belt press, sludge pump. wash water pump and belt press drive. •••• Takes suction from same splitter box. Waehwater / Spray Field Splitter Box EQUIPMENT FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY NOT TO SCALE DIVISION I , wia _ Le; .UN.MitSPP DICKSONI ,a• marsx "NO ROM eAPPIONILS srri at o►a act msspr- MONO ,oem MwM• e °A Columbia. ac .otesaxan10 M-- P,e� a • N .. i- '4 7.31 is COLLECTION SYSTEM AND REHABIUTATION FM TOWN OF ROSMAN SCHEMATIC FLOW PATH EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIUTY v.; Tao Moo - 21135 Elev.- 2179 INFLUENT ROTARY Ds - 2205 SCREEN Else.-210.3 RAW MOPR PUMPINGVALVE STAOON VAULT PUMP'. P-1 P-2 P-3 Floating DeoMs- Elev. - 2181 Mao. flax-2180.7 EIs - 2173 1 16n. Love (-i - 2184.7 58R BASIN Shad Roof Bottom ENvr 2206 9191's Sludge Pump To Dlg.tar FINAL FL11R Maw Lava - 2162.5 POST COU110N DAWN I . Law - 2177.6 Tr OW. P-a 10'0 12'0 To* Drain D1a. Min. S. 0.2210 1met b- 2168.55 Bev. - 2162 Oar. - 2770 Elev. - 2188 60d V Notch Weir (Bottom_1Of WM Eby" 2181) 100 'V . Flood_ 2183.44 To French Broad River 441• Wort�art Elev.217L6fl P-10 (VN-2) P-9 To Spray Field To Wash water Storage Basin fla - 2183 Moo. Loci -2183.5 I To Belt Press T rnpin9 JIYDRAULIC PROFILE OF 0.25 MOD TREATMENT FACILITY NOT TO SCALE RIPS Pia LOCATION TYPE READ Shun -of HEAD Operating O1141RCl (►) RCIL C) P-1 Rae soshoale PS 9Cmudle 48r 32' 10-1 7.5 RP 300 P-2 Rae vaol.dr PS &emerges 4B 32' LC-1 7.51P NO P-3 R...h.lr PS Suhweb. 40' 3r LC-1 7.5 FP 300 P-4 `> * (SO p). r 9.8mom r e 19' Lr Tine•,I.C-2 1.7 HP 100 P-5 SWge (58R fit 9dmwsllls 1Lr Lr Tinr•yl0-2 1.7 If 100 P.0 Sbde1 [Diner Sldewsiro 1C 11' ne•/1A-3 t7 HP 140 P-7 P0S1 E+gMWA1E1I BASH 1Lrblee 25' 2f L'O-4 10 FP 425 P-8 POST 133.1311131 2ARp1 BASIN Maim 20 22' Ly0-4 601P 425 P-2 fuh Rohe 5ipgly Tubb 29 145' .. L/0-8. LC-7 1.0 HP 100 P-10 Spiry Red 98gy Tubb 3Nr 231' Their LC-D 15 HP 112 P-11 Bet Pro. Shute'•' Poem mdty 58 take, LC-8 33 0P 40 P-12 BM Rom VIM Ille - %Min ne 221 Auto . LC-7 10 FP 30 P-13 Feld Filr Da d t SW Pr11*g 22.f 143 FF-1 (bard 30 HP 3D • Memtod M b MR RC to SBR Wolof. crow COW ••• Slew ad/r it Belt Preis Contra Par SLUDGE STORAGE BASIN You Levy - 2186.0 Yaw Lime -2183.5 WASH WATER STORAGE BASIN To Belt Press A t' ' 6. Ole. 6. Ola. Toes Drub (10• DM. Yin. Scapa 0.2210 IE0IAIIC.AL EQUIPIENT NO. DESORPTION TYPE P(1 R r CCOBROL IF-1 Relay Sam knomeBo _ 1.5 tP/23 A Mid OEM AWr Wor Y-1 Meahaalod IBeoe-SBR/l• MAN! 5 FP SBR RV Vour Y-2 Medlantod Msr-SB0/2• Meng 5161, MR PLC Any D-1 1eemi6-59yP Pinang 0.5 HP MR RC' Tier D-2 0uao-SBR/2' - Fim9ug 0.51P SIR PLC• Tine D-3 O.e*v-5ie¢ 04whr' Meng 0.5 FP Tian AC-3 B-1 SBt Fk -SBt/I• ••• JoWZplpalae.t 20 HP MR RL'• Tiny B-2 311-St.ty ••• Mori olitmemml 2 FP MR PLC Tier B-3 MO Born SBt I2 ••• Rohr/ Clipleammt 251P SBR PLC' Tiny B-4 Beater Born • Relay llida----° 15 FP SBR PLC lbw Illgehr Moor Strdgs Sump/ Mt cue etas Fat 03' Pokey - 15 NP On / FF-1 Feed File Relay We 0.9P/3P 20A Told Maud OI/Df 13-1 UV (11Whol m UmR how UM 1WW/2.3 KVA nand nyd0 UV-2 IN Sadly IWI Pokey Una 1101/2.3 Kilt Bawd Cm/Off BP-1 Sludge Bit Pm. BP Paddle LhR 460V/30A Mend MAR MR RC' 11I-1 CO doves V-Notr* Rely 11* Rob rib* 11B/4-20 mA YaaraAdwde/tiiarni 88-1 Eirmg.ay Meador Pods, UM Pelonatlo 111-2 Ihpe& Flo. Yair (2.1 PadkFie[ 1101L4-20 mA Yrlavrl►Ideelenr rol 111-1 lelielly Wlr Pam* Lid 120fc/4-3B mA vae, Yeweehrdoate/b.sR • Wooded it R. MR PLC Y SIB Mar Craw Once "• Tao Bows Opeab Tagih. Bev. - 2193 Sludge Storage Bak Digester Sedge recoador to Elev. - R173.00 CONTROL VALVES NO. LOCATION TYPE POTRR S ZE/'CPERATIOII ELECTRICAL cYr-1 lotint SOPA" Admat8F iP Pi , ., IHN 5 -2 lekmilPtr _0.5 0.515 '. r., 110v Cf-3 DIM 31I1-1" ,etlma5t- l't P . ., 114+ CV-4 Belt 2211-2• Aoleedh _0, 0.5 W Pi ' . .. tiov CV-5 06.t Dl.nl.