NC0024970_Authorization to Construct_20030428

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNIN`: COVER SLEET
NC0024970
McAlpine Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
... .....- w aw.wyw'a..ynw,: ^•i KAykPyypi'r
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Meeting Notes
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
April 28, 2003
This document is pririted on reuse paper - igziore any
content an the re'rer+ae side

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Mr. Barry Gullet
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utility Department
5100 Brookshire Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Dear Mr. Gullet:
AVA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 28, 2003
Subject: Authorization to Construct Permit Issuance
ATC Number 0024970A03
McAlpine Creek WWMF
NPDES Permit NC0024970
Mecklenburg County
A request for an Authorization to Construct (ATC) was received by the Division on March 3,
2003 and final plans and specifications for this project have been reviewed and found to be
satisfactory. Both Natalie Sierra and I appreciate the time taken by you, other members of Charlotte's
staff, and Mr. Wagoner to answer questions and review the site on April 1, 2003. Authorization is
hereby granted for the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities - McAlpine Creek WWMF improvements (to
assist with compliance of the total phosphorus load limit). Specifically, this ATC allows:
• Chemical feed and control systems (iron salts, liquid polymer, sodium/magnesium hydroxide),
• Aeration basin modifications (to provide initial anaerobic selector sections)
• Aeration system improvements,
• Enhanced process control,
• Primary sludge pumps/screening,
• Two gravity thickeners,
• Gravity thickener sludge pump station,
• Gravity thickener effluent pump station (with routing to primary effluent),
• Return activated sludge modifications,
• Routing of centrate and spent effluent filter backwash water upstream of primary treatment,
• and all additional piping, valves, control equipment and appurtenances.
Once modifications approved under this ATC have been completed and an Engineer's Certificate
has been submitted the permittee is authorized to operate the units listed above.
This Authorization to Construct is issued in accordance with NPDES Permit No. NC0024970
issued May 15, 2002 (and in accordance with the settlement agreement dated January 15, 2002), and
shall be subject to revocation unless the wastewater treatment facilities are constructed in accordance
with the conditions and limitations specified in the permit.
The effluent filters are currently under the design flow capacity of 64 MGD. However, effluent
permit limits are being met at McAlpine WWMF. Future modification plans should include additional
filtration (and the Division understands that Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities plans to add filtration in
the near future, during the next phase of the project).
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1 617 - TELEPHONE [phone]/FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/ 1 0% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
VISIT US ON THE WEB AT http://h2o.enr.State.nc.us/NPDES

7=
Mr. Gullet
NC0024970 lc,
2
The sludge generated from these treatment facilities must be disposed of in accordance with
G.S. 143-215.1 and in a manner approved by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance
conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action, including those as may be required by
this Division, such as the construction of additional or replacement wastewater treatment or disposal
facilities.
The Mooresville Regional Office, telephone number [phone], shall be notified at
least forty-eight (48) hours in advance of operation of the installed facilities so that an in -place
inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during the normal
office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State Holidays.
Upon classification of the facility by the Certification Commission, the Permittee shall employ a
certified water pollution control treatment system operator to be in responsible charge (ORC) of the
water pollution control treatment system. The operator must hold a certificate of the type and grade at
least equivalent to or greater than the classification assigned to the water pollution control treatment
system by the Certification Commission. The Permittee must also employ a certified back-up operator
of the appropriate type and grade to comply with the conditions of Title 15A, Chapter 8G, .0202. The
ORC of the facility must visit each Class I facility at least weekly and each Class II, III, and W facility
at least daily, excluding weekends and holidays, and must properly manage and document daily
operation and maintenance of the facility and must comply with all other conditions outlined in Title
15A, Chapter 8G, .0204. Once the facility is classified, the Permittee must submit a letter to the
Certification Commission which designates the operator in responsible charge within: (A) Sixty
calendar days prior to wastewater being introduced into a new system or (B) within 120 calendar days
of the following, (i) after receiving notification of a change in the classification of the system requiring
the designation of a new ORC and back-up ORC or (ii) a vacancy in the position of ORC or back-up
ORC.
A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by the Permittee for
the life of the facility.
The Operational Agreement between the Permittee and the Environmental Management
Commission is incorporated herein by reference and is a condition of this Permit. Noncompliance with
the terms of the Operational Agreement shall subject the Permittee to all sanctions provided by G. S.
143-215.6 for violation of or failure to act in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Permit.
Failure to abide by the requirements contained in this Authorization to Construct may subject
the Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality in accordance with North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
The issuance of this Authorization to Construct does not preclude the Permittee from complying
with any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by other
government agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a certification
must be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted facility has been installed
in accordance with the NPDES Permit, this Authorization to Construct and the approved plans and
specifications. Mail the Certification to the NPDES Unit, Division of Water Quality, 1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.

