NC0025461_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20010417

NPDES DOCUMENT 5CANNINO COVER :SHEET
NC0025461
Bakersville WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File
- Historical
,
'
' -,
Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA)
Speculative Limits
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
April 17, 2001
This document is prixted oa reuae paper -ignore any
coziteat oa the resterse "oldie

ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
MODIFICATION TO NPDES PERMIT #NC0025461
TO INCREASE DAILY PERMITTED FLOW
TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE
PROJECT
Project Lead Agency:
Contact Unit:
Regional Contact:
Co
NCDENR — Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit, [phone]
Mike Parker, Asheville Regional Office
[phone]
SS/•.9
025532�
—s�.';GiNeOlco
PREPARED BY M°G'��``
'-- ', t'4 -17 - 01
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
300 SW BROAD STREET
SOUTHERN PINES, NC 28388
[phone] / [phone] FAX
APRIL 2001

Engineering Alternatives Analysis
NPDES Permit Modification to Increase Daily Permitted Flow
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Project
Town of Bakersville, North Carolina
NC0025461
1 INTRODUCTION
The Town of Bakersville is located in Mitchell County, North Carolina. It is situated
along the intersection of NC Highway 226 and 261 approximately 10 miles south of the
North Carolina / Tennessee border. Mitchell County is part of the Blue Ridge
physiographic province of the Appalachian Highlands west of the Piedmont plateau.
Topography of the area is mountainous with elevations ranging from 2,000 to 3,500 feet.
Relief in the developed area of the Town limits is within the more moderate range of
2,400 to 2,500 feet above sea level. The climate in this area is temperate and humid,
made somewhat cool by the altitude. Summers are relatively short with warm days and
cool nights. Winters are long and cool with occasional cold periods. The average annual
temperature is 53 degrees Fahrenheit with peak temperatures in August and lowest
temperatures generally occurring in January. Annual precipitation averages 50 inches
with an average annual snowfall of around 25 inches.
The Nolichucky River watershed, part of the French Broad River Basin, drains
Bakersville and the rest of Mitchell County. The Nolichucky flows northwest into
Tennessee where it joins the French Broad and Pigeon Rivers near the headwaters of the
Douglas Reservoir. Water quality is generally high throughout this basin. Many
waterways in the French Broad River basin are classified as trout waters and numerous
others have been classified as High Quality or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW).
The Town operates 0.075 MGD wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) which discharges to
Cane Creek. This Engineering Alternatives Analysis is being done as a part of the
NPDES permit modification process to upgrade the existing WWTP and expand the
discharge rate to 0.20 MGD. The need for this project stems from numerous NPDES
permit violations resulting in $16,000.00 worth of fines issued by the NCDENR-Division
of Water Quality (DWQ) since May of 1998. The NCDENR-DWQ has taken the further
step of instituting a moratorium on flow additions, effectively freezing development
within the Town. This suspension of new connections to the Bakersville sewer system
has put two planned development projects, one for construction of low-cost housing and
another to build a new Mitchell County Courthouse on hold until these problems are
rectified.
The referenced NPDES permit violations have been a direct consequence of influent
wastewater flows surpassing the 0.075 MGD capacity of the existing treatment works. In
an attempt to reduce flow into the wastewater plant, Bakersville has pursued an
aggressive program aimed at mitigating inflow and infiltration (I/1) into the collection
system. They have taken the further step of contracting with a consultant, Hobbs,
Page 1
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

Upchurch & Associates, P.A., to perform a detailed system analysis aimed at making
recommendations for I/I repairs. However, the consensus of opinion of all parties
involved, including town officials, consultants and regulatory officials, is that expansion
of the existing treatment works is also needed to best serve the long term infrastructure
needs of Bakersville. Based upon all of this information, a NPDES permit modification
is being requested to expand Bakersville's permitted discharge from 0.075 MGD to 0.20
MGD.
h., 2 EXISTING FACILITIES
r,
2.1 Wastewater Collection
The Town of Bakersville operates a wastewater collection system that serves the
entire population within the Town limits. Presently, there are 203 residential
connections and 62 others classified as commercial, industrial or institutional. The
collection system was originally constructed in 1968 and included 13,970 feet of 8-
inch vitrified clay sewer mains, 1,650 feet of 10-inch vitrified clay sewer mains and
82 precast concrete manholes. Since that time, there have been some line
replacements and extensions to newly developed areas within the Town limits. Most
of these improvements have occurred within the last fifteen years using PVC as the
pipe material for sewer mains. The collection system is 100% gravity flow with no
pumping stations or force main lines.
There are a total of 113 manholes in the collection system, all precast concrete. An
inventory of the present wastewater collection system according to line size and
material is shown in the following table:
BAKERSVILLE SEWER MAINS
Size
Linear Feet
Miles
Inch Miles
10"VC Sewer Main
1,650
0.313
3.13
8"VC Sewer Main
13,370
2.532
20.26
8"PVC Sewer Main
4,980
.943
7.54
TOTAL 20,000 3.79 30.93
As previously noted, the Town of Bakersville has dedicated a considerable amount of
its available resources, both human and monetary, to an I/I abatement program begun
in the summer of 1998. Much of this work has been in the form of smoke testing
suspect areas in the collection system. Numerous inflow sources have been identified
and repaired since the program was begun. Additionally, the town has recently
retained Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A. to further study the collection system.
The scope of that work, aimed primarily at infiltration analysis, is as follows:
• Summarize previous I/1 work
Page 2
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

r1
• Prepare system inventory and base map from information gathered during
system GPS location and manhole survey
• Monitor flows in individual subbasins using electronic data logging flow
meters.
• Augment previous smoke testing for inflow sources as needed
• Recommend areas for internal video inspection (4,000 feet estimated)
• Prepare evaluation of findings and final report
Sources of infiltration are typically harder to find and repair than sources of inflow.
However, effective repair of infiltration sources can have greater benefits in reduction
of flows day in and day out. Repair of inflow sources generally reduces system
surcharging and overflows if they exist but have less effect on daily flows.
2.2 Wastewater Treatment Facilities
The Bakersville WWTP was constructed concurrently with the collection system in
1968. The plant site is located just south of NC Highway 226 in east Bakersville,
directly adjacent to Cane Creek where effluent is discharged. It was originally
configured as a 0.05 MGD extended aeration facility consisting of two 25,000 gallon
per day package type treatment plants. These components are still in operation. Each
of these structures includes an aeration tank, a secondary clarification chamber,
airlift pumps for sludge return and wasting, and a sludge holding chamber.
Centrifugal type blowers mounted on top of the aeration basins provide aeration. The
original plant also included a below ground influent pump station and chlorination
facilities.
The plant was upgraded to its present permitted capacity of 0.075 MGD in 1985. An
additional 0.025 MGD package treatment plant was added along with a new flow
control structure and post aeration facilities.
The most recent facilities improvements were completed in 1998. That project
demolished the original influent flow control structure and influent pump station and
FA' made numerous additional improvements. The present plant configuration includes:
• Influent equalization structure with screening and duplex submersible
ran
influent pumps
• Flow control structure with four way division and return to equalization
• 0.075 MGD extended aeration treatment, clarification and sludge holding
• Operations building including laboratory and chemical feed room
• Gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide equipment housed in operations building
• Chlorine contact chamber and post aeration
• On -site emergency power generator set (60 kw)
Page 3
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

Col
Furl
3 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
Based on an evaluation of all available alternatives with regard to the need to increase the
permitted flow for the Town of Bakersville, the recommended alternative is to expand and
upgrade the existing WWTP. The proposed project for this alternative includes the following
• Construct new 0.125 MGD extended aeration package type treatment plant on the
existing site to augment existing facilities and expand discharge capacity to 0.20
MGD.
• Install new chlorine and sulfur dioxide contact chamber and post aeration
facilities.
• Install new tertiary filters.
• Modify existing plant piping and flow control structures for compatibility with
The justification for the additional 0.125 MGD capacity is based on the existing dry weather
flows plus allowances for growth (50%), collection system I/1, and reserve capacity (10%).
Discharge monitoring reports indicate an average dry weather flow into the treatment plant of
0.067 MGD. The benchmark amount of III considered non -excessive by NCDENR-DWQ is
3,000 gpdim. However, for this calculation we will assume allowable I/I of 2,500 gpdim,
which is a reasonable figure for a collection system of this age and material. Therefore, the
allowable system I/I is calculated to be:
30.93 inch -miles x 2,500 gpdim = 77,325 gpd
The compilation of flows is as follows:
Existing Dry Weather Flow 67,000 gpd
Allowable Inflow / Infiltration 77,325 gpd
System Growth Factor (50%) 33,500 gpd
subtotal 177,825 gpd
Reserve Capacity (10%) 17,825 gpd
Total 195,607 gpd
The total estimated cost for this recommended alternative is $770,350.00
Page 4
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

f1
i
tgal
Sti
4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
As required by NCDENR-DWQ, all environmentally feasible alternatives for wastewater
discharge have been evaluated as a part of the Town of Bakersville NPDES permit
modification application to increase the discharge rate from 0.075 MGD to 0.20 MGD.
These alternatives include the following:
1. Do Nothing
2. Regionalization of Wastewater Treatment by Pumping to Spruce Pine
3. Land Application of Wastewater at 0.20 MGD
4. Land Application of Wastewater at 0.125 MGD
5. 0.125 MGD Onsite Subsurface Wastewater Disposal System
6. Upgrade and Expansion of the Existing WWTP (discussed above)
Each of these alternatives has been evaluated with regard to, first, environmental feasibility,
and then with regard to capital construction costs. Summaries of the preliminary design,
design calculations, and cost estimates are provided for each alternative.
5 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
The previously mentioned alternatives for wastewater disposal have been analyzed in order
to determine to most environmentally feasible and cost-effective solution for the Town's
need to increase its total daily discharge from 0.075 MG to 0.20 MGD.
5.1 Do Nothing Alternative
The "do nothing" alternative was immediately excluded from consideration because
the Town has entered into a Special Order by Consent (SOC) with the NCDENR in
order to eliminate problems surrounding historical NPDES permit violations that have
resulted due to increased flows that exceed the plant's current capacity. Therefore,
this alternative is not environmentally feasible nor would it be allowed by NCDENR.
Furthermore, due to these violations and the resulting SOC, NCDENR has instituted a
moratorium on flow additions, which has stopped planned development within the
Town. Two developments in particular (a low income housing project and a new
complex for Mitchell County offices) have been put on hold until a solution is in
place and the moratorium is lifted. While the SOC has allowed the Town's WWTP to
continue to operate without incurring additional monetary fines, it is the opinion of all
parties involved, including Town officials, consultants, and regulatory officials, that
the plant is undersized and is need of an expansion in order to serve the immediate as
well as long term needs of the Town of Bakersville.
5.2 Regionalization of Wastewater Treatment by Pumping to Spruce Pine
In an effort to determine if regionalization was the most feasible alternative, based
both on environmental and cost concerns, pumping the Town's wastewater to the
Page 5
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
roR

1=1
1=1
rmi
nearest public or private treatment plant was evaluated. The closest entity was
determined to be the Town of Spruce Pine some nine miles away from Bakersville.
In this scenario, the existing Bakersville WWTP would be abandoned in favor of a
large transfer pump station to be built at the plant site and construction of a force
main line along NC Highway 226 to transport flows from Bakersville to the Spruce
Pine WWTP.
The Town of Spruce Pine is located approximately nine miles to the southeast of
Bakersville. NC Highway 226 offers the most practical route for the force main;
however, this or any other route would require considerable blasting of rock in order
to install the line. This factor alone increases the cost of this alternative significantly.
Another factor with regard to the feasibility of this alternative is the steep terrain
between the two municipalities. A transfer pumping system would require three
high -head submersible pump stations in order to overcome approximately 500-feet of
elevation head in the first 4 miles of the proposed route. One additional pump station
would be required at the 7-mile mark to boost the flow all the way to the Spruce Pine
WWTP.
Finally, a significant amount of additional planning and negotiations aimed at an
intergovernmental agreement with Spruce Pine for acceptance of flows from
Bakersville would also be required.
Taking all of these factors into consideration, the total estimated construction cost of
a regionalized wastewater system by pumping to the Town of Spruce Pine is
$2,241,441.00.
At almost three times the cost of the recommended alternative and plagued with
issues concerning the construction of approximately nine miles of wastewater force
main within a mountainous region and with the operation and maintenance of four
pump stations, the wastewater regionalization alternative was determined to be
impractical and, therefore, was not considered further.
5.3 0.20 MGD Land Application Facility
The application of treated wastewater on cropped land is normally an option that is
considered to be environmentally feasible. This form of wastewater disposal is
considered a "non -discharge" alternative and typically includes construction of
secondary treatment facilities and storage facilities for systematic disposal of
wastewater on land permitted for that use. Land application is generally more
expensive than discharge alternatives due to the requirement for up to 90 days storage
capacity and the need for large land disposal areas. Regardless, NCDENR-DWQ
requires that land application be considered prior to expansion of an existing
discharge.
Page 6
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

With regard to the Bakersville area, the terrain and existing use of the land that is in
reasonable proximity to the WWTP make the land application of wastewater not as
feasible as it would be in other areas of the state. In addition, the Town does not own
or have access to any land in the area that could be used for this purpose.
USGS topographic maps as well as USDA soil maps were utilized in order to
evaluate the areas surrounding the plant for their potential suitability for use as land
application sites, should they be available to the Town. Based upon these maps, it
was determined that there is not any available land within two miles of the existing
WWTP that would be suitable for land application uses; therefore, a conservative
distance of two miles was utilized for the force main calculations.
Permeability of the soils in this area is another one of the limiting factors in the land
application scenario; however, the higher average permeability of 0.2 inches per hour
was utilized in this analysis. Weather data from a nearby station was used in the
water balance calculations. A typical storage of 30 days was selected for these
calculations. In addition, 30 days of treatment were included in the lagoon
calculations as is customary for preliminary treatment in a land application scenario.
The rate of application selected was 1.75 inches per week. This was determined to be
the best rate at which to determine the true cost effectiveness of this alternative. All
of these calculations yielded the following results:
Pump Station Capacity
Force Main to Lagoon Site
30 Day Storage/ 30 Day Treatment Lagoon
Land Application Site Required
Total Acreage Required (incl. Buffer)
Irrigation Header
Lateral Piping to Zones
700 gpm
10,5601f
7.16 acres
33 acres
95 acres
6 inch
17,280 if -3 inch
The total estimated cost of the land application alternative for 0.20 MGD is
$6,760,525.38.
The cost of this recommended alternative is truly prohibitive with regard to its
feasibility to Bakersville. In addition, there is no available land in the area that is
suitable for land application of wastewater. Other issues that make this alternative
not feasible are the environmental concerns. The soils within this area are, for the
most part, either on steep inclines or within valley areas along rivers and streams that
are prone to flooding. Land applying wastewater in these areas would not be
permitted. Any acreage that could potentially be suitable for land application around
Bakersville is developed and urbanized land on which this type of wastewater
disposal would not be desirable or even allowable. For these reasons, the alternative
of land applying wastewater at a rate of 0.20 MGD was determined to be impractical
and even potentially detrimental to the environment; therefore, it was not considered
further.
Page 7
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

r.
ANA
fz=,
5.4 Utilization of Existing WWTP and 0.125 MGD Land Application Facility
This scenario would utilize the existing WWTP facilities with the current 0.075 MGD
surface water discharge and a new facility would be constructed to allow for the land
application of the additional 0.125 MGD wastewater flow.
As stated previously, land application of 100% of Bakersville's wastewater is not
considered a viable option due to the expense of finding and acquiring land suitable
for that purpose in this area of the state. The same rationale holds true for this option.
A considerable amount of land is still needed for the application of up to 125,000
gallons per day of wastewater as well as required storage facilities. These
calculations were done using the same rationale as previously discussed for the 0.20
MGD land application scenario with the exception of the amount of wastewater to be
applied. These calculations yielded the following results:
Pump Station Capacity
Force Main to Lagoon Site
30 Day Storage/ 30 Day Treatment Lagoon
Land Application Site Required
Total Acreage Required (incl. Buffer)
Irrigation Header
Lateral Piping to Zones
450 gpm
10,560 if
4.36 acres
22 acres
73 acres
6 inch
11,520 if -3 inch
The total estimated cost of the land application alternative for the additional flow of
0.125 MGD is $3,814,715.33.
The cost of this recommended alternative is also prohibitive with regard to its
feasibility to Bakersville. For the reasons previously discussed, the alternative of land
applying wastewater at a rate of 0.125 MGD was also determined to be impractical
and even potentially detrimental to the environment; therefore, it was not considered
further.
5.5 0.125 MGD Onsite Subsurface Wastewater Disposal System
Another potentially environmentally feasible option for the Town of Bakersville's
wastewater disposal would be to construct an onsite subsurface disposal system. This
alternative would discharge the additional 0.125 MGD wastewater flow to a
nitrification field through a low pressure piping system following treatment in a septic
tank. The system would include a grease trap, pump tank, dual pumps, headers, and
laterals arranged in zones with cleanouts and valves to allow for alternate dosing of
the fields.
Like the land application alternative, the best -case permeability rate of the
predominant soil complex in the area was utilized in the design calculations. It was
also assumed that there would be sufficient available land nearby to accommodate
this alternative. Design criteria as published by NCDENR—Division of
Page 8
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

rAri
F=,
12114
fakl
Environmental Health Onsite Wastewater Branch and the EPA Design Manual for
Onsite Wastewater Treatment were utilized in the preliminary design.
State regulations require that the land application rate for low-pressure piping not
exceed 0.6 gallons per day per square foot. This resulted in a total trench length of
625,000 feet to properly dissimulate the wastewater. Trench widths of 2 feet,
maximum lengths of 100 feet, and 8-foot spacing between laterals are recommended
for these systems. This resulted in a nitrification field area of over 114 acres. A
reserve area equal to 100% of the design area is required to be set aside for future use.
Therefore, a minimum of 228 acres would be required just for the nitrification field.
A normal septic tank retention time for systems of this size is 24 hours, resulting in a
holding tank volume of 125,000 gallons. The grease trap design was based on 2/3 the
total volume of the septic tank. An emergency storage time of 12 hours was used to
size the pump tank.
These calculations resulted in such large tanks being needed as well as an inordinate
amount of acreage required for the lateral trenches and the nitrification field that the
alternative for onsite subsurface wastewater disposal for the additional 0.125 MGD
was not considered feasible. In addition, the poor suitability of soils discussed with
regard to the land application alternatives is also of concern with regard to a septic
system, particularly one of this size.
Although the size and characteristics of soils in this area removed this alternative
from consideration, preliminary construction cost estimates were completed for a
final comparison of alternatives. The total estimated cost of the onsite subsurface
disposal system is $10,345,562.57.
6 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
As with any alternatives analysis, the cost of a project is a critical factor in the decision made
by a municipality with regard to infrastructure improvements. The same is true for
Bakersville. The Town recognizes that it must complete these improvements not only to
allow for the growth of the community but also to eliminate any further NPDES discharge
violations thereby protecting the environment. These improvements, however, must be done
in a manner that allows for the maximum benefit for the Town and the environment at the
most reasonable cost. The following table provides a cost comparison of all the alternatives
included in this analysis:
ALTERNATIVE
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Upgrade and Expand Existing WWTP
$770,350.00
Pump to Spruce Pine
$2,241,441.00
0.20 MGD Land Application
$6,760,525.38
0.125 MGD Land Application
$3,814,715.33
0.125 MGD Onsite Subsurface Disposal
$10,345,562.57
Page 9
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

1
`=` This comparison illustrates that the upgrade and expansion of the existing WWTP proves to
be the most cost-effective alternative for the Town.
As stated above, cost is a major concern when evaluating all alternatives for an infrastructure
project; however, the environmental concerns must also be weighed such that an alternative
that would be more beneficial to the environment is not overlooked simply because of its
cost. While many of the alternatives discussed with regard to Bakersville are normally
considered to be environmentally feasible, the location and nature of the land in and around
the Town must be factored into the overall environmental analysis. As was discussed
previously, Bakersville is located in the Blue Ridge Mountains near the North Carolina /
Tennessee border. This location means that undeveloped tracts of land with soils that could
potentially be used for septic systems and land application are practically non-existent.
Much of the available land in the area of Bakersville is severely limiting to these types of
alternative wastewater disposal methods due to extremely steep slopes and shallow depth of
the soil to bedrock. These factors indicate that these disposal methods are the more
environmentally detrimental alternatives in this particular case and should not be considered
viable alternatives for the Town of Bakersville.
Based on both the cost and environmental evaluations of the available alternatives for the
Town of Bakersville to increase their permitted wastewater flow to 0.20 MGD, the final
-rz► recommendation is to upgrade and expand the existing WWTP. The existing plant currently
meets all NPDES limits with exception of the permitted flow and, therefore, the expansion
will not be detrimental to the receiving waters, Cane Creek. In addition, the upgrades to the
r=1 plant include new disinfection facilities and tertiary filters that will further increase the
wastewater treatment, thereby providing additional protection to Cane Creek. Bakersville's
NPDES limits for an expanded discharge are not anticipated to be any more stringent than
the existing 30 BOD/ 30 TSS limits. Currently, this equates to 18.8 lbs/day of BOD/TSS
allowed. An expanded flow permit to 0.20 MGD will result in an increase to 50 lbs/d of
BOD and TSS. Since the 7Q10 of Cane Creek is 2.4 MGD, the IWC of the discharge will
increase from 3.12% to 8.32%. This increase is not a significant increase in pollutant loading
to this Creek or subbasin. Funding has been secured for this project, and as such, work can
begin on this upgrade upon approval by the NCDENR-DWQ.
Although this project does not exceed the minimum threshold level of 0.50 MGD of
additional flow as outlined in the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act, an
Environmental Assessment has been completed for this recommended alternative and is
attached for reference.
Page 10
NPDES Permit Modification for the Town of Bakersville
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
20-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
20-YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN FOR WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS
Goal Statement
The Town of Bakersville seeks to provide water and sewer services to all of their residents,
commercial businesses and industries within the Town's city limits and service areas. The water
service shall be in accordance with all the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act in order
to ensure that the customers have a safe, reliable drinking water supply with capacity to serve the
►�► present and future demands of the citizens. The sewer service shall be extended to all customers,
which need public sewer to maintain public health and a clean environment. The sewer shall be
treated to a level to maintain compliance with State and Federal regulations to protect the
environment of the area. The system shall be managed in an efficient and cost effective manner
such that the water and sewer fund shall be self-reliant without undue cost to the users of the
system or impacts to the Town of Bakersville general fund accounts.
Description of Area
Bakersville is situated along the intersection of state highways #226 and #261 approximately 10
miles south of the North Carolina / Tennessee border in central Mitchell County. Mitchell
County is part of the Blue Ridge physiographic province of the Appalachian Highlands west of
the Piedmont plateau. Topography of the area is mountainous with elevations ranging from 2,000
to 3,500 feet. Relief in the developed area within of town limits is within the more moderate
range of 2,400 to 2,500 feet above sea level.
The approximate population of Bakersville according to 1990 Census data is 301. The North
Carolina Office of State Planning indicates that the 1999 population was 331. Population
projections indicate that the 2020 population of Bakersville will be approximately 342. The
median household income is $24,658.00. Mitchell County is considered a Tier 2 county in the
State of North Carolina rankings.
The climate in this area is temperate and humid, made somewhat cool by the altitude. Summers
are relatively short with warm days and cool nights. Winters are long and cool with occasional
cold periods. The average annual temperature is 53 degrees Fahrenheit with peak temperatures in
August and lowest temperatures generally occurring in January. Annual precipitation averages
50 inches with an average annual snowfall of around 25 inches.
The Nolichucky River watershed, part of the French Broad River Basin, drains Bakersville and
the rest of Mitchell County. The Nolichucky flows northwest into Tennessee where it joins the
French Broad and Pigeon Rivers near the headwaters of the Douglas Reservoir. Water quality is
generally high throughout this region basin. Many waterways in the French Broad River basin
are classified as trout waters and numerous others have been classified as High Quality or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW).
Topography of Area
Mitchell County lies entirely within the Mountain physiographic province. Topography is
typically deeply dissected mountainous area of numerous steep mountain ridges, intermone
basins and tench valleys that intersect at all angles and give the area its rugged mountain
1

character. The Blue Ridge contains the highest elevations and the most rugged topography in
the Appalachian Mountain system of eastern North Carolina.
Land Use
Over half of the land in the area is forested with much of it located within the 1.2 million -
acre Pisgah National Forest. Steep slopes limit the land area suitable for development and
crop production. Slopes of less than 12% are desirable for development purposes, and, in the
absence of public sewer lines, soil depth of three feet or more over bedrock is desirable in
order to allow construction of onsite septic systems. It is estimated that just 18% of lands in
North Carolina's mountains meet these requirements. Most agricultural and development
activities are therefore concentrated in river valleys. Statistics provided by the US
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service indicate that cultivated cropland is
shrinking as developed lands are increasing. Major industries in the basin include
silviculture, agriculture (dairy, livestock, apples, Christmas trees), mining (feldspar, quartz,
mica, gem stones and others) and tourism.
Forestry
Forestry is a major industry in the Bakersville area that has the potential to impact the
environment in a number of ways if not properly managed. In mountainous areas,
sedimentation is a prime concern. Clear -cutting and improper construction of logging roads
and stream crossings can produce damaging sedimentation. In addition, removing riparian
vegetation along stream banks can cause water temperature to rise substantially, and
improperly applied pesticides can result in toxicity problems.
The Pisgah National Forest occurs in Mitchell County. Trees in the forest are maturing from
the last major round of cutting earlier this century, so timbering activity is expected to
increase. The National Forest Service has been working on revising and updating its 1987
forest management plan aimed, in part, to ensure that harvesting is done in an
environmentally sound manner. Clear -cutting, for example, will be all but eliminated, and
harvesting on many of the steeper slopes will be minimized. Also, the North Carolina
Division of Forest Resources has established voluntary best -management practices for
forestry activities on private lands.
Mining
Mining is another important industry in the area, especially in the Nolichucky watershed area
including portions of Yancey, Mitchell and Avery Counties. While stone quarries are
common throughout the basin, the Nolichucky watershed is valued as a source of feldspar,
mica, olivine and gemstones. Mining operations can produce high localized levels of stream
'' sedimentation if not properly treated. Chemicals used in the production of mined materials
can also pose a problem such as the use of hydrofluoric acid in the production of feldspar and
quartz. These operations have resulted in high fluoride levels in receiving streams that are
being addressed through revised NPDES permit limits. Non -point source impacts associated
with mining are addressed, in part, through the Mining Act. Best management practices for
addressing mining non -point source pollution help with these problems.
2

