NC0089095_Permit Issuance_20120430

rC6ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles v►lakild,P.E. Dee Freeman
Governor IDirector Secretary
April 3 0,2012
Mr.Aubrey Deaver
President
A&D Water Services, Inc.
P. O.Box 1407
Pisgah Forest,NC 28768
Subject: Issuance of New Permit
NPDES Permit NCO089095
High Vista Falls WWTP
Henderson County
Class II
Dear Mr. Deaver:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application as a new surface water discharge
under the subject permit. Accordingly,we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is
issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of
Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or
as subsequently amended).
Before this discharge can commence,an Authorization to Construct(AtQ permit must be obtained from
the Infrastructure Finance Section. The AtC will allow completion of the required equipment additions, and a
dedicated recording meter system to monitor the direct discharge to Line Creek.
Any non-discharge issues,non-discharge violations,non-discharge enforcement actions,conjunctive use
actvities, or required changes in this facility non-discharge permit status are not waived nor regulated by this
permit but is the responsibility of the Permittee to resolve with the appropriate regulatory agency. It is strongly
recommended you contact Asheville Aquifer Protection Section for further instructions.
SummMof New Permit Requirements
1) BOD, TSS, NH3-N, and Fecal Coliform weekly monitoring with daily and monthly average limits.
2) Total Residual Chlorine 2/week monitoring with daily limit.
Page 1 of 2
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Location:512 N.Salisbury St Raleigh,North Carolina 27604 ne
Phone:[phone] FAX [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 ol�lCarohna
Internet:www.ncwaterqualiry.org ,Vatundy
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

. s
3) pH weekly monitoring with daily limit range.
4) Flow continuous monitoring with daily reporting and monthly average limit.
5) Dissolved Oxygen weekly monitoring with daily average minimum limit.
6) Temperature weekly monitoring.
7) Turbidhry quarterly monitoring.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days
following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter
150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made,this decision shall be final
and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal
requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality or permits
required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other federal or local
governmental permits that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit,please contact Ron Berry at telephone number(919)
807-6396 or at email [e-mail].
Sincerely, Q
Jharles Wakild, P.E.
Attachments
Cc: Asheville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section/Chuck Cranford(with revised Fact Sheet)
Asheville Regional Office/Aquifer Protection Section/Landon Davidson(email)
Asheville Regional Office/Aquifer Protection Section/Beverly Price(email)
Aquifer Protection/Jon Risgaard(email)
Lenderman Engineering, LLC, R. A. Lenderman(email:[e-mail])
Central Files
NPDES File
Page 2 of 2

Permit NCO089095
4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRO1ViviETv i AND NATLfIZAi. RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER TIE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
(NPDES)
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission,and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,as amended,
A & D Water Service, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from an outfall located at
High Vista Falls WWTP
Creasman Hill Road
Mills River
Henderson County
to receiving waters designated as Line Creek within the French Broad River Basin in accordance with
effluent limitations,monitoring requirements,and other conditions set forth in Parts I,II,III and IV
hereof.
This permit shall become effective June 1,2012.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on October 31,2015.
Signed this day April 30,2012.
les Wakild,P.E.,Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCO089095
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
A& D Water Service, Inc.
is hereby authorized to:
I. Upon receipt of the signed Engineering Certificate for conversion of the existing High Vista Falls
reuse facility to discharge 0.045 MGD of treated domestic wastewater to Line Creek, operate with
the following components:
o One(1)influent bar screen
o Two (2) influent equalization basins, one 9,000 gallons, one 6,500 gallons, transfer pumps,
blowers
o Five(5)9,000 gallon aeration basin with blowers
o Flow splitter box
o Two(2)6,200 gallon rectangular clarifiers with sludge transfer systems
o Two(2)48 ft multi-media tertiary filters
o Filter backwash clearwell with pumps
o Two(2) 1,200 gallon chlorine contact chambers with liquid bleach chlorination
o Effluent flow splitter box
o One(1)500,000 gallon effluent off-spec holding pond
o One(1)6,500 gallon effluent equalization basin with blower
o Dechlorination
o Post aeration
o Effluent flow meter with recorder
o Effluent composite sampler
o Two(2)sludge holding tanks,one 2,300 gallons, one 9,000 gallons
0 100 KW standby generator
o Effluent lift station for conjunctive distribution(option).
This facility is located at Creasman Hill Road in Mills River,in Henderson County.
2. To discharge through Outfall 001 at a specified location (see attached map) into Line Creek, a
waterbody classified as C waters within the French Broad River Basin.
3. This facility anticipates continuing to provide treated wastewater for conjunctive use. Conjunctive
use and subsequent non-discharge permitting is administered by the Aquifer Protection Section.

1
h
l :
u '__
tt*
NC HWYr 191
Discharge
41 �� NCO089095 }
I
w .
IEghVtSta
• Fall �,�� �� � ,•,�
r ,
� ., F' i5 l •.V in 'rlr,.-gap[1 � '�^� ..'� ! i '�.M�� 7k r' a
4F
w
a 101,
USGS Quad: FBNE Skyland, NC
Outfall Facility
Latitude: 350 25' 52.6"N 350 25'51.8"N
Longitude: 820 34' 18.5" W 820 34'20.1"W
Stream Class: C North Facility Location
Subbasin: 04-03-02 HUC: 06010105 High Vista Falls WWTPNC0089095
Receiving Stream: Line Creek Henderson County

i
Permit NCO089095
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on the effective date of the permit and receipt of the signed Engineering Certificate for
conversion or the existing treatment facility to discharge to Line Creek, and lasting to expiration the
Permittee is authorized to discharge treated domestic wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges
shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
LYMITS MONITQRXNG REQUI�EN�NTS
CHARACTERISTICS Monthly Daily Nleasurpment` Sample Sample
Overage li�laximum Fre uency: :: T e Locaons.
Flow 0.045 MGD Continuous Recorder Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine 28 g/L 2/Week Grab Effluent
BOD 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 5.0 mg/L 10.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Ammonia as N 1.0 mg/L 5.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Fecal coliform 14/100 ml 25/100 ml Weekly Grab Effluent
(geometric mean)
pH Not greater than 9.0 S.U. Weekly Grab Effluent
nor less than 6.0 S.U.
Dissolved Oxygen Not less than 5.0 mg/L, Weekly Grab Effluent
daily average
Temperature, °C Weekly Grab Effluent
Turbidity,NTU Quarterly Recorder Effluent
or Grab
Footnotes:
I. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 µg/L to be in compliance
with the permit. However, the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported
by a North Carolina certified laboratory(including field certified),even if these values fall below
50 µg/L.
THERE SHALL BE NO DISCHARGE OF FLOATING SOLIDS OR FOAM VISIBLE IN OTHER
THAN TRACE AMOUNTS.

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET ADDENDUM FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES PERMIT NCO089095
Permittee Comments on Draft
The Permittee requested a compliance extension to allow for process optimization to meet the
draft permit BOD effluent limit of 5.0 mg/L. The Permittee requested approval to use a flow
estimate procedure in lieu of installing a new flow meter at outfall.
Revised Permitting Strategy
Using the High Vista Falls WWTP draft permit limits and the existing Rosewood MHP WWTP
permit limits,the level B models indicate the seasonal NBOD level B model standards(4.5 mg/L
summer, 8.1 mg/L winter) in Line Creek are exceeded. Rosewood MHP WWTP permit limits
are existing and are therefore not subject to revision. The historical BAT limits applied in the
High Vista Falls WWTP draft permit are not a true BAT but rather a starting point for effluent
NH3-N limits evaluation,lower limits can be assigned as needed.
Additional level B models were ran to determine the optimum seasonal effluent NH3-N levels
that High Vista Falls WWTP would need to achieve in order that the level B model NBOD
standards in Line Creek are not exceeded. The additional models included comparing High
Vista Falls WWTP effluent BOD limits of 5.0 mg/L and 10.0 mg/L.
Based on the additional level B models the following conclusions were reached and will be
incorporated into the final permit:
1) The impact of limiting the effluent to 5.0 mg/L BOD versus 10.0 mg/L was insignificant
and does not impact the wqs in Line Creek. Effluent BOD limits, monthly average 10.0
mg/L and 15.0 mg/L daily, will be assigned in the final permit. Compliance extension is
not warranted at final permit amended limits.
2) A year round monthly average effluent NH3-N limit of 1.0 mg/L was the optimum value
that met the level B model NBOD standards. As a private domestic treatment facility
effluent limits, monthly average 1.0 mg/L and daily 5.0 mg/L, will be assigned in the
final permit. Based on reported effluent NH3-N data, the facility 2 year average NH3-N is
less than 0.6 mg/L.
The new effluent flow meter/recording system remains a requirement to further protect water
quality in Line Creek.No other changes will be made to the final permit.
NAME: DATE:
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
Reviewed via phone conference 4/25/12 with Chuck Cranford and Keith Haynes, Asheville
Regional Office/Surface Water Protection.No comments recommend proceeding with final.

DENR/DWQ
4
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES PERMIT NC0089095
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility High Vista Falls WWTP(formerly High Vista Falls WWTF)
Name:
Applicant Address: P. O. Box 1407;Pisgah Forest,NC 28768
Facility Address: Creasman Hill Road;Mills River,NC 28759
Permitted Flow 0.045 MGD
Type of Waste: 100%domestic
Facility/Permit Status: Class II/Active non-discharge WQ0015929;New NPDES
County: Henderson County
Miscellaneous
Receivin Stream: Line Creek Stream Classification: C
Subbasin: 04-03-02 Index No. 6-59
Drainage Area mi : 0.32 HUC: 06010105
Summer 7Q10 cfs) 0.12 303(d)Listed? No
Winter 7Q 10 cfs): 0.15 Regional.Office: Asheville
30Q2(cfs) 0.24 State Grid/USGS FBNE
Quad: Skyland,NC
Average Flow cfs : 0.55 Permit Writer: Ron Berry
IWC (%): s 36.8%/w.31.7% Date: 1/31/12
BACKGROUND
The High Vista Falls WWTF began operation as a privately owned 0.045 MGD permitted non-
discharge domestic treatment facility operated by the High Vista Falls development group for
treatment of domestic wastewater from the High Vista Falls residential community. The non-
discharge capability was accomplished by meeting tertiary requirements for reclaim water and
then providing adequate storage and irrigation on the High Vista Falls golf complex. The
developer was also the owner of the golf course. Aquifer Protection was responsible for issuing
the non-discharge permit WQ0015929 and subsequent compliance.
The golf course complex, designated property for anticipated future treatment needs, and the
original treatment plant have been sold over the years to separate private groups. The existing
permitted facility owner no longer owns any equipment, or resources, or property beyond the
physical location of the existing treatment plant. The original storage pond and irrigation system
is now part of the golf course property and as such it operation and maintenance is controlled by
the golf course. The current non-discharge operation is contingent on all parties maintaining their
portion of the system, and the golf course accepting and storing treated reclaim wastewater year
round. Non-compliance with the non-discharge permit requirements and operational problems
are reoccurring event.
A & D Water Services, Inc., current owner of the 0.045MGD reclaim treatment facility, has
evaluated alternatives for disposal of the excess reclaim wastewater to resolve the continued
compliance issues with the non-discharge operation and has concluded a NPDES discharge to
Line Creek is the best option. As a result, a NPDES application for the discharge of 0.045 MGD
of treated domestic wastewater to Line Creek with intermittent conjunctive use was submitted.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0089095
Page 1 of 4

The Division has reviewed the concerns with Aquifer Protection, evaluated the owner alternative
analysis for options, and conducted an analysis of Line Creek assimilation capacity with the
addition of 0.045 MGD treated domestic wastewater. The Division concluded that the NPDES
option was a viable option but utilizes the remaining domestic waste load capacity of Line Creek.
TREATMENT PROCESS
Domestic wastewater passes through a bar screen into two influent equalization basins, 9,000
gallons and 6,500 gallons. Transfers pumps delivery the wastewater to 5 aeration basins, each
basin is 9,000 gallons, blowers provide the required air for mixing and aeration. A flow splitter
box divides the combined aeration effluent between 2 clarifiers, 6,200 gallon capacity each. The
combined effluent from the clarifier flows to the dual 48 cubic feet media tertiary filters and
collects in a clearwell. The clearwell effluent divides between two 1,200 gallon chlorine contact
chambers for chlorination, recombines and flows through the effluent flow meter, and collects in
the effluent splitter box. Filter backwash pumps use the clearwell water to backwash the tertiary
filters with the backwash wastewater returning back to influent equalization basins.
The effluent splitter box proportions the flow either to the 6,500 gallons effluent equalization
basin or the 500,000 gallon effluent holding pond. The effluent holding pond original purpose is
to capture treated wastewater that does not meet reclaim standards and allow recycling of the
captured wastewater back to the headworks. When recycling is conducted the pond wastewater is
drained back to the reclaim effluent pumps station, the reclaim effluent to the golf course is
blocked,and the effluent flow is diverted back to the facility headworks.
WAS is routinely removed from the clarifiers and collected in 2 sludge holding basins, 9,000
gallons and 2,300 gallons. About every three month a contractor pumps and hauls the sludge to
the City of Hendersonville WWTP.
The reclaim effluent is transferred to a pond on the golf course where it can be further distributed
for irrigation. Aquifer Protection Section issues and administers the non-discharge permit
WQ0015929 and compliance associated with the current operation.
To facilitate the new NPDES discharge; the effluent equalization flow will be diverted to a new
dechlorination system, then through a new post aeration system, and then to the new discharge
into Line Creek. The Division will require a new effluent meter/recorder system be installed to
monitor the NPDES flow.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
A Level B Model was prepared for summer and winter conditions and indicates (1) an effluent
year round monthly limit of 5.0 mg/L and seasonal BAT NH3-N limits,2.0 mg/L in summer,4.0
mg/L in winter, are require to address surface water quality in the stream at the point of
confluence with Rosewood MHP discharge (NC0075680); (2) an effluent DO minimum limit is
required to meet surface water quality standards as a result of the added oxygen demand to Line
Creek; (3) the remaining waste load capacity was utilized thus no new dischargers or expansion
under current technology for High Vista Falls will be allowed. The indicated limits will be
applied in this permit.
The existing facility has mandatory capability to meet TSS limits of monthly 10 mg/L and 5
mg/L daily and fecal coliform limits of monthly 14/100 ml daily 25/100 ml. These TSS limits
and fecal coliform limits will be applied in this NPDES permit. To be in compliance with surface
water quality standards a pH limit range of not more than 9.0 S.U. nor less than 6.0 S.0 will be
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0089095
Page 2 of 4

applied in this permit. Temperature monitoring will be required in this permit. As a Class H
NPDES treatment facility the surface water quality standards monitoring frequency and
monitoring parameters were applied accordingly.
It is anticipated the proposed new post aeration system should provide sufficient treatment to
meet the DO limit. Since the facility uses chlorination for disinfection then a TRC toxicity limit
will be added to this permit, and dechlorination will be required. Since the facility qualifies as a
minor 100% domestic treatment facility and has seasonal BAT NH3-N limits and a year round
TRC toxicity limit then no additional toxicity test requirement are warranted at this time.
A new NPDES effluent meter/recorder system located in the new NPDES discharge piping will
be required to properly account for the discharge and flow compliance in this permit.
The existing effluent turbidity monitoring system will be used to report turbidity on quarterly
bases in this permit.
Data review
The NDs reports were reviewed for the period of January 2009 to November 2011. ND data is
summarized in Table I below:
Table I
Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Fecal
Flow BOD TSS NH3-N Coliform
(MGD) (mg/L) mg/L) (mg/1} (0100 ml)
Average 0.0258 5.42 2.45 0.59 4.7
Maximum 0.036 17.7 10.9 10.58 71
Minimum 0.016 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 < 1.0
Conjunctive Use and Aquifer Protection Section Notification
Operation, compliance, and treatment requirements for conjunctive use are governed by
regulatory authority by Aquifer Protection Section. The permittee will be directed to contact
Aquifer Protection Section for disposition of non-discharge permit including the existing
WQ0015929 permit. A copy of the NPDES draft permit will be submitted to Aquifer Protection
Section for comment.
SUMMARY OF NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
In keeping with Division policies the following will be incorporated into the permit:
• Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements for Flow, TRC, BOD, TSS, NH3-N,
Fecal Coliform,pH, and DO.
• Effluent monitoring for temperature and turbidity.
• Prior to discharge, approval for Authorization to Contruct and receipt of signed
Engineer Certificate.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: February 1,2012
Permit Scheduled to Issue: March 2012
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
Fact Sheet
NPDES NCO089095
Page 3 of 4