M'r. Gullet
NC0024970
3
One (1) set of approved plans and specifications is being forwarded to you. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Susan A. Wilson, P.E., telephone number
[phone], extension 510.
Since 1y
'reAlan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit, Permit File
Mooresville Regional Office, Water Quality
Mecklenburg County Health Department
David Wagoner, P.E., CH2M Hill
4824 Parkway Plaza Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28217-1968
?,

ATC SUMMARY McAlpine Creek WWMF
ATC No. 0024970A03
McAlpine Creek, C
Catawba River Basin, 030834
Mecklenburg County
SCOPE
The scope of the project includes the installation of new gravity thickeners (and associated
equipment), chemical feed and control systems (to help with TP reduction), aeration basin
modifications (to add an aerobic section and convert to all fine bubble diffusers) - all to aid in the
reduction of phosphorus to comply with the load limit.
REVIEW SUMMARY
Executive Summary
The subject facility received an NPDES permit May 15, 2002 (issued in accordance with the
settlement agreement dated January 15, 2002). The settlement agreement required that a total
phosphorus load limit be met. With this ATC, CMU is hoping to comply with the TP load through
the McAlpine plant. A 60 day turnaround was required for this ATC (part of the agreement in
order to speed compliance with the TP limit).
Applicant:
Barry Gullet
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities (McAlpine Creek WWMF)
5100 Brookshire Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28202
Application/Plans Prepared by:
David Wagoner, P.E.
CH2MHil1
4824 Parkway Plaza Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28217-1968
Significant Dates:
Received: 3/3/03
RO comments: verbally, received OK (Mike Parker) 4/17/03
Reviewed: 4/24/03
Project Location:
Mecklenburg County
Facility status: Existing
Wastewater source: Municipal
Funding Source: bonds (?)
Estimated Project Schedule:
To start construct immediately upon receiving the ATC
Submissions:
• Letter of Transmittal
• Engineering Plans / Specs
Page 1

Regional Office comments: MRO was behind on their ATC reviews. This was originally assigned
to Dee Browder - spoke with Mike Parker (4/17), after sending an e-mail down to them. He gave
the OK to issue the ATC.
Review Notes: CH2Mhill did a thorough analysis of the process changes. To meet the TP load limit
- a portion of the aeration basins will be converted to anaerobic basins (to promote biological
phosphorus removal), gravity thickeners were added to assist in upfront solids removal, chemical
feed and process controls are added to chemically precipitate TP (as a backup to biological
removal).
The gravity thickeners met requirements in reference documents. Although the peak estimated
flows were less than 2.5 x permitted flow - justification was provided for this. Additionally, during
the on -site visit (4/ 1 /03), it was explained that high flows may be diverted to the emergency
storage area (during lower flows - that flow goes back through the headworks). Also, McAlpine
used to receive high flows from Sugar and Irwin - but improvements have been made at those
plants, so peak flows are lower. After reviewing the various input scenarios that CH2Mhill used in
their calculations - DWQ has no problem with the lower calculated peak flows.
Page 2

._
,..
043
Ciq 2i '/PaPPA'6
l
›,
"
6',if�r�.. r/oir —' mj Mi y 6 &
aVV'%+Zyrr r /Lt/® - 5404.1,1.
jet% - 2 !LI :4 _ cBrj �G�
64, em
e4 6/2- iii f - - ti Cow p L � ©2i e'A-LL
//0✓A1
o
,offer 6 2 c& oVE7 / r
NcZ ji 5i crap 0» 6,14,ui eZ 701f44 of p (i
TgN (AN0
--
I *r 1C, rIP LiAtir iwiLtz. co Aci44)fitio- -, (,),._s ���5 0f-
�r iv /GL �7
Zif,9 v 7 m1 J' i*'o /t/ y
N
,t,_.��p1%�
u%/ -Cl�/tl0
Neflo% y j lle-Ile
L,2' - u
- it,a-7-Tff€a $/7iaimJ,)
' i V (fiQ-'cyL.i77 572(P y -- "` 7 pi e 6-11W2-57- C195&)
n2711 /{iw r-6,--/u- Lam* 0 -- -c,,;,,-6 vV_45
.5o!!q b 7-7//v 9 --7 4'07 ,fin,unf 7--0 . ,.? Aix,
0 , 1
1 --W iv 6°i4u r ✓ -2, a, •71 i
_
---
Novi ori &In. l 444 /Loom 7fi t T)
S (/ /2
1---S;-,ri-c-ei /M1, 55r5T E9rz rs