r=1
`' Wildlife Habitat
The type and abundance of wildlife throughout Mitchell County depend largely on the
amount and distribution of food, cover, and water. The wildlife habitat can be created or
improved by planting appropriate vegetation, by maintaining the existing plant cover, or by
promoting the natural establishment of desirable plants. The elements of wildlife habitat are
described in the following paragraphs.
The habitat for open land wildlife consists of cropland, pasture, meadows, and areas that are
overgrown with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas produce grain and seed crops,
grasses and legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. The wildlife attracted to these areas
includes bobwhite quail, mourning doves, songbirds, cottontail, red fox, and deer.
1
The habitat for woodland wildlife consists of areas of deciduous plants and/or coniferous
plants and associated grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife attracted to
these areas includes wild turkey, woodpeckers, squirrels, gray fox, raccoon, deer and bear.
The habitat for wetland wildlife consists of open, marshy or swampy shallow water or
,=, mountain bog areas. Some of the wildlife attracted to such areas are ducks, geese, herons,
redwing blackbirds, muskrat, mink, raccoon, and beaver.
Under present conditions, several cover crops and varieties of vegetation are apparent
throughout the County. Grain and seed crops are domestic grains and seed -producing
herbaceous plants. Examples of the grain and seed crops are corn, wheat, oats, barley, rye,
millet, buckwheat, soybeans, cowpeas, and sunflowers.
Geology
Bakersville is located in the Blue Ridge Belt of the North Carolina Mountain Region
physiographic province. This mountainous region is composed of rocks from over one
billion to about one-half billion years old. This complex mixture of igneous, sedimentary and
metamorphic rock has been squeezed, fractured, faulted and twisted into folds. The Blue
Ridge Belt is well known for its deposits of feldspar, mica and quartz basic materials used in
the ceramic, paint and electronic industries. Olivine is mined for use as refractory material
and foundry molding sand
Surface Waters
PC't The French Broad River Basin is the ninth largest river basin in the state covering 2,842
square miles. It is located entirely within the southern Appalachian Mountains region of
western North Carolina, west of the Eastern Continental Divide. All waters from the French
Broad basin drain to the Gulf of Mexico via the Tennessee, Ohio and Mississippi Rivers.
The basin includes the highest point in the United States east of the Mississippi River located
atop Mount Mitchell (elevation 6,684 feet above mean sea level (MSL)). The lowest
'E' elevation in the basin is 1,254 feet MSL where the French Broad River flows into Tennessee.
The French Broad Basin in North Carolina is composed of three separate drainage areas that
flow northwest into Tennessee and do not join until they reach the headwaters of Douglas
Reservoir (a large multi -use impoundment managed by the Tennessee Valley Authority).
3

ftwl
They include the Pigeon River, French Broad River and the Nolichucky River watersheds
(which includes the North and south Toe Rivers and Cane River). There are 4,113 miles of
freshwater streams in the basin and seven lakes, all man-made, greater than eight acres in
size.
There are 9 counties and 24 municipalities located in whole or in part of the basin. The
population of the basin, based on 1990 census data, was estimated to be 358,000.
Municipalities with a population of 5,000 or more in the basin include Asheville, Black
Mountain, Brevard, Hendersonville and Waynesville. The overall population density of the
basin is 93 persons per square mile versus a statewide average of 123 persons per square
mile. The percent population growth over the past ten years (1980 to 1990) was 8.7% versus
a statewide percentage increase of 12.7%.
Water quality is generally high throughout the basin. Trout waters are abundant and many
waters have been reclassified as High Quality or Outstanding Resource Waters.
The Town of Bakersville discharges to Canes Creek in Subbasin 06, which includes the
1=1 Nolichucky, the North Toe River and the South Toe River. Much of the land in this area is
undeveloped and lies within the Pisgah National Forest. The largest town is Spruce Pine and
several major dischargers are located near this city, including the Spruce Pine WWTP and
1.1 three mine processors: Feldspar, Unimin and K-T Feldspar. Many of the streams in the
subbasin have a supplemental trout water classification.
Demographics
As outlined above, the population in the Town of Bakersville has remained relatively stable over
the last decade. The 1990 Census indicated a population of 301 persons; and the NCOSPL
indicated a 1999 population of 331 persons. Population projections indicate that the 2020
population will be approximately 342 persons.
The 1990 median household income (MHI) for Mitchell County was $20,554.00. The 1990 MHI
for Bakersville was $17,500.00. Both of these incomes are less than the national median
household income of $35,945.00.
The 1995 poverty rate in Mitchell County was estimated to be 13.9 percent, which exceeds the
North Carolina poverty rate of 13 percent. The 1995 child poverty rate for Mitchell County was
19.8 percent. Between 1990 and 1995 the Mitchell County child poverty rate increased by 13.1
percent. Census data from 1990 indicate that the poverty rate in Bakersville is approximately
19.3 percent.
The 1999 unemployment rate in Mitchell County was 6.4 percent. Manufacturing jobs account
for 25.0 percent of employment.
4

1I
ribt
F4
ran
Description of Existing Facilities
Wastewater Collection / Treatment
The Town of Bakersville operates a wastewater collection system that serves the entire
population within the town limits. Presently, there are 203 residential connections and 62
others classified as commercial, industrial or institutional. The collections system was
originally constructed in 1968 and included 13,970 feet of 8-inch vitrified clay sewer mains,
1,650 feet of 10-inch vitrified clay sewer mains and 82 pre -cast concrete manholes. Since
that time, there have been some line replacements and extensions to newly developed areas
within the town limits. Most of these improvements have occurred within the last fifteen
years using PVC as the pipe material for sewer mains. The collection system is 100% gravity
flow with no pumping stations or force main lines.
There are a total of 113 manholes in the collection system, all pre -cast concrete. An
inventory of the present wastewater collection system according to line size and material is
shown in Table 1:
TABLE 1: SEWER MAINS
Size
Linear Feet
Miles
Inch Miles
10" VC Sewer Main
1,650
0.313
3.13
8" VC Sewer Main
13,370
2.532
20.26
8" PVC Sewer Main
4,980
.943
7.54
TOTAL 20,000 3.79 30.93
The Bakersville Wastewater Treatment Plant was constructed concurrently with the
collection system in 1968. The plant site is located just south of state highway #226 in east
Bakersville, directly adjacent to Cane Creek where effluent is discharged. It was originally
configured as a 0.050 mgd extended aeration, facility consisting of two 25,000 gallon per day
package type treatment plants. These components are still in operation. Each of these
structures includes aeration tank, secondary clarification chamber, airlift pumps for sludge
return and wasting, and sludge holding chamber. Centrifugal type blowers mounted on top of
the aeration basins provide aeration. The original plant also included a below ground influent
pump station, and chlorination facilities.
The plant was upgraded in to its present permitted capacity of 0.0750 mgd in1985. An
additional 0.0250 mgd package treatment plant was added along with new flow control
structure and post aeration facilities.
The most recent facilities improvements were completed in 1998. That project demolished
the existing influent flow control structure and influent pump station and made numerous
additional improvements. The present plant configuration includes:
5

II
fun
rag
> Influent equalization structure with screening and duplex submersible influent pumps
> Flow control structure with four way division and return to equalization
> 0.0750 mgd extended aeration treatment, clarification and sludge holding
> Operations building including laboratory and chemical feed room
> Gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide equipment housed in operations building
➢ Chlorine contact chamber and post aeration
➢ On -site emergency power generator set (60 kw)
Bakersville's wastewater collection system is in need of rehabilitation due to deterioration of
the original vcp pipe system. Excessive inflow / infiltration causes the WWTP to exceed its
permitted capacity of 0.0750 mgd and has resulted in fines from NCDENR totaling
$16,000.00.
Currently the Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently being operated under an SOC
agreement with the NCDENR. Grant funds from the N. C. Department of Commerce,
Division of Community Assistance CDBG program have been to finance a project expanding
the Bakersville Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The town's remote location and the surrounding topography and soil conditions make
elimination of the existing point source discharge in favor of the alternatives of
regionalization with another facility or treatment and reuse extremely difficult. Maintaining
the existing Wastewater Treatment Plant and discharge is the likeliest long-term solution for
Bakersville's future wastewater needs. The priority projects are expansion of the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and continuing repair / replacement of the original system sewer mains.
Water Supply /Distribution
Bakersville's water distribution system was originally constructed in 19?? and consists of
approximately 3 miles of distribution main ranging primarily from 2-inch to 8-inch diameter
though there are some streets with smaller galvanized mains. The pipe materials are a
mixture of galvanized iron, cast iron, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and asbestos -cement.
Storage is provided by a 200,000-gallon concrete ground storage tank and a 100,000 gallon
steel standpipe tank located on the same site. Storage is charged by three water supply wells
located at various points in the system.
The Bakersville water system serves the entire population of the town through 294 residential
type connections as well as 54 others classified as commercial.
The existing water system has old asbestos cement, galvanized and cast iron pipe which
needs to be replaced to reduce the amount of water loss in the system and the amount of
maintenance by the Town staff The Town needs to replace the small diameter galvanized
lines (3/a" to 1 — /2" ) throughout the system. Replacement with new 6" lines in will provide
fire protection to all the residents and reduce insurance requirements. The system has
pressure problems throughout Town due to the above issues. The Town will need additional
storage in the future. The operation of the well system needs to be coordinated with the tank
water levels to maintain constant system pressure and back-up power is needed at the well
sites to ensure potable water during extended power outages. The original well pumps are
ors
6

rmt
1=1
1214
nearing the end of their useful operating life and need to be replaced. A new well and well
house is needed to augment existing demand and to meet projected future demand. The
existing altitude valve that allows the standpipe to fill needs repair or replacement.
Additional chemical treatment may be needed as the more stringent Safe Drinking Water Act
regulations are placed into effect.
Identified Capital Need Projects
( Projects are listed in order of priority)
2001-2005
> Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements: design and construction to expand permitted
treatment capacity from 0.0750 mgd to 0.20 mgd.(CDBG Infrastructure Grant Project).
$770,350
> Design and construction to replace / rehabilitate 5,000 if of sanitary sewer collection
system. (applied for through NC Rural Economic Development Center Supplemental
Grant)
$410,600
> Design and construction of additional water supply well. (NC Rural Center Supplemental
Grant Project)
$85,000
> Design and procurement of improvements to 100,000-gallon standpipe storage tank:
repaint interior and exterior plus replacement of existing altitude valve.
$35,000
> Inspection report and recommendation for repairs to concrete ground storage tank
$25,000
> Design and construction for installation of new 6-inch water main along Baker Lane
between S. Mitchell Ave. and Ridgeview Lane.
$30,000
> Replacement of existing 3/4", 1" and 1 — /2" galvanized and cast iron water mains in the
�► distribution system with minimum 2" PVC (AWWA C-900) for elimination of leakage
and areas of low pressure. New water mains will facilitate meeting requirements of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Requirements for compliance with lead and copper regulations.
The town will replace 5001f per year.
$10,000
> Replace existing fire hydrant at N. Mitchell and Hemlock with breakaway type.
$1,500
PNR
0111
7

IVR
> Procurement of computer system dedicated to Internet access and water and sewer system
automation.
$3,000
> Procurement and installation of radio communication equipment on all town vehicles.
$1,000
2006 — 2010
> Design and construction to replace / rehabilitate final 2,000 if of original sanitary sewer
collection system (grant financed project).
$410,600
➢ Design and construction of additional 100,000-gallon steel reservoir type storage tank.
$150,000
> Replacement of existing 3/4", 1" and 1 — 'A" galvanized and cast iron water mains in the
distribution system with minimum 2" PVC (AWWA C-900) for elimination of leakage
and areas of low pressure. New water mains will facilitate meeting requirements of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Requirements for compliance with lead and copper regulations.
The town will replace 500 if per year
$10,000
> Design and construction for installation of new 4-inch water main along White Oak Road
to replace existing 1-inch diameter galvanized line.
$12,500
➢ Design and construction for installation of new 2-inch water main along Morgan Lane to
replace existing 1-inch diameter galvanized line.
$4,000
➢ Procurement of 1,000-gallon tank for transport of reuse effluent from WWTP.
$1,500
2011-2015
> Procurement and installation of emergency power generator at Modem Globe well site.
$20,000
> Procurement of confined space entry equipment.
$2,500
> Install traffic guards at all exposed fire hydrant locations.
$15,000
➢ Design and construction for installation of new 4-inch water main along Redwood Road
to replace existing 1-inch diameter galvanized line.
$12,500
8

reel
i=a
MEM
> Procurement of 3" solids handling pump for WWTP and general maintenance of sanitary
sewer system.
$2,500
2016-2020
> Procurement of truck mounted jitter type cleaning unit for general maintenance of
sanitary sewer system.
$15,000
> Procurement of closed-circuit television monitoring equipment for internal inspection of
sewer mains, water supply wells, etc.
$15,000
➢ Procurement of combination Rubber Tire Loader / Backhoe
$75,000
9

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
SEWER SYSTEM LAYOUT

N
Treatment Plant
Legend
• 10" VCP Sewer Main
• 8" VCP Sewer Main
• 8" PVC Sewer Main
/1\v,/ Creek
Building
i')o•J,4 \IA) am) Qv) \4
Town of Bakersville
Mitchell County, North Carolina
Sanitary Sewer System Layout
F
/
CREEK
o'

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
USDA SOIL SURVEY INFORMATION

U 0
L4ZD
• ► s
3S2
•
' t 392'.
SL \ .r 6 F
35L
•
•� fir.
*11
FtrjC t.•;r !FIC-b; .r a ;ilk
•
,, .v. �,.
v : {
CC
LP it.
\r

1wn
USDA, NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION SERVICE
MITCHELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOIL IDENTIFICATION LEGEND
* AS OF 02/21/97
** ADVANCE COPY -- SUBJECT TO CHANGE
FIELD MAP PUBLICATION MAP UNIT NAME
UNIT SYMBOL SYMBOL AND PERCENT SLOPE
rgn 700E, 700G AcF
mn
199D, 199E BaD
199F, 199G BaE
n
43, 82, 262, 40 BdA
65 BmA
393D, 393E BtD
mn
,,n 393F BtE
mm
393G, 493G BtF
1l
ASHE-CLEVELAND-ROCK OUTCROP
COMPLEX, 30 TO 95 PERCENT
SLOPES, VERY BOULDERY
T=2 K= . 24
BALSAM, SANDY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT
SLOPES, EXTREMELY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.10
BALSAM FINE SANDY
LOAM, 30 TO 50 PERCENT
SLOPES, EXTREMELY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.10
BANDANA SANDY LOAM
0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES,
OCCASIONALLY FLOODED
T=3 K=.28
BILTMORE SAND, 0 TO 3
PERCENT SLOPES,
FREQUENTLY FLOODED
T=5 K=.15
BULADEAN-CHESTNUT COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.20
BULADEAN-CHESTNUT!' COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.20
BULADEAN-CHESTNUT COMPLEX,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.20

F�1
h=l
933D, 933E, 911B ByC BURTON-CRAGGY COMPLEX,
911D, 911E WINDSWEPT, 8 TO 15 PERCENT
`R SLOPES, EXTREMELY BOULDERY
T=2 K=.15
P, 721E, 721D
721F
rag
ram+
721G
tI
722B
rani
PRI
r,
722D
722E
722F
722G, 361G
712D, 712E
CaD
CaE
CaF
CdB
CdC
CeD
CeE
CeF
CfD
CASHIERS SANDY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=4 K= . 2 8
CASHIERS SANDY LOAM,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=4 K=.28
CASHIERS SANDY LOAM,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=4 K=.28
CHANDLER LOAM, 2 TO 8
PERCENT SLOPES
T=3 K=:32
CHANDLER LOAM, 8 TO 15
PERCENT SLOPES
T=3 K=.32
CHANDLER-MICAVILLE COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.32
CHANDLER-MICAVILLE COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES
STONY
T=3 K= . 3 2
. CHANDLER-MICAVILLE COMPLEX,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.32
CHEOAH CHANNERY LOAM,
WINDSWEPT, 10 TO 35 PERCENT
SLOPES, STONY
T=2 K=.17

r-,
712F
ChE
CHEOAH CHANNERY LOAM,
35 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=2 K=.17
712G ChF CHEOAH CHANNERY LOAM,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
mg, T=2 K=.17
313B, 313D, 313D2 CnC2 CLIFTON CLAY LOAM,
mq 330C, 330D 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
ERODED
T=4 K=.17
313E, 313E2, CnD2 CLIFTON CLAY LOAM,
315E, 330E 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
ERODED
MR T=4 K= . 17
313F, 313F2, 313G CnE2
315F, 315G
CLIFTON CLAY LOAM,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
ERODED
T=4 K=.17
FT, 99, 99D, 99E, CsD CULLASAJA COBBLY FINE SANDY
99F, 99G LOAM, 8 TO 30 PERCENT
SLOPES, VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.10
r-�
14 DeA DELLWOOD-REDDIES COMPLEX,
0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES,
OCCASIONALLY FLOODED
T=2 K=.10
253B, 243B,
252B2, 242B
253D, 243D,
242D
DoB
DrC
253E, 253F, 243E, DrD
242E
201D
DsC
DILLSBORO CLAY LOAM,
2 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES
T=5 K=.20
DILLSBORO CLAY LOAM,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.20
DILLSBORO CLAY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.20
DILLSBORO CLAY LOAM,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
RARELY FLOODED
T=5 K=.20

104
337D
337E
337F
mq
337G, 352G
mm
352D, 352D2
- 352E, 352E2
m,
352F
311D, 311E
fI
1
311F
737D, 737E
737F
EcC
EcD
EdE
EdF
FeC2
FeD2
FeE2
HaD
HaE
HnD
HuE
EVARD-COWEE COMPLEX,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES
T=5 K=.24
EVARD-COWEE COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES
T=5 K=.24
EVARD-COWEE COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.24
EVARD-COWEE COMPLEX,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.24
FANNIN SANDY CLAY LOAM,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES
T=3 K=.32
FANNIN SANDY CLAY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES
T=3 K= . 32
FANNIN SANDY CLAY LOAM,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES
T=3 K=.32
HARMILLER-SHINBONE COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=2 K=.24
HARMILLER-SHINBONE COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=2 K=.24
HUNTDALE SILTY CLAY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=2 K=.20
HUNTDALE SILTY CLAY LOAM,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
T=2 K= . 2 0

fin
. 737G HuF HUNTDALE SILTY CLAY LOAM,
ram, 50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
T=2 K=.20
171D, 171E, 171F KcD KEENER-LOSTCOVE COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
ram T=5 K=:24
n
493E PeD PIGEONROOST-EDNEYTOWN
COMPLEX, 15 TO 30 PERCENT
SLOPES, STONY
T=2 K=.20
493F PeE PIGEONROOST-EDNEYTOWN
COMPLEX, 30 TO 50 PERCENT
SLOPES, STONY
T=2 K=.20
r�
761D, 761E
761F
761G
!=1
PtD
PtE
PtF
PLOTT LOAM, 15 TO 30
PERCENT SLOPES, STONY
T=4 K=.24
PLOTT LOAM. 30 TO 50
PERCENT SLOPES, STONY
T=4 K=.24
PLOTT LOAM, 50 TO 90
PERCENT SLOPES, STONY
T=4 K=.24
11 RoA ROSMAN FINE SANDY LOAM,
0 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES,
OCCASIONALLY FLOODED
T=5 K=.28
121B, 123B, SaB SAUNOOK SILT LOAM, 2 TO 8
201A, 201B PERCENT SLOPES
T=5 K=.24
121D, 122D, 123D2 ScC
123D, 124D
121E, 122E, 123E2 SdD
123E, 124E
SAUNOOK SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15
PERCENT SLOPES, STONY
T=5 K=.24
SAUNOOK-THUNDER COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.24

rAirl
121F SdE SAUNOOK-THUNDER COMPLEX,
m+ 30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=5 K=.24
r=1
799G SrF SYLCO-ROCK OUTCROP COMPLEX,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES
T=2 K=.20
711E
711F
711G
mm 190D, 190E
cm,
190F, 190G
rZt
101B, 181B
rm
101D, 181D
ram,
mm 101E, 181E
n
101F, 181F
PR
MR
SsD
StE
StF
TbD
TbE
TsB
TsC
TsD
TsE
SYLCO-SOLO COMPLEX,
10 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=2 K=.20
SOCO-STECOAH COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
T=2 K=.15
SOCO-STECOAH COMPLEX,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
T=2 K=.15
TANASEE-BALSAM COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.15
TANASEE-BALSAM COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.15
THUNDER-SAUNOOK COMPLEX,
2 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES, VERY
BOULDERY
T=5 K=.05
THUNDER-SAUNOOK COMPLEX,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.05
THUNDER-SAUNOOK COMPLEX,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.05
THUNDER-SAUNOOK COMPLEX,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY BOULDERY
T=5 K=.05

•
5 Ud UDORTHENTS, LOAMY
T=5 K=.28
Pt, Qu Un UDORTHENTS, STONY
T=5 K=.28
Ur Ur URBAN LAND
�► T=5 K=.26
361D WgC WATAUGA SANDY LOAM,
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.24
riq 361E
Mel
WgD
WATAUGA SANDY LOAM,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.24
361F WgE WATAUGA SANDY LOAM,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.24
961D
WhC
WAYAH LOAM, WINDSWEPT
8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES,
STONY
T=3 K=.24
961E WhD WAYAH LOAM, WINDSWEPT,
15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES,
't' STONY
T=3 K=.15
ri 961F, 933F, 911F WyE WAYAH LOAM, WINDSWEPT,
30 TO 50 PERCENT SLOPES,
VERY STONY
ram►
T=3 K=.24
961G, 933G WyF WAYAH LOAM, WINDSWEPT,
50 TO 95 PERCENT SLOPES,
ma VERY STONY
T=3 K=.24

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
TOPOGRAPHY MAPS

i

3-D TopoQuads Copyrigbt 0 1999 DeLorsie Yarmouth, MS O4096_ Source Data: OSSS [----------1500 ft Scale: 1 : 12,800 Detail: 13-0 Datma: 16666

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
WWTP DMR DATA

Cal
rat
Owl
OEN
n
PR
roel
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED n
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 2953S
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO. Nc. o o as-46 1 DISCHARGE NO. o 0 1 MONTH .1 n YEAR "a000
FACILITY NAME Tow") o Zaitc.-inso t tlt v-' - z P CLASS 3t COUNTY mt Ae.A.e.1 j
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Gi • l • S o �soGRADE� PHONE �S"s)8-
oe
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) wa,,l-c• Q 4.4. Ay tc.r v t€ .S (2)
4•1.• Jo+,...so.,
PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES
(SIGNATURE OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BFST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
re-128 00
DATE
Operator Arrival
Time: 2400 Clock
Operator Time
On Site
a
=
p
ki
0
_ 50050
00010
00400
50060
00310
00610
00530
31616
00300
00600
00665
I I I
FLOW
1
$El@.
....
Pi.)
a
A
la
p U
aallono
AMMONIA
NITROGEN
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
FECAL
COLIFORM
(Geometric Mean)
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
TOTAL
NITROGEN
TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS
N
ABOVF NAME ND UNITS
BELOW
EFF Er
1NF ❑
,,
IP
Ag
O MG/L
HRS
HRS
Y/N
MGD
°C
UNITS
B"UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
^#/100ML
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
2
IFS
N
,o5S
4
oar.
S-
i
, os s
/3.3
1.. t1a
Re
3• $
,
6
44.3c
aZ
Y
. 0S.$
1. I.
4.t.5
a
R •?
0.9s"
3
.3"3.7
yy
•
8
Ss
co
p
. 0 82
y,
4y4:lGY:•1
a
to s
i,
-J�.
i:a y�e�. R+c:
4,
10
os.3o
4
Y
, o 82
to.'
4.1,1
to
.
- .
'111
.
, •
.
t1.aa1:3a
<q:1;..
y>
:t-: - •'WaW :
: q '7
14'4
'jot.
_
• '/
G.
4s0
12c'S30
2
Y
,1vb
to.1
ii,.y11
Ze
4,1.
14as3o
.:.
3
Y
.oS3L
� , 1. ,4.•5�
,Po
tif2
11 a7. •
��j/44
16ss
0
N
,bli
..
:MO
1 C
r
s•? t
.'2 tc •»t
s•° <
•.
E,+C i„Y:^.
1 ,.'
..
'•
t
180730
3
Y
Dso
1sq.
4.Y7
aO
Z.1
o.79
s
:419.4
., ,...c..
!Y•.'�
0.`',
;, i 8i-`- Sz,••
?
-!'�1/*?
4-f 4I-sTa
': %3 �'3.. f
.•.-r"?h'.ws.}
! .i .' .
a -
- ...
..
•j :
.. ..
200a
A
Y
1DS
q.7
6.40
to
3.7
22
SS
o
el
, a 83
3g�
s�3
Yam
M2. <_
_
w s
>Y may} 1.
24
osac
2
Y
. o'Q3
84
4.3'9
RP
q. 1
_
26.t3c
3
V
081
7.1.
6.41
10
3,7
`27
0 , 0
' '
,�
t r 6 ,z:
t' 1as
l i gl s :
. o .-
q, i
28
oc3.:
3�/�(
018
5', 8
1.. 2
30
4
�Y/j
,Y.
305S
0
,o 7
31
osaa
t, � <
Y,. _
. 4*11t7 -'
=1. 1.'
" 33
�':1 D -
:..
..
'1-•3
AVERAGE
o83
q.3
19
2.1
0.a7
4. S
G.7
'1.O
. ..MAXIMUM
r k$ (• #
I3.3
iI.13
: V O :
gyp.
Ill:
(r'
8 p
4,4
MINIMUM
, bSS.
S. g
4i.2q
10
of
0.71
'2I
Li/Ca
.(C) i crse (G) z
, t ..
4
_ 4 -
• . ,
C..
C.
G
4
Monthly Lixnit
, D7S.
N/A.
t./
i.'i ,
30
i/4.
3••o
•aoe.0
WJ ,
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)