If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Ron Berry at(J9119) 807-6396 or email ron.berry@?ncdenr.gov. Y
NAME: DATE: J
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NCO089095
Page 4 of 4

@erry, Ron
From: Berry, Ron
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 2:22 PM
To: 'Aubrey Deaver
Cc: Haynes, Keith; Cranford, Chuck; Davidson, Landon
Subject: Final NPDES NCO089095 Complinace-High Vista Falls VvWTP
Mr. Deaver,
As requested,the Division February 24,2012 phone response to your February 20,2012 letter are summarized in this
email.As mandated by federal statues,the NPDES draft permit for High Vista Falls WWTP proposed 0.045 MGD
discharge to Line Creek was issued to you,and for public comment,with a letter date of February 1,2012.The actual 30
day comment starting date is defined by the public notice affidavit date, in this case February 10,2012.Your comments
are well within the 30 day comment period.
Any pre-draft narratives,those prior to February 1,2012, are for discussion purposes only and can be different in the
draft permit requirements issued for public notice.
The NPDES permit must address impacts to water quality standards and be protective of the receiving stream.The
Division determined that the High Vista Falls WWTP BOD limits and NH3-N limits must meet Best Available Technology
(BAT)limits for this size/type facility which were applied in the draft permit.
The Division understands that the historical data indicates compliance with the draft permit BOD limits are an issue.
Therefore,to allow your facility time to improve your existing process and/or to engineer,gain approval,and add the
necessary equipment to bring this facility into BOD compliance the Division, upon your written request,will grant up to
a maximum 3 years from your permit effective date to meet the permit BAT-based BOD limits. During the granted period
your facility must meet BOD compliance limits of 10 mg/L monthly average and daily maximum limit of 15 mg/L.In
addition, if a compliance date is granted you must provide to the Division and the Asheville Regional Office within 6
months of the effective date a compliance plan outlining action items with completion dates.All of this will be defined
in the final issued NPDES permit.This request must be received prior to March 16,2012.
There are no concerns with BAT-based NH3-N limits as this facility is capable of meeting these limits. If you have any
questions you can contact Ron Berry by phone at(919)807-6396 or by email at [e-mail].
Ron Berry [e-mail]
Engineer I
DWQ/Point Source/NPDES Complex Permitting Unit
NCDENR
Phone:[phone]
Fax: [phone]
Office:Archdale Building Room 925Y
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
1

A & D Water Service, Inc.
P. O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Phone[phone] Fax[phone]
February 20, 2012
Mr.Ron Berry
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES Complex Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
RE: Draft Permit Review
NPDES#NCO089095
High Vista Falls WWTP
Henderson County
Dear Mr.Berry:
We have reviewed your letter of Feb. 1,2012,the attached Fact Sheet and Draft Permit conditions,limits and
---_--- monitoring requirements. -_- --
Please be aware that a few days prior to receipt of you letter,we had a conference call with Wanda Frazier,
Bev Price and Langdon Davidson. Wanda emailed a(then)current copy of the limits page for discus--Sion.
We reviewed this copy and concurred with the proposed limits and requirements.
We then received your letter which had slightly altered limits for BOD and Ammonia. Specifically,the
BOD monthly average was lowered from 10 mg/l to 5 mg/l; The daily maximum was lowered from 15 mg/1
to .5mg/l. Your Fact Sheet shows the three year BOD monthly average to be 5.42 mg/l. We then review
ed 2011. The 2011 (Jan.thru Dec.)monthly average for BOD was 4.7 mg/l. BOD exceeded the proposed
monthly average(5.0 mg/1)on four(4)occasions(April,June,August&September)in 2011. The low limit
-- of 5 mg/1 immediately places us in position for permit imminent violations. We feel we cannot consistently
comply with this limit. We certainly do not wish to be in a non-complaint situation. Therefore,we hereby
request a return to the previously proposed BOD limits of 10 mg/1 as a monthly average and 15 mg/l as the
daily max.
As an alternative,we offer the following comment for consideration: BOD limits of 8 mg/1(mon.avg.)and
12 mg/l(mon.max)could be acceptable if the stream loadings are too restrictive for 10/15 requested above.
The Ammonia limits were also lowered but these do not appear to suggest a non-compliance issue. We
think we can meet the lower limits.
Thank you for your consideration. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss the situation,please
feel free to call me at 828-884-9772(office)or 828-507-9853 (cell).
Z 2,4 Sincerely, V^&$+k Ift
( rey Deaver
U tot President
6&�111 PP) 11 1
c O
c.• Wanda Frazier,l���VQ/Asheville RO F
�
Bev Price,DWQ/Asheville RO ' FEB 2 2 2012
DENRMATER QUALITY
1 POINT SOU E BRANCH

NPDES Permit Renewal
Regional Office Comments
ifiit.:•>�.1
"'Re
l:M•g:,✓.#tV:iy-•n Y.l:.l�.:u.ii.s•j.j..::i.x:••.y-b.:..;L..e:a:';.•,•..4.E.•rii•=•,::.: NCO089096 •r. ist!w::g,$.. 4' Ashevillei•'• 'c�jtt.l R�i.'_.•n:
February 6' 2012
;,L
�; � � ii�■]—'.� a=� High Vista Falls VWWTP *00
Keith Haynes,
-511 Wanda FrazierP.Hendersonr.•fit�� .,. r...., t ,•..,.
`ir.•.:�ki 7s:�.. .:L�. ;;S}:•:,i�i .�SE
7�.' ?>��=ei... rE•:r.:..�R` }. `= ;� .{ Chuck Cranford
Ilk
❑ Issue permit according to Draft
Q Make changes as noted below
sr4' ,! � •Y i�'' 1. Upon approval of an Authorization to Construct to modify the existing 0.045
E� MGD High Vista Falls domestic wastewater treatment reuse facility for
discharge to Line Creek and submittal of the signed Engineering Certificate,to
••�L•::s I yy
rti{"y:'''y..'•:• •; ;S""`` operate a 0.045 MGD treatment facility with the following components:
�.y�yYir.i:Y.::rti..:::: �•r. Y►1::.7-TAt�f:r:�:'SyR:ierY'••'t'�.y,{�•�=:�or�.�rti.Eetr
•��� ' = One (1) influent bar screen
_`;' • Two (2) influent equalization basins, one 9,000 gallons, one 6,500
gallons, and transfer pumps—insert: with blowers
. :... F:..,..:'.
.fix' �C:•,I.Ar•":'• 'y'}i•'«:�•:�{�•}��i
y'"•r �••,: :K��L:ti:��u:l:•:'�,S_as:El:�.�:rY�F••g.'';
;. Five (5) 9,000 gallon aeration basin with blowers
:•r"a-tGi s��1:,E �}L f•:: t:•"1' . Flow splitter box
Two (2) 6,200 gallon clarifiers with slug —i,
M.�=.�� •:� � ::=>.f: sludge transfer systems insert:
:" t°• __,~ I rectangular
Two (2)48 ftztertiary filters—change: square feet to cubic feet&
insert: multi-media
€�i Yt• '
gin;:. • Filter backwash clearwell with pumps
.i.;+'. •;f�r (thy �(i�._ ?
='x �� � `" t: • Two (2) 1 200 gallon chlorine contact chambers with chlorination—
"` ' r• `' insert: liquid feed (bleach)
4i "�,. .r.' .• rtrrrrtrrrrr■-
-r• j ••re
: ; na; • Effluent flow splitter box
IMP
n�=�: �i? r < �� • One (1) 600,000 gallon effluent holding pond —insert: lined side-
stream.holding pond for off spec water
��' ' x �'�` +{ • One (1) 6,500 gallon effluent equalization basin with blower delete
.:-,i�� this item (already listed ab
..�..•iove)
tSs I.
i:' ytE{X1•ti IL•• �' V
.i. '�i3'Y4 �,► �' it ,'• :s • Dechlorination
S:1SWP12 Templates&Forms\Permit Review\NPDESPennhReview ROComments.Feb2012•dom

/ '. • Post aeration
r p4 Effluent flow meter with recorder
il�tA�j fC� r�l
Effluent composite sampler
Two (2) sludge holding tanks, one 2,300 gallons, one 9,000 gallons
� s A ALP V'ix r
a'J s}($ 2 • Effluent lift station for conjunctive distribution.
• add: 1 Million gallon (non-lined) irrigation pond
71
add: 100 KW Emergency generator
i
Y � '
K 5 d Mi
B.
t �K 1
a
u hrl
,
y8.
F ;X4
' 3'Fy H5�2Y. lNa.
x
1'5
iN l N�4..♦`f
Hll t
I t:
Page 2 of 2

ASHE`7IL E
CITIZEN TA ES
VOICE OFTFIE MOUNTAINS a CI IZEN-TIMES.com
101
is
' l o�?�''=> AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
JL
Qo�cS°� BUNCOMBE COUNTY
SS.
NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina — Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and
Environmental
Commis�"sioN State, duly commissioned,.qualified and authorized by law
NPDFil Unit
1617 Center
Service to administer oaths,personally appeared Anne Gardner,
Raki9h.NC 276 161f
Nptlpe of Intent to Issue who,being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that she is
a NPDU Wastewater
Permit the Legal Billing Clerk of The Asheville Citizen-Times,
The North Carolina En-
vironmental Manage.
ment Commission pro- engaged in publication of a newspaper own as The
pwpeOas�t4watersuetlp cNGEg@
Iisrea br`Iow a lawslione.j Asheville Citizen-Times,published, issued, and entered as
Written `tRe me;p05Qd first class mail in the City of Asheville, in said County and
peggarpe It will s aig the State; that she is authorized to make this affidavit and
it don eaftter the
ouh rs date 0f Mis no.
ce. a Director of Me
NC DwelopnWo Waster sworn statement; that the notice or other legal
Qua]a 11,,publi cQ ay
hew a
should
tdere aot;�g: advertisement, a true copy of which is attached hereto, was
he interest. Please mall published in The Asheville Citizen-Times on the
formatiau requeefs Ifp lh
DWp at the a eye atl- following date: February 10 , 2012, and that the said
dress. Ime sled er-
sons may visa M2 Wp
at 512 N. sails ury newspaper in which said notice, paper, document or legal
str�M, Raleigh. NC t0,
I ew Information !
oon,trej(e. Atlditional innrrmma-i advertisement was published was, at the time of each an
hon pn PDEs permits
d on
notice may a eve publication, a newspaper meeting all of the
ountl on our we0sit a every 11g
v'bR°y ;wP a spell requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the
in6(9 9 90�6004.
Tyco Electronics Cor. General Statues of North Carolina and was a qualified
newel°" d°m st certl� newspaper within the meaning of Section 1-597 of the
of permt t1000=7 tar
C. WVRP ° Ryry^o°ep' General Statues of North Carolina.
Counry. Fac B s
charges trey¢d w
tic and t Industrisai
Creek in the to¢¢nc So.
red River Ras in. Cur
re tly D T55,and to
cartrescue Iry unite are Signed this 150'day of February, 2012.
A & n Water services,
Inc requested a n22w
eRrII NCO 0990% for
,' Vista Palls WWTP
n Nenderswi CCoou t�v
this new permlttetl a13
charge Is nr treated
tlomestic wa6tewat r ��.
to une Creel Ereneeh (Signature of person making affidavit)
11,
Fe atl Rivergas n.
59) 10,2012
Sworn to and subscribed before me the 15th day of
FebM
Notary Pub'c) 2 `1N,.J 10 !0"A
My Conimission expires the 5th day of October, 2013Q� O�:'•,Z
[phone] 1 [phone] FAX E �JO 1^ IOY
14 O.HENRY AVE. I P.O.BOX 2090 1 ASHEVILLE,NC 28802 1(800)800-4204 i
C)GAMOT (9 PVBL'Ci
`54.f/
•r r`171%,
Ieflall{111BQh"

Date: 1/23/12 NR Data for High Vista Falls WWRC
pal: rdb WQ0015929
o FLOW Monthly Average —Limit
0.050 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.045 -
0.040 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.035 -------------------------a-4--p- -*----------------------------------------------
0.030 o----Q----�---------�---------------o-------------------------------------------
c ° ° o o °
00.025 ------------------------------------------9-------------°-o- --------------------
0.020 --------------------------------------------------9---------------0-O- 0-*-o-°
O O
0.015 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.010 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.005 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.000
rn o, a, c, c, o, a, o, c, o, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r1 r1 r1 1-1r1 r1 r1 r-1 ri
O O A O O O O O O O �--4 rl ri ri rl ri rl ri H ri r1 r� ri r♦ %-1 r♦ ri rl rl H
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
r♦ N M tt tl1 t0 1� 0p 01 ei N M et M t0 00 G1 r0-1 e�i .N-1 `: en 111 tp 1� Cp Q1 rOi �
—0 BOD Monthly Average —Monthly Limit —•—BOD Daily Daily Limit
30.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20.0 --------------------------------------- - ------------------------------------------
'X5.0
10.0 - .p
5.0 ------------ ------ -- --- -------- - ------ ------ ------- --= -- -- r'1
. . .
0.0
01O1C1010101C1G1Q10101O1OOOO iir -
O p O O O O O O O O O O H rl ri r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r1 r� re-iI rril rril rr1l rr1
N OO O O O O O OOOoOOO O O O O O O O O OO 0 o Oo OOOl
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N. N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
r♦ N M eh Ill l0 1� 00 O1 O r I N M et IA 1p I� 00 01 O rq rNi r1 N M Ln 1S 1� 00 01 O
—0 TSS Monthly Average Monthly Limit TSS Daily Daily Limit
30.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20.0 ------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------
�5.0 --------- ------------------------------------------ - ---------------------------
10.0 Pk
5.0 -
0.0
0O 0O 0
0O1 0O 0
0O1 0O 0O 0O 0
0O1 O O O OOr OOr OOi OOrl rOOl OO O O O O 0O OO Or1 rO♦ rOi r1 r4 1-1r1ri rrOii rOrii r.--I+ rri+ -.14
O O O Orr 1l rri1
0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
r 1 N M ct IA �D n 00 M O � V-1 e-1 N M 111 �D 1, 00 O r01 er-1 N-i `-I N M 1!1 �O I� op 01 rOi �

Date: 1/23/12 NR Data for High Vista Falls WWRF
psJ:rdb WQ0015929
*TN Readings
14 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 ----p----------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E6 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O
4 ---------------------------------------------a-----------------------------6----
2 ------------------------------------- -------------------0--------------------------
O
0
o, rn rn o o + .�
0 o g o 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N
m n �+ m Z m m
O Chloride Readings
60 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O
50 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 ---E---------------------------------------------p--------e--------Z�--------�---
� O O O
tao30 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E
20 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
m CA M o 0 0 1-0 1-4 W4
n ob o 0 0 0 0 0 0
m n coo n m
o TDS Readings
350 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
300 --------------------------------------------------*--------------------------------
250 ---0--------*--------------------------------------------------------------------
O
200 -----------------------o-----------------°----------------°----------------O----
0
E150 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
rn rn rn
N eq N N N N N N
M z W4 (M Z eel
e-I rl a—I