. A (1-bfau , t < 4- & /G NitJ9 JMM5
Npje, rho- )26/f a ) f'/2 C.C-
_
Pr
C&N]/7fncls
L V 12 &vc -W/LC, gift,
i
Wq
(- 40 Pwe "N-tom ca No r%l a),J5 fJer kfPac�l G3 714-V-Ye'1,-(..,40,hz-Pg--
t eac.(7—
1)1V-' — 5rz
,o LUAU ; A litT /3t rpe-t o . 712 7 FPo\t4 --
Ol A- AD,1 ( j f7 " PIO N 1Z6 i i (o co. .k JiS
1.---7 / 7ca- C. E.
(7-40 wit, t oor4. r P 7cAtu Co Tb B r P2ro2 T6 C. c . rf-A.c
J
MN —? aa° /syuA1^166 ;43
(----7 i? 7 ha1s2 Oie A'0 1j e,G NAby
°ry 7( L�� /s 25Al
'� N
�e 2 7 __ - c0��i of. �/2ac�c,ra z-- o v.
---
A p- 7)
/ell- .7,A---9
(Orr Nor ceci /N 4,c/% 7 jr ,PrP r co
is Vt6W A `'�P� r rye i2,? µc m s;-fP
91q4-lAlA Pe Air IN PPr,,¢A)WsPi5 — Noo vc-t ,Bic,- /1/90y70. 45-
/1( (-la-� larat IOW- P,2s' U:19. i7t 75 &{ape-11- —9 Q�`�

`e
6J J YifiW , r p,g,ott i[ ►ems `_ piWci & 7 ,
/!*9 /l[4✓/A*
/5a IPm I ;TMG lPi1Ci C
f 5
/70 2 Side f pf e ,, 6,
6Pticylf7 t7 C-L.A2r F 1 of",&- c/& W4124-7 -
/al o lc.4--( CF{ (C fC- a;Atz.
Y i CoivT�CT/a
i -•
�1oi-1G
M,4y..5 . P%l'" 7--(41.l? ie,u, �•
t
„M.�0 - N ei
I��
eft—
J V C 44 -- 4 ti C r%l�f'(, 'p. -� , J-(�" _ ...� A Tb
R), i
Log
1,,
( 20 i z
•
rr
W
40
10
4244megayci.,4 - r Z ci- a-, pl alL-co-
Nar.-ia (IDS 1' C2) R a'f =
Sow74 (5) — + R 1

-7
5' i L
.a pe
2 OFF c
Ir. ". �7 ' (co A/i /Ific7-
.
I
r 0e _ Pc�6cNSU1t7 Now
I
:,_
I
I
0/ ,c ,,• i, 47 '4 Cl1 Is ° 7261.771EENF
I
I
I
I
Ai 5eiy.44 Avc riv.r, ea/ p s %ieN ° (Z ; .Avg f ckrvto I.-e
4' }1
ib t/11 $ Te % ;:i / ' 1 iv'ff al › W/ciG %6-7-/G2-C'/
I
1400 44>
N • r,r
C
All
►'LI Mfr� �� iU / 02rV�vcr/tS 'all
qa 174415
1
, 9151f �©(.ir f 7 '.72A AiG�� c o ''ar.�
NvS ���
if /I , 4N -- - z-Alt
'. it- , ;-
I
Ls4w9 1 7 . i,vP( cyti COI.,) 22 G--- CO/vTJL-11Tc0 iz-
'o.Nt 7? o N 7 iar-' 64N_b Vfr 677467' 0Pi7v,f$
—,
7- , 0f
i * �o `i. �P
4)R- h%�rMF(GA1W / 1