F�1
figs
MEI
ern
rmt
WEI
EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO. NC ooa5'1 L 1 DISCHARGE NO. O o t MONTH cc. b YEAR 000
FACILITY NAME 'Town o 4' BAkaFasu :11 I CLASS - COUNTY V'`Act-4 1 I
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) G . L. S othien GRADOL PHONE (8a.N3) o 8$-0i
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) w r Qmeat oLy Se r v 1 c.Qs (2)
CIIECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED n PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES G. • 1-• S o Lnso.,
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
x gIkrep /\2obe(SIATUR F OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) UAT
BY THIS SIGNATURE, 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
0
Operator Arrival
Time: 2400 Clock
Operator Time
On Site
ORC On Site?
50050
00010
00400
50060
00310-
00610
00530
31616
00300
00600
00665
I I I
FLOW
TEMPERATURE
CELSIUS
a
:4
iV
�1
pb�
A
6
.� 0
Oc
aqN
AMMONIA
NITROGEN
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
^
Q
.a
V�V
�
VV
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
TOTAL
NITROGEN
TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS
ENTER PARAMETER CODE
ABOVE NAME AND UNITS
BELOW
EFF 3
INFO
w
l'"E-�
Q
O MG/L
HRS
HRS
YIN
MGD
'C
UNITS
IT UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
1/100ML
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
5
2
�asAc
2
y
.07y
7. 1.
1..yy
at
41.A
'3
:I.
� >V
:
.sxy >L' -
�i ".T'r
tsw`7JY
;.s#o,.'
. ��-
•�...
.y
.
4
t4q
2
Y
.0/0
$. 3
1.. s1
10
3,11
L.$
'01 #fi,
4` t
'A fy F.'l:s•+•
Yy.r. '^z �,t
')tidSK,
tP•;
> �.• yf
;v Sy:-:
:i'• �
i
6AC
to
N
,0.79
"}R?
.?u "'fC.6: ya
..
A '+
ppa a
_.++; gyp.,
� 2f,.Z
,4
n y e
w
•
8
eir.30
5/
Y
14e' 6.2.
e. Y
I. .,73
.2a
4, 7
y
i.1,
si.S
,0
tigitgo,
6Vititi
,... a
,4.,-olin-iic,
-ig-i-:4.14,-,-...44-0:11-•
iiiisn'cc,7,:741.1.1...,;.;
.1.-.,,c,,,,;;Ik,,,,-
..!,e,i*. '
; ;
„
,.
r .......,
. -
. ;
..
10
oust%
,
Y
fii.e '
13..1-
(:. 9:iii
/0 .
7.R
11
f.
•
r t : ,.
9'
4: •
,.31).
• •
.
. •
B. q
12093C
a
Y
812:0$
14
es-
s o $
!mil
L•As-
0
3• q
16ciS3o
(o
Y
"IS3
9.9
4.71
ass
Jtit .
4'
3.8
t 1
�.;;I:-.,:,.:.
l :.
�•
lily
A
w. JW Y
::'..?:2?S 1. ;;,•
�•>: b
a ~'
F
IA
•<t' 26
<.i5
Yk' .�i)i;•u
< a ,
.
, y i ''
1 € £f�2
<�
vt >
T
. N
•4
• F, '...).,•:,,,+?
}
av:.;
# .'.
18D
3o
+
Y
,.// 2. .
I0.1-
L.+!3
(o
v.a
l'�t9
ii
5.,.
l'
4s.
t�ti c`s 'E-''kie.
{,t.2 3
- .b. .,.#
2
t°'�n< .r
t
Y .♦�'
2''
.p `
�
e' ->
- :. ..i�-�.
#:p;.1;Z.eY
.�i-.. _
',5zi,c-
{.. .:
>l e
f
?: .o
. ' r:
d
`Y'a2
...... ..
-,: �..
.. .
E a
-6:•3:::
..
20
S
0
N
+/ o !i
- .
y:1''.1.
j %z ¢
s
x
�'
•>'t;Y
.>r15:`
K
s sf
�i• •
•
•.,•
< •Jf'ST
22
c,c7tm
3
y
Ito_<93
?. 8
6.I. I
3 0
io.s
11
190
41. /
•�
Vfsf4<
lal)
WI
xr
' j '+ t •.'
<<'jj ?jQj �
<<aa'''����''��''���jj`A
<
Qy1,!,!ttttr
g i
: tt��tt
s k.
'
/r •
_ '.
; 'ti
3
24
4 c
2
.10 8 i.
10.3
(,. So,
2 0
i
<e:11
-.7!!
a� s a
t �
,
�
t eN p�-+ ��
`Y
+��� ;i�•t
r�
�
at/
.R �IM.�Y
>. 7 o-
q a.: f
•' yt
TY $
i>q
�✓•.�.
_Al
_ `Y. o:.
� ... _
> ,
� �::
s .
''*'•
4
<-
- <
.4 . -''
1 -
.0
0
to
•..0-)I..
"/276
yy Q,yt(
28
Gee
x
Y
•b7 o
0. L.
(..?1
/D
3rS'
-
29
#:0
`
,s j 24:s,
ii 4
t(Sal
d..
`.Z�
1 ...
Y,$
.
30
31
...
. {.
<3: ;sS:
:.(`;(1...f . ti'
s>;*;;Wi:'
> b .' <
',I .;• .'
'' .
.: • !•.;
:'..A ''
f .
,
AVERAGE
..-
9.y
_
I e. V
io.'
1.'.I
g...
pi. 1.
I. 0
• MAXIMUM . 1
''' < ! ".
1114!.
1i.9 I
•''10;-:.igz
-1. y
8'• •
lb `
4. S-
MINIMUMJy(y��.
, b 7'1
7. i
L.23
A
•i
/, 3
1
3. `i
Co..
co'liv! (C'/ C`b.(G / .
' 4l` M./� f
t•
. -• Lc.
L0
3 14' '!
t.c. r
::G'
. : vs••
.•
•
Monthly Limit
. O7.S
iu/J.
&id:,
b 44
30
#J/L. _WC. b
.%. O
N/A.
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)

N a o oo.S 4• L ,/ EFFLUENT
I4PDES PERMIT NO. S/iK. SOc W011 - 0 b 8 DISCHARGE NO. o01 MONTH M'►a l'N YEAR 2.ob D
FACILITY NAME ` u., U o4 a Mcoa.e.su t L w wTP CLASS Sr COUNTY r+ l7cm e L L
P`')PERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) 441,1t tNsea GRADE a PHONE 45).b) `08- 00-1 1
jERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) 1+4trr ca a? (t. I.+-ry s eau +cePS (2)
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED El PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES 4. L. So ttsa
fail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
A TN: CENTRAL FILES
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ratHNR
a. BOX 29535
NALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
(SIGNATURF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) ATE
BY THIS SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT LS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
Z- 7 oea
Operator Arrival
Time: 2400 Clock
Operator Time
On Site
I ORC On Site? •
50050
00010
00400
S0060
003101 00610
00530
31616
1 00300I00600I00665
j I I
FLOW
TEMPERATURE
CELSIUS
o.
..-4.
El()mo
.n
AMMONIA
NITROGEN
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
,-.,
,,,,a OG , i
vI53
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
TOTAL
NITROGEN
TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS
F.NTER PARAMETER CODE
A13()VF: NAME AND UNITS
BELOW
EFF E'
�INF
�CO
Q
OMWL
HRS
HRS
Y/N
MGD
' C
UNITS
B' UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
1//100ML
MG/L
1NG/L
MG/L
1
f . Y
.•'C
. $ 6',#/r ` .11
.1.:
4.''74
:'Z Q
Ai.
2
c#30
,?,
�1
, 672
i2.,5f
6. sb
X 0
3.
4
as
0
N
. co..s
`
4
io3:•h<,cx-i3��-••
?."hl.
�•• <• :a{;a
-
f
•
w; •.
1. ..
asap
R
Y
. e 6s'
11. 7
1.• s.
Atu
3$ 4.
1
' "
tiiVlik
iiv
` #9
f>
0 K .
2424.�
6.
- 1. :
a. q;-
:.•'
8ot3o
Y
.oi.1.
II.4
4•y3
.20
3,7
v""C'^LI;
T.+3
.4-cK
w1''y
.7.+n:.Iit;`
£ .
...
•vt•:..,•
< x
,..� +c s' " -
' 3 .4' ...
..
'
)
css30
£1
Y
, e.4s
i Rye, `t
1.. I.3
s'o
3 , 4,.
-
..
... . ...
1
12SI
0
N
Ap72
'
ti. I
g53o
3
y
t o 4.s-
9, b
6. 43
.20
Y.1
At:
42,
Pit
g, fk% }.i<:h-.
!(, S ii
6, s t
.L
f •;
Q
< ...
-
•
'�
d4
1
Y
, OV b
u, 7
y. 8
,,Zb
.3. V
r..
gy
. •.4,
` <i� j�j���ii 5
f ''i
j >4
: n'<
- W.
i -
f : Y .l
t"1If S
(,
i
x
18
SS
0
ov
,o{.al
b
I. Ss
Y.3- -'
A' >•'d'.`t
Y '�
y }
P .. ..F •
.� 4. .af` P.3
, F'3{
J
6yf'.3 '<°� ;I;
•f , ;;:0'
)4
'c
S r Y
>-U `t!t ,
`, jjam.. S
4':
}•<•
•Y�
<.
� •S.
• '^r£��
•yt ;.< -•,-
t ',
_
qcb
ii
o`a►
/2.4
1.• 33
0
3,5
``"1
yA
,4.,N,, -,--,-.
.4.40..,<,
,e1,,,,iik-i,
:: * -, -4.4,-,k,.,;
,,,,,F,:
„-' ,., ,
21i4.:
. , :
- . -
, ,.... ,
. ,
, :.I;- ...
"‘.:.'4:,2'-
22
4s3b
.2
Y
..%/a`
t1.S
4.s7
.?0
A.I,
o.ls-
to
S-
_7
0 '.'1.
<
` r R
�144
(3-
s- t.r
•
z
"- <
ft.'\
..gig
: rf
• ,
•
.
Y
.l1S
'.2.1
4•41!
,Zo
3,g
�. <..Jii :.
L ?,^4
<litp
g;Y $II
1 .
,., -z'
y'7 w
•'t:w'Yt ^i
7?,
jSPt_:•:Sf E
Y'�St` +t. ii ;
lt' e�
1ftaY . %Z ,
., -
}y' :.:
»x
SS 10
I"
,D93
_28
Oe3d
A
/.
b 58
i/. 9
(.114
st 0
2.1
7
1
3. `i'
.
04
_
iiiii0
Ci• '
iim
Arge.:4,..u.
If. 49.g,
6,...f2,2..
':: , ,
h',$,:.,' F
••1.;,... . .
- j, .
• • !s• ':
• r.
• • .
-
• •• - •
,
us-30
f
Y
.os l
.2.3
4.6q
30
3. 7
YF.T
Fi*i• °
C•
- .
•f
,`,..:,:--,.1.
^k• ;'
• -..£'i-4
R i y f,
` t AVERAGE
0137
11,?
�.Z1.3
,21�
1,18
7.8
1$
MAXIMUM' , {.
, 1 `.
.
.3.8
MINIMUM
♦OyS.
'.al
4433
O
,1 1 /',/.S
(0
1
3,2.
Camp. (C)/ G,*b (G) i,
'. •t►` t.
.'.(.
4
4
•L •
C.• ..
C. • .
,
Lfuo Monthly Limit Coas0
Ad/
Id/ _
N11. _
Srs
L14.
iits
/ 0e.
NA.
_
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)

rX1
r�1
Mgr
cocas 4t. EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO.e'i . Soc w 99 - 0 08 DISCHARGE NO. Do l MONTH A ?t 1 t, YEAR a< 000
FACILITY NAME T eaw o of Zw k ee►as u , erW W T ? CLASS f' COUNTY lh'+4...Le 11
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) 4 .L, Se LOIS* n GRADE 1 PHONE ex b) lose- Oe1.1 1
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) WA-rmli Qtaine.,-ry 6a&V1cES (2)
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED El PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES Co. L . .. 04. NLes N
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 2953S
RALEIGH, NC 27626-053S
x /_4
(S GNAT E OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE, 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
/*2 ZOo 0
DA'I E
Operator Arrival
Time: 2400 Clock
Operator Time
On Site
*
2
US
04
O
50050
00010
00400
50060
00310
00610
00530
31616
00300
00600-00665
I I I
FLOW
1
S2
69 0
Ti.
4 $
a 0
A V
0 u
4 w
Z
5
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
FECAL
COLIFORM
(Geometric Mean)
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
TOTAL
NITROGEN
TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS .
ABOVE NAME AND UNITS ENTER PARAMETER �
BELOW
EFF Qj
INF ❑
1>4g A
O MG/L
HRS
HRS
YIN
MGD
'C
UNITS
fl UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
II/100ML
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
q
.�
;(a
I*
ix';".F is .Y
.•�'F.: ,i
a ,"..
':
.
..
• •
-
•'< : . -. „�-
°t;a*
2ss
e,
N
,p7,7
. '.3
iiihji*2
?l
, '
ficat'
(. .�
x> °
>•?3a''a:
'A ',:;,tj'+
''fy :.'ti'
ga-
1 »
T ,
<t: "A
•
•
Y cei
x< '.'.
4ex33o
2
Y
.1el
sa,l
6.sy
0
3
19
1.
/,Aob
3.7
3E
�iw
of
fr ia. 4
i'!'
.M .v., T
� Y 3
<yf ■
� b
..�,
.
6
0s3o
A#
Y
, 8
j
ct.si
6. et
Re.
_
14.2.
Ms,• 4.
i�.r.ii
r `
i>
i'"�rlfrl,. yy
�����.
.7 �I...
.�+d :.
t.
?. , •,s
�• _
.
-
•
3.
-
-
.•
8
SS
o
N•
,ofi
��
i
Y�<e.L
�.
"�k'E � s�
�
tz ak
2 Y
'< k
a < orb. •
S„
a
s � f'i a:.
,T..
-i,�
�. .`�.x
to
os30
e
y
• , o' el
r,2. l
1..49
30
•
•
• ,
9.0
a
•
66
Y
. W,�+r .f% 'i'L,
- :!
A ice: F-
i •.g=•rya
>' S�
-,2
4
: n .
it !:.
y
�5..;/ °,':
�s.-,i
•iy:;4,
o.°�t1
, `• •
..;
3.. •�.
12pS30
.r
y
eel
I ,o
`.70
'j0
3.S
„elf�y
�� �
ra
k�'.['_
:
.i^•�
• L
:'? 'SIon
y�,j
/r7
�•,
•-},
"T T�
, Ets
�(`�� }l:
%.- ! .Sk i,
'��,lw
:5•. �•:
� . - 'w�f
i. �i''v:}n.
jC ���y �'S`1
'. tf i`�-.v o �;
.A ;. t..
: iz
-
- :.
y."
'ivY3'}. f�
�'
' 't4.
si .�.`�
i v ' t{.
~w`� '.�i•
..0 ..•
14
pc 7Q
4
. p 8 %
�3 ,3
L. 3 l
e! 0
3.3
s.
16
55
0
A
, /at 1
l
,il
Vi#
WiLitk
:
i l
E3
4b
-
P
:
Y 3.s.-:ty
9.- .
yx
J>'ao:
a
a.
• !
h
�-t
18o5301
,/l o
♦V°
7.00
D
2,4
11
?Y
3.S
AliA,
.
a -.f
e
!.
V•."FY•
:tS4:_v
.
;?�0iti
g1wS
`ok Yk
.kR
`:.1:F.fik'
iv<.n
y
'.„T..,
,
44
:
20
s3o
't
Y
,D94
ts.O
4.77
4v
3.I
S14i
o
}AO
V.
:SJ4g
�:f
w
l.i
i �.o
'1
�•
• •
•
V• =l
i F .5.
22
ss
O
N
,oly
.
'.1F�F;yyyy
lt
OVA'
wfilliA
2 3C}. '
Y.*
0,�,
'i"Si:
4(�Wi
:. *11.�01
1^C •'. } _
« '.'
,,
'i` :`
f
tj ..
24
Ho4.
O
Ij
79'
-
--,. .
7,,,,tv
yt
.4§,4,5x#:
_0
1* .-,:fiiii.ek:
.„,:w.iie---•!.
:-., .
IT
,. s,...F,..,:.:
„ .-.
•,•,.,,.. .,-,..1i.)...
; ,
.,--,,,- .-. ...
_
.. .:...
26
,s3o
S'
Y
• D sag
'4/
/,.. 7 V
o
3.0
S
113.
%t7g.
(►
A V
_ _
-
`29
os-30
"f
y
, on 1.
"�1, l
3'�
7. 1
128
;Og
:,Y ''
?�'.
.,1,ai •xy+y'�r
,1..e8
ii2 `1.i �'
' k
j-<'42
3
-76. 'a?
y�p.,y
.f'-P.--
v .o.-
• . Q
30
55
0
/J
. f o S
. < `�Y<.
1' AAA,.
..: i`l�•i
�ti>Y$<..
k�.
> a'�>..r
i',.yt`�Y Xf '.. )
:.Y �j'��.�>�T
y'T `�'_.
%'Si}•
-C �.+'�.
+
}^ ..
g , Y�_R
!T•>vt
i s.. i i'n'
1�'.7,! '•
'�f 1r
0.
4 i
.:Y
..
AVERAGE
, ,IOW
4.4
3 a ,,Lig
,. fs
7
13.3
3 S
No/
O. y 1
'3'_ MAXIMUM'' •..
MJ
e; . 9,
7'1I ''
'` 1 ;"
.
4, '
1/- �`r:
'I.DYa
q.%
Nf. Vi
o•e(1
_
MINIMUM
. o7 a
(a. i
I„10
0
A
_
j'
'i
!
J 3
ii. 4
o. el I
Drerigt
s 1Y
of
l`7
h .Y
Y.{ ('
, ti
+4
A
.','
.
Monthly Lin+It O, ISO
MIL.
C49
Nil.
Is
A/&
I.-
/ 00
Pit. _N/A.
Ao-
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)

EFFLUENT ,,r�
NPDES PERMIT NO. DISCHARGE NO. MONTH /' `( YEAR -23°C)
r� FACILITY NAME
CLASS COUNTY
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) GRADE PHONE
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1)
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
c=r1 DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-053S
mit1
(2)
(SIGNATURE OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
BY THIS SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
I Operator Arrival
Time: 2400 Clock
Operator Time
On Site
ORC On Site? '"
50050
00010
00400
50060
00310
00610
00530
31616
00300
006001
00665
FLOW
a
QO18
OX. U
°
g'A
S Z
!Et 0
001E
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
it
4C0t
0 8
�
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
W
(-,O
TOTAL
PHOSPHOROUS
ENTER PARAMETER CODE
ABOVE NAMEAND UNITS
EFF 0
Ow
INF ❑
g 2
-
adE�
Q�
g Si 0
O MG/L
HRS
HRS
YIN
'C !
MGD
°C
UNITS
OKUG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
11/100ML
it'
r�'�
..7 t`< f'
�: �V.
„
� t
` S
1.6: . f4A
�.. �
:f �
k,.. 4
_��Fs�}A �s
k �^i 1 • i `:`::.'
`t
w t
�. -S
,tom
4'
. #vi%, -
<
. �' ,t;Iifk'
26 k YYe K h
v�i''H4i 4gik
'Y. .. >
i�: Y»
r B •, 'i
..
r
k . }' I`
. {,• TY
�
,�,f�
�j Mom' , <:
osa-
o9 I
s
(...7
GO
>�f
:::
x:,
�.^
- •ot14
<� TA".
f.
�M,..�i's..
it�k :t'
�,F���..c
: %
�
1w. �� sk
5 r
'� nt
�"?��
sus xrt£...
.. k.:.. <•
y,, k
?f .,. C .<, .
k
��.i`\M„
L.
y •P; r'S.
4 ,:...., YS
RM .ff.
�1�
.t-
���`¢
.:
�s,���•
'� L'�•:
.
0 4
.7. 0
`f
;+
• YC
E:-f..:: t .:7ii
^'".
k • y4c'.'t
:'ii .
k :�
Rtib < .
'+'+1 �p>^
- A.- "'_;..'-.!.
,>�Jy '�3
iitftt$i
+�yp,$,^/$,
4.,' .
' .
Y >�Q p >j
�.,.' ''',
�$`�>Ya.
i4 �
..;>ti%�f,• _ !<�:.`y`'�
,::3`.t:t
.yg.'yY.•YS�¢Yt2Ty�{r
a'1` ' 5j''S..
..�f�.,�` :<
" .:
ai..p� 2L.�aN
tom; "•<XS
Sac ,.i.
S�
iyoKkt
f
i ..' +Zyy
4. "♦
• Y 4
.f111
tJ
r
MIN
f.
Y
zi-.j��y V tyc..
S{Cj. "p�
.. Y.,
.' '
d .:`
ak) .t is
�
Sa f y)r•
^{L�
.!C .}
yF.' ':'. '. �T,��y�
k b.-.•�i .=T3%
f
�Yiii�'.
-I'-Y.
},, =
Y t
%VJ
Y �t
...
V.
�%'yt
it' w(t
Z
10 V$
I7. C
4-8
lob
Asa.
,'��'�°f j.3
9
�g'µ �
a�Y»$
F�
'- 4. • t
.v�
,-
��yt��'�.'t :titrt4,
d'Y Ci'2 4 0
f Q+�� y
TIC,
.?3. q.>
;� .tLrv�
' OY
-> ro.k
f :.�ww
c .. •.A�,¢f -i
.. N � 4:.
F
�.
)Y!'{
S-
K Y$Ni.,
yti ` �,'
.(
.:; Y� ...
:q A':P.'.7v>'>
�`v� ..
Yat1 ti, I
f t ,'
.� -.
u
b 4t -. "t'Y':.
� i. ��
fq , Y>.4 ,„
/F$`r.}yy�
�,
: Y>:' :.Y Y
�, �+5.-4
�f.
�. ai7- .
y}
i
......4.1,- -
a7a
1 .$
A0
A. I
..•S
,^S�`.�.A.,".."''.
n r
spa C�
Y e
'4'
w S-obb, '20Ik;
> :# e•
,,A
4 K. Y
':i+% f'
��s(y�, p:
.x>�;:LF,�_.
W ft /''k:�?,E
�k- ryrda:Yr
1. :>�>
: YA;t<',M
.':tfa .4:*:'`
` Y.a3,t:b� �B
;c .! '-4 li:
ALA":?\S•y��1`�
X r i.
�r>
•.l t-:. k'`t
i s 7 f
t' -'f
"� }i G' - SF
^•k'd
£�k>'
7'3L'?Y
E w:*
4 1,0
12
�,�.
..
o7D
17,,-
3 0
2 . SL.
-,
-
r ..
P. S �
' L.
G L Iei
03,3 v
-d P .i
'
aA .
,Y;.....:.,ia.
£ `.
.. ....
Zs. "• .
, .... 9Y/S
< 4.%
,' rr ...
jj
�i
Z.. ��y� ;
.'/•`Y.•ti Y:
f„tt„
j
�X..
1.44.,
4 �t
3 Y L
�!�q 44ffAA
%'k'a "'Y.,,it'
:N.: <
.�
'^".
y<j
"��('. t2'� idjL
g �sTSp�.
jt�" 4
�:�4
��cpy.� L
-.S :. y
f3�t �
l }✓:' f S
�$T
��{ �>��
Yf
; ig-..:.
�{.Ii
14
a
, c 7 q
.'ti
... . 5.7 .
fW.4..2�' ...
:e. .:. .,,
,.�>r3 ti�h
i?��3`�,.'MY�6.114
.N,/�
$ �.
�. ,A
�""-,ak;w
t°
F'.
.z6
a t�'3s t! `;�'
': :
.. , .r�
14
c�..
•;v, Y,e
s' ]s9'" `ei
§, : .. Y.)
.u�` s' °"
f, r� ,
'ky+x v<
v t , ' t;
RCA
'RCA
:�,es
Y t
2
Q� -y,� y k
v o.
: �t
>„ ,
,!:
ct
y� x'o ,-;.
r , 17-
16•'
►
.
_
.Jh?
I3.6
7.:Sfo
p
Z,
[£>2w f
pp i t<
t.Ei� rta
iv.r�3a�
yk�'3
d•rwF.a:::�....-.
'Ss.:
,s'�. A.
. Zs:,'%�02
icy". 0j'.. ;°t
Y: :w��
tq'•ce'L4 y-
s" tom' �• Yk' 4
'Yt;E_
<:IYS"a�
s x:. R�
vffi•...:,
�:
�y'r ,¢�.•
k2E k
fit
£� .r
k }
P'1E 4;
)LW ,'
.'s'���'.
> • • f
''s.•.
In '
�.e•»
'%°ffd- >'. ` •
- a.
.'t.>.''�
S S
W�
:.e�:4fi'
0 j
:.t
e
�e
64134
t '
t
AS
~
' wk
'
µF '
;sr' a
`�
.,"at
:.
-,
«Lac�i
20
ELz+
EL
22
y�o Ft�
AL
..
t
�a `�f%
Dry
� ��
: i �..'.f; •
. ° (03
Iffy
20
i0
"°�•3ko,,.
1sx':
'
�... r., n .
s
: ,' I
y
',
�
.ski
,' °
<', s*Le
q.:
2
�
-2
•�I`;
S
I.j �•
f,!-.2w.ti
X,.'
.
` »,�
' : e .
i[^•<t'4...:
f• ��3_
t� c -
,
�,�+•
'o- � .:f
r
':A .% ..
,,� .w�c
, .1
<., %'
T -: .i
•.t� � <
�6< va:
:4" tJ
x��
•S '6}t ? ><
�s
y:
.'+��,, �>.
1t. Kd
i4'�'��%# r
,•
�l}y.:
ac.:."�gi
� - ��t�
;„'
� �.
3
� t �'
24
05? •
5
1 Z
fe:i7 yt. _,M
�•.2�
'n�
iJ•j ,F.�fpa... y}}
s
ry
�iSt i '
-" �__ L..'
S, v
W 'P..
A,C
' �.
�•L4�
r.
:.
q.:
Y'9'Z�•Y>�S'
�:�f.
.5:<,Ti%P3
'a:ta<S:Y.r}�P.L
%. y[�Fy�'','•{{
t. :,
•<,
.:14,,,,,,
:K!u
y.
, a-
,.
x?'. .---- 4,; a
r�...
t,�RS f
'6fY.. /...,
w pl ,-, ..7,Y
�'L/`-
.:4.
y, .. ..
cr:.r.a �.
,
Q:. 't.. '. t"
: L"?
. r.j
t
"`f'':7.
i ',R•
�J.
'"' ,.- C
:�� �2.
v,S�}---t *.i:
�yi� �`��
SfSf'
k a:11y`3
73
L
�'Z{ff i .
:Yr
}� w5'>
L.
4
���.�.
L28
S S
, o� le
F) 2' j 41
,Y :
f,:k`,'yy
<..t+t6• i
�C -
,:itmaa'
'Y
y-'': lYM> ..,
g•��33�f'.'tYf'A'
ti3 .. •'>F
_.y. �<
L�"%tC w
x<, h
s
Yf•. .�.+
, , <k1v:
.'•�'f a
,.
'Y.....}3ik'4
At t
:;fy�e t '
o
f� tii
�3'
•.� i
G x
'• T t
C
.,'�`� < ::
'.*,
.,}. ti
_30,
a
Z.
,Di
i
'
I -•�^
/� 8.
..
d
f' ''cM„'tS'
..
"5`(R((�44{�#y .3u
?-~ ' '/rut- -
a. 'Y ..
T'-,q.
:. .:.
r:`T .3
t:..�• :.. :..
0�,
-
'
.,.. • f7 k
. .,e .$
, r
i. L
y
F,.
�
-T'�'
' :;,
yykk
14:
- ,., r
volt
,b�
�'f
,".>�S' .. i.R
S-k', ..
Y
T+- -'S:
.:.rt
AVERAGE
a
' k>. .... X1MUM f s
.:?,4;,;.{fxz4'
;:r. ,4,..
.>,'Y *g5jk�
l:r b1c,`v .s •ss�
. }o •t•'s Ry#,ig
�.0 x
''�'
i .!s#' k',l'.<X
r
-,y..
g,
MINIMUM
��y��} . ."ii'Qyxy...'•iY
-/.: t( x
. i ...
.''l'
.. , '.>...
'!••j.✓.�.�'
..
,�z'
F
4'
....s..��
1,41i.. . .
f:`S' r
E
Y°`�rj�,. $ -
_ •m
�.:�: ir<*s. :!'
yy {y f_3 ;y,' Y ;..
:'h b.-'
��>1`9
>g�•'S''
[}%fi=
,.;� x
f. T•j_,
' ,i
`�'& .?yi.
Sy
> t
y".
. �T
.t�:
�<¢ JT
>if.
.5.
S _ ��-
Monthly Limit
1'
DEM Form MR -I (12/93)