Date: 1/23/12 NR Data for High Vista Falls WWRF
pp: rdb WQ0015929
O Turbidity Daily -Daily Limit
12.0 ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
10.0 -
O O o 0 o O O O O O
8.0 0-----------0--------------4-------------�---------------------0---------e--------
O
6.0 ------------------- -------------------o----O---------------------V---------0-----
O O O O O O O
4.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O
2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.0
o, Cl 4T M M (n Al M M (A M M 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 O O O 0 .-1 .-I 1-1 .-1 r4 r� r-4 V-1 � r�
0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O o .-4 r-1 1-1 1-4 1-4 74 "1 ri TI ri ri rq .-4 r4. r4 .-1 rqTI W4 1-4 .-1 r4
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
ri N M d to 4O (� 00 01 O a-1 N M N tD N 00 Q1 O .-I N M u 1 t0 N 00 01TI
f0.4
-0 NH3-N Monthly Average Monthkly Limit -■-NH3-N Daily -Daily limit
14.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.0 ---------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
10.0 ---------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
8.0 ---------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
E 6.0
4.0 -
2.0 -------- -- --------------------- -- --------- - -------------------------------
0.0
Cn Cn Cn G1` G1 01 C1 O1 Al M 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O O O O t-4 r�1 r4 r1 .� .� �-1 .-4 r�1 :-4
O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 .-1 .-4 .-1 r) rq r4 ri .-4 rl .-4 rl r4 H rl .-1 r4 r1-0 -1 l . . e-4 e-1 1-1
O O O O o 0 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
ri M u1 t0 00 01 O ri N M to t0 (Z 00 M O rq
�--Fecal Coliform Monthly Average Monthly Limit Fecal Coliform Daily -Daily Limit
100.0 . -----------------------------------7-- --- ------------------------ -------------
90.0 -------------------------------------- --- ----------------------- - --- --------
80.0 -------------------------------------- --- ---------------------- --- --------
70.0 -- ----------------------------------- - - ----------------------- - -- - -------
E
60.0 -- ------------------------------ ---- - ------------------------ - -- - -------
0 50.0 - - ------------------------------ ---- -- ------------------------ ---- - -------
\
40.0 - -------------------------------- ---- - ----------------------- --- -- -------
30.0 - -- ----------------------------- - -- -- ---------------------- --- --- ------
20.0 ---- ------- --------------------- - - --- --------------------- --- --- ------
10.0 - -- ----- -- ------------------- -- --- --------------------- - - --- ------
0.0
c, M 4r 4T rn 4n rn 4T M rn rn M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-1
O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 rl .-1 .-4 r-4 1.4 r-1 .-4 .-4 .-4 1-4 rq .-1 r-1 .-4 .-4 1.4 rq .-1 e-1 rq .-1 V 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
r l N 4 M N 47\1 O .\4 N \1 N M L 1 �O ^ 0\0 O\1 O r`1 N .\4 N f 1 V\1
rl

Date:4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NC0089095
pb: rdb BOD= 10.0 mg/L, DO =5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3-N= 0.8 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek-Winter
12.0 -
�D.O. -DO WQS,minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS,maxmum
11.0
10.0
9.0
0
8.0
2
7.0
J C
6.0
E
5.0 Er
4.0
3.0 �
2.0 a0
1.0
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Segment Mile
Se¢# Reach# Se¢ Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 8.21 6.13 1.86 0.22 THIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 9.15 5.76 1.78 0.24
1 1 0.11 9.72 5.45 1.72 0.26
1 2 0.11 9.72 5.45 1.72 0.26
1 2 0.26 10.29 4.79 1.58 0.31
1 2 0.41 10.49 4.31 1.47 0.36
1 3 0.41 10.49 4.31 1.47 0.36
1 3 0.45 10.48 4.22 1.45 0.37
1 3 0.48 10.48 4.14 1.43 0.38
1 4 0.48 9.35 8.56 8.10 0.43 4=ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 9.80 7.89 7.41 0.47 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 10.05 7.33 6.83 0.51 NH3-N= 14.0 mg/L
1 4 0.84 10.21 6.86 6.33 0.55 BOD= 30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 10.21 6.86 6.33 0.55
1 5 1.01 10.23 6.31 5.74 0.61
1 5 1.18 10.25 5.85 5.25 0.67
1 5 1.35 10.28 5.47 4.83 0.73
1 5 1.52 10.31 5.14 4.48 0.78

Date:4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NCO089095
pb: rdb BOD= 10.0 mg/L, DO =5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3-N= 1.1 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek- Summer
9.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.O. -DO WQS,minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS,maxmum
8.0 ---- ---------- --y7----� sue-" "'.".-.'--'""-�-'-'----=`= ------------
in
7.0 ---------------------;1E-------------------------------------------------------------
O
O
2 fl_
6.0 s------------------- -------------------
<
5.0 .'^v-- 0-- ------------
� of -
E v
4.0 ---------------- -----------------------------------------------------
v
2.0 - - ------- ------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 --------------------------------------------------------------------
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Segment Mile
Sea# Reach# Se¢ Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 6.72 6.78 2.51 0.19 4=HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 7.51 6.37 2.36 0.21
1 1 0.11 7.93 6.01 2.23 0.22
1 2 0.11 7.93 6.01 2.23 0.22
1 2 0.26 8.23 5.17 1.95 0.27
1 2 0.41 8.33 4.57 1.75 0.31
1 3 0.41 8.33 4.57 1.75 0.31
1 3 0.45 8.31 4.45 1.71 0.32
1 3 0.48 8.30 4.35 1.67 0.33
1 4 0.48 7.29 9.32 4.50 0.38 4=ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 7.70 8.50 4.09 0.42 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 7.92 7.82 3.74 0.45 NH3-H=5.5 mg/L
1 4 0.84 8.04 7.23 3.45 0.49 BOD=30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 8.04 7.23 3.45 0.49
1 5 1.01 8.02 6.57 3.09 0.54
1 5 1.18 8.04 6.03 2.80 0.59
1 5 1.35 8.06 5.57 2.56 0.64
1 5 1.52 8.09 5.18 2.35 0.69

Date:4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NCO089095
pb: rdb BOD= 10.0 mg/L, DO =5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3 N =4.0 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek-Winter
12.0
v D.O. -DO WQS,minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS, maxmum
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0 -
2
7.0
J
� 6.0 -
E
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.9
Segment Mile
Ses# Reach# Se¢ Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 8.21 6.13 6.40 0.22HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 9.14 5.76 5.94 0.24
1 1 0.11 9.69 5.45 5.56 0.26
1 2 0.11 9.69 5.45 5.56 0.26
1 2 0.26 10.25 4.79 4.74 0.31
1 2 0.41 10.45 4.31 4.15 0.36
1 3 0.41 10.45 4.31 4.15 0.36
1 3 0.45 10.45 4.22 4.03 0.37
1 3 0.48 10.44 4.14 3.93 0.38
1 4 0.48 9.31 8.56 10.32 0.434=ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 9.76 7.89 9.42 0.47 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 10.02 7.33 8.66 0.51 NH3-N= 14.0 mg/L
1 4 0.84 10.17 6.86 8.01 0.55 BOD=30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 10.17 6.86 8.01 0.55
1 5 1.01 10.19 6.31 7.23 0.61
1 5 1.18 10.21 5.85 6.59 0.67
1 5 1.35 10.24 5.47 6.05 0.73
1 5 1.52 10.27 5.14 5.59 0.78

Date: 4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NCO089095
pb: rdb BOD= 10.0 mg/L, DO =5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3 N = 2.0 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek-Summer
9.0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.O. -DO WQS,minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS, maxmum
8.0 _____ _ __________________ A
1E-
7.0 rr
O
c
Q
s ----------------------
< _
5.0 ^ - ------------
E m
4.0 - -------------------- ------------- -------------------------------------------
3.0 --------------------------- - ------------ -----
2.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Segment Mile
See# Reach# Seg Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 6.72 6.78 3.94 0.194=HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 7.50 6.37 3.66 0.21
1 1 0.11 7.91 6.01 3.42 0.22
1 2 0.11 7.91 6.01 3.42 0.22
1 2 0.26 8.20 5.17 2.91 0.27
1 2 0.41 8.30 4.57 2.54 0.31
1 3 0.41 8.30 4.57 2.54 0.31
1 3 0.45 8.29 4.45 2.47 0.32
1 3 0.48 8.27 4.35 2.40 0.33
1 4 0.48 7.26 9.32 5.13 0.38402ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 7.68 8.50 4.65 0.42 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 7.90 7.82 4.25 0.45 NH3-N = 5.5 mg/L
1 4 0.84 8.02 7.23 3.91 0.49 BOD=30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 8.02 7.23 3.91 0.49
1 5 1.01 8.00 6.57 3.49 0.54
1 5 1.18 8.01 6.03 3.15 0.59
1 5 1.35 8.04 5.57 2.87 0.64
1 5 1.52 8.07 5.18 2.62 0.69

LEVEL B MODEL INFORMATION SUMMER
Facility Information Flow Information
Facility ame High Vista Falls W WTP Topo Quad FBNE Skyland,NC
NPDES No. NC0089095 USGS sta.# 00344770825 USGS Data at Outfall
Mouth Line Creek to Line Creek
Type of wastewater 100%Domestic Date of flow estimate: 6/3/2011 6/3/2011
Facility status Existing,non-discharge Drainage Area,mi : 1.55 0.32
Receiving stream Line Creek Summer7Q10,cfs: 0.60 0.12
Stream class . C Winter7010,cfs: 0.70 0.15
Subbasin 04-03-02 Average flow,cfs: 2.65 0.55
A.U.Number 6-59 30Q2,cfs:1 1.20 1
MM R024 WINTER V�1/5?rQSIr�. ��Z
County Henderson IWC at discharge,%: 36.8 31.7 V 1 L,r4 SJ3, D T2-
Regional Office Asheville Model B File Name: VA;Fp . I�5� �„C, �.r�
Seasonal Bases Summer Y/
Segment/Reach 1 2 3 4 5 Total Reach
Length of reach mi 0.1100 0.3000 0.0700 0.3600 0.6800 0.400 1.6100
Incremental length 0.0550 1 0.1500 0.0350 0.1200 0.1700 0.0450
Waste characteristics 2c fl
FacilityName High Vista Falls W WTP Rosewood MHP WWTP
Flow MGD ✓ 0.045 ✓ 0.03 V
BOD m A,month) av 1 0 5 (t7 30
BOD Multiplier 1.5 ✓ 1.5
CBOD 1 7.5 15 45 �
NH3-N m /l,month) av 2 2 l , 5.5 iii Lt.
NH3-N multiplier ✓ 4.5 V 4.5 i-�
NBOD 9 24.75 (p
DO m ll,dailyav 5.0
Background DO m ✓ 7.72' ✓ 7.72* 7.72' 7.72* �72* 7. '
Runoff charactericstics
s7Q10 cfs/mi 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0. 0
QA cfs/mi 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1. 0
CBOD m /I 2 2 2 2 2
NBOD m A 1 1 1 1 1
DO m 7.72* 7.72* 7.72' 7.72* 7.72* Tf 2-
Tributary characteristics
Tributary name
s7Q10 cfs/mi
QA ds/mi
CBOD m 2 2 2 2 2
NBOD m /I 1 1 1 1 1
DO m /I 7.72* 7.72' 7.72' 7.72* 7.72* 7 2*
Slope ft/mile 85.99 66.88 45.22 45.22 26.67 112
NOTE:*DEFINED BY MODEL 90%SATURATION
HIGH VISTA FALLS BOD LIMIT BAT TO MINIMIZE INTERACTION WITH ROSEWOOD O/zo Pt'r 12
HIGH VISTA FALLS NH3-N LIMIT BAT TO MINIMIZE INTERACTION WITH ROSEWOOD
ROSEWOOD MHP BOD and NH3-N LIMITS BASED ON PERMIT NC0075680 F-YL4/-11
RUNOFF OA=(2.65 CFS-0.55 CFS) +1.61 M1= 1.30
RUNOFF 7Q10s=(0.6CFS-0.12CFS)+1.61 MI= 0.30 ►YW �rL
RUNOFF 3002=(1.2 CFS-0.24 CFS)+1.61 MII= 0.60
Nc'7 (OMPJ

Date:4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NCO089095
a pb: rdb BOD=5.0 mg/L, DO=5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3-N= 2.0 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek- Summer
9.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.O. -DO WQS, minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS,maxmum
8.0 ..------ ---------------o---------- ".'. ------- --------------------
0
N
O
2 a
6.0*--------------------!Z------------------------------------------------------------
< 2
5.0 ^ ------------
J\ (v
cm
C _ _________________________________
4.0
3.0 --
2.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Segment Mile
Sea# Reach# See Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 6.72 4.02 3.94 0.19HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 7.51 3.84 3.66 0.21
1 1 0.11 7.93 3.69 3.42 0.22
1 2 0.11 7.93 3.69 3.42 0.22
1 2 0.26 8.24 3.30 2.91 0.27
1 2 0.41 8.34 3.01 2.54 0.31
1 3 0.41 8.34 3.01 2.54 0.31
1 3 0.45 8.33 2.96 2.47 0.32
1 3 0.48 8.32 2.91 2.40 0.33
1 4 0.48 7.30 8.06 5.13 0.38 4=ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 7.71 7.37 4.65 0.42 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 7.93 6.80 4.25 0.45 NH3-N = 5.5 mg/L
1 4 0.84 8.05 6.31 3.91 0.49 BOD=30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 8.05 6.31 3.91 0.49
1 5 1.01 8.03 5.76 3.49 0.54
1 5 1.18 8.04 5.30 3.15 0.59
1 5 1.35 8.07 4.92 2.87 0.64
1 5 1.52 8.10 4.59 2.62 0.69

j sn'
lt
SUMMER
HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP BAT
ROSEWOOD.,MHP 0 . 03 MGD, LIMITS
Seg # Reach # Seg Mi D.O. CBOD I NBOD. Flow
1 1 0 . 00 6 . 72 4 . 02 3 . 94 0 . 19
1 1 0,. 06 7 . 51 3 . 84 3 .66 0.21
1 1 0 . 11 7 . 93 3 . 69 3 .42 0 .22
1 2 0 . 11 7 . 93 3 . 69 3 .42 0..22
1 2 0 . 26 8 .24 3 . 30 2 . 91 0 .27
1 2 0 .41 8 . 34 3 . 01 2 . 54 0 . 31
1 3 0 .41 8 .34 3 . 01 2 .54 0 .31
1 3 0 .45 8 .33 2 . 96 2 .47 0 .32
1 3 0 .48 8 .32 2 . 91C4 -. 615
0 .33
1 4 0 .48 7.30 8 . 06 0 .38
1 4 0 . 60 7. 71 7 .37 0 .42
1 4 0 . 72 7 . 93 6 . 800 '45
1 4 0 . 84 8 . 05 6. 31 3 . 91 0 .49
1 5 0 . 84 8 . 05 6 . 31 3 . 91 0 .49
1 5 1. 01 8 . 03 5 . 76 3 .49 0 .54
1 5 1. 18 8 . 04 5 . 30 3 .15 0 .59
1 5 1.35 8 . 07 4 . 92 2 . 87 0 . 64
1 5 1 . 52 8 . 10 4 . 59 2 . 62 0 . 69
�-- -.._.6 -1- 5-2---. ._8 c 10 2
-1-----. __. 6------- 1 '5-Cr--. _ 8 . 18
--
1 6 1 . 6r 8 . 24 ." 4.3 - ._� 1�3 - 2
Seg # Reach # Seg Ili D.O• 1 GBQD . I {IBOD � ` Flow
s c.,
1. 3 30
�o ]P WJo� 4
,E, t A t. 7 . 91 2 . 40 ni
�n 2 ro
oJ. 7( n
. 0
t "
8 ..10 4+. 5.9 2162 r • ., ..
E. 4, 5!
f
I