.
57c
-- aletto 91i P''%G� FA- PANE /If
"* `(oil (Af 7 iv /7or,,(' A©i)f-fio l
4��i44vfr — Cper1 G7k,R'LCy fl% (4/}7p 86 o/ -5l' E i4U
(,41 ,+Zi /v
261,11- it r '/&r --7 pe, — 14)0G.g 5r/ v wri-ov� Ta
/,
.
itmtivr cam- �rire w OV
Qiy AD7t �M fAr
1 G 7-
7 . lr Aft. ,f Row 6d147 w F /Z,;�(ir ,r7:-
ieU
PL
I0A/17e 5 ---7 Gc/ e&V/t-/`tDNAtr• //L(19', 5 CO,17.2.oG4-'
czz7
'"
, l i,„ ag.ed Co O_ pF 2a J-4 f i-NS 7r
vs
0

Ii!
Aw
(u` uc 'A G, ,_)(/J
_
lc o0247'
(fr. 6%/4z 2 2g c c,
((5 -uev sl -(02
(45 of 2/2e7 & () o.^- if/,-.. P t r) " = 64 /hip
— IP (n,oNriet y ,qv.) = /o 67 -,Aily
(Z %keN7/l ,4 = .3 # -/Dil '
�.
c 0ter)
Sri r2 64,4 = 33 -4P/D/ii ( •u L-1 /) 4247
1
12 '�u c/ux - ZSU r �A'y (•kcv; NAY Aids)
60,97
if
Kr5401°h r
1,1M,r
Ai
so 07
4ND
NcAL-PfA I,: 33 - �,37pit ,
l
M
-
ceLt.e?cC► ve uM i T
I' : gam#/cAy tothAt
0.0 o
MA-44.pw- Co,dc- 4u1J.
/"P v4 - 2 frail
0,,Lopu 11* (— C .024, 0- / y = ,47e 6fixtr04«►N;
(4vti pccr,JS Itvy
•
-- i-6� �4/L i iy /f/ L%Uca : A4r.07I46- = 3 2 iyii
Suog. = S, 7 fr.i L
(/ZwJ= 2,2.

r
Summary Table for the McAlpine Creek WWTP Gravity Thickeners
Design Hist1 Hist2 Pop
From Black and Veatch Process Evaluation Report (2002)
Design Flow mgd 64 64 64 74
Diurnal Peak Flow mgd 107 89.5 89.8 103.7
Total Primary Sludge Production @ ()des Ib/d 199,826 243,196 162,720 199,386
Sugar Creek Sludge Contribution Ib/d 47,958 46,208 48,002 47,852
Thickeners Existing North New South New
Number 2 1 1
Diameter ft 45 60 60
Area ft2 1,590 2,827 2,827
Total area ft2 8,836
SWD ft 14 14 14
Volume ft3 22,266 39,584 39,584
Total Vol. ft3 44,532 39,584 39,584
Reference Values for Gravity Thickening
WEF MOP-8 (1998)
Solids Loading
Feed Concentration
Underflow Concent.
Surface Overflow Rate
Metcalf and Eddy (1991)
Solids Loading
Feed Concentration
Underflow Concent.
Surface Overflow Rate (add eff)
Total Primary Sludge Flow
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow
Total Thickened Sludge Flow
Total Thickener Effluent Flow
Ib/d/ft2
gpd/ft2
I b/d/ft2
gpd/ft2
gpm
gpm
gpm
gpm
at 0.25% gpm
at 0.50% gpm
at 1.0% gpm
20-30
2.0-7.0
5.0-10.0
380-760
18-28
2.0-7.0
5.0-10.0
600-750
0.25
0.50 %
1.0 %
=22266*2
= [(162 72 0+48002)/(8. 34 * 1.
0/100*10000)]10^6 /24/60
=[(162720+48002)/(8.34*0.
50
* 10000)] 10^6 /24/60
= [(162720+48002)/(8.34* 0.2
5*10000)]10^6 /24/60
8,253 9,639
4,126 4,820
2,063 2,410
510 588
7,018 8,235
3,509 4,117
2,059
1,755
=112*2 + 67*64/40
440 509
7,743 9,051 6,578 7,725
3,616 4,232 3,06 ` 3,608
1,553 1,822 1,3 1,549