EFFLUENT
mck NPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 DISCHARGE NO 001
FACILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE MONTH DUNE YEAR 2000
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE ORC CLASS 11 COUNT MITCHELL
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Qua ServicesRRY CARVER GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
r' s
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED �
® PERSON NJ COLLECTING SAMPLES STAFF
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL, FILES
WI DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0635
HRS E YIN
1 .1740 2_ Y
2, 1730 1.5 Y
twl , 3
r=
FLOW
EFF
INF 0
MOD
0.085
0.091
0.082
4 0.082
5 1800 2 Y 0.082.
6 53O. 2„ Y 0.07
7 ::1800 .2 , Y 0.087
8 1700 1.5. Y
9 1730 2 Y
ram+, 10
11
12 530 3 Y
13 530 2.5, Y
rAir; 14 1815 :3 . Y
f 15 .1740
16 1710
17
2` .Y
0.075
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.059
0.087
0.075`
Y 0.073
18
19, 730::Z5 Y
20 746' .;:3:: Y
21 - 805. 2.5 Y.
_ . 22 ..700 12.5
23� . 650'; 2.5, Y
24
25
26, 730 4.5 Y
_27 730
Y
28 .600 5 Y
29 500 5.5 Y
L30.635:..2
• Y
1
0.065:
0.065
0.065.
0.075':.
0.0'
0.077'
0.084
009. <:
0.0:1
0.09
0.089
0.1
0.184
0.191,
18.4
20
23
23
22
21
22
21.6
VERAGE
MAXIMUM
NIMUM
)mp.(C)IGrab (Gj
I....mthiy Limit
cal
0.1
0.191
0.1
OEM Form MR -I (12/93)
21
23
18.4
a..
UNITS
6.9.
7.3
7.3
7.6
7.4
6.9 . 40
7.8
7.2.
1111
7.8
6.9
RATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
THIS SIGNATURE,1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
6.3
20 , ‹ 2
60
26.25 4.60 7
)► 1200 2.4
} 1200
360
2
2.5
1.9
1.5
1.6
2.2
2.2 ,
2S-- o c)
DATE
71900
UGIL
60 7.7 7.3
0 . 2 6.8
5.00
9
2
151
1200
1
2.04
2.5
1.5
#DIVIO!
0
0
#DIV/01
0
0
0
0
G
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls

EFFLUENT
n
tst
fat
t�s
t=1
faal
fan
Pal
t=l
rya
NPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 DISCHARGE NO 001 MONTH JULY YEAR 2000
FACILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE CLASS 11 COUNT MITCHELL
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) LARRY CARVER GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Quality Services #2
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED ® PERSON (s] COLLECTING SAMPLES STAFF
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
DN. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0535
1
RE t3fi OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE, 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
DATE
a
0
o�
60050
00010
00400 60060 00310
00610 00630 31616
00300
00600
00666
00095
01027
71900
FLOW
.. EFF
INF 0
ak
0 gg
1.
W
0
2
g I
0
TOTAL NITROGEN
0
MERCURY
HRS
to
YMI MOD
0
UNITS UGIL MCA.
MGIL MOIL 91100ML
MG&
MG&
MGGL
UMHOS
uGGL
UG/L
1
N 1 0.114
2
N ( 0.114
3
815
1.5
Y. I: 0.114..
4
5
730
730
2
2
Y � . o.099:
Y 1 . 0.074
23.8
21'
7.4 0 _ 4.6
0
2.7. 4 270
2
2.2
6
800:
0.085:
7
730:.
0.079
8
N I ` ` 0.071
9
10
730
2.
N I 0.071
.:0.071
1
••_ 800
2..
0.082':
:'21.5
6.8: 20 10.3
8 20
2.5
12
810
2
0.079
21
0
2.2
13
14
15
16
800
1550.-
1
2.
Y 1 0.071
0,104-..!
N'I ' 0.083
N_► 0.083
17
800
0.083 -
18
19
730
20
21
730
800
1
t. .
2.5
Y f : 0 084
0.074
21.8
40'.
20.5
4.4 , ' 27 1200
0.+
0.071``
•21,•
22
0.088
•
23
N 1 0.088
24
6.5
0.066'
21.5�
7.1
2
25
26
730
745.
5.
2
Y;1 : 0.203
Y1 0.104`'
.20..
10. ' 38
31
>1200
2
-
27
800
2.
0.097
28
29
30
830.
1700
2.
2
Y I 0.092
Y [, 0.072
N 1 0.072`
31
730
2
Y 1 0.072
AVERAGE 1 0.1
MAXIMUM 1 0.203
MINIMUM 1 0.1
21
23.8
20
18.75 18.35
7.4 60 38
6.5 0 4.6
4 17.50 95
4.4 ' 31 1200
2.7 4 1
2.11
2.5
2
#DIV/0!
0
0
#DIVIO!
0
0
0
0
Comp. (C) ! Grab (G)
Monthly Llmtt
G G C
C C G
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UGJLs

EFFLUENT
von
NPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 DISCHARGE NO 001
FACILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE CLASS
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) LARRY CARVER
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Quality Services
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED ® PERSON [s] COLLECTING SAMPLES
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL. FILES
r=1 DN. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29635
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0635
tact
evt
tOot
a¢►
Fni
i
x
(SEOPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
MONTH JULY YEAR 2000
11 COUNT MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
#2
STAFF
DATE
a
1
00010 00400 60060
60060
FLOW
EFF ■
INF 0
00310
0
a
00610 00630 31616
a b
5 n
14 gi
00300
}
0q
00600
8
00666
00096
CONDUCTIVITY
01027
i
4.
71900
cc
HRS
YIN MOD
2
N
0.114
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
815.
730
0
C UNITS UGIL
MGAJ
MGA.
MGA-
9J100ML
MG1L
MGA..
MGII.
UMHOS
uo&
LIGA.
0.114
,1.5 .Y >•0.114
2 Y 0.099
730
800
730
2 Y 0.074
1 Y 0.085
23.8 7.4
21
0
:CO
6
2.2::
2 Y 0.079
10
11
12
13
14
15
730
800
810
800
1550
2
N 0.071
N 0.071
0.071
2 Y .0.
2 Y 0.079
:'0.071*.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
800
730'
84
730
800:
0.104
21.5 6.8 20
21 0 :.
A .
410.3 •
•
8,.•
2.5
•2.2
0.083
0.083
2 Y 0.083•
2 ` Y. 0.084
Y 0.074
•
2.5 Y 0.082
•Y OQ71:
N•
;':0.066' .
•
21.8 8.5 4
1
4. y.
20.5
4.4 .. :: ' { •1200 .
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
800'
730
745
800
830
1700
A8.5
5
0.203:
2 Y 0.104
2 Y 0.097
215'
20
2.
10<.•
1.1
2 Y 0.092•'
2 Y 0.072
0.072
2 Y 0.072' •
AVERAGE 0.1
31
730
MAXIMUM 0.203
MINIMUM 0.1
Comp. (C)1Grab (G)
Monthly Limit I
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)
•
21 - 18.75
23.8 7.4 60
20 6.5
0
G G G
18.35
4.6
4 17.50
95
4.4 31 1200
2.7
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls
4 1
2.11
2.5
2
G
#DIVro!
0
0
#DIVIOI
0
0
0
0

t1
EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 DISCHARGE NO 001 MONTH AUGUST YEAR 2000
FACILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE CLASS
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORQ LARRY CARVER
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Qudit" Services
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED ® PERSON [s] COLLECTING SAMPLES
Mall ORIGINAL and ONE COPY lo:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
DN. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29636
RALEIGH, NC 27626-0636
MRS YM
1 745 2 Y;
2 800: 4 Y
11 815 3 • Y
1
11 COUNT MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
#2
STAFF
OF TOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE, 1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT 13
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
60060 00010 01400 60010 00310 00610
MGD
0107
0.244
0.24
013'f
• •
`0:08
0.076' •
• .0.083
• 0.089
28 810 3 Y 0.068 21.5
29 730. 3 Y 0.078 21
30 830 3 Y 0.074
31 800- 3 ° Y 0.083
AVERAGE , 1 b 0.1 21
MAXIMUM . 0.244 22.5
MINIMUM •C0 i 0.1 19
Comp. (C)1 Grab (G)
Monthly Llmtt
22.73
7.5 40
8.8 10
O G
4.72
9.7
2
C
2
2.3
1.15
C
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls
W100ML MGIL
80 1.67 :
#DIV/0l
0
c.0
DATE
#DIV/0I
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)

lei
'pet CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED ® PERSON (sJ COLLECTING SAMPLES STAFF
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN: CENTRAL FILES
amt DIV. OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEHNR
P.O. BOX 29635
RALEIGH. NC 27626-0635
Fon
l�1
Pk;
rat
Pan
rat
121114
EFFLUENT
rin NPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 DISCHARGE NO 001 MONTH SEPTEMBER YEAR 2000
FACILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE CLASS 11 COUNT MITCHELL
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) LARRY CARVER GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
CERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Quality Services #2
NA rr OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
BY THIS SIGNATURE.1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
DATE
IN
1
60050
00010
00400
1Isi
60060
00310
00610
•'00630
31616
00300
00600
00666
00096
01027
71900
FLOW
1
g
GB
1
Cc
a
Q
0
p
i I
;
6
i
I
�
6
..
r
INF
ii
HRS
I
YIN
MGD
G
C
UNITS
UGIL
MGA.
PAWL
I
MIL
W100ML
MG1L
MGR.
MO
WA.
UGIL
1
815
3
Y
0.068
2
0.068
'
'
3
0.086
1
4
900
2
Y
0.063
-
I...
5
845.
3
Y
0.066
22
6.9
30
3.2
0.33 •
6
4
2
6
815
3
Y
0.07
20
20
1.9
7
815
3
Y
0.08
8
800
4
Y
0.056
9
0.084
•
10
0.064
_
r
11
815
3
Y
0.064
12
730
3
Y
0.067
21.5
8.7
60
8.8
5
> 1200
2
13
815
3
Y
0.077
_ 21
20
•
2
14
800
3 ,
Y
. 0.066
15
1100
4
Y
0.072
16
0.083
17
_
0.063
-
18
815
3
Y
0.0634
_
19
815
4
_ Y
0.087
19
6.9
20
2.4
0.18'4
20
2.1
20
830
3
Y
• 0.065
19
40
2
21
700
3
Y
0.083'
"
•
22
815
3
Y
0.073
•
A
.
23
0.067
24
0.067
25
845
3
Y
0.08T '
20.5
- 6.6 ,
. . 20
- 2.8
-
26
845
3
Y
0.078
19 _
' 40 '
3.6
0.51- -
• 2 •
80
2.4
,
27
830_
3
Y
0.071
,
•
28
830
3
Y
0.067
. '
29
730
4
Y
0.073
w
30
,
.
31_
AVERAGE . t
• 7 0.1
20
31.25
4.00
0
4.25
49
2.13
#DIV/0!
#13IV/0!
::
MAXIMUM
0.078
22
, 8.9
,
60
8.8
0.51
8
1200 •
2.6
0
0
0
MINIMUM • I •
' 0.1
19
6.6
20 _
2.4
0.18
r
2
4
,
1.9
0
0
0
Comp. (C) l Grab (G]
G
G
G
C
C•
C
G
G
C
,
C
G
Monthly Limit
_
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93)
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls

•
)ES PERMIT 1 NC00254611-WQ99-088 DISCHARGE NO 001 MONTH October 2000
.ILITY NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
ERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Jadd Brewer
:ERTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Quality Services
.HECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED C9l PERSON (sj COLLECTING SAMPLES
it ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
. IN: CENTRAL FILES
:)ivision of Water Quality
I7 Mall Service Center
Ielgh, NC 27899-1617
w
CLASS 11 COUNTY MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
#2
Jadd Brewer
/ — coo
(SIGNA OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
BY T SIGNATURE,1 CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
',
, . ,
-.1
'
..
co
E
4
h..
l
a
F
in
Z
Oo-
0
p..
a
0
60060
00010
00400
500601 00310
00610 [ 1005301 1
31616 ( 003001 00600 l
00665
00095
01027
71900
FLOW
g
;
V
a
W
RESIDUAL CHLORINE
0
AMMONIA NITROGEN
TOTAL SUSPENDED
RESIDUE
.....
O
h
$.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
TOTAL NITROGEN
TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS
CONDUCTIVITY
1 CADMIUM
V
tia
x
EFT ■
INF
O
g
r
it
MGD
0 C
UNITS,
UG/l.
MQJL
MG/1.
M011
a1t1100ML
MOIL.
Moll.
MQJL ,
vs
UGC/L
UGlL
'3
:08;20:�;:3:
;:0;07;3:
::1e::
:� :6 :
:20: '•
:Z :
:.2;....;�.;
•
.
•0:10;:�
;:•'•�''
:8:::�
$ ' ' ' '
',�.:
.::II;�I
:l0.48;';'
.�.
.•'f9:':'
.:•,
:. ....•.
ce!
0:
:4:
;Y:
Y
...
:•'
..
.....
...
.
6
:
:bi3i d:
:•:-:
:0 dBd:
..........
.
•.
•�r-.•IP''�.•.-+'A"�►�'�•
• . •
. .
,•
. . • . ,
. . . . . . . .
• . . •
r_.•r
. •
.
. ..
1'T^:
,
:07.230:
:•3:
•Y::-:0:059:...:•15•:...:•6:4•:...:-o
:•:•
•.....•37:.
..::.•OA8•::...
..:•2:•:•:
•:.4•
...:•!:•:•:•:
.:-:a 6:-:-:
• .
i . ....
.
:t::' .t;:�;:
... .
11
. : -
•,:•:•:
' :
....
::%:13::
.. ..
b dd
7
yy j,
0
J.
.1:3i..
.... .
•:07.00'
•:2:
•
01i8' �.:•
:4a:•' :.
....•••H:1•:•:•
•..•`:•:•:•::•:•:•:
C•:•'•
' •:t6•:•:
•?•
..:4200•:•:
•..•3.05':•:
•.........
. . . . . . .
.:::0
t9
....:00...:2:
Y:
'-0i �•
..:.�:::
.•.•r 4...
:.;:•.
.....
...
•.0 dd6.•.•I:..
Y:::d:bi16:
.:it::
:6:2i3::'
:0:'•''
...
.•
1 ..
...•••.. ..
•••
... :
... .
:6
oo:
:•3:
Y..::o:083
:•
•.•..............
•......
......•••••..
..........::•:•:•
•......:
.•.
.:ol
•
so
:OR:bQ:..:?::Y:::4:Q87:.
•..=i>Ir:•':'•
_
..:P:'•'
�...
..
..
�•2 dx:::'
.. .. . ..•.•.
...
3t
::2::y:
:b�ddd:
:::::0:::::
.:B:i�:'
:afii:
• .:> ::':'
•9.00
.....:ira
:':'
••5.74
.............
..•.�C ::::
•
: •....:I:':::'
:.:1:80::•:
•
•........ .
AVERAGE
.:b7!=00:
0.064
17
0.12
8.60
4
2.08
10.48
1.90
ODIV/OI
:
AXIII UM 0087:
:1o:
..... ..•...:44:•:•
.6.28
•.•
.� •
8:_'_'
'•a8� •:
'?I•
..:4200 :•:•
•.. 0.4:•'
•...soAs•'•'
• -t}:90 _'
•-.".:o:•:•'•_
•
. - - - -
INIMUM
_
• 0.054
_
15
0 <
-:RO.:••;
2
<•
0.10
2
<
1
1.05
10.48
1.90
0
• :..::(::;
::
..:;:::
;::;
: •.0::•:'
. .:::::AC:':•:::.::9::':
::..::•:::'
::q•:•::'
...:a:;':•
....:
: ;:
'cold;:iC):i:0ritr(t3>::...
Monthly Limit j
.:::.•:G::::::
.:..::'•:.:..
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls

JE§ PERMIT NO NC00264811 WQ 99-088 DISCHARGE NO
^, fb NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
001 MONTH November 2000
E. TOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Jadd Brewer
RTIFIED LABORATORIES 81 Water Quality Services
CLASS 11 COUNTY MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE
02
ECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSON [=j COLLECTING SAMPLES
M )RIGLNAL and ONE COPY to:
N: vrNTRAL FILES
Of Water Quality
• 191414endosOuter
q rn 14817
i
100.0 00010
FLOW
• EFF■
INF 0
8 0
4
I4i
rr
:Goy
11:
•
c
IOUd I r. ~ 813EME
BVE
1 .t1 .
�/y rr��l i
p;�1�G�r7M1..71��
rti ' 1 IO'9iKil
K!gh
•t 3b !�
BEM
Ea KO KCEaM
t7�:
ILtiI I
ME OE
.:c. .r.•;•
.:I.�__ .• ... ..
X.
1 i •.i
IDS
1 t.X
.1,
.. 1.
•
1- •
W py91 gt101 I : 7
1 el] PEE Bgel
GE
9
Nta1UM
•ttp4 r4 r mb:
nvoly Unit
':11•:: ....•• . .
0.054 15
•
0.048
'r)
1
11
c
6.58
..: S :.
0.00
0
(M▪ ONATU OPERATOR tN
SY THIS TORE, I CERTIFY THAT Tin REPORT a
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE UST OF MY KNOINLEDQE.
Jadd Brewer
00310 00610
u
DO
88�
X.
X.
X.
5
•.::1• .::
•i*Ir.
31.10
t
M1.041L
COME
BEEMEESI
NE MR= UMW MON
...8.50..
X.
118
6: 4
X.
3
■ CI 1 CJ 1111111.11111111
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UGILs
. i f • i�1 a
0
r;
DATE
01027 71.00
NEM
11=66 MEN
0
IDN101
0
StESSES
EMIR
622011

VPDES PERMIT NO NC00254611 WQ99-088 DISCHARGE NO
FP ILITI NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
D :RATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC)
001 MONTH December 2000
Jadd Brewer
Crt;TIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water QuafitY Servbes
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSON (sj
rim
Ail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
At .._: CENTRAL FILES
DPI. OF Wier Cwillr
1A1T M I sank. Cantor
NC VSW-1I17
10040 00010
FLOW
�■
8 INF o
g
YM
}
11• 'j'.
.•
MINNi1 { {
1 J:
IBL ETAS
1
CLASS 11 COUNTY MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE
CTING SAMPLES Jadd Brewer
(S▪ IGNATURE OF TOR CHARGE) DATE
YY TIMs SIGNA I CIRTMY THAT THIS REPORT Is
ACCURATE AND COIEM.lTIE TO THE UST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
00400
C UNITS U .
ENEFI
00H10 10110
� �� T��p� �y� MAN
p� p� Q Epp
l Di' lPO[�1a7 70G=Ll C :3 1100i'. JWr: MAN Et 88 C :AG
ME :.....• BSkEB 3 i8888883
' E IIR 30 38�' :F El MIS
Fi Fin 8g Ea nSEM
w eet ....::.'
31414
i
01027 71*00
MCA• NG I. MOM.TOIL N0i+1. trG+t MHOS UOIL uvn
ISIMMENNICOM
MEM
':Q.�
;VIr�C
W 1 , I 3Es8 i I»
OREM•'JJ�' •.
:•H•:
28
:•:•
:.
i
i
i
i {
I
•
...1 �Tg Q•�'
' �ii
Ca1WYW 'ter
INIMUM
4•
.ilipttetty umlt
0.052 /
0.04
1
••••••.
.6
4
c
EVEITE
•
MISMS
181
0.00
0
i'lti.M
itaSOgi 12a
0.33
.. 0.39
0.38
• •
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UGILs
::
::::::
3215•
3
881*S131 SEEM
13
......:::•
•
1
eoIvm
0
0
8DIY101
0
•
#DNAI
0

PpSPERMIT NO NC00254811 WQ 99-088
A( _ITN NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
,P _ tATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC)
DISCHARGE NO 001 MONTH January 2001
CLASS 11 COUNTY MITCHELL
GRADE 111 PHONE
82
Jadd Brewer
ERTIFIED LABORATORIES 61 Water Quallty Services
*ILK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSON Is) COLLECTING SAMPLES
A ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
TTNk CENTRAL FILES
N. OF WMsr Googly
Hliztsti So** Gear
NC 2TSN4617
r•
8
60010 00010
FLOW
EFF ■
INF 0
MOO
1 ,..1
11BEI na llfa
4
8 98I00
11 t:
12
13
1•
11
•••w•:.
to ;AZ116
7 :t
26
2
.46
f
1
Jadd Brewer
t23.rteAdAi
TOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE)
SIGNATURE, I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COIEPLET1i TO THE KEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
.•:a:•.
ars
MR f 1
BEITAI ME REM MEN
..• .040:•.
•'1 1 ;..
.. '038:.
I8 I Ii:338t
t j 1 TI gogo
f
• (.108•••
•' •IJ'• digg Wit Mar
IV�Y'RRM�
30 :t 1 : 1-1
• ::•:Y:
!RAGE
.1..:1-
MI M
►;
rob.
Mihaly Limit
.061•:•. • .
0.0871 4
0.045
0010
u
00010
31010
00096 01027 71900
MGA. MGIL MGA. 6/100ML MNt. MaII. MOII. IIMHOS UWL 1 •
BEWagICI ..•:,:•:•i•.•. KO•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:. :: • : • :: •:•:•:•:.:•:•:•:•:• :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:- :•:•:•:•:•:•:•:-: '•:•:•:•:•:•:•: :•:•:•:•:•:•: •:•:•:•:•:•:•: •:•:•:•:•:•:•
BE Wag ICI FICEE3S1 •••••••••••%::..{83 EMBERfil BEINE 1111=81 MEM WM MIR 11362
::'.f::::::-:::::".• ::::::::::::'.::::: :::::::::::::::::::: MMEME1
::::::: •::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::- ::::::::::::::. ::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::: en
•.+ •
. ...•. • .•.•. T•:: .:.:4•: •:•:• ........• .....::•:•: ...........:: •......•.
:................ 0 :.............:•:•:.: :.:. :..........:•:•:•:•:•ga......:=MBELMEN
............:':......... •......:•
ice
•.•.
e
II)8I
8.71
IR
BS
.::::: • • a •:•:.:..:•••: 88 EMMEN illi EMEMBR BONN
MOM EOM NE= Mtn IMO
___
•
•
kg •.....:.. •..•-•y . .. ..•......• •. ..:.:.:.•...::..:•::•• : •: •. .
.:: • •: .;�..80 SON/01 80N/01 SON/01 SON/01 NE
0.00
0
3
•
0.10
4
1
0
0
0
0
c
0.01S LESS THAN 100 UG/Ls

NUDES PERMIT NC00254611 VI DISCHARGE NO
FACILITI NAME TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
1' 'ERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC)
001
Jadd Brewer
MONTH Febuary 2001
CLASS 11 COUNTY MITCHELL
1RTIFIED LABORATORIES #1 Water Quality Services
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSON
1 1 Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
.1 'N: CENTRAL FILES
. OF Water Quatlty
1417 MN Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27d!!-1617
A
IMF
a
ECTING SAMPLES
GRADE 111 PHONE [phone]
#2
Jadd Brewer
.gHH'4## 3 - 7- a/
(SIGNATURE r . PERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
BY THIS SIG . TURE,1 CERTIFY THAT TI{IS REPORT IS
ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
4
g
60050
00010
00400
60010
00310
110.00
00630
31616
00300
00600
00666
00006
01027
71100
FLOW
w
3
1
a.
il
P
•
NFFO
�3
g
o
a
YM
NOD
0
C
U1UT8
UGIL
MOIL
MOIL
MOIL
M100NL
MOIL
MWL
gK
0MHOS
0GIL
UQII..
•
11RS
1:•01
at
:1
::0:+ 1 ::::
:..
•......:
......:•
.•.
•.......
...........
...•......::
....
....: :•:•
..:: ....
....... •
.......
.......
......
:0.1.
. .•
•
:::
:'
.:ii.dgcl:.......
a
=:::; ::' :
•:::::=.:=
>;:::4:::_::=
=;=::-
< , =;
:fl:05�:
:: j
I10;Q0
. i
. ;
......
...
/A-%- is
i�:a.:>�'
:wi:
.....•. •
: ij'__ett-- /
: /////
i /////
-•.
.........
..•......
........•
.......•
.......
•.......
sam
..........
::::::
:::
.......
...
...............
.......
......
.:o;o56::.
.:.'::::::;
MIMI
........
gignag
..............
mgess
Nogg
....
Eggs§
.
t 09::t.
.+:+t'r...
..
....:+•..
.:
..
...
......:
•
::137::.
:0:80::•:
.::%:::::::
..:4::':•:•:•
....
t t0i30
:0:066:..
.....
.......
..::0::..
....
... ..
::: :
. .
.::
•....•.
1
'gyp•..
•IIA•II
•
.......
:\-'/
- = t•
- -II;'•%'
-�//
' �' ' -•t-•
'\-%'•'�
';%%%%
40'1
i a1�
-I4� ♦•''
:.'
.:.•%III I:
%/:A•�I-.....
......:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
''
.
....
......
... ..
....
.:.:
. .. .
KEEN
Egan
P
PIN..
.-
....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.....:.:.:.:.:.:.:.......:.:.:.:.:.
ENE
i 11 4 I
.......:„:...
•::11,004:•:••
•
•
'MINIM!!
lal
MENNE
6
..?..?•:!:-•?•?..
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
....??.?•:•••••?•:•....:t:.;?•?•:5.-•?.......S."...-..!;.!.:t......t.t.:!:;.;
.
....,,,,,,.....
.....'ilak.<.:•....**:>.;.......
.:
1:2
...'•'.t!•:•......t.::.6?.....
S.1.!....>.:?...
.5.::*....(....
3
8
a. ..
. ..
....
ANIIMU
rya
I�
�C)/Gp$b )• �„o _ .G VO�._ •: _:Cs :D'''' ': ' -- '''d :::••.• ...
onthly unit
0.0 IS LESS THAN 100 UGILs