{. •. ', t: j ,SUMMER
. � 'i.r- •'fit.► .� ! t ti •ri Y ..:..r,.�-_ .
•r1 { � _�- ''�'- '' tr 'i HIGH="VISTA FALLS WWTP BAT
r '. ROSEWOOD MHP- 0 . 03 MGD LIMITS
• -- , MODEL' RESULTS - ----=.---;.
Discharger HIGH -VIs%TA TALLS
Receiving Stream LINE .CREEK �� ;`� ;~r ±1
——————————————————————— — — — ` '� ' ----------
The End D.O. is 8 .2 4,;mg/-1
.• �•9•;<, .. -'f�l ..h. r.•< } J+•-. . `lam:r':.►:i-. .=..i, `-� {4-�.
The End CBOD is 4 .43 mg/l. ;
The End NBOD is 2 .53 mg/l. '
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
------ --------- ------- ---- ---- -- ----------
Segment 1 6 .72 0 . 00 1
Reach 1 7.50 9 . 00. 5. 00 0 . 04500
Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0. 00000
Reach 4 45'. Oor 24 .75 0 . 00 0. 03000
Reach 5 0. 00 :l 000 0 . 00 0. 00000
----�==----- ----__....._._.__.�..w_�...�.�...�_w.. _ _.y:::.,....�.-0-•.-00��I:,:��—,,;0•�.Q4,.�.......�...�._�
: .:
W1,A
r� 0 D. ill"_0 D
0_. 0 0
0 0 u .
0 . 00 . U . 00

MODEL SUMMARY DATA
Discharger : HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP Subbasin 040302
Receiving Stream : LINE CREEK Stream Class : C
Summer 7Q10 : 0. 12 Winter 7Q10 0 . 15
Design Temperature: 23 . 0
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY I DEPTH Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design @200 design @200 design
------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ -
Segment 1 0 . 11 85 . 99 0 .163 0.29 0 .23 0.20 26 . 94 25 .23 0 . 63
Reach 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Segment 1 0 .30 66. 88 0 . 163 0 .33 0 .57 0 .49 20 . 92 19. 60 0 .63
Reach 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Segment 1 0 . 07 45 .22 0..154 n,�7 .59 . 0 .43 13 .37 12 .53 0 . 63
Reach 3 �Mt�it�nY 0, •
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
j'r'p
Segment 1 0 .36 4522 � 0 .178 '' 0.40 0 .52 0 .45 15 .44 14 .47 0 . 63
Reach 4
` 4�
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Segment 1 0 . 68 26. 67 0. 167 0 .48 • 0.39 0.34 8 .58 8 . 03 0 .63
Reach 5 ;
--------------- -- c'p ------
:-1 iP'I'i ;----* T--,M ------ --------------
Segment 1 0 :50 27 . 00 25.30 0 . 63
-------------------- �-g � 0 1E3----'U 29 -0-. j�--Ot20. ` -: f----------------
c T
I
�'Flow• E.CBOT NBOD I D.0
_cfs . - --- mg/l- - - =mg�l -
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 0 : 070� �r'�.500�� 379� 0p0 5000Q �
Headwaters 0 120 2 .090. _- 1 000;, 7.720 _
Tributary_ _O 1000_ -_ 2 .000, _ '1! 000 ' _ 7.720-. _
* Runoff . 0 .300 2 .000 1.000 7 .720-'i
Segment_ ' 1 Reach 2
Waste -0 . 000 ~0.000- 0 . 000 7
_ 10.000 +T
Tributary., E 0' 000 * 1 2 .000� } 11000; 7`J720
Runoff 0i300 2 .0Q0- l 00.0 7.720
Segment , 1• Reach 3
Waste . G. v 0 .0
0 . 000 . 0 .000 0 000 10 . 000
Tributary_ 0 : 000 _ 2 .000 1! 000 :) 7 .720
* Runoff 0 .300 2 .000 "1. 000 7.720 _1

Segment lj Reach040 0~:000 b OOhwE '0' O+Ob
Waste 0 . 046 45 . 000 : 24 .750 } 0 . 000
Tributary 0 . 000 , 2 . 000 laO00j 7.720
* Runoff . 0.300. 2 .0.00 _1. 00.0 ;, 7..720
Segment 1 Reach'-,
g , 1
Waste 0 . 000 ' 0 4 000: . : 0.4 000 -.I0: 000 :.
Tributary, i=a 0 : 000 2:000 f�,A1 000 .1.v7:720 •
* Runoff � 0 .300 2 .00Q. 0001 ,i 7 '720 i
Segment 1 Reach 6 r �— --•_._.�..�_._____._._.__.
:Waste 0 . 000 0 .000 0 . 000 0 . 000
. 00 1. 000 7
* Runoff 0 .300 2 .000 1. 000 7 . 720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
0 fl I ..,,

LEVEL B MODEL INFORMATION WINTER
Facility Information Flow Information
Facility Name High Vista Falls W WTP Topo Quad F8NE Skyland, NC
PDES No. NC0089095 USGS sta.# 00344770825 USGS Data at Outfall
Mouth Line Creek to Line Creek
Type of wastewater 100%Domestic Date of flow estimate: 6/3/2011 6/3/2011
Facility status Existing,non-discharge Drainage Area,mi : 1.55 0.32
Receiving stream Line Creek Summer7Q10,cfs: 0.60 0.12
Stream class C Winter7Q10,cfs: 0.70 0.15
Subbasin 04-03-02 Average flow,cis: 2.65 0.55 1 �
A.U.Number 6-59 30Q2,cfs:1 1.20 0.24 V 4 S TA
County Henderson IWC at discharge,%' 36.8 R w31.7firl"R J)cJ f.} 1/J •D Z
Regional Office Asheville Model B File Name: J'S J& W C 2
Seasonal Bases Winter
Segment/Reach 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Reach
Length of reach mi 0.1100 0.3000 0.0700 0.3600 0.6800 0.0 0 1.6100
Incremental length 0.0550 0.1500 0.0350 0.1200 0.1700 oz45o
Waste characteristics rY
Facility Name High Vista Falls WTP Rosewood MHP W WTP v I S IA��•l�r Z
Flow MGD r/ 1 0.045 ✓ 0.03 -�
BOD (mg/1, month) av o 5 60 30 i
BOO Multiplier i 1.5 r/ 1.5 ✓
CBOD l 7.5 l 45
NH3-N m /1,month) ava) 4 14 ,
NH3-N multiplier 4.5 ✓ 4.5 ✓
NBOD 8 18 3?r 63 47
DO m /l,daily iv 5.0
Background DO m /1 ✓ 9.7' r/ 9.7' 9.7' 9.7' ✓ 9.7' ir
Runoff charectericstics
w7Q10 cfs/mi 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 .34
QA cfs/mi 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 .30
CBOD m /1 2 2 2 2 2 2
NBOD m /I 1 1 1 1 1 1
DO (mg/I 9.7' 9.7' 9.7' 9.7' 9.7'
Tributary characteristics
Tributary name
s7Q10 cfs/mi
QA cfs/mi
CBOD m 2 2 2 2 2
NBOD m A 1 1 1 1 1
DO m A 9.7• 9.7' 9.7' 9.7' 9.7' 9 7'
Slope ft/mile 85.99 66.88 45.22 45.22 26.67 2
NOTE:'DEFINED BY MODEL 90%SATURATION
HIGH VISTA FALLS BOD LIMIT BAT TO MINIMIZE INTERACTION WITH ROSEWOOD
HIGH VISTA FALLS NH3-N LIMIT BAT TO MINIMIZE INTERACTION WITH ROSEWOOD
ROSEWOOD MHP BOD and NH3-N LIMITS BASED ON PERMIT NCO075680
RUNOFF QA=(2.65 CFS-0.55 CFS) +1.61 MI= 1.30 Nwq�Z
RUNOFF 7Q10s=(0.7CFS-0.15CFS)+1.61MI= 0.34 G
RUNOFF 3002=(1.2 CFS-0.24 CFS)+1.61 MII= 0.60

Date: 4/11/12 HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP NCO089095
pb: rdb BOD=5.0 mg/L, DO=5.0 mg/L, Flow=0.045 MGD
NH3-N=4.0 mg/L: Level B Model Prediction for Line Creek - Winter
12.0 - -
e D.O. -DO WQS, minimum NBOD -NBOD WQS,maxmum
11.0
10.0 ,
9.0
8.0 =
7.0 r6.0
J
E
5.0
4.0 -
3.0
2.0
1.0 -... .._..._ ....__. -._.. _......-
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Segment Mile
See# Reach# Sea Mi D.O.. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0.00 8.21 3.75 6.40 0.22HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
1 1 0.06 9.15 3.58 5.94 0.24
1 1 0.11 9.71 3.44 5.56 0.26
1 2 0.11 9.71 3.44 5.56 0.26
1 2 0.26 10.28 3.15 4.74 0.31
1 2 0.41 10.48 2.93 4.15 0.36
1 3 0.41 10.48 2.93 4.15 0.36
1 3 0.45 10.47 2.89 4.03 0.37
1 3 0.48 10.47 2.85 3.93 0.38
1 4 0.48 9.34 7.41 10.32 0.43 4=ROSEWOOD MHP WWTP
1 4 0.60 9.78 6.86 9.42 0.47 Flow=0.03 MGD
1 4 0.72 10.04 6.39 8.66 0.51 HN3-N = 14.0 mg/L
1 4 0.84 10.19 5.99 8.01 0.55 BOD=30.0 mg/L
1 5 0.84 10.19 5.99 8.01 0.55
1 5 1.01 10.21 5.54 7.23 0.61
1 5 1.18 10.23 5.16 6.59 0.67
1 5 1.35 10.26 4.84 6.05 0.73
1 5 1.52 10.29 4.57 5:59 0.78

WINTER
HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
ROSEWOOD MHP 0 . 03 MGD LIMITS
Seg # Reach # Seg Mi D.O. CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0 . 00 8 .21 3 . 75 6 .40 0 .22
1 1 0 . 06 9 . 15 3 . 58 5 . 94 0 .24
1 1 0 . 11 9 . 71 3 .44 5 . 56 0 .26
1 2 0. 11 9 . 71 3 .44 5 . 56 0 .26
1 2 0 .26 10 .28 3 .15 4 . 74 0 . 31
1 2 0 .41 10 .48 2 . 93 4 . 15 0 . 36
1 3 0 .41 10 .48 2 . 93 4 . 15 0 . 36
1 3 0 .45 10 .47 2 . 89 4 . 03 0 . 37
1 3 0 .48 10 .47 2 . 85JNBO�D
0 .38
1 4 0 .48 9.34 7 .41 0 .43
1 4 0 . 60 9. 78 6. 86 0 .47
1 4 0 . 72 10 . 04 6.39 0 .51
1 4 0 . 84 10 . 19 5. 990 .55
1 5 0 . 84 10 . 19 5 . 990 . 55
1 5 1 . 01 10 .21 5 . 54 0 . 61
1 5 1. 18 10 .23 5 . 16 0 . 67
1 5 1.35 10 .26 4 . 840 . 73
1 5 1. 52 10 .29 4 .570 . 78
Seg # Reach # I Seg Mi D.O. I CBOD Flow
-i 4 - L
1 ` WL✓4 Hg>l)
Bso
-t . r E 9 �" . ) i
36
U : S9 :
n
._0_2-
4 . P41
' F
I,

WINTER
HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
ROSEWOOD MHP 0 . 03 MGD LIMITS
---------- .MODEL RESULTS ---------- ~�
Discharger HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
Receiving Stream-- -LINR- CREED--- --- ----- - --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D.O. is 10 .29 mg/l .
The End CBOD is 4 . 57 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 5 . 59 mg/l .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
------ --------- ------- ---- ---- -- ----------
Segment 1 8 .21 0 . 00 1
Reach 1 7 . 50 18 . 00 5 .00 0 . 04500
Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 .00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 4 45 . 00 63 . 00 0 .00 0 . 03000
Reach 5 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
- -: .;i` 'h1OUEL RES'[TLiS _r•L" .4i_._ __ ' � . `. ,
I�I LH I i^n F1 LT.'S WWTE" I
ilc I
C
tdC'GTIT
• 'P:L •I\. •
r
t ,
7 50tj'Itk) 1%u! 00I
r I ..
A W 5.+00
Yppi t F -rwr�r{OMQ .1l�...aY+�/ +1..
f' rf f' t •F . .F { ;..�;o . .J a fF) ,_ "��,�{I -
1 ..
' �- �tr 3 S •� ' �� ro f^['bf - 1 1�:�1 ;Y ' rt..`I V'• 1
1 }g((
1 t 4;'pI

j+A a w :. , 2 1 A Y1
T -• 1�1 ;;11� a• t y�y �• `x>�' t''�f, Z•��. �� _►` �j .• -atr e-'J' W /lV��
! *** 'MODEL SUMMARY. DATA ***
"" !
�, • aw a �,_ '�r .F„ �� lii�ay •,- . c -' „
• },1't' 1 1 �:'' �,�1ri'' r.ir' Kt �= ;4;{ i�f T (y'x
�IA.j M.
Discharger HIGH:' VISTA,,FALLS.'IWWTP ` Subbasin 04030
ReceivingStream LINE CREEK-:
Stream Class. C
Summer 7Q10 0.12 if; r ,' e nv. =,1 a, '°C: a(Wi�te r:' IQ14„: ,: - 0 .15
Design Temperature. ; --
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY . DEPTH Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design @200 ! design @200 design
------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ -
Segment 1 0 .11 85 . 99 0. 182 0.30 0.39 0 .57 23 . 65 28 .15 0 .27
Reach 1 -- _
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Segment 1 0 .30 66. 88 0 .181 0.34 0 .36 0 . 52 18 .30 21. 77 0 .27
Reach 2
------------------------7------7------------------------------------------------
Segment 1 0 . 07 45.22 ,,--�� p 0, 3J ) 0.45 - , 11.67 13 .89 0 .27
l�t���sL 'S ;T'71�1Ak � I)AI ,
Reach 3 r' ; _
-------------------- --w.-- fr r r�-y t.r;�.- +-��.�r�rs�.ra -�r.�r,r�.� -.-----------------
il�r�''Ii >> F;�s� T 4,31
T?W^,p
Segment 1 0.36 ; 45..,22 0 .195 0.'41" 0'.32 0 .47 13 .32 15. 85 0.27
Reach 4 If
-------------- -- ----- - ----- --, , -- --- -- -- --- ---------------------
I
.. � •r :! ,. +. Est a,� ,• <, `•
Segment 1 0 .68 26'.67 0.'184.* 0.49�., - 0.24 0 .35 1 7.40 8 . 81 0 .2.
Reach 5 q+'•t +
,.'�t-i .11:V�I r�'- DF�'I'�? :�..•t.I� •�C i. �,:: ,
_ �:f. tl :, ; '►' i.i d� Ij '2�
Flow.:,,{ CBOD,. �NBOD� D:O"
s , bL�
, cf smg/lu; ' !a; mg/h �•� , ....
Segment 1'•Reach 1
Waste 0 070� 7.500 - -1 18 000 5. 000,
F 3
Headwaters 0 ,1�0. 2.._OQO. . ,;. ;� 000. . 9.700 i
Tributary ' 0 O, Q :�2_.0.00 ;1.•_'.0 7.0�.-
Runof { 0 340 j 2 ,�0 0 000�,` ! '9 ;
Segment: l,,Reach 2 , ! -- � L
Waste-, � �;�0 .00,0 ,r�,.,0•:490� li:"0-000, : A' 0�000
Tributar, ` "' 0 . 000 ` ',' •2:000' �'•�1 0001* ! 9.700
* Runoff
y� r 01••340� 7172 .000, 411 000 9.70Of
j.
1,4 � r-¢!fit i:..��,k.►L. .s�•r.__ . ;31 (»tat' p ,�
Segment etch .;3r tas w 11 ' ' '. ^+ 1Y '{ - �.♦=ii a.L I,
Waste +r'". ' p ! 000 80 .0000 t 0 `000 ' 0 . 000'•
! ; r •
Tributary_ ; _`0 . 00,0 u. 2:000 ,�!r 1.000: _ 9. 700•-I �t
* Runoff 0 .340 2..OOO r, �`,1.000 9.700
it !
Segment •1"Reach 4 � ; ,;r +i ', ... ►.,
Waste ! �0'P.° ,6 45t8°'_° ,, > 6AE3800 F: . 00 ! a
P
il�Cf � -�lt 11 ;p ..1+. t. 4 :f. 1? `•P.1 47
-.. .1 , , ;- •
j1�" �' 't1i`'? 1' � 'i1/,, S•C (1TY • �

Tributary 0 . 000 2 . 000 1 . 000 9 . 700
* Runoff 0 . 340 2 . 000 1 . 000 9 . 700
Segment 1 Reach 5
0 . 0"
000
Tr
Ruunoffy I �0 .340�� 2 . 000d 1 000' I �9 . 7700
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
I uu �. �UU oC n
j
I

!1i
• r (i �; �� • 035°26'41.62"N 082°34'06,B1"W
r GLEN
EL 2040 ft
4J,
gC00 1 � , ; 1 ` _ ASHB
RE (dN
uF� . % BtriCkhoals k,` vvv
EL 2080 ft
,
Fanning. QriagS
rib = Bethel Ch
—F_- 0
tLc-oo �s-q0` ?)-

a
p Z L4.
VID
Lk Lt
0 A! C6� `q
�cis s�34, �' v
9,5�o Z �®
2,120' 2 o< 2090,
SSA' r
�3 3 5• �`" � t
tke
M
C }
)4e-
233�
o $ N
V

611 1136, CYZ-CZ-(itit-
Q �o
3 2 = 1 ,241r
3o ►�ylL 8oD
IL
0 .12cfr v� fZ��s of P-AfF-
s �
0,
1
3 o QZ = o,24 cFs
t�coo
n,o
`1
RI z u' 0 '420
�Z.3 �- � h^. y�e
f4
o -7�
J Se ir-,3 0,2, " t

1
w a 0, '- PA
Permit NCO075680
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning upon expansion above 0.02 MGD and lasting until October 31,2015,the
permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited
and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
TFFLUEIVT LIlVTS MOI�TITORING]tEQU.IREIINTS: -.
L[JE1vT CHARA►CEItISTICS - -
"Monthly = aly Nleasorement S mple Sample _--
_-
Par'gmeter Cede - Average 11 axumuln 'irequencY ; T -Re.. "i - Location =:
Flow,in conduit or thru treatment plant 0.03 MGD Weekly Instantaneous Influent or Effluent
50050
BOD,5-Day(20 Deg.C)
30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
00310
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
00530
Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as N)-Summer
5.5 mg/L 27.5 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
00610
Nitrogen,Ammonia Total(as N)-Winter
14.0 mg/L 35.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
00610
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean) 200/100 ml 400/100 ml Weekly Grab Effluent
31616
Total Residual Chlorinel 28 µg/L 2/Week Grab Effluent
50060
Temperature,Water Deg.Centigrade Weekly Grab Effluent
00010
pH Not<6.0 nor>9.0 Weekly Grab Effluent
00400 standard units
Winter. November 1 -March 31 ,
Summer. April 1 -October 31
Footnotes:
1. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 µg/1 to be in compliance
with the permit.However,the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values reported by
a North Carolina certified laboratory(including field certified),even if these values fall below 50
µg/l.
THERE SHALL BE NO DISCHARGE OF FLOATING SOLIDS OR VISIBLE FOAM IN OTHER THAN TRACE AMOUNTS.

12/22/2011 IWC Based Calculations Data/comment entry
High Vista Falls WWTP Assume upstream TRC level =0 Results
NCO089095 Assume upstream Fecal level =0
Prepared By: RDB Check Box if WTP Facili ❑ Check Box if SW ❑
Enter Design Flow(MGD): 0.045 Enter Upstream NH3-N Level (mg/L): 0.220
Enter s7Q10(cfs): 0.120 To meet conjunctive and toxicity NH3-N limits, year round
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 0.150 daily= 6.0 mg/L and winter monthly=4.0 mg/L
Total Residual Chlorine Toxicity Requirment Ammonia NitrogenToxicity Requirment
Total Residual Chlorine(TRC) Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) Limit MAX
Summer 35.0 mg/L
s7Q10 (cfs) 0.120 s7Q10 (cfs) 0.120
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.045 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.045
DESIGN FLOW (cfs) 0.06975 DESIGN FLOW-(cfs 0.06975
STREAM WQS (pg/L) 17 STREAM WQS (mg/L) 1.0
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL(1 0 UPSTREAM LEVEL (mg/L) 0.220
IWC (%) 36.76 IWC (%)Summer 36.76 NON-POTW
Allowable Conc. (pg/L) 28 Allowable Conc. (mg/L)* 2.3 2.3
WEEKLY AVG LIMIT(mg/L) 6.9 11.5
(MONTHLY/DAILY)
To meet conjunctive Fecal Coliform limits, Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) Limit MAX
monthly and daily=25/100 ml
Winter 35.0 mglL
Secondary Treatment Requirement
(#/100 ml - MONTHLY/DAILY) w7Q10 (cfs) 0.150
Fecal Coliform Limits 100/200 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.045
(If DF>331; Monitor) DESIGN FLOW (cfs) 0.06975
(If DF<331; Limit) JISTREAM WQS (mg/L) 1.8
Dilution Factor(DF) 2.72 UPSTREAM LEVEL(mg/L) 0.220
IWC (%)Winter 31.74 NON-POTW
Allowable Conc. (mg/L)* 5.2 5.2
WEEKLY AVG LIMIT(mg/L) 15.6 6.0
(MONT LY/DAILY)
MONTHLY AVG LIMIT
Check other limit docs such as basin plan or model / F
12/22/2011

3. As *an indicator of proper operation and maintenance, the facility shall produce an effluent*in
compliance with the following limitations:
Parameter Monthly Average a Daily(Instantaneous)Maximum c
Flow 45,000 GPD
BOD5 (5-day,20°C) 10 mg/1 15 mg/1
NH3 as N 4 mg/1 6 mg/1
TSS 5 mg/1 10 mg/1
Fecal Coliform 14 per 100 ml b 25 per 100 ml
Turbidity 10 NTU
H The effluent pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0
p standard units.
a Monthly averages for all but fecal coliform shall be the arithmetic mean of all samples collected
during the reporting period.
b Monthly average for fecal coliform shall be the geometric mean of all samples collected during the
reporting period.
c Daily maximum shall be the maximum value of all samples collected during the reporting period.
The effluent from the subject facilities shall be monitored, by the Permittee, at point prior to
discharge to wet-weather storage ponds for the following parameters:
Parameter Sampling Point Sampling Freguency Type of Sample
Flow Influent or Effluent Continuous Recording
Turbidity Effluent Continuous Recording
BOD5 (5-day,20°C) Effluent *2/Month Composite
NH3 as N Effluent *2/Month Composite
TSS Effluent *2/Month Composite
Fecal Coliform Effluent *2/Month Grab
Settleable Matter Effluent Daily Grab
Residual Chlorine Effluent Daily Grab
NO3 as N Effluent **Triannually Grab
TDS Effluent **Triannually Grab
TOC Effluent **Triannually Grab
Chloride Effluent **Triannually Grab
pH Effluent **Triannually Grab
* 2/Month sampling frequency only during the months of April through October.During the remainder of the
year,these parameters shall be monitored monthly.
Triannually sampling shall be conducted during March,July,and November.
If Groundwater sampling indicates or predicts problems with the compliance with Groundwater
Standards,this permit will be modified to include additional and/or more restrictive limitations.
4

8. An automatically activated standby power source shall be on site and operational at all times. If a'
generator is employed as an alternate power supply, it shall be tested weekly by interrupting the
primary power source.
7. No type of wastewater other than that from the High Vista Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant
(permitted herein)shall be irrigated onto the irrigation area.
8. Freeboard in the storage ponds shall not be less than two feet at any time.
9. A waste-level gauge, to monitor waste levels in the storage pond, shall be installed within 60 days of
issuance of this permit. This gauge shall have readily visible permanent markings indicating the
maximum liquid level at the top of the temporary liquid storage volume, minimum liquid level at the
bottom of the temporary liquid storage volume,and top of the dam elevations. Caution must be taken
not to damage the integrity of the liner when installing the gauge.
10. A protective vegetative cover shall be established and maintained on all earthen basin embankments
(outside toe of embankment to maximum pumping elevation),berms,pipe runs,erosion control areas,
and surface water diversions. Trees, shrubs, and other woody vegetation shall not be allowed to grow
on the earthen basin dikes or embankments. Earthen basin embankment areas shall be kept mowed or
otherwise controlled and accessible.
11. All wastewater shall be routed to the five-day holding pond should the limit for fecal coliform(daily
maximum concentration of 25 per 100 ml) or turbidity (instantaneous maximum of 10 NTU) be
exceeded,until such time that the problems associated with the treatment capability of the wastewater
treatment plant have been corrected. The wastewater in the five-day holding pond shall be pumped
back to the treatment plant for retreatment or treated in the five-day pond prior to discharge to the
storage pond.
III. MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Any monitoring (including groundwater, surface water, soil or plant tissue analyses) deemed
necessary by the Division to insure surface and ground water protection will be established and an
acceptable sampling reporting schedule shall be followed.
2. Influent flow shall be continuously monitored and daily flow values shall be reported on Form
NDMR.
The Permittee shall install an appropriate flow measurement device consistent with approved
engineering and scientific practices to ensure the accuracy and reliability of influent flow
measurement. Flow measurement devices selected shall be capable of measuring flows with a
maximum deviation of less than 10 percent from true flow, accurately calibrated at a minimum of
once per year, and maintained to ensure that the accuracy of the measurements is consistent with the
accepted capability of that type of device. Records of flow measurement device calibration shall be
kept on file by the Permittee for a period of at least three years. At a minimum,data to be included in
this documentation shall be:
a. Date of flow measurement device calibration
b. Name of person performing calibration
c. Percent from true flow
Plans and specifications for the flow measuring device shall be prepared by a licensed Professional
Engineer and submitted to the appropriate regional office 30 days prior to installation. The flow
measuring device shall be installed within I year of the date of this permit.
3

.._ viata•Fe'ns��r y 35 25'50.8"N, 82'34'20 1'W r_
�,y,Havcm
191
j "�: ` i J ©2011�E�opa Technologies
35025'50.8"N, i
1
•og - . 1 10

LENDERMAN ENGINEERING,LLC
RICHARD A.LENDERMAN,P.E.
CIVIUL ENGINEER
228 WEST ROAD,MOORE,SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
Mr.Ron Berry December 15,2011
NPDES Permitting Unit
Division of Water Quality
NCDENR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Ref: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
A&D Water Service,Inc.
Henderson County
Dear Mr.Berry:
Mr.Aubrey Deaver,owner of A&D Water Service,forwarded your letter dated November 29,
2011 to me and asked that I submit a response to the questions you listed. The following
information is presented in the same order as your questions:
1. The bar screen is located inside the Influent Equalization Basin,attached to the wall at
the entrance pipe.
2. The Influent Equalization Basin is comprised of two tanks(9,000 gallons and 6,500
gallons)connected at the bottom by 8"piping.
3. The Effluent Equalization Basin is a single tank sized at 6,500 gallons.
4. The 20 CFM Blowers supply air to the Influent Equalization Basin.
5. The overburden solids are removed from the two Sludge Holding Tanks by pumper truck
and taken to the City of Hendersonville's wastewater treatment plant(NC0025534)for
final disposal. Approximately every three months the Sludge Holding Tanks are pumped
empty.
6. All five Aeration Basins are currently in service.
7. The 237 CFM blowers supply the Aeration Basins and all plant air requirements except
for the Influent Equalization Basin.
8. All Tertiary Filter backwash is returned to the Influent Equalization Basin.
9. Yes,the Flow Meter has a circular chart recorder.
10.Yes,"conjunctive use"capability will be maintained.
11.There is a Flow Sputter Box located on top of the Influent Equalization Basin.
We trust this information will adequately answer your questions.

f
Please copy Lenderman Engineering with all future correspondence as I will continue to provide
professional engineering services to A&D Water Services for the High Vista project in the
future. Thank you.
Yours truly,
Richard A.Lenderman,P.E.
Cc: Mr.Aubrey Deaver,A&D Water Service

Date:11/28/11
pb:rdb
300 GPM •
Effluente. 500,000 gal
lift Station
NPDES Emergency Pond
Outfail <- ------ ---- De-CL=
Line
CreekPQSTAERATION D.CHLORINATiON
NPDES EFFLUENT REQUIREMENTS(not currently met)
1)TRC Limit a 28 µ 1. 1 6,500 gal a AWDGE HOLDING Win
2)DO Min Limit-5 mg/L 1 EFFLUENT EQUALIZATION BASIN �- -� Splftter-
Q3:Size? L2,300 gal 9,000 gal Box
QS:Final disposal solids?
2 Pumps
125 GPM 6,200 gal
Manway Bar `
Screen 9,000 gal 9,000 gal 9,000 gal 1 9,000 I 1 9,000 gal 9,000 al
�y 1 MANUAL BAR SCREEN 1 INFLUENT EQUALIZATION BASIN 5 AEARTtQN QASINS
Reclalm water for
QlO:Operation?
•Ql:Location? Q2:Size? Q6:Operation? 6,200 1
irrigation 20 CFM 237 CFM 2 CLARIFIERS Backwash
2 CFM BLOWERS Wastewater
Q4:Air for?? a CFM BLOWERS
Influent from High Vista Falls Q7:Air for aerators? QS:Goes
100%domestic 48 sgft 48 sgft where?
DUALTERTIARY FILTERS
QUESTIONS AND COMMENT LOG
Q1:Where Is the manual screen located In this process?Currently shown between manawy and influent equalization basin. Clearwell Flow
QZ:Is the Influent Equaiization Basin sizes 9,000 gal?If notwhat is the size?Is there more than one Influnet equalization basin? 2 Bac_kwash Pumas Meter Q9:Recorder?
if yes,then provide size and location. 1 160 GP
0.3:Is the Effluent Equalization Basin size-6.500 gal?If not what Is the size?Is there more than one effiunet equalization basin?
If yes,then provide size and location.(Exclude emergency pond). Cl! Co
Q4:Where is the air generated by the 20 CFM blowers used? 11,200 gal 1,200 gal
Q5:How do you plan on disposing of the accumulated solids?How often have the solids been disposed of in the past? 2 CHLORINN gONTACT BASINS
Q6:There are 5 aeration basins available,can these basin be staged as needed or are they all in service?
Q7:Do the 237 CFM blowers provide the lar supply for the aeration basins?.
Q8:Where does the tertiary backwash waste water go?
09:Does the flow meter have a recorder?
Q10:Do you plan on maintaining the"conjunctive use"capability to supply reclaim water to the golf course or other users?
Q11:(NOT SHOWN)Are ther any additional treatment features not shown,for example splitter boxes or collector boxes or basins of tanks?
Basically the Influent flows by gravity into the influent eqaulizatlon basin.Influent pumps transfer the wastewater from the Influent basin to the
areation basins where the wastewater then continues to flow by gravity until it is discharged through NPDES outfall,or diverted to th emegency
pond,or diverted to the effluent lift station.For the energency pond to be recycled its is first allowed to drain to the effluent lift station and second
the effluent lift station discharge is diverted back into the influent at the manway.
To comply with the surface water standards the outfall to Une Creek must meet surface water quality standards.Total Chlorine Residual(TRC)and
Dissolved Oxygen(DO)are two standards that will require additional treatment.If"conjunctive"use is planned then a metering system must be
in place to report the treated water that is discharged to Line Creek,and a non-discharge permit will need to be maintalned similar to the current
non-discharge permit.The treatment facility must have the capability to meet its NPDES permit requirements prior to a NPDES permit being issued.
FLOW SCHEMATIC FOR HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP-NPDES DISCHARGE TO LINE CREEK 0.045 MGD