McAlpine New 60' Thickener
Design
Solids Load Ib/d 79,291
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 3,802,915
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 1,901,457
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 950,729
Solids Loading Rate to the New 60' Thickener
Ib/d/ft2
Max suggested SLR is 30 lb/d/ft2.
Surface Overflow Rate
at 0.25% gpd/ft2
at 0.50% gpd/ft3
at 1.0% gpd/ft4
Min suggested SOR is 380 gpd/ft2.
Minimum Total Flow Needed at 380 gpd/ft2 =
28
Thickener Underflow
Assumed solids capture efficency =
Solids in
Ib/d
lb/d
lb/d
Assumed underflow solids content =
Underflow Rate
Solids out
Underflow Solids
Thickener Overflow
Overflow Rate
1345
673
336
79,291
15,858
63,433
gpm 132
at 0.25% gpm
at 0.50% gpm
at 1.0% gpm
2509
1188
528
_ (162720+49002)* 2827/8836
iii
Hist1 Hist2 Pop
92,609 67,431 79,116
0.25
4,441,692 3,234,100
0.50 %
2,220,846 1,617,050
1.0 %
1,110,423 808,525
1571
785
393
1,074,425 gpd
80%
92,609
18,522
74,087
4%
154
1144
572
286
67,431
13,486
53,945
3,794,546
1,897,273
637
15,823
63,293
112'ir 132
=(3234100)/(24*60)-112
2930
1388
617
2134
1011
449
i
=67431/(8.34*0.25*
10000)*10^6
,
=67431/(8.34*0.25*10000
)*10^6
=67431/(8.34*1.0*
10000)*10^6
=1617050/(2827) 1
=(53945/(8.34*4*10000)*
10^6)/(24*60)
2503
1186
527

McAlpine New 60' Thickener
(operation at current flow of 40mgd)
Design
Solids Load Ib/d 49,557
=(162720+48002)*2827/8
836*40/64
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 2,376,822
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 1,188,411
Assumed primary sludge solids content =
Sludge Flow gpd 594,205
Solids Loading Rate to the New 60' Thickener
Ib/d/ft2 18
Max suggested SLR is 30 Ib/d/ft2.
Surface Overflow Rate
at 0.25% gpd/ft2
at 0.50% gpd/ft3
at 1.0% gpd/ft4
Min suggested SOR is 380 gpd/ft2.
Mihimum Total Flow Needed at 380 gpd/ft2 =
Thickener Underflow
Assumed solids capture efficency =
Solids in
Ib/d
Ib/d
Ib/d
Assumed underflow solids content =
Underflow Rate
Solids out
Underflow Solids
gpm
Thickener Overflow
Overflow Rate
at 0.25% gpm
at 0.50% gpm
at 1.0% gpm
841
420
210
49,557
9,911
39,645
83
Hist1
57,881
=42144/(8.34*0.25*10000)*
10^6
Hist2
42,144
0.25
2,776,057 2,021,313
0.50 %
1,388,029 1,010,656
1.0 %
694,014 505,328
=42144/ (8.34* 0.50* 10000
*10^6
,371,591
Pop
,44,
1,185,796
592,898
17
=42144/(8.34* 1.0* 10000)* 10^ 6
20
982
491
245
1,074,425 gpd
80%
=42144
=2021313/(2827) II
839
419
210
57,881 42,144 49,448
A=42144*(1-0.80)
11,576 8,429 9,890
46,305 33,715 39,558
=42144-8429
4%
96 82
= (33715/(8.34*4* 10000)*
10A6)/(24*60)
1568
743
330
1831
868
386
1334
632
281
=(2021313)/(24*60)-70
1565
741
329

McAlpine Existing 45' Thickener
Design Hist1 Hist2
Solids Load Ib/d 46,210 52,439 40,426
Pop
46,108
(162720*0.5+48002)*0.5*40
Assumed primary sludge solids content = 0.25 % /64
Sludge Flow gpd 2,216,290 2,515,074 1,938,879 2,211,410
Assumed primary sludge solids content = 0.50
Sludge Flow gpd 1,108,145 1,257,537 969,440 1,105,705
Assumed primary sludge solids content = 1.0 %
Sludge Flow gpd 554,072 628,769 484,720 552,852
Solids Loading Rate to the 60' Thickener Ib/d/ft2
29 33 25 29
Max suggested SLR is 30 Ib/d/ft2.
Surface Overflow Rate
at 0.25% gpd/ft2 1394 1581 1219 1390
at 0.50% gpd/ft3 697 791 610 695
at 1.0% gpd/ft4 348 395 305 348
Min suggested SOR is 380 gpd/ft2.
Minimum Total Flow Needed at 380 gpd/ft2 = 604,364 gpd
Thickener Underflow
Assumed solids capture efficency =
Solids in
Ib/d
Ib/d
Ib/d
Assumed underflow solids content =
Underflow Rate
Solids out
Underflow Solids
gpm
Thickener Overflow
Overflow Rate
80%
46,210 52,439
9,242 10,488
36,968 41,951
4%
77 87
40,426 46,108
8,085 9,222
32,341 36,886
_ (32341/(8.34*4* 10000)* 10
A6)/(24*60)
67 77
at 0.25% gpm 1462 1659 1279 1459
at 0.50% gpm 693 786 606 691
at 1.0% gpm 308 349 269 3
=(1938879)/(24*60)-67
1