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
EXISTING WWTP SCHEMATIC
WITH PROPOSED UPGRADES

EXISTING EFFLUENT
DISCHARGE LINE
PROPOSED CHAIN
LINK FENCE
PROPOSED POST
AERATION BASIN
PROPOSED CHLORINE H CONTACT BASIN
PROPOSED TERTIARY
FILTER BEDS
PROPOSED 0.125 MGD _.._.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN PHET )
1 Inch — 10 ft
PROPOSED
MANHOLE
EXISTING CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
(TO BE DEMOLISHED)
EXISTING CHAIN UNK FENCE. •
(TO BE DEMOLISHED)'
EXISTING EFFLUENT SAMPLER
(TO BE RELOCATED)
EXISTING STILLING WELL
(TO BE DEMOLISHED)
EXISTING EMERGENCY
GENERATOR
EXISTING
SPUTTER BOX
EXISTING
VALVE VAULT
fhhk„_
k.�
.r
4SAy
AST A
gRk/ivc
qR�
J.Glii 0
>gx„x,juk DEMOLITION
EXISTING EQUAUZATION AND
INFLUENT PUMP STATION
EXISTING
48" RCP
z
0
rn
z
0
4
COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
AND PIPING
are
MARCH, 1999
DESIGNED:
JVM
DRAWN:
EV
CHECKED:
MCW
SCALE
NTS
SLEET NO.
Of:
1
1

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE:
WWTP UPGRADE DESIGN
CALCULATIONS AND COST ESTIMATES

Mal
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
FOR THE TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
Apr-01
Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate
1. New 0.125 mgd Package Treatment Plant $400,000.00
2. New Chlorine / Sulfur Dioxide Contact Basin $35,000.00
3. New Tertiary Filters $100,000.00
4. New Post Aeration Facility $25,000.00
7. Modifications to Existing Flow Splitter $35,000.00
8. Plant Piping Modifications $22,500.00
9. Chemical Feed Modifications $15,000.00
10. Demolition and Site Work $20.000.00
Total Estimated Construction $652,500.00
Total Project Capital Budget
,=, Estimated Construction $652,500.00
Construction Contingency (5%) $32,625.00
Engineering Planning and Design (8.10%) $52,852.50
'w' Construction Inspection (4.90%) $31,972.50
Permits $400.00
Estimated Total Project Cost $770,350.00
I1

119
Project: Bakersville WWTP Improvements - Preliminary Design
▪ HUA No.: BA9902
WASTEWATER FLOWS and DESIGN CONDITIONS
Peak Flow
✓ Design Flow
Start-up Flow
BOD(5)
TSS
TKN
NH3-N
Max. Temp.
Site Elevation
Temperature Correction Theta
Saturation D.O. @ Temp., Elev. Cst.
fort
DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
MLSS
Start-up MLSS
RAS / WAS Conc.
Transfer Alpha Value
Transfer Beta Value
MCRT
Operating D.O. (Co)
`aq lb BOD(5)/1,000cf Aeration Vol.
Sludge Yield (lb TSS/lb BOD5 destroyed)
Volatile SS Fraction (MLVSS/MLSS)
furl
RATE COEFFICIENTS
fa" lb Oxygen/lb BOD(5) applied
lb Oxygen/lb NH3-N applied
HP COEFFICIENTS
lb 02/BHP-Hr.
rs+
BHP/ 1,000 CF
FORMULAS
• Sludge Age (days)
mffl MLSS (mg/1)
r=, MCRT (days)
f=, Food to Microorganism Ratio
#1a mgd
mgd
1< mgd
Suspended Solids in Aeration
Suspended Solids to Aeration
4/11/01
Influent Effluent
Desired Suspended Solids in Aeration
Weight of Water in Aeration
Suspended Solids in Aeration
SS in WAS + SS in Effluent
BOD to Aeration
MLVSS in Aeration
fan

Pal
CALCULATED PARAMETERS
1. BOD (5) Destroyed
@ Peak Flow
@ Design Flow
@ Start-up Flow
2. NH3 N Destroyed
AERATION BASIN SIZING
= MGD x (8.341b/gal.) (Influent BOD (mg/1) - Effluent BOD (mg/1))
212.67 lb./day
283.56 lb./day
158.79 lb./day
= MGD x (8.341b/gal.) (Influent TKN (mg/1) - Effluent NH3-N (mg/1))
,a, @ Peak Flow — 0.00 lb./day
@ Design Flow = 0.00 lb./day
@ Start-up Flow = 0.00 lb./day
3. Actual 02 Transfer Rate = (1.50 x BOD(d)) + (4.60 x NH3-N(d))
@ Peak Flow = 319.01 lb./day
r-, @ Design Flow = 425.34 lb./day
@ Start-up Flow = 238.19 lb./day
4. Standard 02 Transfer Rate = AOTR x Theta^(Tw-20)
Alpha x (Transfer Beta x C(st)) - Co)
C(20)
@ Peak Flow = 517.43 lb./day
@ Design Flow = 689.91 lb./day
• Start-up Flow = 386.35 lb./day
5. Aeration Volume (@ 121b. BOD(5) / 1,000 cf) = BOD(d)*(1,000 cf /151b BOD(d))*(7.48 gal./cf)
@ Peak Flow = 132,564 gal.
M, @ Design Flow = 176,752 gal.
@ Startup Flow = 98,981 gal.
Detention Time = Aeration Volume / Design Flow x (24 hrs. / day)
@ Design Flow = 21.21 hrs.
_ 6. System Mass = BOD(d) x MCRT x (lb TSS / lb BOD(d))
3686.28 lb.
ron 7. Aeration Volume @ System Mass = System Mass / (8.34 lb. / gal.)
MLSS
196,444 gal.
r+�
Detention Time = Aeration Volume / Design Flow x (24 hrs. / day)
® Design Flow
SELECTED REACTOR BASIN VOLUME
23.57 hrs.
Detention Time = Aeration Volume / Design Flow x (24 hrs. / day)
@ Design Flow
r
= 24.00 hrs.

Pri
8. Horsepower Required = SOTR / (lb 02 / BHP-hr) / 24 hrs.
@ Design Flow = 11.50 hp
9. Food / Mass Ratio = BOD(d) / (MLSS x 0.65 x (8.34 lb. / gal.) x Aeration Volume)
@ Design Flow = 0.12
10 WAS Rate = SS in Aeration - Effluent SS
WAS conc. x MCRT
(Aer. Vol. x MLSS conc. x (8.34 lb/gal.)) - (WW Flow x Effluent SS conc. x (8.34 lb./gal). x MCRT)
@ Design Flow
@ Start-up Flow
WAS conc. x (8.34 lb./gal.) x MCRT
2,063 gal./day
= 2,393 gal./day
11 Basin Layout Use Dual Aeration Basins
tt1 CI
r=1
15 ft. channel width
12 ft. sidewater depth
Length = Aeration Volume / 2
(7.48 gal. / CF) x Channel Width x Sidewater Depth
= 74 ft.

SP,
CLARIFIER EVALUATION
DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
Design Flow Peak
Design Sludge Return Rate mgd
Design Flow MLSS x mg/1
# of Units
• Sidewater Depth ft.
Design Surface Loading Rate gpd/sf
Design Solids Loading Rate
1b/da /sf lb/
day/sf
/s f
...................
Design Weir Overflow Rate gpd/sf
Design Detention Time hrs.
sma CALCULATED PARAMETERS
1. Diameter Required
a. Surface Loading Basis: Area = Design Flow / Surface Loading Rate / 2units
250 sf
`m' Dia. = Square root of ((Area / Pi) x 4)
17.85 ft.
fag
b. Solids Loading Basis: Area = (Design Flow x MLSS x( 8.34 lb./gal.)) / (30 lb./day/sf) / 2units
62.55 sf
Dia. = Square root of ((Area / Pi) x 4)
8.93 ft.
's' c.Weir Overflow Basis Weir Length = Design Flow / Weir Overflow Rate / 2 units
Dia.= Weir Length / Pi
10 ft.
3.18 ft.
`w' d. Detention Time Basis Area = Design Flow x Detention Time
(7.48 gal./cf) x SWD x 2 units
furl
Rol
222.82
Dia. = Square root of ((Area / Pi) x 4)
= 16.85 ft.
SELECTED CLARIFIER DIAMETER
' 2. Surface Loading Rates
• Peak Flow
@ Design Flow
'or' ® Start-up Flow
= Flow / Area / # Units
238.85 gpd/sf
318.47 gpd/sf
178.34 gpd/sf
ral

3. Solids Loading Rates = (Flow x MLSS x (8.34 lb./gal.)) / Area / Units
@ Peak Flow = 4.48 lb/day/sf
_, @ Design Flow + RAS = 11.95 lb/day/sf
® Start-up Flow + RAS = 9.32 lb/day/sf
4. Weir Overflow Rate = Flow / Weir Length / # Units
ran
@ Peak Flow = 1194.27 gpd/lf
® Design Flow = 1592.36 gpd/lf
r, @ Start-up Flow = 891.72 gpd/lf
5. Detention Time = Area x SWD x (7.48 gal./cf) x (24 hrs./day) x # Units
Flow (gpd)
mkn
@ Peak Flow = 7.52 hrs.
@ Design Flow = 5.64 hrs.
@ Start-up Flow = 10.07 hrs.
SLUDGE DIGESTION and STORAGE
ra,
DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS
WAS Rate (@ Design Flow) 2,063 gal./day
ton WAS Rate (@ Start-up Flow) 2,393 gal./day
Target % Solids :� :::::.r ::.::.:•.>
Target Decant Solids mg/1
CALCULATED PARAMETERS
1. Lbs. of Solids per Day = WAS Rate (mgd) x WAS/RAS conc. x (8.34 lb./gal.)
@ Design Flow = 137.61 lb./day
® Startup Flow = 159.63 lb./day
2. Thickened Sludge Volume = (Lbs. Solids/Day) / (% Solids - Decant Solids) x 8.34 lb./gal.
® Design Flow = 737 gpd
rim ® Start-up Flow = 854 gpd
3. Aerobic Digestion and Storage
rgri a. Volume Required @ 20 degrees C: (40 days storage)
@ Design Flow
® Start-up Flow
29,464 gal.
34,179 gal.
b. Volume Required @ 15 degrees C: (60 days storage)
® Design Flow
® Start-up Flow
44,196 gal.
51,268 gal.
• Thickened Sludge Volume x 40 days
Thickened Sludge Volume x 60 days

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
REGIONALIZATION ALTERNATIVE:
DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND COST
ESTIMATES

Ma,P a, PtiJ
i
i
Bakersville WWTP
PROPOSED 8" FORCE MAIN
■ WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
A DISCHARGE POINT
COLLECTION SYSTEM
A/ ROADS
HYDRO
CITY LIMITS
BAKERSVILLE
SPRUCE PINE
MITCHELL COUNTY
PS #1 Elev: 2440'
PS #2 Elev: 2625'
t
Hwy 226
u
High Point on Route
Elev: 2935'
Spruce Pine WWTf�-
0
6000
TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
WASTEWATER REGIONALIZATION
ALTERNATIVE APRIL 2001
PS #4 Elev: 2715'
12000 Feet
ti

t�1
fain
ram,
tan
BAKERSVILLE WASTEWATER PUMPING SYSTEM Apr-01
Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate
Pay Item
1. Duplex Non -Clog Pump Station (50 HP)
2. Duplex Non -Clog Pump Station (20 HP)
3. Flow Metering Station (Parshall Flume)
4. 8" PVC (C-900, DR 18) Force Main
5. 8" D.I.P. (Pressure Class 350) Force Main
6. 12" Steel Casing Pipe (bored and jacked)
(W' 7. Mechanical Joint Fittings
8. Air / Vacuum Release Valve Assembly
9. Solid Rock Excavation
10. Site Work Allowance
11. Temporary Erosion Control Measures
,", 12. Permanent Seeding
Total Estimated Construction
Project Capital Budget
Estimated Construction
Contingency on Construction (5%)
Engineering Design (7.00%)
Construction Management and Inspection (3.60%)
Land and Rights of Way
Permits
Total Estimated Project
Est. Est.
Quantity Unit Unit -Cost
3 ea. $150,000.00
1 $115,000.00
1 $50,000.00
45,000 lf $12.00
5,000 lf $18.00
750 if $125.00
8,000 lb. $2.00
30 ea. $2,500.00
7,500 cy $45.00
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
15 ac. $2,500.00
Extension
$450,000.00
$115,000.00
$50,000.00
$540,000.00
$90,000.00
$93,750.00
$16,000.00
$75,000.00
$337,500.00
$50,000.00
$75,000.00
$37,500.00
$1,929,750.00
$1,929,750.00
$96,487.50
$135,082.50
$69,471.00
$10,000.00
$650.00
$2,241,441.00

niMin
PRE! IMINARY PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DESIGN CALCULATIQNS.
PROJECT:
PUMP STATION DESIGN:
A. WASTEWATER FLOWS
BAKERSVILLE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: APRIL-01
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - REGIONALIZATION
DESIGN TRANSFER PUMPING SYSTEM FOR CONVEYANCE OF WASTWATER FLOWS FROM THE TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE TO THE TOWN OF
SPRUCE PINE WWTP; APPROXIMATELY 91/2 MILES TOTAL DISTANCE WITH 495-FEET OF ELEVATION HEAD. BASE PRELIMINARY
SYSTEM DESIGN ON MULTIPLE DUPLEX CONFIGURED PUMP STATIONS AND FORCE MAINS LOCATED ALONG HIGHWAY #226 BETWEEN
BAKERSVILLE AND SPRUCE PINE.
AN ESTIMATED THREE STATIONS WITH HIGH -HEAD SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS ARE REQUIRED TO TRANSPORT FLOWS PAST HIGH POINT
LOCATED AT THE 4.12 MILE MARK ALONG THE ROUTE. PRELIMINARY DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR PUMP STATION #I LOCATED AT
THE EXISTING BAKERSVILLE WWTP SITE ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1 DESIGN FLOWS
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS FROM THE BAKERSVILLE WWTP INDICATE A PRESENT AVERAGE WASTEWATER FLOW RATE OF
85,000 GALLONS PER DAY.
85,000 GPD
2. PEAK FLOW
85,000 GPD X 2.50' = 212,500 GPD 10 YR. Q, PEAK = 147.57 GPM
3. TARGET PUMPING RATE
USE 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN TO MINIMIZE HEADLOSS DUE TO FRICTION AND OFFSET EXTREMELY HIGH STATIC ELEVATION
HEAD. SET TARGET PUMPING RATE TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM 2.50 FPS VELOCITY IN 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN.
THEREFORE, USE 400 . : GPM FOR INITIAL TARGET PUMPING RATE

plINT
1.61
1.4
B. PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DESIGN CRITERION
I. PIPING
A. STATION PIPING
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING
PUMP DISCHARGE PIPING: '?
HEADER PIPING:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
C. TOTAL FORCE MAIN LENGTH
D. TARGET PUMPING RATE
VELOCITY IN FORCE MAIN AT TARGET PUMPING RATE
HEADLOSS IN FM PER 1,000 FT. (C=I30)
2. WET WELL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I .
J.
K.
L.
M.
INSIDE DIMENSIONS, AREA (SF)
PUMP STATION RIM ELEVATION
INVERT OF INFLUENT LINE
HIGH LEVEL ALARM
LAG PUMP ON
LEAD PUMP ON
PUMP OFF
Low LEVEL ALARM
BOTTOM WET WELL
DETENTION VOLUME
FORCE MAIN HIGH POINT
FORCE MAIN DISCHARGE ELEVATION
CYCLE TIME :
PUMP ON TIME _
PUMP OFF TIME
PUMPING CYCLE
3. STATIC HEAD;
YR.,: 2011
b 00 FT. DIA.
2,440.00 FT. MSL
2,430.00 FT. MSL
.................:.
2,430.00 FT. MSL
2,429.50 FT. MSL
2,429.00 FT. MSL
2,426.50 FT. MSL
2,426.00 FT. MSL
2,425.00; FT. MSL
528.46 GAL.
2630.00FT. MSL
2,630.00: FT. MSL
FORCE MAIN MAX. ELEV. 2625.00 FT.
PUMP OFF ELEV. 2426.50 FT.
TOTAL STATIC LIFT 198.50 FT.
1.55 MIN.
8 95 MIN.
10.50 MIN.
4"D.I.P.
6"D.I.P.
C= 125
C=100
8"PVC
6,600 FT.
400 GPM
28.26 SF
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
C= 130 (INITIAL SERVICE)
C= 110 (END OF SERVICE)
2.55 FPS
3.38 FT.

4. ERICTION LQSsES•
A. PUMP STATION PIPING
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
4-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
25.00
La -INCH
GATE VALVES
1
2.50
2.50
4-INCH
SWING CHECK VALVE
1
25.00
25.00
4-INCH
90 DEGREE BEND
3
11.00
33.00
SUBTOTAL 4" DIA. PIPE 85.50
6-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
6
6-INCH
RUN OF STD. TEE
I
13.40
13.40
SUBTOTAL 6" DIA. PIPE 19.40
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING:
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
8-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (PVC)
-
-
6,400.00
* SUBTOTAL 8" DIA. PIPE 6720.00
* ADD 5% EQUIVALENT LENGTH OF FORCE MAIN PIPING FOR HEADLOSS DUE TO FITTINGS, ETC.
3. PROJECTED SYSTEM CURVES
FLOW (Q)
STATIC
HEAD LOSS
FRICTION HEADLOSS
VELOCITY
HEADLOSS
TOTAL HEAD
(BEGIN SERVICE)
TOTAL HEAD
(END SERVICE)
FLUID
HORSEPOWER
(INITIAL)
PUMP
STATION
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
PUMP
STATION (END
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(END SERVICE)
(GPM)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(60% EFF.)
0
198.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
198.50
198.50
0.00
50
198.50
0.19
0.52
0.25
0.79
0.00
199.21
199.54
4.19
100
198.50
0.67
1.88
0.91
2.84
0.01
201.06
202.26
8.46
150
198.50
1.42
3.98
1.94
6.02
0.01
203.92
206.47
12.87
200
198.50
2.42
6.78
3.30
10.25
0.03
207.73
212.07
17.49
250
198.50
3.66
10.25
4.98
15.48
0.04
212.44
219.00
22.35
300
198.50
5.12
14.36
6.98
21.69
0.06
218.04
227.23
27.53
350
198.50
6.81
19.09
9.28
28.85
0.08
224.48
236.71
33.07
400
198.50
8.72
24.44
11.88
36.93
0.10
231.77
247.42
39.02
450
198.50
10.85
30.39
14.78
45.93
0.13
239.87
259.33
45.43
500
198.50
13.18
36.93
17.96
55.81
0.16
248.78
272.42
52.35
550
198.50
15.72
44.06
21.42
66.57
0.19
258.47
286.68
59.83
600
198.50
18.47
51.75
25.16
78.20
0.23
268.95
302.09
67.92
650
198.50
21.42
60.01
29.18
90.68
0.27
280.20
318.62
76.65
700
198.50
24.57
68.83
33.46
104.00
0.31
292.20
336.28
86.09
750
198.50
27.91
78.20
38.02
118.16
0.36
304.97
355.04
96.26
800
198.50
31.45
88.12
42.84
133.15
0.41
318.47
374.89
107.23

D PUMP SEI FCTION
1. DUPLEX NON-( ost3 ilitiFi2staL.E_SEINAciafunas
A. SELECTED PUMP
B. PUMP DISCHARGE
C. MOTOR HORSEPOWER
D. MOTOR SPEED
E. ELECTRICAL SERVICE
F. IMPELLER DIAMETER
G. SOLIDS
H. TARGET Q V. HD.:
EBARA I00DLF640
4 INCHES
50 HP
1800 RPM
460 VOLT 3 PHASE
360 MM
3 INCHES
400 GPM @ 231.77 FT. TDH
2. ESTIMATED PUMPING RATE (ONE PUMP RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
GPM @ FT. TDH
3 ESTIMATED PUMPING RATE (TWO PUMPS RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
280
004
270
110
260
250
240
w
230
a
0
1-
220
210
200
190
180
GPM/EA.
FT. TDH
PUMP CURVE
(Q) FLOW
(GPM)
2(Q) FLOW
(GPM)
TOTAL HD.
(FT.)
0
0
255.00
200
400
245.00
400
800
235.00
600
1200
223.00
800
1600
211.00
560
520
- 480
- 440
- 400
- 360
- 320
280
- 240
200
160
120
- 80
GALLONS / MINUTE
40
0
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.
HYDROMATIC MODEL S6A:
0 - HEAD
SYSTEM CURVE (INITIAL)
TWO PUMPS IN PARALLEL
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.

PRELIMINARY PUMP STATION / FQIRCE_MAIN_DESLGlLCAC-ULAZLONS
PROJECT: BAKERSVILLE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: APRIL-01
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - REGIONALIZATION
PUMP STATION DESIGN:
A. WASTEWATER FLOWS
DESIGN TRANSFER PUMPING SYSTEM FOR CONVEYANCE OF WASTWATER FLOWS FROM THE TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE TO THE TOWN OF
SPRUCE PINE WWTP; APPROXIMATELY 91/2 MILES TOTAL DISTANCE WITH 495-FEET OF ELEVATION HEAD. BASE PRELIMINARY
SYSTEM DESIGN ON MULTIPLE DUPLEX CONFIGURED PUMP STATIONS AND FORCE MAINS LOCATED ALONG HIGHWAY #226 BETWEEN
BAKERSVILLE AND SPRUCE PINE.
AN ESTIMATED THREE STATIONS WITH HIGH -HEAD SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS ARE REQUIRED TO TRANSPORT FLOWS PAST HIGH POINT
LOCATED AT THE 4.12 MILE MARK ALONG THE ROUTE. PRELIMINARY DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR PUMP STATION #2 LOCATED AT
AT THE 1.20 MILE MARK ARE AS FOLLOWS:
I. DESIGN Fi OWS
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS FROM THE BAKERSVILLE WWTP INDICATE A PRESENT AVERAGE WASTEWATER FLOW RATE OF
85,000 GALLONS PER DAY.
85,000 GPD
2. PEAK FLOW
85,000 GPD X 250: = 212,500 GPD 10 YR. Q, PEAK = 147.57 GPM
3. TARGET PUMPING RATE
USE 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN TO MINIMIZE HEADLOSS DUE TO FRICTION AND OFFSET EXTREMELY HIGH STATIC ELEVATION
HEAD. SET TARGET PUMPING RATE TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM 2.50 FPS VELOCITY IN 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN.
THEREFORE, USE 400 GPM FOR INITIAL TARGET PUMPING RATE

MINA
B. PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DESIGN CRITERION
I. PIPING
A. STATION PIPING
B. FORCE MAIN P►PING
PUMP DISCHARGE PIPING:
HEADER PIPING:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
C. TOTAL FORCE MAIN LENGTH
D. TARGET PUMPING RATE
VELOCITY IN FORCE MAIN AT TARGET PUMPING RATE
HEADLOSS IN FM PER 1,000 FT. (C=I30)
.., 2. WET WELL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
J.
K.
L.
M.
INSIDE DIMENSIONS, AREA (SF)
PUMP STATION RIM ELEVATION
INVERT OF INFLUENT LINE
HIGH LEVEL ALARM
LAG PUMP ON
LEAD PUMP ON
PUMP OFF
Low LEVEL ALARM
BOTTOM WET WELL
DETENTION VOLUME
FORCE MAIN HIGH POINT
FORCE MAIN DISCHARGE ELEVATION
CYCLE TIME
PUMP ON TIME _
PUMP OFF TIME _
PUMPING CYCLE
3. STATIC HEAD:
YR._- 2011
6.00 FT. DIA.
2,625.00: FT. MSL
2,620.00 FT. MSL
2,620.00 FT. MSL
2,619.50 FT. MSL
2,619.00 FT. MSL
2,616 50 FT. MSL
2,616.00 FT. MSL
2,615.00 FT. MSL
528.46 GAL.
2,820.00 FT. MSL
2,825.00 FT. MSL
FORCE MAIN MAX. ELEV. 2820.00 FT.
PUMP OFF ELEV. 2616.50 FT.
TOTAL STATIC LIFT 203.50 FT.
1.55 MIN.
8.95 MIN.
10.50 MIN.
8,,PVC
6,600 FT.
400 GPM
28.26 SF
C=.125
C='100
C= ;►30,
C=110
2.55 FPS
3.38 FT.
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)

4. ERLCTIO.LLLOSSES•
A. PUMP STATION PIPING
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
4-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
25.00
4-INCH
GATE VALVES
1
2.50
2.50
4-INCH
SWING CHECK VALVE
1
25.00
25.00
4-INCH
90 DEGREE BEND
3
11.00
33.00
SUBTOTAL 4" DIA. PIPE 85.50
6-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
6
6-INCH
RUN OF STD. TEE
1
13.40
13.40
SUBTOTAL 6" DIA. PIPE 19.40
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING:
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
8-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (PVC)
-
-
5,280.00
SUBTOTAL 8" DIA. PIPE 5544.00
* ADD 5% EQUIVALENT LENGTH OF FORCE MAIN PIPING FOR HEADLOSS DUE TO FITTINGS, ETC.
3. PROJECTED SYSTEM CURVES
FLOW (0)
STATIC
HEADLOSS
FRICTION
HEADLOSS
VELOCITY
HEADLOSS
TOTAL HEAD
(BEGIN SERVICE)
TOTAL HEAD
(END SERVICE)
FLUID
HORSEPOWER
(INITIAL)
PUMP
STATION
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
PUMP
STATION (END
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(END SERVICE)
(GPM)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(60% EFF.)
0
203.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.50
203.50
0.00
50
203.50
0.19
0.43
0.25
0.65
0.00
204.12
204.41
4.30
100
203.50
0.67
1.55
0.91
2.34
0.01
205.73
206.77
8.66
150
203.50
1.42
3.29
1.94
4.96
0.01
208.22
210.41
13.15
200
203.50
2.42
5.59
3.30
8.45
0.03
211.54
215.27
17.81
250
203.50
3.66
8.45
4.98
12.77
0.04
215.65
221.29
22.69
300
203.50
5.12
11.84
6.98
17.90
0.06
220.52
228.43
27.84
350
203.50
6.81
15.75
9.28
23.80
0.08
226.14
236.66
33.31
400
203.50
8.72
20.17
11.88
30.47
0.10
232.49
245.96
39.14
450
203.50
10.85
25.07
14.78
37.89
0.13
239.55
256.29
45.37
500
203.50
13.18
30.47
17.96
46.04
0.16
247.31
267.66
52.04
550
203.50
15.72
36.35
21.42
54.92
0.19
255.76
280.03
59.20
600
203.50
18.47
42.69
25.16
64.51
0.23
264.89
293.40
66.89
650
203.50
21.42
49.51
29.18
74.81
0.27
274.69
307.75
75.15
700
203.50
24.57
56.78
33.46
85.80
0.31
285.16
323.08
84.01
750
203.50
27.91
64.51
38.02
97.48
0.36
296.28
339.36
93.52
800
203.50
31.45
72.70
42.84
109.85
0.41
308.05
356.59
103.72

D PUMP SELECTION
I. DUPLEX NON -CLOG SUBMERSIBLE SEWAGE PUMPS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
SELECTED PUMP
PUMP DISCHARGE
MOTOR HORSEPOWER
MOTOR SPEED
ELECTRICAL SERVICE
IMPELLER DIAMETER
SOLIDS
TARGET Q V. HD.:
2 FSTIMATFD PUMPING RATE (ONE PUMP RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
GPM
3. ESTIMATED PUMPING RATE (TWO PUMPS RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
280
270
260
250
240
a
w
230
a
1-
0
1-
220
210
200
190
EBARAI00DLF640
4 INCHES
50 HP
1800 RPM
460 VOLT
360 MM
3 INCHES
400 GPM @ 232.49 FT. TDH
FT. TDH
GPM/EA. @ FT. TDH
PHASE
PUMP CURVE
(Q) FLOW
2(Q) FLOW
TOTAL Ho.
(GPM)
(GPM)
(FT.)
0
0
255.00
200
400
245.00
400
800
235.00
600
1200
223.00
800
1600
211.00
560
— 520
— 480
— 440
— 400
— 360
— 320
280
— 240
— 200
— - 160
— 120
— 80
180 • r
— 40
GALLONS / MINUTE
0
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.
HYDROMATIC MODEL S6A:
Q - HEAD
SYSTEM CURVE (INITIAL)
Two PUMPS IN PARALLEL
HORSEPOWER @ 6O% EFF.