EFFLUENT
{ LIFT STATION EFFLUENT
HOLDING
\ VALVE POND
PROPOSED DIRECT DISCHARGE TO LINE CREEK w�-
PROPOSED
DECHLORINATION
TANK
kE AN Kroh
EFFLUENT FLOW EXISTING 45,000 GPD
EQUALIZATION TREATMENT PLANT SPUTTER
VALVE MANHOLE r—-I
eox
AERATION CLARIFIER
VALVE J
Y FUTURE J T INFLUENT FLOW TERTIARY
w SPUTTER FILTER
FILTER
v BOX I
o
: °' < SLUDGE
HOLDING
o S CHLORINE
CONTACT
cr = I FLOW
MONITORING
ZIz-
i r — � r-- -- -- , r- - - � r --�
o z �——�I I—-►I I—-►I F--—-►I �--—-r1
Z
J FUTURE 45,000 CPO
TREATMENT PLANT
w
HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
W00015929
FLOW SCHEMATIC
Revised 5/5/11

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H.Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
November 18,2011
PATRICK WARREN
HIGH VISTA COUNTRY CLUB.
88 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
MILLS RIVER,NC 28759
Subject: Permit No.WQ0015929
High Vista Falls WWTS
Wastewater Treatment and Reclaimed
Water Utilization System
Henderson and Buncombe Counties
Dear Mr.Warren:
Thank you for your letter dated November 2, 2011 concerning the application of reclaimed water
at High Vista Country Club. It is clear from your letter and past site visits by Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Regional Office staff that the needs of the High Vista Falls Wastewater
Treatment System (WWTS)to manage their treated wastewater are not matched by the desire
and ability of the Country Club to use that water. It is the hope of DWQ that the Country Club
and A&D can continue to work together in the future to supply the Country Club with reclaimed
water for irrigation as needed by the golf course.
In April 2011, A&D Water Services submitted an application for a NPDES discharge permit into
Line Creek, not an application for a conjunctive use permit. If approved,the NPDES permit
would provide A&D with the needed capacity for direct discharge of treated wastewater, and
would allow A&D to rescind or modify their existing reclaimed water permit which list property
owned by High Vista Country Club as their reclaimed water irrigation fields. I have forwarded a
copy of your letter to the NPDES permit reviewer for consideration and for insertion into the
permit file.
If a NPDES permit is approved, future use of reclaimed water at High Vista Country Club will
likely require the country club to obtain a separate reclaimed water use permit. The permit
would specify conditions and requirements for use of the reclaimed water at the golf course and
would be similar to the requirements already in place (e.g. signage requirements, setbacks). The
country club will not need to seek a permit until after A&D is ready to rescind or modify their
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Location:512 N.Salisbury St.Raleigh,North Carolina 27604
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 One
Internet:wv w.ncwaterquality.org Nofth Caroliina
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer Naturally

PATRICK WARREN
November 18,2011
Page 2 of 2
existing reclaimed water permit. If you would like to continue the use of reclaimed water
irrigation at the golf course DWQ will gladly provide assistance in navigating the permitting
process. In the meantime, I strongly encourage you to work with A&D to form and sign an
operational agreement for the future use of reclaimed water at the golf course. In developing the
agreement, please consider if the Country Club wants to agree to accept a minimum or maximum
amount of reclaimed water, conditions when the Country Club will not accept any reclaimed
water, any fees for providing the reclaimed water, and which parry will be responsible for
maintaining the different parts of the reclaimed water irrigation system.
If you have additional questions on reclaimed water or NPDES permitting,please contact me at
[phone], or either Landon Davidson or Bev Price at the Asheville Regional Office (828)
296-4500.
Sincerely,
Jon R gaard,
Supervisor,Land Application Unit,APS
cc: Aubrey Deaver,A&D Water Services,Inc., P.O. Box 1407, Pisgah Forest,NC 28768
Tom Kilpatrick, Tom Kilpatrick& Associates, P.O. Box 679, Etowah,NC 28729
Tom Belnick, SWPS
Ron Berry, SWPS
Landon Davidson,ARO
APS Central Files

Berry, Ron
From: Belnick, Tom
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 10:58 AM
To: Poupart, Jeff; Berry, Ron
Subject: FW: High Vista NPDES permit app.
Jeff-this is a new application that Ron has-we should briefly discuss.
Tom Belnick
Supervisor,Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(91g)807-6390;fax [phone] .
E-mail correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.
From: Davidson, Landon
Sent:Tuesday,June 28, 2011 10:45 AM
To: Belnick,Tom
Cc: Edwards, Roger; Price, Bev
Subject: High Vista NPDES permit app.
Tom-
As you may recall,APS is currently in litigation with A&D Services(permit holder) related to violations of their current
non-discharge permit.We spoke with our AG rep.yesterday and have decided to postpone any legal action(next step is
Admin.hearing or another attempt at mediation) until the NPDES permit application response is issued to A& D.A&D
has long held out that this is a viable option for their site to avoid dealing with the whole ND permit application, piping,
storage,operational agreement,etc. issues.
APS still supports our position as discussed in the telephone conference,that is,we do not support the permit issuance
based on the reasons A& D have stated in their application. However,there are problems with the ND permit that may
at some point force us to look at other options if the subdivision is completely built out(ex.the property where one
large storage pond was to be installed,was sold and developed).We're now thinking that at some point along our
predicted legal path,we may be asked if an NPDES permit is possible at this site. I could see this question coming from a
judge perhaps in an effort to find a middle-ground solution while repairs are made on the ND system or for some other
reason.
I'm not sure how far along you are with crafting the permit application denial letter like we spoke,but to position
ourselves to be able to respond to potential questions regarding the technical viability of an NPDES permit, it would be
beneficial to have a technical evaluation of whether an NPDES permit(conjunctive)would even be possible at this
location.This technical analysis,your typical permit app review,does not necessarily have to be part of this response to
A& D but could be information we retain for when we reach a point where the question arises: Is it technically(the
current ND permits issues aside) possible to issue an NPDES permit at this site?
Thanks
Landon
v y

t
LENDERMAN ENGINEERING,LLC
RICHARD A.LENDERMAN, P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
228 WEST ROAD,MOORE,SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
Mr. Ron Berry May 12, 2011
DWS/NPDES Unit
NCDENR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 P [N@F=0WFMP
Ref: NPDES Permit Application NCO089095 MAY 16 2011
High Vista Falls WWTP
Henderson County DENR-WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Dear Mr. Berry:
This letter is in response to your email dated 04/14/11 requesting additional information on the
above described NPDES permit application. Our response in the same number sequence as your
email is as follows:
1. Additional stream flow data for Line Creek has been requested from USGS. This
information will be forwarded to you as soon as it is received.
2. It is difficult from County GIS mapping to determine the exact boundaries of the High
Vista development. A search for additional map sources is now underway including an
attempt to locate a copy of the original sewer service area map. It is our intent to send a
map of the development boundaries to you as soon as possible.
3. A letter was sent to US Fish and Wildlife Service in Asheville requesting their position
on endangered species impact from the proposed discharge. This information will be
forwarded to you as soon as received.
4. An email was sent to MSD requesting their position on acceptance of the WWTP flow.
This information will be forwarded to you as soon as received.
5. In the EAA the land application and water reuse alternatives were deemed not feasible
because of the current unworkable situation at the golf course irrigation and the lack of
and high expense of additional land near the WWTP. However a cost estimate for a new
land application system has been prepared as you requested. The assumption is that
adequate land area can be purchased 1,000 if from the plant site at our previously
documented price of$25,000.00 per acre. Assume the same operational process as now
where the effluent pump station pumps to a holding pond at the spray field. Assume
similar soil conditions as the golf course with the same amount of land area needed for
the new spray field. The original project design called for 793,780 sf(18.22 ac)of spray
irrigation area. Add 25%to the required land area for force main corridor,holding pond
area, and buffer areas,resulting in approximately 23 acres of land required. A present
worth analysis for Alternate B/C—Land Application/Wastewater Reuse is enclosed.

7 A
l
Response Letter to DENR/NPDES Unit
High Vista Falls WWTP May 12, 2011
6. A revised present worth analysis for Direct Discharge is enclosed. Revisions include the
addition of a Tablet Dechlorination/Aeration Tank and Engineering/Administration at
15%to reflect the need for engineering design and DENR permitting of the new
facilities.
7. The existing effluent holding pond is used as a side stream holding pond for use only in
unusual circumstances such as plant upsets or inadequate effluent treatment. Any
wastewater in the holding pond is recycled through the effluent pump station back to the
head of the plant for additional treatment. This operational setup for the holding pond
and effluent pump station will not change with a direct discharge. The Flow Schematic
included in the EAA did not show the valving and the connecting pipe from the effluent
force main back to the head of the plant. A revised schematic is enclosed that shows the
connecting pipe and valves.
8. The existing plant does use chlorination for disinfection. A tablet dechlorinator will
function adequately at the low flow rate of this plant. A tablet dechlorination and
aeration tank has been added to the Flow Schematic diagram and has been included in the
present worth analysis of the Direct Discharge alternative and the Conjunctive Use
alternative. Both revised cost estimates are enclosed herewith.
9. Enclosed is a list prepared by the plant Owner that has reported monthly averages for
ammonia(NH3-N) for the months from May 2008 through April 2011.
10. It is acknowledged that any process modifications to the existing plant will require
engineering plans and reports and DENR permitting.
11. All components listed on Alternative E—Year 20 Operations and Maintenance Costs are
ongoing expenses except the Discharge Pipe line item which is a new activity.
12. Because of the difficulty of proper operation of the existing golf course irrigation system,
it is the preference of the Owner to abandon all reuse activity in favor of 100%NPDES
permitted discharge.
If you have any questions on this submittal or need additional information,please contact me.
Yours truly,
Richard A. Lenderman,P.E.
Cc: A&D Water Service, Inc.

NH3-N Page 1 of 2
NH3=N
From: [e-mail]
To: Rick Lenderman
Subject: NH3-N
Date: May 11.2011 2:66 PM
Rick,
These are the reported monthly averages for the High Vista WWTP for April,2011
back to May, 2008.
April, 2011 = 2.8 mg/L
March, = 0.37 "
Feb. , = 0.17
Jan. = 0.50 "
Dec. , 2010 = 0.44 "
Nov. of = 0.69 "
Oct. = 3.39 "
Sept., " = 0.12 "
Aug. , = 0.14 "
July , " = 0.21 "
June = 0.535"
May = 3.493"
April, = 0.78 "
March, = 0.11 "
Feb. = 0.24 "
Jan. , " = 1.4 *'
Dec. 2009 = 0.1 "
Nov. = 0.67 "
Oct. = 0.16 "
Sept., " = 0.25 "
Aug. , " = 0.41 "
July , " = 0.115"
June " = 3.586"
May = 0.14 "
April, = 0.875"
March, =<0.1 "
Feb. " = 0.38
Jan. = 0.13
Dec. 2008 = 0.16 "
Nov. = 0.17 "
Oct. = 0.33 "
Sept., = 0.21 "
Aug. = 0.415"
L"-. -. -+UNwAr SAA v--1 ions ARR57 5/1 1/201 1

NH3_N Page 2 of 2
y }
S
July " = 0.18 "
June , = 0.73 "
May , _ 0.15
Let me know if you need any thing more.
Thanks,
Aubrey
hffn-/hxvphmail Parthiink.netlwam/nrintable.isv?msgid 3154&x=1590168852 5/11/2011

A & D Water Service, Inc.
P. O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Phone [phone] Fax
[phone]
November 21, 2011
Ron Berry
Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
RE: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application#NCO089095
HENDERSON COUNTY
Dear Mr. Berry:
The purpose of this letter is to provide information requested in your request dated October 25,2011.
We will address your questions in the order presented.
Attached is a copy of the `draft' Operations Agreement presented to High Vista for review. High
Vista is reviewing the agreement. High Vista is considering a `Conservation Easement' of certain
parcels of their land. Part of their review process gives consideration to the implications of the
Operations Agreement on their Conservation Easement effort. I know very little about the
Conservation Easement effort. I might suggest you contact:
Patrick Warren,PGA, General Manager/PGA Professional
High Vista Country Club END
n
88 Country Club Road 7 D
Mills River,NC 28759 2011
828.891.1986 x104(p), 828.891.8817 (f)patrick@U,hiEhyistagolf.com OUALlry
for additional information, details and an update. BRANCH
High Vista cannot utilize all the wastewater most months of the year. They are only able to use
all the water in the dry weather summer months. This year,High Vista has only been able to use
all the reuse water for irrigation during the very hot and dry weeks of mid June,July,August,some
in September and early October. I am enclosing a copy of an email from Chris Mahoney,
Superintendent at High Vista,to Tom Kilpatrick,ORC,which provides meaningful insight into the
situation at High Vista
In a previous letter(Tom Belnick, September 2, 2011),we suggested that prior to the current
Superintendent,the spray irrigation operation for High Vista was operated by individuals that may
not have adhered strictly to permit conditions. The monthly NDMR's may have indicated
historical compliance,but verbal comments from course employees indicate that stated compliance
to be a questionable issue. We do not believe the spray irrigation process was operated
appropriately and in strict accordance with the permit conditions in those periods. This is the case
even though we realize much of this time period included severe drought years. The current High
Vista Course Superintendent is adamant in his opinion that the golf course cannot support the spray
t

irrigation operation. The golf course cannot utilize all the reuse water on a 12 month,year round
basis—and especially in wetter months. The operational experience since A&D's involvement
validates this opinion. I want to emphasize a point here—WE OPERATE BY THE PERMIT
CONDITIONS. The available land at High Vista cannot assimilate this much reuse water.
As to the recommendation that these issues be discussed with Landon Davidson,ARO. We have
not done so directly with Mr.Davidson since this recommendation was presented. Mr.Davidson is
aware of these comments. Our discussions and comments have been with Bev Price. She has been
our primary contact and we have tried to keep her informed as the situation develops.
Compliance status: The only month in compliance in 2011 was August. July and September had
freeboard violations but no overflows. Overflows started again in October. By this time the grass
is dormant and the wetter time of the year has returned. We expect overflows to be the norm until
next June.
Enforcement status: I've had no correspondence for several months.
Thirty six months of WWTP effluent flows are attached. Please note the reduction in flows due to
the I/I efforts by A&D.
We would like to add the following as additional information. A&D acquired a permit that was
already in violation. The developer failed to build all the storage ponds required and failed to
adhere to the buffer requirements of section I.5. After a short time and experience with operations,
A&D realized the High Vista spray irrigation system could never operate within the existing permit
conditions—especially the pond freeboard and spraying when wet and runoff requirements. A&D
decided to request a permit modification at renewal time which was due November,2009. While
preparing the application for a modification to conjunctive use,A&D was advised that all ND
permits were renewed by Legislative action. This action denied A&D the opportunity to request a
permit review and modification. This left A&D with a permit already in violation of permit
conditions with no immediate recourse for review.
Later,when enforcement action was taken,A&D's review indicated that either a direct discharge
permit or a conjunctive use permit were the most realistic options to solve a very complex problem.
A&D decided a direct discharge permit would resolve all spray irrigation issues and was the most
desirable to A&D. Last week,we were reminded that a direct discharge permit would leave High
Vista without needed irrigation water in the summer. This was not our intent. Therefore,we now
favor the conjunctive use permit as the best solution to a complex situation.
If you have any questions,please feel free to call me a 828-884-9772.
Sincerely,
Oresident
eaver
cc: Pat Warren,High Vista Country Club
2