Splitter Box Hydraulic Calculations
Primary sludge solids content
0.5
45ft
CLEAN BAR
%
600
CALCs
0.25 %
45ft
60k
30 % BLOCKED
0.5 %
4511 60ft
CALCs
0.25 %
4511
6011
50 % BLOCKED
0.5 %
45ft 601t
CALCs
0.25 %
45ft
6011
Flow MGD
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
Head loss ft
Channel after weir 1
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
Weir 1
1.33
1.41
1.56
1.69
1.33
1.41
1.56
1.69
1.33
1.41
1.56
1.69
Weir2
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
Channel after the screen
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
Bar screen
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.22
0.21
0,14
0.14
0.45
0.43
Channel before the screen
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
HGL Elevation ft
Channel after weir 1
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
Weir1
555.03
555.11
555.26
553.39
555.03
555.11
555.26
555.39
555.03
555.11
555.26
553.39
Weir 2
556
556.08
556.23
556.36
556
556.08
556.23
556.36
556
556.08
556.23
556.36
Channel after the screen
556
556.08
556.22
556.35
556
556.08
556.22
556.35
556
556.08
556.22
556.35
Bar screen
556.01
556.09
556.27
556.4
556.06
556.13
556.41
556.53
556.13
556.2
556.64
556.75
Vel @ bar screens fps
1.37
1.35
2.59
2.51
1.94
1.91
3.58
3.48
2.67
2.62
4.76
4.65
Channel before the screen
556.02
556.1
556.3
556.44
556.06
556.14
556.44
556.56
556.14
556.21
556.67
556.79
Depth upstream ft
4.02
4.1
4.3
4.43
4.06
4.14
4.44
4.56
4.14
4.21
4.67
4.78
Slitter Box Hydraulic Calculations With One New Thickener Off Line
Primary sludge solids content
0.5
45ft
CLEAN BAR
%
60ft
CALCs
0.25
45ft
%
60ft
30
0.5
45ft
% BLOCKED
°
60k
CALCs
0.25
45ft
%
60ft
50
0.5
45ft
% BLOCKED
%
60ft
CALCs
0.25
45ft
°
60ft
Flow MGD
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
1.07
1.9
2.14
3.8
New Flow MGD
1.64
2.66
3.28
5.32
1.64
2.66
3.28
5.32
1 64
2.66
3.28
5.32
Head Toss ft
Channel after weir 1
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
Weir 1
1.46
1.53
1.77
1.88
1.46
1.53
1.77
1.88
1.46
1.53
1.77
1.88
Weir 2
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
0.97
Channel after the screen
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
Bar screen
0.02
0.02
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.2
0.2
0.13
0.13
0.41
0.43
Channel before the screen
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
HGL Elevation ft
Channel after weir 1
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.68
553.7
553.7
553.7
553.68
Weir 1
555.16
555.23
555.47
555.58
555.16
555.23
555.47
555.58
555.16
555.23
555.47
555.58
Weir 2
556.13
556.2
556.44
556.55
556.13
556.2
556.44
556.55
' 556.13
556.2
556.44
556.55
Channel after the screen
556.13
556.2
556.43
556.54
556.13
556.2
556.43
556.54
556.13
556.2
556.43
556.54
Bar screen
556.14
556.21
556.48
556.58
556.18
556.25
556.6
556.71
556.25
556.32
556.82
556.92
Vel @ bar screens fps
1.33
1.31
2.47
2.41
1.88
1.85
3.43
3.35
2.59
2.55
4.58
4.49
Channel before the screen
556.15
556.22
556.51
556.61
556.19
556.26
556.64
556.74
556.26
556.33
556.85
556.94
Depth upstream ft
4.15
4.22
4.51
4.61
4.19
4.26
4.64
4.74
4.26
4.33
4.85
4.94
557.52
5.52
At Max Day flow condition, 00.25 %
solids, and @50% blocked
These calculations were performed using HYDRO hydraulic modeling software, and the results of each run at conditions listed above are included in these tables. Hydraulic gradeline
corresponding to 0.25 % solids condition were used in sizing the primary sludge splitter structure. The headlosses in the splitter box and gravity thickener area,
and pump sizing calculations were performed using AFT FATHOM hydraulic software. In determining the weir elevations and pipe sizes these headloss calculations were considered.
Headlosses were calculated for clean water and a range of solids concentrations (0%10 6%) in the pumped liquid to have a complete picture of the pumping conditions.