PS #3
OMMIN
.1101
PREI IMINARY PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DESIGN CALC_ULATI_ONS
PROJECT: BAKERSVILLE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: APRIL-01
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - REGIONALIZATION
PUMP STATION DESIGN:
A WASTEWATER FLOWS
DESIGN TRANSFER PUMPING SYSTEM FOR CONVEYANCE OF WASTWATER FLOWS FROM THE TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE TO THE TOWN OF
SPRUCE PINE WWTP; APPROXIMATELY 91/2 MILES TOTAL DISTANCE WITH 495-FEET OF ELEVATION HEAD. BASE PRELIMINARY
SYSTEM DESIGN ON MULTIPLE DUPLEX CONFIGURED PUMP STATIONS AND FORCE MAINS LOCATED ALONG HIGHWAY #226 BETWEEN
BAKERSVILLE AND SPRUCE PINE.
AN ESTIMATED THREE STATIONS WITH HIGH -HEAD SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS ARE REQUIRED TO TRANSPORT FLOWS PAST HIGH POINT
LOCATED AT THE 4.12 MILE MARK ALONG THE ROUTE. PRELIMINARY DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR PUMP STATION #3 LOCATED AT
AT THE 2.20 MILE MARK ARE AS FOLLOWS:
I. DESIGN FLOWS
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS FROM THE BAKERSVILLE WWTP INDICATE A PRESENT AVERAGE WASTEWATER FLOW RATE OF
85,000 GALLONS PER DAY.
85,000 GPD
2. PEAK FLOW
85,000 GPD X 2.50 = 212,500 GPD 10 YR. Q, PEAK = 147.57 GPM
3. TARGET PUMPING RATE
USE 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN TO MINIMIZE HEADLOSS DUE TO FRICTION AND OFFSET EXTREMELY HIGH STATIC ELEVATION
HEAD. SET TARGET PUMPING RATE TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM 2.50 FPS VELOCITY IN 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN.
THEREFORE, USE 400 GPM FOR INITIAL TARGET PUMPING RATE
Page 1

PS #3
B. PUMP STATION/FORCE MAIN DESIGN CR1_T.ERI.ON
I. PIPING
A. STATION PIPING
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING
PUMP DISCHARGE PIPING:
HEADER PIPING:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
C. TOTAL FORCE MAIN LENGTH
D. TARGET PUMPING RATE
VELOCITY IN FORCE MAIN AT TARGET PUMPING RATE
HEADLOSS IN FM PER 1,000 FT. (C=130)
2. WET WELL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I .
J.
K.
L.
M.
INSIDE DIMENSIONS, AREA (SF)
PUMP STATION RIM ELEVATION
INVERT OF INFLUENT LINE
HIGH LEVEL ALARM
LAG PUMP ON
LEAD PUMP ON
PUMP OFF
LOW LEVEL ALARM
BOTTOM WET WELL
DETENTION VOLUME
FORCE MAIN HIGH POINT
FORCE MAIN DISCHARGE ELEVATION
CYCLE TIME :
PUMP ON TIME =
PUMP OFF TIME _
PUMPING CYCLE
3. STATIC HEAD'
YR. - 2011
6.00 FT. DIA.
2820.00 FT. MSL
2,815.00 FT. MSL
2,815.00 FT. MSL
2,814.50 FT. MSL
2,814.00 FT. MSL
2,811.50 FT. MSL
2,811.00 FT. MSL
2,810.00 FT. MSL
528.46 GAL.
2,935.00 FT. MSL
2,720.00 FT. MSL
FORCE MAIN MAX. ELEV. 2935.00 FT.
PUMP OFF ELEV. 2811.50 FT.
TOTAL STATIC LIFT 123.50 FT.
1.55 MIN.
8.95 MIN.
10.50 MIN.
4"D.I.P.
6 " D.I.P.
C= 125
C=100
8"PVC
6,6.00- FT.
400 GPM
28.26 SF
C= 130
C= 110
2.55 FPS
3.38 FT.
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
Page 2

PS #3
rM1
rirq
rz,
4. FRICTION LOSSES:
A. PUMP STATION PIPING
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING /VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
tG -1I- Di P~
-
-
oOL I
E `C = €
g`tt
. _ , -
_ ..Wilyfasgt.
2.50
ittill
`C R EG fr or
ayall=
EN: ..WNSMI °
25.00
'w -Mi
Wi ► -:,:ilgt 41. g`"`:
[$"` =s +.:-W.:.
33.00
SUBTOTAL 4" DIA. PIPE 85.50
WateA2
FirgirrMIraPlidfda ° a
-
-
R
Iltite
a . �L
.__ _ o -1D X.
- . :, .'
_
0 .
13.40
SUBTOTAL 6" DIA. PIPE 19.40
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING:
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
j
r: 1.1.s
_ q-j�-a
rt
-
-
o 01.,V 0 iMiti
* SUBTOTAL 8" DIA. PIPE 28297.50
* ADD 5% EQUIVALENT LENGTH OF FORCE MAIN PIPING FOR HEADLOSS DUE TO FITTINGS, ETC.
3. PROJECTED SYSTEM CURVES
FLow (Q)
STATIC
HEADLOSS
FRICTION HEADLOSS
VELOCITY
HEADLOSS
TOTAL HEAD
(BEGIN SERVICE)
TOTAL HEAD
(END SERVICE)
FLUID
HORSEPOWER
(INITIAL)
PUMP
STATION
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
PUMP
STATION (END
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(END SERVICE)
(GPM)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(60% EFF.)
0
123.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
123.50
123.50
0.00
50
123.50
0.19
2.20
0.25
3.32
0.00
125.88
127.07
2.65
100
123.50
0.67
7.92
0.91
11.97
0.01
132.10
136.39
5.56
150
123.50
1.42
16.77
1.94
25.34
0.01
141.70
150.79
8.95
200
123.50
2.42
28.55
3.30
43.14
0.03
154.50
169.96
13.00
250
123.50
3.66
43.14
4.98
65.19
0.04
170.34
193.71
17.92
300
123.50
5.12
60.45
6.98
91.34
0.06
189.13
221.88
23.88
350
123.50
6.81
80.40
9.28
121.49
0.08
210.79
254.35
31.05
400
123.50
8.72
102.93
11.88
155.53
0.10
235.25
291.01
39.60
450
123.50
10.85
127.98
14.78
193.39
0.13
262.46
331.80
49.71
500
123.50
13.18
155.53
17.96
235.01
0.16
292.37
376.63
61.53
550
123.50
15.72
185.52
21.42
280.33
0.19
324.93
425.44
75.22
600
123.50
18.47
217.92
25.16
329.29
0.23
360.12
478.18
90.94
650
123.50
21.42
252.70
29.18
381.85
0.27
397.89
534.79
108.85
700
123.50
24.57
289.83
33.46
437.96
0.31
438.21
595.23
129.10
750
123.50
27.91
329.29
38.02
497.58
0.36
481.06
659.45
151.85
800
123.50
31.45
371.05
42.84
560.68
0.41
_ 526.40
727.42
177.24
Page 3

PS #3
D. PUMP SELECTION
I. DUPLEX NON -CI OG SURMERSJBJ F_,SFWAGF2i MPS
A. SELECTED PUMP
B. PUMP DISCHARGE
C. MOTOR HORSEPOWER
D. MOTOR SPEED
E. ELECTRICAL SERVICE
F. IMPELLER DIAMETER
G. SOLIDS
H. TARGET Q V. HD.:
EBARA I00DLF640
4 INCHES
50 HP
1800 RPM
460 VOLT 3 PHASE
360 MM
3 INCHES
400 GPM @ 235.25 FT. TDH
2. FSTIMATFD PUMPING RATE (ONE PUMP RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
GPM @ FT. TDH
3. FSTIMATFD PUMPING RATE (TWO PUMPS RUNNING)
TOTAL HEAD
PUMP CAPACITY:
280
270
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
GPM/EA. @
FT. TDH
PUMP CURVE
(0) FLOW
(GPM)
2(Q) FLOW
(GPM)
TOTAL HD.
(FT.)
0
0
255.00
200
400
245.00
400
800
235.00
600
1200
223.00
800
1600
211.00
GALLONS / MINUTE
640
600
560
520
480
440
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.
HYDROMATIC MODEL S6A:
Q - HEAD
SYSTEM CURVE (INITIAL)
Two PUMPS IN PARALLEL
HORSEPOWER @ 6O% EFF.
Page 4

PS#4
•
MOM
PRELIMINARY PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DFSIGN CALCULATIONS
PROJECT: BAKERSVILLE NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: APRIL-01
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - REGIONALIZATION
PUMP STATION DESIGN:
A WASTEWATER FLOWS
DESIGN TRANSFER PUMPING SYSTEM FOR CONVEYANCE OF WASTWATER FLOWS FROM THE TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE TO THE TOWN OF
SPRUCE PINE WWTP; APPROXIMATELY 91/2 MILES TOTAL DISTANCE WITH 495-FEET OF ELEVATION HEAD. BASE PRELIMINARY
SYSTEM DESIGN ON MULTIPLE DUPLEX CONFIGURED PUMP STATIONS AND FORCE MAINS LOCATED ALONG HIGHWAY #226 BETWEEN
BAKERSVILLE AND SPRUCE PINE.
AN ESTIMATED THREE STATIONS WITH HIGH -HEAD SUBMERSIBLE PUMPS ARE REQUIRED TO TRANSPORT FLOWS PAST HIGH POINT
LOCATED AT THE 4.12 MILE MARK ALONG THE ROUTE. PRELIMINARY DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR PUMP STATION #4 LOCATED AT
AT THE 7.30 MILE MARK ARE AS FOLLOWS:
I. DESIGN FLOWS
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS FROM THE BAKERSVILLE WWTP INDICATE A PRESENT AVERAGE WASTEWATER FLOW RATE OF
85,000 GALLONS PER DAY.
85,000 GPD
2. PEAK FLOW
85,000 GPD X 2:50 = 212,500 GPD 10 YR. Q, PEAK = 147.57 GPM
3. TARGET PUMPING RATE
USE 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN TO MINIMIZE HEADLOSS DUE TO FRICTION AND OFFSET EXTREMELY HIGH STATIC ELEVATION
HEAD. SET TARGET PUMPING RATE TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM 2.50 FPS VELOCITY IN 8-INCH DIAMTER FORCE MAIN.
THEREFORE, USE 400 GPM FOR INITIAL TARGET PUMPING RATE
Page 1

PS#4
rrn
B. PUMP STATION / FORCE MAIN DESIGN CRITERION
I. PIPING
A. STATION PIPING
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING
PUMP DISCHARGE PIPING:
HEADER PIPING:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
H-W FRICTION COEFFICIENTS:
C. TOTAL FORCE MAIN LENGTH
D. TARGET PUMPING RATE
VELOCITY IN FORCE MAIN AT TARGET PUMPING RATE
HEADLOSS IN FM PER 1,000 FT. (C=130)
2. WET WELL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I .
J.
K.
L.
M.
INSIDE DIMENSIONS, AREA (SF)
PUMP STATION RIM ELEVATION
INVERT OF INFLUENT LINE
HIGH LEVEL ALARM
LAG PUMP ON
LEAD PUMP ON
PUMP OFF
Low LEVEL ALARM
BOTTOM WET WELL
DETENTION VOLUME
FORCE MAIN HIGH POINT
FORCE MAIN DISCHARGE ELEVATION
CYCLE TIME :
PUMP ON TIME
PUMP OFF TIME
PUMPING CYCLE
3. STATIC HEAD-
YR. - 2011
6.00 FT. DIA.
2,715.00FT. MSL
2,710.00 FT. MSL
2,710.00 FT. MSL
2,709.50 FT. MSL
2,709.00 FT. MSL
2,706.50 FT. MSL
2,706.00 FT. MSL
2,705.00, FT. MSL
528.46 GAL.
2,750.00 FT. MSL
2,720.00 FT. MSL
FORCE MAIN MAX. ELEV. 2750.00 FT.
PUMP OFF ELEV. 2706.50 FT.
TOTAL STATIC LIFT 43.50 FT.
1.55 MIN.
8.95 MIN.
10.50 MIN.
4"D.I.P.
6" D.I.P.
C= 125
C= 100
8"PVC
6,600 FT.
400 GPM
28.26 SF
C=130
C= 110
2.55 FPS
3.38 FT.
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
(INITIAL SERVICE)
(END OF SERVICE)
Page 2

PS#4
4. FRICTION LASSES'
A. PUMP STATION PIPING
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
4-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
25.00
4-INCH
GATE VALVES
I
2.50
2.50
4-INCH
SWING CHECK VALVE
I
25.00
25.00
4-INCH
90 DEGREE BEND
3
11.00
33.00
SUBTOTAL 4" DIA. PIPE 85.50
6-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (D.I.P.)
-
-
6
6-NCH
RUN OF STD. TEE
I
13.40
13.40
SUBTOTAL 6" DIA. PIPE 19.40
B. FORCE MAIN PIPING:
NOMINAL
DIAMETER
FITTING / VALVE
DESCRIPTION
#
EQUIVALENT LENGTH
PER FITTING / VALVE
(FT. / EA.)
TOTAL EQUIVALENT
LENGTH
(FT.)
8-INCH
STRAIGHT PIPE (PVC)
-
-
11,620.00
* SUBTOTAL 8" DIA. PIPE 12201.00
* ADD 5% EQUIVALENT LENGTH OF FORCE MAIN PIPING FOR HEADLOSS DUE TO FITTINGS, ETC.
3. PROJECTED SYSTEM CURVES
C3
0
J
L
STATIC
HEADLOSS
FRICTION
HEADLOSS
VELOCITY
HEADLOSS
TOTAL HEAD
(BEGIN SERVICE)
TOTAL HEAD
(END SERVICE)
FLUID
HORSEPOWER
(INITIAL)
PUMP
STATION
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(BEGIN
SERVICE)
PUMP
STATION (END
SERVICE)
FORCE MAIN
(END SERVICE)
(GPM)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(FT.)
(60% EFF.)
0
43.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
43.50
43.50
0.00
50
43.50
0.19
0.95
0.25
1.43
0.00
44.64
45.19
0.94
100
43.50
0.67
3.41
0.91
5.16
0.01
47.59
49.58
2.00
150
43.50
1.42
7.23
1.94
10.92
0.01
52.17
56.38
3.29
200
43.50
2.42
12.31
3.30
18.60
0.03
58.26
65.42
4.90
250
43.50
3.66
18.60
4.98
28.11
0.04
65.80
76.63
6.92
300
43.50
5.12
26.06
6.98
39.38
0.06
74.74
89.92
9.44
350
43.50
6.81
34.66
9.28
52.38
0.08
85.06
105.24
12.53
400
43.50
8.72
44.38
11.88
67.06
0.10
96.70
122.54
16.28
450
43.50
10.85
55.18
14.78
83.39
0.13
109.66
141.79
20.77
500
43.50
13.18
67.06
17.96
101.33
0.16
123.90
162.95
26.07
550
43.50
15.72
79.99
21.42
120.87
0.19
139.41
185.98
32.27
600
43.50
18.47
93.96
25.16
141.98
0.23
156.16
210.87
39.43
650
43.50
21.42
108.96
29.18
164.64
0.27
174.14
237.58
47.64
700
43.50
24.57
124.97
33.46
188.83
0.31
193.34
266.11
56.96
750
43.50
27.91
141.98
38.02
214.54
0.36
213.75
296.41
67.47
800
43.50
31.45
159.98
42.84
241.75
0.41
235.34
328.49
79.24
Page 3

PS #4
D PUMP SELFCTIQtL
I. DUPLEX NON -CLOG SUBMERSIBLE SEWAGE PUMPS
A. SELECTED PUMP EBARA 100DLMF622
B. PUMP DISCHARGE 4 INCHES
C. MOTOR HORSEPOWER 30 HP
D. MOTOR SPEED 1800. RPM
E. ELECTRICAL SERVICE 460 VOLT 3 PHASE
F. IMPELLER DIAMETER 293 MM
G. SOLIDS 3 INCHES
H. TARGET Q V. HD.: 400 GPM @ 96.70 FT. TDH
2. ESTIMATED PUMPING RATE (ONE PUMP RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
GPM @ FT. TDH
3. ESTIMATED PUMPING RATE (TWO PUMPS RUNNING)
PUMP CAPACITY:
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
W 110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
GPM/EA.
FT. TDH
GALLONS / MINUTE
PUMP CURVE
(Q) FLOW
(GPM)
2(Q) FLOW
(GPM)
TOTAL HD.
(FT.)
0
0
121.00
200
400
111.00
400
800
98.00
600
1200
78.00
800
1600
-
640
- 600
560
520
480
440
400
360
320
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.
HYDROMATIC MODEL S6A:
Q - HEAD
SYSTEM CURVE (INITIAL)
TWO PUMPS IN PARALLEL
HORSEPOWER @ 60% EFF.
Page 4

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
0.20 MGD LAND APPLICATION
ALTERNATIVE:
DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND COST
ESTIMATES

Sheetl
HOBBS , UPCHURCH AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, NC
BAKERSVILLE WVVfP Apr-01
LAND APPLICATION COST ANALYSIS - 0.20 MGD ALTERNATIVE
DESIGN CRITERIA
FLOW
200,000
GPD
WETTED ACRES
35
AC
LAGOON
STORAGE
30
DAYS
TREATMENT
30
DAYS
TOTAL LAGOON VOLUME
19912877
GALLONS
2662149.3
CF
TOTAL LAGOON AREA
7.16
AC
LENGTH
684
FT
TYPE OF LINER
CLAY
WIDTH
456
FT
THICKNESS OF LINER
1
FT
DEPTH
9.5
FT
AREA OF LINER
377545
SQFT
VOLUME OF LINER
13983.15
NOZZLES
240
SPRAY PIPE
3" pvc
IN LF
17280
IRRIGATION PUMP
STATION
700
FORCE M
6" pvc
IN LF
10560
COST ESTIMATES
Item
Qty
Unit
$/unit
Total
General -Bonds, Ins.
1
Is
$ 20,000.00
$ 20,000.00
Land acquistion
95
acres
$ 2,500.00
$ 237,500.00
Land clearing,grading
35
acres
$ 4,500.00
$ 157,500.00
Crop planting
35
acres
$ 2,000.00
$ 70,000.00
barbed wire fencing
5339
If
$ 2.50
$ 13,347.50
spraypipe
3" pvc
17280
If
$ 3.50
$ 60,480.00
nozzles
1/4"
240
ea
$ 200.00
$ 48,000.00
valves
3" pvc
10
ea
$ 175.00
$ 1,750.00
3" pipe excavation
1600
cy
$ 45.00
$ 72,000.00
lagoon excavation
98598.12339
cy
$ 45.00
$ 4,436,915.55
lagoon liner
13983.14815
cy
$ 5.00
$ 69,915.74
lagoon effluent box
1
ea
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
influent
6 " dip
50
ft
$ 20.00
$ 1,000.00
woven wire fence
2340
ft
$ 4.50
$ 10,530.00
pump stat
700gpm
1
lump sum
$ 150,000.00
$ 150,000.00
force main
6" pvc
10560
ft
$ 6.50
$ 68,640.00
6" fm excavation
2054
cy
$ 45.00
$ 92,430.00
irrigation pump sta
1
Is
$ 150,000.00
$ 150,000.00
header
6" pvc
500
ft
$ 6.50
$ 3,250.00
tractor
50hp
1
ea
$ 15,000.00
$ 15,000.00
mower
1
ea
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
rake
1
ea
$ 4,000.00
$ 4,000.00
baler
1
ea
$ 7,000.00
$ 7,000.00
monitoring wells
4
ea
$ 5,000.00
$ 20,000.00
subtotal
$ 5,729,258.79
Construction Contingency
5%
$ 286,462.94
Engineering
8.10%
$ 464,069.96
Inspection
4.90%
$ 280,733.68
Total estimated construction cost
$ 6,760,525.38
Page 1

farl
Sheetl
1214
PRI
r=►
12141
1011
ra,
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, NC
l
Bakersville Land Application - 0.2 MGD Alternative
WATER BALANCE
WATER STORAGE
MONTH
DAYS
PRECIP
ET
ET -PR
PERM
D<32DEG
PERC
HYDRLD
FLOW
CHANGE
CUMULT
D>.5" PR
STORAGE
Jan
31
2.73
1
-1.73
0.2
4
5.184
3.454
7.113014
3.659014
3.659014
2
Feb
28
2.93
2
-0.93
0.2
2
4.992
4.062
6.424658
2.362658
6.021671
2
March
31
4.34
3
-1.34
0.2
1
5.76
4.42
7.113014
2.693014
8.714685
3
April
30
3.36
4
0.64
0.2
0
5.76
6.4
6.883562
0.483562
9.198247
2
May
31
3.31
5
1.69
0.2
0
5.952
7.642
7.113014
-0.528986
8.66926
2
June
30
3.27
5
1.73
0.2
0
5.76
7.49
6.883562
-0.606438
8.062822
2
July
31
2.91
5
2.09
0.2
0
5.952
8.042
7.113014
-0.928986
7.133836
2
August
31
3.76
5
1.24
0.2
0
5.952
7.192
7.113014
-0.078986
7.054849
2
Sept
30
3.53
4
0.47
0.2
0
5.76
6.23
6.883562
0.653562
7.708411
2
Oct
31
2.72
3
0.28
0.2
0
5.952
6.232
7.113014
0.881014
8.589425
2
Nov
30
2.71
2
-0.71
0.2
0
5.76
5.05
6.883562
1.833562
10.42299
2
Dec
31
2.79
1
-1.79
0.2
2
5.568
3.778
7.113014
3.335014
13.758
2
Annual
365
38.36
40
1.64
0.2
9
68.352
69.992
83.75
13.758
25
Average
3.196667
3.333333
0.136667
0.2
0.75
5.696
5.832667
6.979167
1.1465
2.083333
ET PR+PERC=MAX HYDRAULIC LOADING
PERC=.04 ( PERMEABILITY) X 24 HRS X DAYS - FREEZING DAYS)
STORAGE = AVAILABLE WASTEWATER - HYDRAULIC LOADING
OR STORAGE = NONSPRAY
DAYS
selected storage
30
days
I
DESIGN FLOW
200,000
GPD
APPLICATION RATE
1.75
INIWK
DAYS MEEK
5
OPERATION CYCLE 5 ZONES ONCE
PER WEEK EA.
NONSPRAY DAYS
30
I
APPL PERIORD
239.2857
365 days minus nonspray days x days/4/7
APPL FLOW
305074.6
GPD
1525373IGALMK 1
ACRES REQD
32.09994
ACRES=FLOW/ ( 27154 X APPLICATION RATE)
I I I
mil Page 1

ral
Sheetl
r=1
rya
r�1
r-r
1
(
Sprinkler selected
Senniger
application rate=96xflow/spacing x spacing
pressure (
50
psi
application rate ( 0.2407411in/hr
nozzle size
0.25
in
time of operation = daily app rate/hourly
flow
13
gpm
1 7.269231(hrs/d
diameter
125
# nozzles = flow/flow per nozzle
overlap selected
50
%
53.80505
sparing (
62.5
ft
diameter x % overlap
selected spacing
72
ft
actual overlap
57.6
%
number zones
5
nozzles per zone
16
total nozzles site
80
number of rows
4
number nozzles per row
4
length of pipe per row (
288
ft
total length of pipe per zone
1152
ft
total field pipe
5760
ft
selected diameter (
3
inch
I.
wetted area=2xradius + no. rows-1 x spacing x 2xradius+nozzles per row-1 minus
diameter squared- pi(radius)"2/4) x 4 + nozzles per row-1 x rows-1/2
109142.3
sq.ft.
2.505563
acres/zone
12.52782
acres
select
35
acres
Pump station calculations
flow/(hrs of operation x 60)
flow applied per day
305074.6
gpd
hrs/day applied
7.269231
pump size(
699.4656
gpm
length force main
10560
pump selected
700
gpm
force main selected
6
inch
(
Lagoon requirements
required
volume
volume
(
(fiats)
(ct)
sludge zone
depth
2
ft
treatment
days
30
depth
3
ft
treatment
6000000
802139
storage
days
30
depth
3
ft
storage
6000000
802139
25 yr/24hr storm
0.5
ft
trt + strge
12000000
1604278
freeboard
1
ft
total
9.5
ft
rag" Page 2