HIGH VISTA WWTP EFFLUENT/SPRAY IRRIGATION INFLUENT FLOWS
2011 2010 2009 2008
AvgG/D AvgG/D AvgG/D AvgG/D
JAN 0.023 0.036 0.030 0.035
FEB 0.029 0.035 0.028 0.040
MAR 0.025 0.035 0.031 0.034
APR 0.023 0.036 0.028 0.030
MAY 0.016 0.030 0.032 0.028
J U N 0.017 0.025 0.027 0.027
J U L 0.017 0.020 0.027 0.029
AUG 0.018 0.022 0.029 0.031
SEP 0.018 0.021 0.031 0.032
OCT 0.021 0.034 0.032
NOV 0.022 0.040 0.032
DEC 0.035 0.031 0.033
AVERAGE = 0.021 0.028 0.031 0.032

Tom Kilpatrick
From: Chris Mahoney[[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday,October 27,2011 11:34 AM
To: 'Tom Kilpatrick'
Cc: 'Pat Warren;[e-mail]
Subject: RE: High Vista Spray Irrigation Pond Overflow Condition
Hey Tom,
I believe this is a perfect example of why a direct discharge permit should lx,in place-and as quirk as possible.
Early last week the pond was 4-6 inches below overflow-it has been tit least that for the past couple of months
(and that was following approximately 1 inch of rainfall on the 11th the week before).The downside to that is
that our fairways were saturated and in several places could/should have been considered safety hazards as
carts were actually sliding.It got to the point last week that I cut the irrigation back slightly AND we received
another 1+inches of rainfall on the lgth and 19th.Well,the pond went from an acceptable level to overflowing
over night and those golf holes were super-saturated. I have been irrigating;everyday this Week and,as of this
morning,there is still a slight trickle over the bank.
All of my turf and vegetation is going dormant and cannot assist by processing weekly,much less daily,
irrigation and we are fast approaching the time of year when,in all likelihood,I will be forced to drain the
pumps/system in order to prevent damage from freezing.I agree that an Operations Agreement needs to be in
place asap but,obviously,the direct discharge is an issue NOW.I can be available for any"brainstorming'
sessions that we need in order to come up with something to get the necessary parties to understand this.
Thank you,
Chris
From:Tom Kilpatrick
Sent: Wednesday,October 261, 2011 5:54 PM
To: .
Cc: Pat Warren; Chris Mahoney
Subject: High Vista Spray Irrigation Pond Overflow Condition
Sorry, i lorgot the attachmei It. Hertz it is.
I plan to keep 3 Hi gin Vj!`t�1 ca4ivl;+'i! on ill# fu tli,'`I �
iom
1

- F" DRAN T -
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
WATER REUSE AND SPRAY IRRIGATION OPERATIONS AGREEMENT
COUNTY OF TRANSYLVANIA
THIS AGREEMENT,Made and entered into this day of .20_,by and
between HIGH VISTA COUNTRY CLUES.INC'..Owner.hereinafter referred to as`•Owner': and A&D Water
Service Inc.,a North Carolina Corporation,hereinafter referred to as"Operator'.
WHEREAS,Owner is the owner of the presently existing Water Reuse Spray Irrigation System(including all
lands and all equipment) located on the area generally known as High Vista Golf Course located off NC Highway 191
in Henderson and Buncombe Counties:and,
WHEREAS.Operator is in the water and sewer utility business and holds NC Permit#WQ0015929 for the
operation of the Sanitary Sewer System and the Wastewater Treatment Plant(W W'1'1')currently providing sanitary
sewer service to residential and commercial units(including the Goll'Coursc Club House)in High Vista Subdivision
and desires to continue the use the Spray Irrigation System as a means for final disposal of the treated wastewater
produced by High Vista Subdivision;and.
WHEREAS,The State of North Carolina owns the waters being reused and controls and governs the terms of use
by Permit#WQ0015929 which provides for civil and/or criminal penalties for violations of Permit#WQ0015929
conditions;and,
WHEREAS.Owner and Operator desire to continue to operate the Sanitary Sewer System,the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and the Water Reuse Spray Irrigation System in compliance with the tenors Permit#WQ0015929 for
the mutual benefits accruing to Owner.Operator and the Users within High Vista Subdivision.
NOW,it is understood:
A. Owner needs to continue to insure sanitary sewer service to users in High Vista Subdivision and to have a
source of irrigation waters available for use on the golf course;
B. Operator needs a dependable means for the final disposal of treated waters;
C. Owner does not employ a properly licensed and certified Operator-in-Responsible-Charge(ORC)for
operation of a Spray Irrigation System:
D. Operator does not possess the technical knowledge to operate and manage the turf requirements of a golf
course:
THEREFORE,it is agreed:
I. Owner shall operate and maintain the Water Reuse Spray Irrigation System(including all lands and all
equipment)in compliance with the terns of use contained in Permit#WQ0015929; Owner shall be
responsible for all expenses and capital improvements associated with said operations and maintenance on
lands and equipment it owns.
2. Operator shall operate and maintain the Sanitary Sewer System and the Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP)in compliance with the terms of use contained in Permit#WQ0015929-, Operator shall be
responsible for all expenses and capital improvements associated with said operations and maintenance on
lands and equipment it owns.
3. Operator and Owner shall cooperate in,and take the following steps,for operation of the Spray Irrigation
System:
a. Owner will provide manpower and equipment to land apply the reuse waters and to collect and

r
` provide required data on forms provided;data shall be transmitted to ORC by the 15"day of the
month following the end of the previous operating month:
b. Operator shall provide an Operator-in-Responsible-Charge(ORC),ORC shall have supervisory
responsibility for proper operation of the facilities.
C. Owner and Operator provides these services(a&b above)at no cost to the other:
4. Owner conveys the right of access,ingress,egress and passage to ORC and Operator for operations,
maintenance and inspection activities as deemed required.
This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding of the Owner and the Operator_It can only be changed or terminated
by written agreement of the Owner and the Operator.All of the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall be
binding upon and insure to benefit of and be enforceable by the successors and assigns of the Owner and the Operator.
Any and all notices to be sent pursuant to the terms of this Agreement shall be sent by registered mail addressed as
follows:
To the Owner: High Vista Country Club
88 Country Club Road
Mills River.NC 28752
To the Operator: A&D Water Services.Inc.
P.O.Box 1407
Pisgah Forest,NC 28768
Operator and Owner shall do all things reasonable,necessary or appropriate to assure the operation of the System(s)
without interruption and to assure the full effectiveness of the operating agreement between them.
Owner and Operator acknowledges that each shall operate and maintain the System(s)according to all relevant
regulatory standards.
Operator and Owner shall take all actions necessary to maintain in effect any permits, licenses,or other operating
approvals required for the operation of the System(s).
This Agreement may be terminated by either party by providing a minimum six(6)months written notice.
The parties hereby commit to good faith negotiations with respect to the transaction described herein. If the foregoing
is acceptable,please indicate such acceptance by signing where indicated.
"Owner"
HIGH VISTA COUNTRY CLUB,INC.
BY: Date:
WITNESS:
"Operator"
A&D WATER SERVICE,INC.
BY: Date:
Aubrey L.Deaver,President
WITNESS:

�FWA
*.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H.Sullins Dee Freeman
Govemor Director Secretary
October 25, 2011
Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President
A&O Water Services,Inc.
P. O. Box 1407
Pisgah Forest, NC 28768
Subject: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Henderson County
Dear Mr.Deaver:
In your September 1, 2011 letter you stated various problems with the current operation and that you
were pursuing a new Operation Agreement with High Vista Country Club. What is the status of the agreement?
What issues or problems were resolved? The letter further stated you could discharge to High Vista Country
Club only two month out of the year. Why was the previous operation able to successfully operate year round?
The Division also recommended that these issues be discussed with Landon Davidson in the Asheville
Regional Office (828-2976-4500). What is the status of compliance and enforcement for permit WQ0015929?
Please provide documentation of the last thirty-six months of influent flow by month to the existing treatment
facility, average gallons per day.
Further action on your NPDES application is pending until we received a response on the before
mentioned items.
If you have any question regarding this NPDES permit applic-lion, please contact Ron Berry at 919-
807-6396 or email [e-mail].
Sincerely,
con &r^
Ron Berry, Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
Cc:
Asheville Regional Office/Surface Water protection/Keith Haynes
Asheville Regional Office/Aquifer Protection/Landon Davidson
NPDES File
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
Location:512 N.Salisbury St.Raleigh,North Carolina 27604 One
Phone:919-B07.6300\FAX:919.807-fi492\Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internetal www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal OpponuniN\Alfimtittive Action Employer

USGS Info on Stream Flows
From: John C weaver [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:04 AM
To: R A Lenderman
Cc: [e-mail]; Berry, Ron; Curtis weaver; Jeanne C
Robbins; Rose D Pinnix; James C Finnerty
subject: Low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at NC Highways 191 / 280
near
Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770825). . .Re: High Vista Falls WWTP
U.S. Geological Survey North Carolina water Science Center
3916 sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Date: May 25, 2011
To: Mr. Richard A. Lenderman, P.E.
Lenderman Engineering
228 west Road
Moore, SC 29369
Mr. Lenderman,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics for a location on
Line Creek at NC
Highways 191 / 280 at the Henderson / Buncombe County lines near Fletcher (station
id 0344770825,
drainage area 0.32 sgmi), the following information is provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGS North Carolina water Science center
does not indicate a
previous determination of low-flow characteristics for the specific point of
interest identified in your email
dated May 3, 2011. No USGS records of discharge are known to exist for your point
of interest.
where no or insufficient data is available for a low-flow analysis, a determination
of low-flow
characteristics is based on assessment of low-flow yields at nearby locations where
such statistics have
previously been determined. The low-flow characteristics that are provided have
been computed by
correlating the runoff characteristics of nearby streams in vicinity of the request
site.
Please note the flow estimates do not account for the presence of any diversions or
regulation, present
or future, which may occur upstream of the request site.
Previously published low-flow information for streams in your area of interest. . .
For streams in Henderson and Buncombe Counties, the most recently published low-flow
information is a
statewide report completed in the early 1990's. It is USGS water-Supply Paper 2403,
'Low-flow
characteristics of streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993). An online
version of the report is
available through http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/wsp/wsp2403. The report provides
the low-flow
Page 1

•
4
USGS Info on stream Flows
characteristics (based on data through 1988) via regional relations and at-site
values for sites with
drainage basins between 1 and 400 sgmi and not considered or known to be affected by
regulation
and/or diversions.
If you access the report, please note the online report files are provided in the
".DJVU" format and
require a particular Lizardtech plug-in, also available through a link displayed on
the page. or you can
click an adjacent link that will allow you to view the report as a group of images
without the need for a
plug-in.
several pieces of information to consider. . .
(1) A drainage area of 0.32 sgmi was determined for your point of interest on Line
creek at NC Highways
191 / 280 near Fletcher (station id 0344770825).
(2) In Table 1 of the above referenced report, there are nearby partial-record sites
and continuous-record
gaging stations in vicinity of your point of interest for which low-flow discharge
estimates are provided.
Expressing these estimates as low-flow yields (again, flow per square mile of
drainage area, or cfsm)
provides some indication of the yield ranges that could potentially be applicable to
your point of
interest:
7Q10 low-flow yield range is from about 0.17 to 0.49 cfsm (with an average of about
0.38 cfsm)
3-OQ2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.39 to about 0.95 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.75 cfsm)
w7Q10 low-flow range is from about 0.25 to about 0.56 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.47 cfs �ield
7Q2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.31 to about 0.81 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.62 cfsm)
(3) The regional low-flow relations presented in the above referenced report for
this hydrologic area
(HA10) do not apply to drainage areas less than 0.5 sgmi . use of the relations for
this small drainage
represents an extrapolation beyond the range in drainage area for which the
statistical analyses were
completed.
(4) Mean annual runoff for streams in this area is mapped in the above referenced
report as being 1.5 to
2.0 cfsm.
(5) Considering the above information, please be aware of the following: The data
provided in the above
referenced report are based on periods of record ending in advance of the drought
conditions that have
occurred since publication of the report. In some North Carolina basins, the
low-flow conditions
observed during the recent droughts (1998-2002, 2007-09) have resulted in lower
low-flow statistics. No
formal statewide investigation has been completed to document the changes in
low-flow statistics since
the droughts. However, where updated analyses have been completed for selected
stations, the
Page 2

USGS Info on Stream Flows
changes in pre-drought versus updated 7Q10 discharges have shown varying percentage
changes of
decline.
For instance, at the nearby long-term gaging station on Mills River near Mills River
Sstation id 03446000,
rainage area 66.7 sgmi , continuous records October 1933), the 7Q10 declined about 7
percent between
the 1998 and 2009 climatic years. Based on analysis of available period of record
through the 2009
climatic year, the 7Q10 and 30Q2 low-flow estimates have yield values of about 0.43
cfsm and 0.91
cfsm, respectively.
Note: The climatic year is the standard annual period used for low-flow analyses at
continuous-record
gaging stations. It runs from April 1 through March 31 and is designated by the
year in which the period
begins. For example, the 2009 climatic year is from April 1, 2009, through March
31, 2010.
Putting together the above pieces of information. . .
Applying the above low-flow and mean annual runoff yields (in item #2, #4) to a
drainage area of 0.32
sgmi results in following flow estimates:
7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.05 to 0.16 cfs (with an average of
about 0.12 cfs)
30Q2 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.12 to about 0.30 cfs (with an average
of about 0.24 cfs)
w7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.08 to about 0.18 cfs (with an average
of about 0.15
r�f�
7Q2 ow-flow estimated range is from about 0.10 to about 0.26 cfs (with an average
of out 0.20 cfs)
Mean annual runoff estimated range is from about 0.5 to about 0.6 cfs
Invoice information. . .
A charge of $250.00 for accessing and processing information has been assessed to
partially offset
these costs. An invoice covering the processing costs for these data will be sent
via regular mail from
the u.s. 1G-etivgi cal survey to the' billing address stern below. Instructi vns for
sending your payment
will be shown on the invoice.
Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President
A & D water Service
P.O. Box 1407
Pisgah Forest, North Carolina 28768
This information is considered preliminary and subject to revision pending further
analysis as further data
were to become available, and is made available through our cooperative program of
water-resources
investigations with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
Hope this information is helpful . If you have any questions regarding this
information, please contact me
Page 3

USGS Info on Stream Flows
at the phone number listed below.
Thank you.
Curtis weaver
J. Curtis weaver, Hydrologist, PE
USGS North Carolina Water science Center
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: (919) 571-4043 // Fax: (919) 571-4041
Mobile: (919) 830-6235
E-mail address -- [e-mail]
Internet address -- http://nc.water.usgs.gov/
From:
R A Lenderman <[e-mail]>
To:
[e-mail]
cc:
[e-mail], [e-mail]
Date:
05/03/2011 10:28 AM
sub'ect
Hig4 Vista Falls WWTP
To: Mr Curtis Weaver, USGS, Raleigh, NC
From: Richard A Lenderman, P.E.
Subject: NPDES Discharge Permit Application, High Vista Falls WWTP, Henderson
County, NC
This email is written on behalf of Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President of A & D Water
service, owner and operator of the subject WWTP. Attached is a scan of an
email from you previously received by Mr. Deaver concerning low-flow
characteristics for Line Creek at NC Hwy 191 at the Henderson / Buncombe
County line.
An NPDES permit application for High Vista wwTP has been submitted to NCDENR
for a direct discharge into Line Creek immediately adjacent to the plant site.
Review comments have been received from NCDENR. One comment is as follows:
"Provide USGS data for 7Q10 winter flow and QA flow (average stream flow) at
the discharge location and the mouth of Line Creek (French Broad River). USGS
may provide this data in terms of cfs/sq mi which would be sufficient."
The discharge location on Line Creek is approximately 700 feet downstream from
Hwy 191 and the mouth is at French Broad River about one mile downstream from
Hwy 191.
We herewith request that you provide the flow characteristics for Line Creek
Page 4