L 1 U - Alck.j' & iN = 3(37(.73
7o
r— _AJ______A-7
(& r
,iLy.4,N,.al)
-
r Api' /947/) AtoPft'rCyi'-%Og 9 i-1 - Me
a /KazAfioN s51/.u//1zI%( vT
give h-Nc-a>
- rLoc ci /N$7,--G(itcdv rii %(J Ai
144W'j- 1-uvg. A4.44, 5'>4;?o nrs/ f/tipi_72pL5 dc,6- .9 24N4i..
,
2i4'tirif -AirocoAJCY-5/r/lA'"r 7y //ram` c-A_ PG1+P 7-foN/
- 4-5 I C4-c,i7
eff
-' f(1.i G- Ki*TII :4-4t of P/Llik9y7 i
7 G 1c T`v litic/4&ticen-at T —7 c. 5�4 or fitifk.,94v i7201.7 c
W W nil _ Ilit44-AI i
p4A4,44,q w ,4t ,t 0- 4-14 /ti/W %-,
..

a •
CMUD TP avg Values
Charlotte -Mecklenburg U 00665 - Phosphorus, Total (a
NC0024970
Month Day Year Comment UoM Value Modlfle
1 1 2002 mgll HOLID
1 7 2002 mgll 3.5
1 14 2002 mg/I 3.6
1 21 2002 mgfl HOLID
1 22 2002 mgll 2.8
1 28 2002 mg/I 3.3
2 4 2002 mg/1 4.4
2 11 2002 mg/I 3.
2 18 2002 mg/I 3.9
2 25 2002 mg/I 3.8
3 4 2002 mgfl 3.2
3 11 2002 mg/I 3.4
3 18 2002 man 2.9
3 25 2002 mg/1 3.1
3 29 2002 mg/I HOLID
4 2 2002 mg/I 2.5
4 8 2002 mg/1 3.3
4 15 2002 mg/I 3.5
4 22 2002 mg/I 3.4
4 29 2002 mg/I 3.6
5 6 2002 mgfl 2.3
5 13 2002 mg/I 3.6
5 20 2002 mgll 3.8
5 27 2002 mg/I HOLID
5 28 2002 mg/I 3.5
6 3 2002 mg/1 2.6
6 10 2002 mg/I 1.7
6 17 2002 mg/I 2.6
6 24 2002 mgll 3.6
7 1 2002 mg/I 3.7
7 8 2002 mg/I 3.7
7 15 2002 mgll 1.7
7 22 2002 mg/1 3.
7 29 2002 mg/I 2.8
8 5 2002 mgll 2.7
8 12 2002 mgll 2.6
8 19 2002 mg/I 2.3
8 26 2002 mg/I 2.
9 2 2002 mgll HOLD
9 3 2002 mg/1 2.6
9 9 2002 mgfl 2.9
9 16 2002 mg/1 2.6
9 24 2002 mg/1 2.6
9 30 2002 mgll 2.1
10 7 2002 mg/I 3.1
10 14 2002 mg/1 2.4
10 21 2002 mg/I 2.9
10 29 2002 mg/I 3.7

CMUD TP avg Values
�,
Month Day Year Comment UoM Value Modlfle
11 5 2002 mg/I 3.7
11 11 2002 mg/1 3.1
11 19 2002 mgll 2.3
11 25 2002 mg/1 2.
12 2 2002 mg/I 2.9
12 9 2002 mg/I 2.4
12 17 2002 mg/I 2.6
12 23 2002 mg/I 2.4
12 24 2002 mg/I HOLED
12 25 2002 mg/I HOLD
12 30 2002 mg/I 1.7
TP avg
2002
2.95 mg/I