- Aul.alle . 05 1P r PC ' , 110V CV-7 At Net MR-1• M d a 03 +P P WV 1194 CV-8 At Wet SBR-2' NdanaSo 05IP r BFv toy • Controlled Rao SBR PLC r SBR Mots Control Color LEVEL o *ORCtS NO. LOCATION TYPE W/CPERATION ELECTRICAL LC-1 Ram Rode lane P5 Rod 5 Guaira PIt/}ser1 11Qv LC-24 53-1 Ftret 2 Control Phi PLC _OW L0-28 IDRJ Root 2 MOH Pam NC 110V 1A-3 6intk ObaO Rod 2 ;onw P11Iigm 110V LO-4 hit Di BB�ahh Fed 4 Cn di PloPlala 110V 15-5 *eh Rotrs/SFrai Fold Colledf. 9ve0 Fled 3 Dew Pr/Men O.trds Ms Twee nor 10.6 drape staves Boob Fad 3 Call Ph/Mm. 110V LC-7 soh far Stomps Bach Root 4 DAM Ph/Nam caws 11a Peep 110V •• Ste SredleetIme O. 14' poor Bolt Prmas Dim- 2168.00 100 Yr. Flood -2183.44 DIVISION ( WV on oraaaPnal IMISCOIS TAW "C..� �°rwoo �� alw GPI amm aa[ WK o.s DICKSON "o�o DAV FcWNW AIS ` . . I ,amaaa. ,r..,. ow7•Sump,' Amnia. CA ' os aoanuamN;ae rmdo ` ..m i.r. NC Ieroaosa 1 Imo. y- -4 `,a` T. COLLECTION SYSIDA AND REHASIUTATION FOR Tel OF ROSMAN .• ...0 ..�: • I HYDRAUUC PROFILE EQUIPMENT UST WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIUTY P2 4 6e ti • l�' ! TURN II III I 4 if DIVISION NI EXISTING WASTEWATER COW:CRON SYSTEM TO BE RENABERATED OR REPLACEMENT BENCH MARK LOCATED ON BRIDGE ABUTMENT DIVISION I PROPOSED SITE FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACN.RY sa i s SCAM r . xs 446, ♦ ♦ t DIVISION III DUSTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM TO BE TENARPJTATED OR REPLACOENT DIVISION N PROPOSED 1P GRAVITY SEWER UNE "H" i • DIVISION 1 PROPOSED RAW WATER PUIIPBW STATION • DIVISION II PROPOSED V ORAVRY SEWER LIE "B" t_. i / "'DIVISION N PROPOSED 11" GRAVITY l SEWER UNE "A" FOR FUTURE EXPANSION LOCATNNI OF EXISTING — WASTEWATER TREATMENT _ FACILITY DIVISION II PROPOSED 6" SEWER FORCE MAIN (SOUTH) i ° i DIVISION N PROPOSED II" ORAYRY SEWER UNE "C" "Po DMSION 11 — PROPOSED PUMP STATION #2 (SOUTH) DIVISION I PROPOSED SPRAY IRRIGATION FORCE MAIN AND DISTR®UITON DIVISION N PROPOSED PUMP STATION #1 (NORTH) DMSION N PROPOSED 6" SEWER FORCE MAIN (NORTH) DIWSION 11 -PROPOSED 8" ORAYTTY SEWER UNE "O" DIVISION N `PROPOSED 6" GRAVITY SEWER UNE "F" DMSION N • PROPOSED 6" GRAVITY SEWER LIE "D" DIVISION N "—PROPOSED 11" GRAVITY z' SEWER UNE "E' 441, ADDED AnCe10.1 alANT, A!b K.RY "AN may RiLiekt3ED S.RAY ppQAf 1351121ka ! NEMIKINS 1W = MA=— _ _MOO DICKSON • e�"b"e aN ai wi one °w..c ryailMaiiii isms me w; NW AV— MO I« 10e03AY-002.RNIEDA0 IIFE �,,. NIC/ f7� NNiiblO.a AlA"M. ND °I�e"Aavksc �I NN�+e4 +art. NC Ladner AMA& Wt.IYiC.i"I - CA"I.N. SIC =Cm D". WASTEWATER TREATMENT NT FACILITY COLLECTION SYSTEMAND �I,�uTAI1CN Foil TOM OF ROSMAN 1RANS1LVA16A COUNTY. NOON CAROLINA PROJECT AREA PLAN WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIUTY Rosman WWTP jmn Engineering Alternatives Analysis 8/9/02 French Broad River Basin 9/15/03 040302 Rosman has re -submitted its EAA for expansion to 0.25 MGD from the existing 0.090 MGD facility. A previous EAA needed to clarify certain areas and the resubmittal addresses the items. 1) Flow Justification The major issue of concern with the EAA is clear justification for an increase in flow to 250,000 GPD. From review of Figure 1., the projected increase in population from year 2002 to year 2022 is 570 persons to approximately 660 persons. An increase of less than 100 people over a twenty-year period does not clearly justify an increase in flow of 160,000 GPD. There was no mention of potential industrial flows due to businesses that would contribute to the need for this amount of flow. While the Rosman plant currently has inflow and infiltration (I&I) problems, there should be a reduction of I&I flow with the addition of new sewerlines. With a projected improvement in the excessive flows to the system and the minimal yearly increase in population in Rosman, a more thorough explanation and justification of the request for expansion is required before a permit modification can be issued. Response: Several developments planned in the service area. Because of its location in a tourist area, 1) a condo complex is planned in two phases. Each phase will have 84 3-bedroom units, with a flow of 60,480 GPD from both phases. 