Sheetl
rya
Pal
rI
MCI
rAci
berm side slope
3
horizontal
1 vertical
length to width
1.5
length
1 width
trt+storage depth
6
ft
selected length
675
ft
water surface
width j
450
ft
water surface
water surface area
6.97314
acres
trt + strge volume ck
1702944
cf
12738021
gallons
l
top of berm length
684
bottom of berm length
627
top of berm width
456
bottom of berm width
418
total area
311904
sq ft
7.160331
acres
total volume to top of berm
2662149
cf
19912877
gallons
estimated excavation
98598.13
cy
type of liner
clay
thickness required
1
ft
area of liner
377545
sq ft
volume
377545
cf
13983.15
cy
woven wire fence
2340
If
barbed wire
5338.988
If
buffer area
400
If outside wetted area
(c100)"2x4)+4xc100)x(wetted area sq.ft.)".5)
buffer
2815595
sq ft
60.0458
acre
total=buffer+wetted
95.0458
acre
rAwl Page 3

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
0.125 MGD LAND APPLICATION
ALTERNATIVE:
DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND COST
ESTIMATES

Sheetl
HOBBS , UPCHURCH AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, NC
BAKERSVILLE WWTP Apr-01
LAND APPLICATION COST ANALYSIS - .125 MGD ALTERNATIVE
DESIGN CRITERIA
FLOW
125,000
GPD
WETTED ACRES
22
AC
LAGOON
STORAGE
30
DAYS
TREATMENT
30
DAYS
TOTAL LAGOON VOLUME
11764972
GALLONS
1572857.2
CF
TOTAL LAGOON AREA
4.36
AC
LENGTH
534
FT
TYPE OF LINER
CLAY
WIDTH
356
FT
THICKNESS OF LINER
1
FT
DEPTH
9.5
FT
AREA OF LINER
240724
SQFT
VOLUME OF LINER
8915.704
NOZZLES
160
SPRAY PIPE
3" pvc
IN LF
11520
IRRIGATION PUMP STATION
450
FORCE M
6" pvc
IN LF
10560
COST ESTIMATES
Item
Qty
Unit
$/unit
Total
General -Bonds, Ins.
1
Is
$ 20,000.00
$ 20,000.00
Land acquistion
73
acres
$ 2,500.00
$ 182,500.00
Land clearing,grading
22
acres
$ 4,500.00
$ 99,000.00
Crop planting, coastal
22
acres
$ 2,000.00
$ 44,000.00
barbed wire fencing
4316
If
$ 2.50
$ 10,790.00
spraypipe
3" pvc
11520
If
$ 3.50
$ 40,320.00
3" pipe excavation
1067
cy
•
$ 45.00
$ 48,015.00
nozzles
1/4"
160
ea
$ 200.00
$ 32,000.00
valves
3" pvc
10
ea
$ 175.00
$ 1,750.00
lagoon excavation
58253.97108
cy
$ 45.00
$ 2,621,428.70
lagoon liner
8915.703704
cy
$ 5.00
$ 44,578.52
lagoon effluent box
1
ea
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
influent
6 " dip
50
ft
$ 20.00
$ 1,000.00
woven wire fence
1840
ft
$ 4.00
$ 7,360.00
pump stat
450gpm
1
lump sum
$ 100,000.00
$ 100,000.00
force main
6" pvc
10560
ft
$ 6.50
$ 68,640.00
6" fm excavation
2054
cy
$ 45.00
$ 92,430.00
irrigation pump sta
1
Is
$ 150,000.00
$ 150,000.00
header
6" pvc
500
ft
$ 6.50
$ 3,250.00
tractor
50hp
1
ea
$ 15,000.00
$ 15,000.00
mower
1
ea
$ 10,000.00
$ 10,000.00
rake
1
ea
$ 4,000.00
$ 4,000.00
baler
1
ea
$ 7,000.00
$ 7,000.00
monitoring wells
4
ea
$ 5,000.00
$ 20,000.00
subtotal
$ 3,633,062.22
Construction Contingency
5%
$ 181,653.11
Engineering
8.10%
$ 294,278.04
Inspection
4.90%
$ 178,020.05
Total estimated construction cost
$ 3,814,715.33
I
Page 1

Sheetl
r1
1411
raq
n
r=,
t1
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, N.C.
I I
Bakersville Land Application - 0.125 MGD Alternative
WATER BALANCE
WATER STORAGE
MONTH
DAYS
PRECIP
ET
ET -PR
PERM
D<32DEG
PERC
HYDRLD
FLOW
CHANGE
CUMULT
D>.5" PR
STORAGE
Jan
31
2.73
1
-1.73
0.2
4
5.184
3.454
7.113014
3.659014
3.659014
2
Feb
28
2.93
2
-0.93
0.2
2
4.992
4.062
6.424658
2.362658
6.021671
2
March
31
4.34
3
-1.34
0.2
1
5.76
4.42
7.113014
2.693014
8.714685
3
April
30
3.36
4
0.64
0.2
0
5.76
6.4
6.883562
0.483562
9.198247
2
May
31
3.31
5
1.69
0.2
0
5.952
7.642
7.113014
-0.528988
8.66926
2
June
30
3.27
5
1.73
0.2
0
5.76
7.49
6.883562
-0.606438
8.062822
2
July
31
2.91
5
2.09
0.2
0
5.952
8.042
7.113014
-0.928986
7.133836
2
August
31
3.76
5
1.24
0.2
0
5.952
7.192
7.113014
-0.078986
7.054849
2
Sept
30
3.53
4
0.47
0.2
0
5.76
6.23
6.883582
0.653562
7.708411
2
Oct
31
2.72
3
0.28
0.2
0
5.952
6.232
7.113014
0.881014
8.589425
2
Nov
30
2.71
2
-0.71
0.2
0
5.76
5.05
6.883562
1.833562
10.42299
2
Dec
31
2.79
1
-1.79
0.2
2
5.568
3.778
7.113014
3.335014
13.758
2
Annual
365
38.36
40
1.64
0.2
9
68.352
69.992
83.75
13.758
25
Average
3.196667
3.333333
0.136667
0.2
0.75
5.696
5.832667
6.979167
1.1465
2.083333
ET PR+PERC=MAX HYDRAUUC LOADING
PERC=.04 ( PERMEABILITY) X 24 HRS X DAYS - FREEZING DAYS)
STORAGE = AVAILABLE WASTEWATER - HYDRAULIC LOADING
OR STORAGE = NONSPRAY
DAYS
selected storage
30
days
I
DESIGN FLOW
125,000
GPD
APPLICATION RATE
1.75
INIWK
DAYS /WEEK
5
OPERATION CYCLE 5 ZONES ONCE
PER WEEK EA.
NONSPRAY DAYS
30
APPL PERIORD
239.2857
365 days minus nonspray days x days/wkl7
APPL FLOW
190671.6
GPD
953358. JGAL/WK I
ACRES REQD
20.06246
ACRES=FLOW/ (27154 X APPLICATION RATE)
I
I I
Page 1

Sheetl
1
raP
r
r=1
n
Mai
I
I I 1
Sprinkler selected
Senniger
application rate=96xfl0w/spacing x spacing
pressure I
50
psi
application rate 10.240741 Iin/hr
nozzle size
0.25
in
time of operation = daily app rate/hourly
flow
13
gpm
17.269231Ihrs/d
diameter
125
# nozzles = flow/flow per nozzle
overlap selected
50
%
33.62816
spacing I
62.5
ft
diameter x % overlap
selected spacing
72
ft
actual overlap
57.6
%
number zones
5
nozzles per zone
16
total nozzles site
80
number of rows
4
number nozzles per row
4
length of pipe per row
288
ft
total length of pipe per zone
1152
ft
total field p pe
5760
ft
selected diameter I
3
inch
I
wetted area=2xradius + no. rows-1 x spacing x 2xradius+nozzles per row-1 minus
diameter squared- pl(radius)"2/4 ) x 4 + nozzles per row-1 x rows-1/2
109142.3
sq.ft.
2.505563
acres/zone
12.52782
acres
select
22
acres
Pump station calculations
flow/(hrs of operation x 60)
flow applied per day
190671.6
gpd
hrs/day applied
7.269231
pump size
437.166
gpm
length force main
10560
pump selected
450
gpm
force main selected
6
inch
I
Lagoon requirements
required
volume
volume
I
(gals)
(cf)
sludge zone
depth
2
ft
treatment
days
30
depth
3
ft
treatment
3750000
501336.9
storage
days
30
depth
3
ft
storage
3750000
501336.9
25 yr/24hr storm
0.5
ft
trt + strge
7500000
1002674
freeboard
1
ft
total
9.5
ft
Page 2

rFq
Sheetl
AMA
r=1
Asti
sal
Mgt
fsSAI
berm side slope
3
horizontal
1 vertical
length to width
1.5
length
1 width
trt+storage depth
6
ft
selected length
525
ft
water surface
width I
350
ft
water surface
water surface area
4.21832
acres
trt + strge volume ck
1009944
cf
7554381
gallons
top of berm length
534
bottom of berm length
477
top of berm width
356
bottom of berm width
318
total area
190104
sq ft
4.364187
acres
total volume to top of berm
1572737
cf
11764072
gallons
estimated excavation
58249.51
cy
type of liner
clay
thickness required
1
ft
area of liner
240724.2
sq ft
volume
240724.2
cf
8915.71
cy
woven wire fence
1840
If
barbed wire
4315.753
If
buffer area
400
If outside wetted area
(c100y2x4)+4xc100)x(wetted area sq.ft.)".5)
buffer
2206301
sq ft
50.6497
acre
total=buffer+wetted
72.6497
acre
I
iaA
Page 3

TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE
0.125 MGD ONSITE DISPOSAL
ALTERNATIVE:
DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND COST
ESTIMATES

Sheetl
fort
ra+
pal
0114
cM
r=
PIM
I
HOBBS, UPCHURCH& ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, NC
I
Bakersville WWTP Apr-01
Preliminary Cost Estimate
Onsite Disposal
125,000gpd
Item
Description
Quantity
unit
Cost/unit
Total
1
General -Bonds , Insurance
1
LS
30,000
$ 30,000.00
2
Land Acquisition
229.5684
Acres
2,500
$ 573,921.00
3
Clearing , Grading
229.5684
Acres
4,500
$ 1,033,057.85
4
Grassing
229.5684
Acres
1000
$ 229,568.41
5
Lateral Piping
625000
If
2.5
$ 1,562,500.00
6
Manifold Piping
50000
If
3
$ 150,000.00
7
Dual 220 GPM Pumps
2
each
40,000
$ 80,000.00
8
Grease Trap
1
each
7500
$ 7,500.00
9
Pump Tank
1
each
18800
$ 18,800.00
10
Septic Tank
1
each
28350
$ 28,350.00
11
Lateral Cleanouts
6250
each
400
$ 2,500,000.00
12
Manifold Cleanouts
2
each
400
$ 800.00
13
Gate Valves
313
each
250
$ 78,125.00
14
Excavation -piping
44151.23
cy
45
$ 1,986,805.56
14
Excavation - tanks
1371.481
cy
45
$ 61,716.67
15
Stone bedding- piping
38595.68
cy
10
$ 385,956.79
16
Stone bedding- tanks
82.46296
cy
10
$ 824.63
17
Installation - tanks
3
each
5000
$ 15,000.00
18
Electrical
1
LS
5000
$ 5,000.00
19
Force Main
2500
If
6
$ 15,000.00
20
Monitoring Wells
3
each
1500
$ 4,500.00
Subtotal
$ 8,767,425.90
21
Construction Contingency
5%
$ 438,371.30
22
Engineering
8.10%
$ 710,161.50
23
Inspection
4.90%
$ 429,603.87
$ 10,345,562.57
Page 4

Sheetl
HOBBS, UPCHURCH AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
SOUTHERN PINES, NC
Bakersville Onsite Wastewater Disposal System Alternative
Flow
125,000
gpd
Design
125,000
gpd
Soils
Permeability
Percolation
rate
Infiltration rate
Recommended
Dillsboro
0.2
in/hr
0.008
in/hr
0.1196871
gpd/ftA2
0.1
gpd/ftA2
Adsorption area required= Flow / infiltration rate
1250000
sq.ft.
reserve
1250000
Trench width
2
ft
Total Trench length=Adsorption area/trench width
625000
ft
Individual Trench Length selected
100
ft
Required Number of Trenches
6250
Spacing
center to center
8
ft
Total Nitrification Field Area= # of laterals x length of laterals
x spacing
reserve
5000000
sq ft
5000000
sq ft
114.78421
acres
114.7842057
acres
perforation diameter
0.25
in
in line h
2
ft
pipe dia"
2
perforation spacing
4
ft
length
625000
perforation discharge
1.042099
gpm
Q=11.79d"211`0.5
# of perforations
25
lateral
lateral discharge
26.05247
gpm
velocity
2.6570502
manifold type
center
length of manifold
total
50000
length = # of laterals X spacing
flow in manifold
peak
125000
gpd
87
gpm
pipe diameter
4
velocity
2.218248
9.46
ft
pump station
peaking factor 2.5 ADF
312500
gpd
217.0138889
gpm
septic tank
detention time
24
hrs
volume required
125000
gallons
16711.22995
cf
length/width ratio
3
depth
10
ft
area
1671.123
length
70.80515
width
23.60172
select
72
24
grease tank
LC=D X GL ST X HR/2 X LF
D=seats dining room
GL=gailons/meal
2.5
ST=storage cap fact
2.5
HR= hours in operation
6
LF=loading factor
1
LC=grease trap capacity
required
83750
gallons
11196.52406
cf
2/3 Septic Tank Vol
depth
6
ft
area
1866.087
length/width ratio
3
length
74.821535
width
24.94051152
select
75
25
Page 1

+dR
Sheetl
r'
Moo
r=s
F41
Pump Tank
emergency volume required
12
hrs
62500
gallons
8355.614973
cf
diameter of wetwell selected
12
ft
area of wetwell selected
113.256
sq.ft.
depth to hwl alarm
73.77636
depth of pump tank selected
10
ft
area
835.5614973
length/width ratio
3
length
50.0668
width
16.68893343
select
50
17
trench width
2
ft
trench length
100
ft
trench depth
1.5
ft
stone bedding depth
0.833666667
ft
volume of stone bedding
166.7333
cf/trench
number of trenches
6250
total volume stone
1042083
cf
38595.679
cy
,
volume of excavation=trench width
x trench length
x trench depth
volume
166.7333
cf/trench
1042083
cf laterals total
volume of excavation manifold = trench
width x trench depth x manifold length
volume
150000
cf
6" stone
1851.852
cy
total piping excavation=laterals plus manifold
1192083.3
cf
44151.23457
cy
I
tank excavation=tank width x tank depth x tank
length
septic tank
17280
cf
640
cy
6" stone
32
cy
pump tank
8500
cf
314.8148
cy
6" stone
15.74074074
cy
grease trap
11250
cf
416.6667
cy
6"stone
34.72222222
cy
total
37030
cf
1371.481
cy
total
82.46296296
cy
concrete costs tanks
septic tank
wall height
10
ft
wall thickness
8
inches
0.666667
ft
tank length
72
ft
tank width
24
ft
slab thickness
12
inches
1
ft
top thickness
12
inches
1
ft
baffle height
6
ft
volume of concrete
walls
(2 x wht x wt x tl) +(2 x wht x wt x
tw) +(bht x wt x tw)
walls
1376
cf
50.96296
cy
x $ 450/cy
$ 22,933.33
volume of concrete
slab
((2*e92)+c93)*((2*e92)+c94)*c95/27
slab
68.80658
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 17,201.65
top
68.80658
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 17,201.65
Total
$ 57,336.63
Page 2

Sheetl
pump tank
wall height
10
ft
wall thickness
8
inches
0.666667
ft
tank length
50
ft
tank width
17
ft
slab thickness
12
inches
1
ft
top thickness
12
inches
1
ft
baffle height
6
ft
volume of concrete
walls
(2 x wht x wt x tl) +(2 x wht x wt x tw)
+( bht x wt x tw)
walls
961.3333
cf
35.60494
cy
x $ 450/cy
$ 16,022.22
volume of concrete
slab
((2*e92)+c93)*((2*e92)+c94)*c95/27
slab
34.85597
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 8,713.99
top
34.85597
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 8,713.99
Total
$ 33,450.21
grease trap
wall height
6
ft
wall thickness
8
inches
0.666667
ft
tank length
75
ft
tank width
25
ft
slab thickness
12
inches
1
ft
top thickness
12
inches
1
ft
baffle height
3.6
ft
volume of concrete
walls
(2 x wht x wt x tl) +(2 x wht x wt x
tw) +( bht x wt x tw)
walls
860
cf
31.85185
cy
x $ 450/cy
$ 14,333.33
volume of concrete
slab
((2*e92)+c93)*((2*e92)+c94)*c95/27
slab
74.44856
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 18,612.14
top
74.44856
cy
x $ 250/cy
$ 18,612.14
Total
$ 51,557.61
number of zones= number of Iaterals/20 laterals
per zone maximum
313
number of valves on manifold
313
number of cleanouts on laterals
1
per lateral
total
6250
number of cleanouts on manifold
2
Page 3

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
MODIFICATION TO NPDES PERMIT #NC0025461
TO INCREASE DAILY PERMITTED FLOW
TOWN OF BAKERSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE
PROJECT
PREPARED BY
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
300 SW BROAD STREET
SOUTHERN PINES, NC 28388
[phone] / [phone] FAX
APRIL 2001

rzak
Environmental Assessment
NPDES Permit Modification to Increase Daily Permitted Flow
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade Project
Town of Bakersville, North Carolina
NC0025461
1 PROJECT SUMMARY AND NEED
1.1 Introduction
The purpose of this Environmental Assessment is to provide information
regarding the possible environmental impacts of the proposed wastewater
treatment system improvements in Bakersville, North Carolina. The needed
wastewater treatment system improvements include the expansion of the existing
0.075 MGD wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to 0.20 MGD by the addition of
new 0.125 MGD extended aeration package type treatment plant, new chlorine
and sulfur dioxide contact chamber and post aeration facilities, and new tertiary
filters to be constructed on the existing WWTP site.
1.2 Background
The primary beneficiaries of this project will be the citizens of the Town of
Bakersville. The approximate population according to 1990 Census data is 332.
The projected year 2000 population is 360 based on the previous ten-year
population growth of between 8% and 10 %. The median household income is
$24,658.00.
Bakersville is situated along the intersection of NC Highway 226 and 261
approximately 10 miles south of the North Carolina / Tennessee border in central
Mitchell County. Mitchell County is part of the Blue Ridge physiographic
province of the Appalachian Highlands west of the Piedmont plateau. Topography
of the area is mountainous with elevations ranging from 2,000 to 3,500 feet.
Relief in the developed area within of town limits is within the more moderate
range of 2,400 to 2,500 feet above sea level.
The climate in this area is temperate and humid, made somewhat cool by the
altitude. Summers are relatively short with warm days and cool nights. Winters
are long and cool with occasional cold periods. The average annual temperature is
53 degrees Fahrenheit with peak temperatures in August and lowest temperatures
generally occurring in January. Annual precipitation averages 50 inches with an
average annual snowfall of around 25 inches.
1.3 Wastewater Collection System
The Town of Bakersville operates a wastewater collection system that serves the
entire population within the town limits. Presently, there are 203 residential
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
FA, Bakersville, North Carolina Page 1

AV,
f
SOZA
filaP
connections and 62 others classified as commercial, industrial or institutional. The
collections system was originally constructed in 1968 and included 13,970 feet of
8-inch vitrified clay sewer mains, 1,650 feet of 10-inch vitrified clay sewer mains
and 82 precast concrete manholes. Since that time, there have been some line
replacements and extensions to newly developed areas within the town limits.
Most of these improvements have occurred within the last fifteen years using
PVC as the pipe material for sewer mains. The collection system is 100% gravity
flow with no pumping stations or force main lines.
There are a total of 113 manholes in the collection system, all precast concrete.
An inventory of the present wastewater collection system according to line size
and material is shown below:
SEWER MAINS
Size
Linear Feet
Miles
Inch Miles
10"VC Sewer Main
1,650
0.313
3.13
8" VC Sewer Main
13,370
2.532
20.26
8" PVC Sewer Main
4,980
.943
7.54
TOTAL 20,000 3.79 30.93
As previously noted, the Town of Bakersville has dedicated a considerable
amount of its available resources, both human and monetary, to an I/1 abatement
program begun in the summer of 1998. Much of this work has been in the form of
smoke testing suspect areas in the collection system. Numerous inflow sources
have been identified and repaired since the program was begun. Additionally, the
Town has recently retained Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A. to further study
the collection system. The scope of that work, aimed primarily at infiltration
analysis, is as follows:
• Summarize previous I/1 work
• Prepare system inventory and base map from information gathered during
system GPS location and manhole survey
• Monitor flows in individual subbasins using electronic data logging flow
meters.
• Augment previous smoke testing for inflow sources as needed
• Recommend areas for internal video inspection (4,000 feet estimated)
• Prepare an evaluation of findings and final report
Sources of infiltration are typically harder to find and repair than sources of
inflow. However, effective repair of infiltration sources can have greater benefits
in reduction of flows day in and day out. Repair of inflow sources generally
reduces system surcharging and overflows if they exist but have less effect on
daily flows.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 2

gni
rati
Ato
1
tcga
1
1.4 Wastewater Treatment Facilities
The Bakersville Wastewater Plant was constructed concurrently with the
collection system in the in1968. The plant site is located just south of NC
Highway 226 in east Bakersville, directly adjacent to Cane Creek where effluent
is discharged. It was originally configured as a 0.050 MGD extended aeration,
facility consisting of two 25,000 gallon per day package type treatment plants.
These components are still in operation. Each of these structures includes an
aeration tank, a secondary clarification chamber, airlift pumps for sludge return
and wasting, and a sludge holding chamber. Centrifugal type blowers mounted on
top of the aeration basins provide aeration. The original plant also included a
below ground influent pump station and chlorination facilities.
The plant was upgraded to its present permitted capacity of 0.0750 MGD in 1985.
An additional 0.025 MGD package treatment plant was added along with new
flow control structure and post aeration facilities.
The most recent facilities improvements were completed in 1998. That project
demolished the original influent flow control structure and influent pump station
and made numerous additional improvements. The present plant configuration
includes:
• Influent equalization structure with screening and duplex submersible
influent pumps
• Flow control structure with four way division and return to equalization
• 0.0750 MGD extended aeration treatment, clarification and sludge holding
• Operations building including laboratory and chemical feed room
• Gas chlorine and sulfur dioxide equipment housed in operations building
• Chlorine contact chamber and post aeration
• On -site emergency power generator set (60 kw)
Town of Bakersville
NPDES Discharge Requirements
Effluent
Characteristics
Requirements for
April 1— October 31
Requirements for
November 1— March 31
Monthly Avg.
Daily Max.
Monthly Avg.
Daily Max.
Flow
0.0750 MGD
0.0750 MGD
BOD
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
TSS
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Residual Cl
64.0 ug/1
64.0 ug/1
Fecal Coliform
200.0 / 100m1
400.0 / 100m1
200.0 / 100m1
400.0 / 100m1
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina
Page 3