Re: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities - Mc...k WWMF Phosphorus Reduction Improvements
.•
Subject: Re: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities - McAlpine Creek WWMF Phosphorus
Reduction Improvements
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:19:53 -0500
From: Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: "Wagoner, David/CLT" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Pasteur, Steve/GNV" <[e-mail]>
David -
Sorry this took so long. I'll send this and then return your call in case you have other questions.
11x17 is fine (we just may have to call if something is too small to read).
Corporate seals - for our purposes - the intent of the rule is to make sure a responsible P.E. has signed and
sealed the plans (a corporate seal is not necessary on every page). I'm not sure what the state P.E. rules are
with regard to that - you may wish to check into that (but for our purposes, no problem, as long as an
individual signs/seals; but if I were that individual, I'd probably want the corporate seal on the front of the
plans at least.)
Hydraulic profile - this one is tricky - and I hope we discussed this in some detail before. I'm not opposed
to a complete hydraulic profile. However, most folks here would like some detail (either as part of the
calcs or otherwise) indicating that anything new that's added flows down hill (or is adequately pumped
uphill) - and properly connects to the old piping/equipment. (we don't mind if a full profile is not provided
- a partial one would be nice if components/basins are added).
As for the building codes, etc. - out of our purview, so no need for us to see them.
Give me a ring tomorrow if we need to clarify. Thanks.
Susan
"Wagoner, David/CLT" wrote:
Susan, This is a follow-up to our telephone conversation last week regarding
submittal requirements of the Subject Plans and Specs. The agreement between
NCDENR and SCDHEC gives a two month review period for the package - March 3-
May 1, 2003 ...short and sweet, I hope.During our conversation several issues were
clarified:
• submittal of 11X17 drawings are OK/preferred (photo -reduced signed and
sealed),
• the corporate seals for engineering and architecture are not required for the
package, and
• If the overall hydraulic profile of the facility does not change(internal changes
only), then a detailed hydraulic profile does not need to be submitted for your
review.
One other issue that has come up is a local requirement (Char-Meck Building Stds)
to include in the plans a written description of the design work conducted by the
various disciplines relative to local building codes. Is your office interested in
seeing these sheets? One issue is if we reduce these sheets to 11X17, the font size
I of 2 3/3/03 11:25 AM

Re: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities - Mc...k WWMF Phosphorus Reduction Improvements
for these particular sheets becomes <6. If you need them as part of the complete
package and the tiny font is ok, great. If you need to review, we could provide
them in a different format, separately for your review. If you don't want or need to
review, we can leave them out. Just let me know your preference. Thanks. Please
let me know if I have misinterpreted anything from our conversation. Thanks for
your help.David <><David L. Wagoner, PECH2M Hi114824 Parkway Plaza Blvd., Suite 200Charlotte, NC
28217-1968704.329.0073x238704.329.0141 Fax[phone] CellularMcAlpine Field Office 704.34 1..5657704.34 1.5205
Faxe-mail: [e-mail]
2 of 2 3/3/03 11:25 AM

vIL
6 Cx (or+•S
C r--t
3 -3
413°4 \1EX.',
{iC iiG l E ZIA g.t'LL.
Delat 10a onef-
£JL4v . Gtl ► �-�� N
ii/I)Doz/c
7'_✓` -6 Z-/I
GAQD %ou-
C,'lVD _704— ---T7'S
001 He[.t.._ iri. g7s ((
C.P4 vt7 7014 311- &hi c,
T76-4-! 3 57- l 3 LA/
MV�
wt'-
34(- ao73 c;
? s0 7a(- 3,1-56c
L—_-------f?733-Sos3 x:
�4v0/r1/Pi)E S x1W. 51_

FY 03-07 Capital Improvements& 10 Year Needs
Sewer Projects
IREDELL CO. ROWAN CO.
CABARRUS Cq;.
SOUTH CAROLINA
Previously Funded
2525 Previously Funded - Activated
IIII ( First Year Funded
EIEM Funds Identified
LP Unfinanced
7M 10 Year Needs
Proposed Lift Stations
Charlotte
Cornelius
Davidson
Huntersville
Matthews
Pineville
n Mint Hill
n Mecklenburg County
Ex. Major Sewer System
Gravity Line
`'=e Force Mains
® Lift Stations
Streams
n n u u m m Proposed Roads
Proposed Roads

rs_
McAlpine Creek WWMF
Field Offices and Site Security
Manual Gate
Electronic Gate V deo Camera
Modify Existing
Electronic Gate
Electronic Gate
Video Camera