2 * 84 =168 - 3 bedroom units = 504 bedrooms * 120 gpd/bedroom = 60480 GPD Increase in condos, will result in an increase in schools ? — no estimate of flow given. 2) MHP will connect to this system as soon as possible — 34 trailers, three people per trailer @ 100 gpd/person = 34* 300 gpd = 10,200 gpd 3) Additional 200 - 300 residential sewer connections are planned to be annexed to Rosman. Approximately 3 persons/tap. 200 * 3 persons/tap = 600 * 100 GPD = 60000 GPD 300 * 3 persons/tap = 900 * 100 GPD = 90000 GPD *Where will these connections come from? Nearby town? Rural or county customers? The permittee needs to be more specific as to the source of these connections since it could be one of the largest sources of the expanded wasteflow. Expanded flows to the Rosman WWTP 1) 60,480 2) 10,200 3) 60,000 130,680 GPD + existing 61,500 = 192,180 GPD 1) 60,480 2) 10,200 3) 90,000 160,680 GPD + existing 61,500 = 222,180 GPD 4) American Thread expansion of 25,000 GPD Total = 192,180 + 25000 = 217,180 GPD = approximately 220,000 GPD Total = 222,180 + 25000 = 247,180 GPD = approximately 250,000 GPD **The additional flow from American Thread Co. is not included in the updated information received 8/25/03 250,000 GPD is more readily available size for standard equipment. All new plumbing must meet new EPA Building Code low flow flushing requirements. 8/25/03 - Commercial and industrial flow this version increases the industrial and commercial flow based on the additional 1240 persons projected for population increase. 1240 * 40 GPD = 49640 GPD. There was no specific industries or commercial entities listed in this update. The distance of approximately 10 miles between Rosman and Brevard make connection to the Brevard WWTP, economically unfeasible. Nearest connection point between the two is 8.8 miles. Land based disposal Two parcels of land R 1 and R2 were initially considered available to the Town for land disposal of effluent. Residential areas are located in all other directions. They require buffer zone limits, which make any small amount of land between them unusable. The Mayor was able to locate 4 other parcels (R3 through R6) of land available for land application of treated wastewater. Only R4 and R5 were feasibly usable for spray irrigation purposes. Previously R 1 and R2 were considered however the useable area inside the buffer zones was insignificant and only allowed for a very small percentage of the total effluent to be land applied. R4 and R5 were adequate for use and consisted only of cleared pastureland. R4 contains 11.17 acres, 7.2 which are usable. R5 contains 19.6 4 acres, 10.4 that are usable. This is a total of 17.6 usable acres, approximately $1000 per acre. It yields an annual maximum land application loading of 4,713,283 gallons. This is approximately 5% of the total yearly proposed plant effluent. All other land in the vicinity is privately owned and developed or not available to the town after contact with the owners. The soil loading rate is approximately 267,800 gal/ac/year. It would require approximately 341 acres to dispose of all effluent. Only 17.6 acres available for spray irrigation and therefore 94.8% of the effluent would have to be discharged by alternate method. Most effective way to land apply is to use a spray irrigation system. Land application is not feasible during certain months, and during rain events