RIR
rota
17111
MO_
Town of Bakersville
Wastewater Treatment Plant Flow Data
Flow
Average
Flow (MGD)
Max. Daily
Flow (MGD)
Min. Daily
Flow (MGD)
Jan-00
0.083
0.216
0.055
Feb-00
0.110
0.208
0.074
Mar-00
0.087
0.295
0.045
Apr-00
0.106
0.314
0.076
May-00
0.085
0.246
0.063
Jun-00
0.086
0.191
0.065
Ju1-00
0.087
0.203
0.066
Aug-00
0.096
0.244
0.063
Sep-00
0.067
0.078
0.060
Oct-00
0.064
0.087
0.054
Nov-00
0.054
0.069
0.046
Dec-00
0.052
0.068
0.042
Jan-01
0.087
0.093
0.045
Feb-01
0.060
0.080
0.048
Average
0.081
0.171
0.057
1.5 Project Summary
The Town of Bakersville WWTP is approximately 30 years old and has operated
continuously with minimal upgrades and improvements since construction. To
improve the operational effectiveness of the treatment plant, thereby eliminating
the discharge limit violations, the following work items are proposed:
• Construct new 0.125 MGD extended aeration package type treatment plant
on the existing site to augment existing facilities and expand discharge
capacity to 0.20 MGD.
• Install new chlorine and sulfur dioxide contact chamber and post aeration
facilities.
• Install new tertiary filters.
• Modify existing plant piping and flow control structures for compatibility
with additional treatment and effluent structures.
• Maintain an operational wastewater plant and discharge during
construction.
These improvements will help insure effective treatment and operation, which
will protect the surrounding environment and allow continued growth and
development for the Town of Bakersville.
The justification for the additional 0.125 MGD capacity is based on the existing
dry weather flows plus allowances for growth (50%), collection system I/1, and
Environmental Assessment - Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 4

ram
reserve capacity (10%). Discharge monitoring reports from recent months indicate
an average dry weather flow into the treatment plant of 0.067 MGD. The
benchmark amount of I/I considered non -excessive by NCDENR-DWQ is 3,000
gpdim. However, for this calculation we will assume allowable I/I of 2,500
gpdim, which is a reasonable figure for a collection system of this age and
material. Therefore allowable system I/1 is calculated to be:
30.93 inch -miles x 2,500 gpdim = 77,325 gpd
The compilation of flows is as follows:
Existing Dry Weather Flow 67,000 gpd
Allowable Inflow / Infiltration 77,325 gpd
System Growth Factor (50%) 33,500 gpd
subtotal 177,825 gpd
Reserve Capacity (10%) 17,825 gpd
Total 195,607 gpd
1.6 Project Need
The need for this project stems from numerous NPDES permit violations resulting
in $16,000.00 worth of fines issued by the NCDENR-Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) since May of 1998. The NCDENR-DWQ has taken the further step of
instituting a moratorium on flow additions, effectively freezing development
within the Town. This suspension of new connections to the Bakersville sewer
system has put two planned development projects, one for construction of low-
cost housing and another to build a new Mitchell County Courthouse on hold until
these problems are rectified.
The referenced NPDES permit violations have been a direct consequence of
influent wastewater flows surpassing the 0.075 MGD capacity of the existing
treatment works. In an attempt to reduce flow into the wastewater plant,
Bakersville has pursued an aggressive program aimed at mitigating inflow and
infiltration (I/I) into the collection system. They have taken the further step of
contracting with a consultant, Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A. to perform a
detailed system analysis aimed at making recommendations for I/I repairs.
However, the consensus of opinion of all parties involved, including town
officials, consultants and regulatory officials, is that expansion of the existing
treatment works is also needed to best serve the long term infrastructure needs of
Bakersville. Based upon all of this information, a NPDES permit modification is
being requested to expand Bakersville's permitted discharge from 0.075 MGD to
0.20 MGD.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 5

i*1
�► 2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
This section provides an overview of the current environmental conditions of Mitchell
County, the Town of Bakersville, and the proposed project area. The discussions are
intended to outline the historic and current conditions, however general information
regarding the potential impacts of the proposed project is also included. More detailed
information about the expected impacts of the project is provided in Section 3 —
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Project.
1.1 2.1 Background
FaaTt
tovi
Bakersville is situated along the intersection of NC Highway 226 and 261
approximately 10 miles south of the North Carolina / Tennessee border in central
Mitchell County. Mitchell County is part of the Blue Ridge physiographic
province of the Appalachian Highlands west of the Piedmont plateau. Topography
of the area is mountainous with elevations ranging from 2,000 to 3,500 feet.
Relief in the developed area within of town limits is within the more moderate
range of 2,400 to 2,500 feet above sea level.
The climate in this area is temperate and humid, made somewhat cool by the
altitude. Summers are relatively short with warm days and cool nights. Winters
are long and cool with occasional cold periods. The average annual temperature is
53 degrees Fahrenheit with peak temperatures in August and lowest temperatures
generally occurring in January. Annual precipitation averages 50 inches with an
average annual snowfall of around 25 inches.
2.2 Topography of Area
Mitchell County lies entirely within the Mountain physiographic province.
Topography is typically deeply dissected mountainous area of numerous steep
mountain ridges, intermone basins and trench valleys that intersect at all angles
and give the area its rugged mountain character. The Blue Ridge contains the
highest elevations and the most rugged topography in the Appalachian Mountain
system of eastern North Carolina.
The proposed project is located at the existing site along Cane Creek near
intersection of NC Highway 226 and 1278, west of Town. The existing site has
space available for the proposed construction with some clearing and grading
necessary. The site is limited by the existing topography.
2.3 Land Use
Over half of the land in the Bakersville area is forested with much of it located
within the 1.2 million -acre Pisgah National Forest. Steep slopes limit the land
area suitable for development and crop production. Slopes of less than 12% are
raN desirable for development purposes, and, in the absence of public sewer lines, soil
depth of three feet or more over bedrock is desirable in order to allow
construction of onsite septic systems. It is estimated that just 18% of lands in
North Carolina's mountains meet these requirements. Most agricultural and
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
dkg, Bakersville, North Carolina Page 6

061
PIP
4211
development activities are therefore concentrated in river valleys. Statistics
provided by the US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
indicate that cultivated cropland is shrinking as developed lands are increasing.
Major industries in the basin include silviculture, agriculture (dairy, livestock,
apples, Christmas trees), mining (feldspar, quartz, mica, gem stones and others),
and tourism.
2.4 Forestry
Forestry is a major industry in the Bakersville area that has the potential to impact
the environment in a number of ways if not properly managed. In mountainous
areas, sedimentation is a prime concern. Clear -cutting and improper construction
of logging roads and stream crossings can produce damaging sedimentation. In
addition, removing riparian vegetation along stream banks can cause water
temperature to rise substantially, and improperly applied pesticides can result in
toxicity problems.
The Pisgah National Forest occurs in Mitchell County. Trees in the forest are
maturing from the last major round of cutting earlier this century, so timbering
activity is expected to increase. The National Forest Service has been working on
revising and updating its 1987 forest management plan aimed, in part, to ensure
that harvesting is done in an environmentally sound manner. Clear -cutting, for
example, will be all but eliminated, and harvesting on many of the steeper slopes
will be minimized. Also, the North Carolina Division of Forest Resources has
established voluntary best -management practices for forestry activities on private
lands.
2.5 Mining
Mining is another important industry in the area, especially in the Nolichucky
watershed area including portions of Yancey, Mitchell, and Avery Counties.
While stone quarries are common throughout the basin, the Nolichucky watershed
is valued as a source of feldspar, mica, olivine and gemstones. Mining operations
can produce localized high levels of stream sedimentation if not properly treated.
Chemicals used in the production of mined materials can also pose a problem
such as the use of hydrofluoric acid in the production of feldspar and quartz.
These operations have resulted in high fluoride levels in receiving streams that are
being addressed through revised NPDES permit limits. Nonpoint source impacts
associated with mining are addressed, in part, through the Mining Act. Best
management practices for addressing mining nonpoint source pollution help with
these problems.
2.6 Wildlife Habitat
The type and abundance of wildlife throughout Mitchell County depend largely
on the amount and distribution of food, cover, and water. The wildlife habitat can
be created or improved by planting appropriate vegetation, by maintaining the
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 7

existing plant cover, or by promoting the natural establishment of desirable plants.
The elements of wildlife habitat are described in the following paragraphs.
The habitat for openland wildlife consists of cropland, pasture, meadows, and
areas that are overgrown with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas
produce grain and seed crops, grasses and legumes, and wild herbaceous plants.
The wildlife attracted to these areas includes bobwhite quail, mourning doves,
songbirds, cottontail, red fox, and deer.
The habitat for woodland wildlife consists of areas of deciduous plants and/or
coniferous plants and associated grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants.
Wildlife attracted to these areas includes wild turkey, woodpeckers, squirrels,
gray fox, raccoon, deer and bear.
The habitat for wetland wildlife consists of open, marshy or swampy shallow
water or mountain bog areas. Some of the wildlife attracted to such areas are
ducks, geese, herons, redwing blackbirds, muskrat, mink, raccoon, and beaver.
Under present conditions, several cover crops and varieties of vegetation are
apparent throughout the County. Grain and seed crops are domestic grains and
seed -producing herbaceous plants. Examples of the grain and seed crops are
corn, wheat, oats, barley, rye, millet, buckwheat, soybeans, cowpeas, and
sunflowers.
Grasses and legumes are domestic perennial grasses and herbaceous legumes.
Examples of grasses and legumes are fescue, lovegrass, switchgrass, clover,
bahiagrass, trefoil, and crownvetch.
Wild herbaceous plants are native or naturally established grasses and forbs,
including weeds. Examples of wild herbaceous plants are goldenrod, beggarweed,
partridgepea, and pokeweed.
Hardwood trees and woody understory produce nuts or other fruit, buds, catkins,
twigs, bark, and foliage. Examples of these trees are oak, poplar, sweetgum,
dogwood, hickory, blackberry, and blueberry. Examples of fruit -producing
shrubs that are suitable for planting on soils rated good are Russian -olive,
autumn -olive, and crabapple.
Coniferous plants furnish browse and seeds. Examples of coniferous plants are
pine and cedar.
Wetland plants are annual and perennial, wild herbaceous plants that grow on
moist or wet sites. Examples of wetland plants are smartweed, wild millet,
rushes, sedges, cutgrass, cattail, and reeds.
The food and habitat requirements of the major kinds of wildlife in the Mitchell
County area are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
tax,Bakersville, North Carolina Page 8

a. Beaver: Beavers eat plant foods only, mostly bark, roots, tender twigs,
and green plants. Their choice food is the tender bark, or cambium, of
alder, ash, birch, cottonwood, hornbeam, maple, pine, sweetgum, and
willow. Beaver also eat the tender shoots of elder, honeysuckle, grass, and
weeds. Acorns and corn are also choice foods. The chief feeding areas
are within 150 feet of water.
b. Bobwhite: Bobwhites eat acorns, beechnuts, blackberries, browntop
millet, wild black cherries, corn, cowpeas, dewberries, annual and shrub
lespedezas, milo, mulberries, panicgrass, pecans, common ragweed,
soybeans, pine seeds, and the fruit of flowering dogwood and sweetgum.
They also eat many insects. Their food must be close to sheltering
vegetation.
c. Deer: Deer eat acorns, clover, cowpeas, greenbrier, honeysuckle,
annual and shrub lespedezas, oats, rescue -grass, rye, ryegrass, soybeans,
and wheat. They need an adequate supply of surface water for drinking,
and wood areas, 500 acres or more in size, for cover.
d. Dove: Doves eat browntop millet, corn, Japanese millet, pokeberry
seeds, common ragweed, grain sorghum, the seeds of pine and sweetgum,
and other kinds of seeds. Doves do not eat insects, green leaves, or fruits.
They drink water daily.
c. Duck: Ducks eat acorns, beechnuts, browntop millet, corn, Japanese
millet, and the seeds of smartweed. These foods must be covered by water
to be readily available to ducks. Occasionally, ducks feed on acorns and
esti grains on dry land.
d. Otter: Otters are primarily carnivorous. Their principle food is fish,
ellsh mainly the coarse, undesirable species. They also each crayfish, water
beetles, water birds, clams, and, occasionally, water -loving mammals.
Swamps, rivers, streams, and lakes are the habitat of otters.
fan
e. Rabbit: Rabbits eat clover, winter grasses, and other succulent
vegetation. They also eat waste grain, bark, and twigs. They especially
need cover, such as blackberry or plum thickets or honeysuckle patches.
f. Raccoon: Raccoons eat a wide variety of foods. Among their favorite
vegetable foods are acorns, chufa, greenbrier, grapes, persimmons,
pokeberries, corn, hollyberries, and pecans. Favorite animal foods are
frogs, crayfish, grasshoppers, insects, and small mammals. Raccoons
inhabit bottom lands and swamps where den trees are plentiful.
g. Squirrel: Fox squirrels are restricted mainly to the Sandhills area, but
gray squirrels are plentiful throughout the county. Their choice foods are
acorns, beechnuts, black cherries, corn, hickory nuts, mulberries, pecans,
pine mast, and the fruit of blackgum and flowering dogwood.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 9

tzar
h. Turkey: Turkeys thrive only in large blocks of woodland, generally
1,000 acres or more in size. They need surface water daily for drinking.
They often roost over water in the overhanging branches of large trees.
Their choice foods are insects, acorns, beechnuts, blackberries, browntop
millet, chufa, clover, corn, cowpeas, wild grapes, hackberries, mulberries,
oats, paspalum seeds, pecans, pine mast, rescuegrass, rye, wheat, and the
fruit of blackgum and flowering dogwood.
As previously discussed, the proposed project area is located on property that
was previously cleared for the existing wastewater treatment facility. The existing
site has limited value as wildlife habitat. Because the project area has previously
been developed, construction of plant improvements is not expected to impact
wildlife or wildlife habitat.
2.7 Agricultural
Prime farmland is one of several kinds of important farmland defined by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). It is of major importance in meeting the
nation's short- and long-range needs for food and fiber. The acreage of high -
quality farmland is limited, and the USDA recognizes that government at local,
state, and federal levels, as well as individuals, must encourage and facilitate the
wise use of our nation's prime farmland.
Prime farmland soils, as defined by the USDA, are soils that are best suited to
producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and oilseed crops. Such soils have properties
that are favorable for the economic production of sustained high yields of crops.
The soils need only to be treated and managed using acceptable farming methods.
The moisture supply, of course, must be adequate, and the growing season has to
be sufficiently long. Prime farmland soils produce the highest yields with
minimal inputs of energy and economic resources. Farming these soils results in
the least damage to the environment.
Prime farmland soils may presently be in use as cropland, pasture, or woodland,
or they may be in other uses. They are used for producing food or fiber or are
available for these uses. Urban or built-up land, public land, and water areas
cannot be considered prime farmland. Urban or built-up land is any contiguous
unit of land 10 acres or more in size that is used for such purposes as housing,
industrial, and commercial sites, sites for institutions or public buildings, small
4.4 parks, golf courses, cemeteries, railroad yards, airports, sanitary landfills, sewage
treatment plants, and water control structures. Public land is land not available
for farming in national forests, national parks, military reservations, and state
parks.
Prime farmland soils usually get an adequate and dependable supply of moisture
�► from precipitation or irrigation. The temperature and growing season are
favorable. The acidity level of the soils is acceptable. The soils have few or no
rocks and are permeable to water and air. They are not excessively erodible or
ra4
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 10

saturated with water for long periods and are not subject to frequent flooding
during the growing season. The slope ranges mainly from 0 to 6 percent.
The recommended project is not located within areas identified as prime
farmland In addition, construction of the project is not expected to impact any
land that is currently used for agricultural purposes.
2.8 Wetlands and Floodplains
Wetlands are areas that are covered by water or have waterlogged soils for long
periods during the growing season. Plants growing in wetlands are capable of
living in saturated soil conditions for at least part of the growing season.
Wetlands such as swamps and marshes are often obvious, but some wetlands are
not easily recognized because they are dry during part of the year. Some of these
wetlands include bottomland forests, pocosins, pine savannas, bogs, wet
meadows, potholes, and wet tundra.
Wetlands provide a variety of functions and values that are important to
environmental protection and enhancement. Historically, wetlands have been
considered unimportant or worthless. Much of the time they were considered
useful only when drained or filled. During the last 20 to 30 years, scientists and
policy makers have become more aware of the values of wetlands to landowners
and the general public. These values include water storage for flood protection,
bank/shore line stabilization to prevent erosion, pollutant removal through settling
and filtration, wildlife habitat enhancement by habitat and travel corridor areas,
aquatic life breeding grounds, and recreation/education value for hunting/fishing
or ecological studies.
The increased awareness of value of wetlands has resulted in a number of wetland
regulations and programs designed to protect wetlands and the benefits they
provide. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 provides the primary
legislative authority behind Federal efforts to regulate the use of wetlands. This
section requires that a permit be obtained from the Corps of Engineers prior to
undertaking any activity that will result in the discharge of dredged or fill
materials into waters of the United States, including wetlands.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the States insure that any issued
Federal permits comply with State Water Quality Standards. Therefore, the State
of North Carolina must issue a certification for each Corps of Engineer 404
permitted activity. These certifications by the State are primarily concerned with
the importance of wetlands to the protection of water quality. Therefore, the State
has taken a proactive role in this certification program by evaluating each wetland
project based on the values and uses of the impacted wetland. The previously
mentioned values associated with wetlands are rated for each specific site and an
overall rating of the wetland is determined. Also, the project itself will be
evaluated. Whenever possible, wetland disturbance will be avoided, minimized,
or mitigated by the restoration or creation of disturbed or new wetland areas.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 11

Because the proposed project is being constructed on the existing wastewater
treatment plant site, it will not disturb nearby wetlands. The project will require
an erosion control plan that must be approved by the North Carolina Land
Quality Section. In addition, the project will be constructed in compliance with
sound engineering and management practices.
2.9 Geology
Bakersville is located in the Blue Ridge Belt of the North Carolina Mountain
Region physiographic province. This mountainous region is composed of rocks
v" from over one billion to about one-half billion years old. This complex mixture
of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rock has been squeezed, fractured,
faulted and twisted into folds. The Blue Ridge Belt is well known for its deposits
of feldspar, mica and quartz basic materials used in the ceramic, paint and
electronic industries. Olivine is mined for use as refractory material and foundry
molding sand.
r•
efin
2.10 Surface Waters
The French Broad River Basin is the ninth largest river basin in the state covering
2,842 square miles. It is located entirely within the southern Appalachian
Mountains region of western North Carolina (Figure 2.1), west of the Eastern
Continental Divide. All waters from the French Broad basin drain to the Gulf of
Mexico via the Tennessee, Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. The basin includes the
highest point in the United States east of the Mississippi River located atop Mount
Mitchell (elevation 6,684 feet above mean sea level (MSL)). The lowest
elevation in the basin is 1,254 feet MSL where the French Broad River flows into
Tennessee.
The French Broad Basin in North Carolina is composed of three separate
drainages, which flow northwest into Tennessee and do not join until they reach
the headwaters of Douglas Reservoir (a large multi -use impoundment managed by
the Tennessee Valley Authority) (Figure 2.2). They include the Pigeon River,
French Broad River, and the Nolichucky River watersheds (which includes the
North and south Toe Rivers and Cane River). There are 4,113 miles of freshwater
streams in the basin and seven lakes, all man-made, greater than eight acres in
size.
There are 9 counties and 24 municipalities located in whole or in part of the basin
(Figure 2.3). The population of the basin, based on 1990 census data, was
estimated to be 358,000. Municipalities with a population of 5,000 or more in the
basin include Asheville, Black Mountain, Brevard, Hendersonville and
Waynesville. The overall population density of the basin is 93 persons per square
mile versus a statewide average of 123 persons per square mile. The percent
population growth over the past ten years (1980 to 1990) was 8.7% versus a
statewide percentage increase of 12.7%.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 12

war
MEP
Water quality is generally high throughout the basin. Trout waters are abundant
and many waters have been reclassified as High Quality or Outstanding Resource
Waters.
The Town of Bakersville discharges to Cane Creek in Subbasin 06, which
includes the Nolichucky, the North Toe River, and the South Toe River. Much of
the land in this area is undeveloped and lies within the Pisgah National Forest.
The largest town is Spruce Pine and several major dischargers are located near
this city, including the Spruce Pine WWTP and three mine processors: Feldspar,
Unimin and K-T Feldspar. Many of the streams in the subbasin have a
supplemental trout water classification.
2.10.1 Overview of Water Quality
Water chemistry data is available from two sites on the North Toe river
(bracketing the Spruce Pine area), two sites on the South Toe River, and a
single site on the Nolichucky River. Low pH values (<6.0) have been
observed at the South Toe River sites since 1991, with some values of less
than 5.0 during fall and winter months. Long term records suggest a
steady decline in pH at the South Toe River near Celo. The North Toe
River at Penland (below the Spruce Pine dischargers) shows elevated
conductivity values, as well as elevated fluoride values. The South Toe
River sites appear to be the least affected sites, consistently having low
conductivities and lower concentrations of nutrients and solids.
Benthos collections have indicated Good or Excellent water quality in
most streams, but some problems are associated with dischargers in the
North Toe River near Spruce Pine. Degraded areas include the North Toe
River at . Penland (Fair or Good -Fair), Little Bear Creek (Poor), and
Brushy Creek (Good -Fair). Some improvement has been observed at the
Penland site, going from Fair in 1985-1987 to Good -Fair in 1989 and
1992. The proposed endangered mussel Alasmodonta raveleniana has
been found in the Nolichucky and North Toe Rivers.
Most of the South Toe River watershed has been designated as
Outstanding Resource Waters, but the upper North Toe River and the
Nolichucky River both appear to have some problems with sedimentation.
Fisheries information suggested that the South Toe ORW section might be
extended to include the lower seven miles, and benthos collections
suggested that Big Rock Creek may qualify for ORW or HQW
classification.
Two specimens of the blotched logperch, Percina burtoni, were collected
in the lower portion of the South Toe River which is currently classified
C-Tr. All of the South Toe River upstream of US-19E is classified ORW.
Only the lower seven miles of this river are not. The South Toe River is
the only known location of the blotched logperch in North Carolina. The
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 13

Ogg
n
site where this species was collected also received an Excellent ecological
health rating.
Any construction work associated with the plant improvement project is not
expected to create surface water quality problems in the nearby streams and
swamps. All proposed work will include proper erosion and sedimentation
control practices that may be needed to protect surface waters. Project
construction will be completed using best management practices. The plant
NPDES expansion is not of significant percent of the stream flow to have great
impact.
2.11 Groundwater
Impacts on the groundwater related to construction of the proposed project are
expected to be moderate and short term. Some lowering of the water table during
any trench dewatering and installation operations may be required, but should
not result in significant adverse impacts.
3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
This section provides a detailed evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project.
3.1 Changes in Land Use
The line work associated with the proposed project will be constructed within the
boundaries of the existing wastewater treatment plant. Because construction will
primarily be limited to previously cleared property, there should not be any direct
change in any land use due to project construction.
3.2 Public Lands — Scenic and Recreational Areas
Initial evaluation indicates that the recommended project, which is designed to
upgrade the existing wastewater treatment plant, will not have adverse affects on
local scenic or recreational areas. All construction work will be restricted to the
existing site. No parks or scenic areas are located on the subject property.
Construction of the project alternatives will require an approved Sedimentation
and Erosion Control Permit. The approved erosion control measures will be
implemented and maintained during construction to prevent run-off to the nearby
waters.
3.3 Areas of Archaeological or Historical Significance
The proposed project area is located west of town on the existing wastewater
treatment plant site. The construction associated with the proposed project will
not disturb the historic buildings that are located in downtown Bakersville.
3.4 Wildlife and Their Habitats
As previously discussed, the proposed project area is located on property that was
previously cleared for the existing wastewater treatment facility. The existing site
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 14

n
has limited value as wildlife habitat. Because the project area has previously been
developed, construction of plant improvements is not expected to impact wildlife
or wildlife habitat.
3.5 Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands
Some of these soils may be located within the project area; however, the site has
been developed for the existing wastewater treatment plant and is not identified as
prime farmland. Project construction will not impact designated prime farmlands.
In addition, there are no unique agricultural lands found in the project area.
3.6 Wetlands and Floodplains
Wetland areas in Bakersville are located along creeks or bogs. Because the
proposed project is being constructed on the existing wastewater treatment plant
site, it will not disturb nearby wetlands. The project will require an erosion
control plan that must be approved by the North Carolina Land Quality Section.
In addition, the project will be constructed in compliance with sound engineering
and management practices.
3.7 Impact on Receiving Waters
Any construction work associated with the proposed plant improvement project is
not expected to create surface water quality problems in the nearby streams. All
proposed work will include proper erosion and sedimentation control practices
that may be needed to protect surface waters. Project construction will be
completed using best management practices.
Bakersvilles NPDES limits for an expanded discharge are not anticipated to be
tan
any more stringent than the existing 30 BOD/ 30 TSS limits. Currently this
equates to 18.8 lbs/day of BOD/TSS allowed. An expanded flow permit to 0.20
MGD will result in an increase to 50 lbs/d of BOD and TSS. Since the 7Q10 of
Cane Creek is 2.4 MGD, the IWC of the discharge will increase from 3.12% to
8.32%. This increase is not a significant increase in pollutant loading to this
Creek or subbasin.
3.8 Groundwater Quality
Construction related impacts on the groundwater will be moderate and short term.
Some lowering of the water table during any trench dewatering and installation
operations may be required, but should not have significant adverse impacts.
Currently, no adverse effects on groundwater quality can be identified.
3.9 Air Quality
Air quality in the immediate project area will be temporarily affected by the
construction activities. There may be some occurrences of dust or fumes from
some of the construction equipment, however these impacts will be temporary.
"" The contractors will be required to follow the open burning laws regulated by the
Division of Air Quality and open burning laws of the Town of Bakersville.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 15

1
r
ftiR
No indirect impacts on air quality are anticipated. The proposed utility lines will
be located underground and will not be emitting any odors to the atmosphere. The
project area is not densely populated and vehicle traffic, while potentially
increasing, should not be a significant factor. Therefore, this project will have
little or no impact on the existing air quality.
3.10 Nuisance Conditions
Construction of the recommended project will be accompanied by some
temporary noise pollution caused by the construction equipment. However, these
nuisance conditions will be a part of any construction activity. To minimize the
impact of additional noise contractors will be required to work reasonable hours
and will proceed as quickly as possible through each residential block. The
construction operations of all the alternatives is normally limited to 8:00 AM to
5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, except during special construction that requires
work to be performed at low flows and for emergency situations. This workday
schedule will keep any negative impacts by construction operations to a minimal.
The number of people who will be negatively impacted by construction nuisance
conditions will be kept to a minimum.
3.11 Indirect Impacts
The construction of the recommended project will likely result in some indirect
environmental impacts. During construction, there will be an increase in noise,
atmospheric emissions, nuisance odors and temporary changes in land use to
varying degrees; but because of majority of proposed work is in previously
disturbed lands, there should not be any negative secondary impacts.
4 MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Construction of the recommended project will result in some adverse environmental
impacts that cannot be avoided. There will be some use of fossil fuels and building
materials, which will be permanent in nature. Some temporary noise pollution and
reduction in air quality will occur during the construction period. A certain amount of
soil erosion may occur, though proper erosion control techniques and some existing
natural barriers to erosion should minimize erosion problems.
The approved permitted contract documents for the project construction will require the
contractor(s) to meet or exceed the provisions of the North Carolina Sedimentation
Control Act, North Carolina Open Burning Laws, NCDOT Encroachment Agreements,
and will require contractors to fully comply with any Corps of Engineer's Nationwide
Permits. The Contractor(s) will also be required to control dust on the respective sites, to
dispose of construction materials properly, to operate during normal working hours, and
encourage the use of recycled materials.
The proposed utility alignments will be chosen to minimize negative environmental
impacts. With access to existing roads and the work proposed in already disturbed and
cleared areas the disturbance of wildlife habitat will be minimized.
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 16

5 SUMMARY
The Town of Bakersville operates a 0.750 MGD package wastewater treatment plant
discharging to Cane Creek in the French Broad River Basin. The facility is overloaded
with influent flow and faces continuing penalties and moratoriums without taking
necessary actions to increase the capacity of the wastewater treatment plant. Past I/I
projects have not revealed significant areas where reductions can be effective. Even dry
month base flows are over 80% of the WWTP capacity. The following represent
alternatives evaluated for Bakersville:
Do Nothing: This is not a feasible option. The existing plant is inadequate to handle the
current flows.
Regional System: The closest other NPDES permittee is the Town of Spruce Pines.
The nine -mile distance through mountainous terrain rules out the possibility of a cost-
effective non -discharge option.
Land Application: The area topography and climate do not make this a feasible
option. The variable seasonal flows and rainfall would require large amounts of storage
and available land. Underlying geology is not conducive to percolation on spray fields.
Increase NPDES permitted discharge: This is the recommended option. The
existing site can be expanded to 0.020 MGD with minimum disturbance to the
surrounding countryside or to Canes Creek.
These improvements will help insure effective treatment and operation, which will
protect the surrounding environment and allow continued growth and development for
the Town of Bakersville. The proposed scope of work will be contained on the existing
wastewater treatment plant site and should not have long-term impacts on the
surrounding environment.
07,
gim
Environmental Assessment — Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
Bakersville, North Carolina Page 17