USGS Info on stream Flows
as specified in the NCDENR review comment. Thank you very much for your
assistance. If you have any questions, please email me or call at (864)415-
7909.
Any fee for your response should be billed to A & D water service, P. e. Box
1407, Pisgah Forest, NC, 28768 or email at [e-mail].
Yours truly,
Rick Lenderman
WeaverjwR[attachDment ent "HighvistausGS032610.pdf" deleted by John C
Page 5

c
< al alai ...LI■1■1■......1■1■LL1■1.1■..I�1.1■�........LI■.....LI■...Mimi■1■L Mimi.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.in
A & D Water Service, Inc.
P. O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Phone[phone] Fax[phone]
September 2,2011
Tom Belnick
Supervisor,Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1 6 1 7
RE: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application#NCO089095
HENDERSON COUNTY
Dear Mr. Belnick:
This morning, I learned that a previous version of this letter,dated Sept. 1,was mailed inadvertently. I had
laid it on the Office Assistant's desk with a note to `hold'.
I was `holding' pending the outcome of a meeting with High Vista management and staff to review the
final copy. Please disregard the letter dated September 1. Attached is the corrected and final version.
If you have any questions,please feel free to call me a 828-884-9772.
orl e y,
l � w J Aubrey Deaver
President
fps-
w
r /-I P p rb;S s c1 �-�-
W;1t
P�B (R. 0d�
S E P 6 2011
L---. -
DENR-WAI ER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
1

1.L1.1u n.....4.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.....1.L1.1.1.1•LLL LL1.......1.1.1.1.1.,............0......
A & D Water Service, Inc.
.00,07,..L 1.1.1.1.LL L 1.1.1.L 1.1.L 10 I ON,O.1.1•LLL1.101010 L L L L 1a I a I.1.1.LL LLLLL108,
L i a.i aaa a a a a a.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.
P. O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
September 2, 2011
Tom Belnick 0 9 @ @ 0%q D
Supervisor, Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
r. U
1617 Mail Service Center SEP 6 2011
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
DENR-WATEi2 QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
RE: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application #NCO089095
HENDERSON COUNTY
Dear Mr. Belnick:
The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information pursuant to your request dated July 7,2011.
This information is provided by the High Vista Golf Course Greens Superintendent Chris Mahoney, ORC
Tom Kilpatrick and myself.
As a reminder,here is our current situation:
1. A&D acquired the High Vista W WTP and spray irrigation operation by transfer of Permit
W00015929 in 2006. Unfortunately, DENR review did not recognize that only the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and facilities were being deeded to A&D by the developer. High Vista Country Club
retained ownership of the spray irrigation Pond, spray irrigation pump house, pumps &controls,
irrigation lines and sprav heads. High Vista is the owner and High Vista personnel operate and
maintain these facilities and equipment. High Vista is responsible for all finances,expenses and
capital improvements.
2. A&D has no right to enter upon the property or operate the spray irrigation facilities. Imagine the
liability and ensuing lawsuit if A&D went in and spray irrigated the golf course and caused damage.
3. A&D does not have an Operations Agreement for the disposal of treated wastewater with High Vista.
A&D is totally dependant on the management,personnel and budget procedures of High Vista.
A&D is pursuing an Operations Agreement. This proved difficult with past management but High
Vista now has anew manager(a recent appointment). We think we will be able to get an Operations
Agreement. But this is actually a secondary issue-the primary issue is that High Vista cannot utilize
all the treated wastewater on the golf course on a year round basis.
4. Tom Kilpatrick serves as ORC to meet the permit ORC licensing requirements. Unfortunately, this is
a problem in itself. Historically, here in the western region, it has been common practice to have an
ORC sign off as operator when the actual operations are done by a golf course employee. The
practice is known to,and apparently condoned by, local regional DENR personnel. The practice
probably started with the lack of certified operators available. This is not a good situation and should
be recognized and remedied by DENR rules and regulations.
Although Tom Kilpatrick serves as ORC,the High Vista Golf Course Superintendent and staff perform the
actual hands-on day-to-day spray irrigation activities. High Vista personnel make the decision to irrigate
as the needs of the golf course require. The High Vista superintendent is very aware of the permit and its
requirements. He operates the spray irrigation activities in accordance with permit requirements.
1

Operating this manner, High Vista personnel do not spray in wet conditions just to get rid of water. High
Vista staff sprays only when the golf course needs water. High Vista operates according to the permit.
High Vista also reports the following problems with spray application:
l. The spray heads are not located in the proper positions for irrigation water application. The heads
will not put water in the locations he needs.
2. The heads in the upper elevation areas(the ends of the lines)do not have enough pressure to operate
properly. This may be a condition of pump output or a condition if internal corrosion and buildup
internal to the main lines.
3. More than one head sprays irrigation water into the adjacent surface waters stream.
4. High Vista cannot utilize all the wastewater most months of the year. They are only able to use the all
the water in the dry weather summer months. This year,this has meant that High Vista has only been
able to use all the pond waters for irrigation during the very hot and dry weeks of mid June thru
August.
5. Prior to the current Course Superintendent,the spray irrigation operation for High Vista was operated
by individuals that apparently did not adhere to permit requirements. The monthly reports may have
indicated historical compliance, but verbal comments from course employees indicate that said
compliance to be highly questionable issue. We do not believe the spray irrigation process was
handled in accordance with permit conditions.
6. The High Vista Course Superintendent is adamant in his opinion that the spray irrigation operation for
High Vista cannot operate in compliance with the current permit conditions. The golf course just
cannot utilized the water in wetter months-and that is 10 months of the year.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
It appears High Vista County Club,as with most area golf courses,has been going through some tough
economic times. The economic downturn hits the leisure industry first. Budgets are tight. High Vista has
not been,or is not,financially able to provide adequate funds for proper maintenance and capital
improvements. The pumps need regular maintenance,the main lines may be corroded,spray heads need to
be relocated,a freeboard marker is needed and the pond aerator needs replacement. It is our opinion that a
professional golf course irrigation engineering review is needed in order to determine and correct
deficiencies. This should be done by High Vista-not A&D.
Since A&D is the permit holder and recipient of the Notices of Violation and civil penalties, High Vista
has had little or no incentive to fund and correct deficiencies. This is a situation that must corrected.
We have reviewed the several options. Our review indicates that either a direct discharge,or a conjunctive
use permit for the periods when High Vista can not utilize the treated wastewater,are the most realistic
options to solve a very complex problem. A direct discharge permit will resolve all spray irrigation issues
and is the most desirable to A&D. With this facilities very low limits,we would like to see the results of
the stream model prediction. The conjunctive use issue is the second best alternative.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me a 828-884-9772.
Sincerely,
Aubrey Deaver
President
cc: High Vista
2

.l �1
I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.Itl.1.1.1.1.1.1.......1/I.I.1.1.1.1...........
1.1.1.1.1.1.1•
Y A & D Water Service, Inc.
1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.
P. O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 Phone[phone] Fax[phone]
September 1,2011 n�7
Tom Belnick n � tl l/ R D
Supervisor,Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center SE° 0 1 2G11
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
, LITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
RE: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application#NCO089095
HENDERSON COUNTY
Dear Mr. Belnick:
The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information pursuant to your request dated July 7,2011.
This information is provided by the High Vista Golf Course Greens Superintendent,Chris Mahoney, ORC
Tom Kilpatrick and myself.
As a reminder,here is our current situation:
1. A&D acquired the High Vista W WTP and spray irrigation operation by transfer of Permit
WQ0015929 in 2006. Unfortunately,DENR review did not recognize that only the Wastewater
Treatment Plant and facilities were being deeded to A&D by the developer. High Vista Country Club
retained ownership of the spray irrigation pond_spray irrigation pump house pumos&controls
irrigation lines and spray heads. High Vista is the owner and High Vista personnel for operate and
maintain these facilities and equipment. High Vista is responsible for all finances,expenses and
capital improvements.
2. A&D has no right to enter upon the property or operate the spray irrigation facilities. Imagine the
liability and ensuing lawsuit if A&D went in and spray irrigated the golf course and caused damage.
3. A&D does not have an Operations Agreement for the disposal of treated wastewater with High Vista.
A&D is totally dependant on the management,personnel and budget of High Vista. A&D is
pursuing an Operations Agreement. This proved difficult with past management but High Vista now
has a new manager(a recent appointment). We think we will be able to get an Operations Agreement
but it is a secondary point-the primary problem is that High Vista can not utilize all the treated
wastewater on the golf course on a year round basis.
4. Tom Kilpatrick serves as ORC to meet the permit ORC licensing requirements. Unfortunately,this is
a problem in itself. Historically,here in the western region, it has been common practice to have an
ORC sign off as operator when the actual operations are done by a golf course employee. The
practice probably started with the lack of certified operators available. The practice is known to
DENR personnel.
Although Tom Kilpatrick serves as ORC,Chris Mahoney performs the actual hands-on day-to-day spray
irrigation activities. Chris Mahoney is an employee of High Vista-not A&D. As such,Chris's primary
responsibility is to his employer. Chris makes the decision to irrigate as the needs of the golf course
require. Chris is very aware of the permit and its requirements. Chris operates his spray irrigation
activities strictly in accordance with permit requirements. Operating this manner,Chris does not spray in
1

I
wet conditions just to relieve the irrigation pond freeboard condition and get rid of water. Chris only
sprays in dry conditions and only when the golf course needs water.
Chris also reports the following problems with spray application:
1. The spray heads are not located in the proper positions for irrigation water application. The heads
will not put water in the locations he needs.
2. The heads in the upper elevation areas(the ends of the lines)do not have enough pressure to operate
properly. This may be a condition of pump output or a condition if internal corrosion and buildup
internal to the main lines.
3. At least one head sprays irrigation water into the adjacent surface waters stream.
4. Chris cannot utilize all the wastewater most months of the year. He is only able to use the waters in
the dry weather summer months. This year,this has meant he has only been able to use all the pond
waters for irrigation during the very hot and dry weeks of mid June thru August.
5. Prior to Chris Mahoney,the spray irrigation operation for High Vista was operated by individuals that
did not adhere to permit requirements. The monthly reports may have indicated historical
compliance,but verbal comments from course employees indicate that compliance to be highly
questionable.
6. Chris Mahoney is adamant in his opinion that the spray irrigation operation for High Vista cannot
operate in compliance with the permit. The golf course just cannot use the water in wetter months-
and that is 10 months of the year.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
It appears High Vista County Club,as with most area golf courses,has been going through some tough
times recently. The economic downturn hits the leisure industry first. High Vista has not been,or is not,
financially able to provide adequate funds for proper maintenance and capital improvements. The pumps
need regular maintenance,the main lines may be corroded,spray heads need to be relocated,a freeboard
marker is needed and the pond aerator needs replacement. It is our opinion is that a professional golf
course irrigation engineering review is in order to determine and correct deficiencies. This should be done
by High Vista-not A&D.
Since A&D is the permit holder and recipient of the Notices of Violation and civil penalties,High Vista
has had little or no incentive to fund and correct deficiencies. This is a situation that must corrected.
We have reviewed the several options.Our review indicates that either a direct discharge or a conjunctive
use permit,for the periods when High Vista can not utilize the treated wastewater,are the most realistic
options to solve a very complex problem.
If you have any questions,please feel free to call me-a 828-884-9772.
Sincerely,
rey Deaver
President
2

CD E N
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 7, 201 l
Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President
A &:D Water Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 1407
Pisgah Forest, NC 28768
Subject: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application#NCO089095
Additional Information Request- 60 day
Henderson County
Dear Mr. Deaver:
The Division received your NPDES permit application for a new surface water discharge of 45,000 gpd
to Line Creek on April 7, 2011. Following review of the supplemental Engineering Alternatives Analysis
(EAA) and discussions with our Asheville Regional Office, we have questions concerning the current non-
discharge treatment system, which was originally permitted in 1999. Historically, this non-discharge system
has been successful and is still considered the most environmentally sound wastewater treatment option. It is
not clear in the EAA why this current treatment system is no longer viable. We recommend that you thoroughly
discuss the non-discharge issues with our Asheville Regional Office (Landon Davidson, 828-296-4500). The
NPDES Unit will place your NPDES application on hold for 60 calendar days, to provide time for such
discussions and submission of any additional material that can document the inability of the current non-
discharge treatment system to perform as designed. If we do not receive such feedback by September 6, 2011,
we will consider your application as withdrawn.
If you have any questions regarding this NPDES permit application, please contact Ron Berry at 919-
---- 807-6396 or myself at 919-807-6390. - - --
SiTerely,
-Tom Belnick
Supervisor, Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
Copies:
Application File NCO089095
Central File
ARO (Landon Davidson, Roger Edwards)-email
1617 Nlaii Service Center,Raleigh,North Carcli;;;27c99 161
Location:512 N.Salisbury St.Raleigh,North Carciina 27604 olle
Pbone:919-807-6300 4 FAX:[phone] Customer Service: l-877-623-6748 NoI`thCarolina
l�ternet :a:vv�.ncv�ateruuality.org 7
r : �lahh allil

1
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue colleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 7, 2011
Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President
A & D Water Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 1407
Pisgah Forest, NC 28768
Subject: High Vista Falls NPDES Application
Application#NCO089095
Additional Information Request-60 day
Henderson County
Dear Mr.Deaver:
The Division received your NPDES permit application for a new surface water discharge of 45,000 gpd
to Line Creek on April 7, 2011. Following review of the supplemental Engineering Alternatives Analysis
(EAA) and discussions with our Asheville Regional Office, we have questions concerning the current non-
discharge treatment system, which was originally permitted in 1999. Historically, this non-discharge system
has been successful and is still considered the most environmentally sound wastewater treatment option. It is
not clear in the EAA why this current treatment system is no longer viable. We recommend that you thoroughly
discuss the non-discharge issues with our Asheville Regional Office (Landon Davidson, 828-296-4500). The
NPDES Unit will place your NPDES application on hold for 60 calendar days, to provide time for such
discussions and submission of any additional material that can document the inability of the current non-
discharge treatment system to perform as designed. If we do not receive such feedback by September 6, 2011,
we will consider your application as withdrawn.
If you have any questions regarding this NPDES permit application, please contact Ron Berry at 919-
807-6396 or myself at 919-807-6390.
Sin ;rey,/ �
Tom Belnick
Supervisor, Complex NPDES Permitting Unit
Copies:
Application File NCO089095
Central File
ARO (Landon Davidson, Roger Edwards)- email
1617 Mall Seivic-c znlzr,RaleKo.North Carolina 27699-161'
L ocatun:512 N.Salisit ry St.Rilegh North Carolina 27601 One 1,./� 1
Phone 91M07 ,a FAX 91 807 o492 V customer S'Piv�ca:1-877-6236148 NorthCaro11na
InternetEqual
w:•nvn v erauall.e4y . ;VatimallJ
An Equal hlperul�y T-mnnve. �n E:rrnlm er

LENDERMAN ENGINEERING,LLC
RICHARD A.LENDERMAN,P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
228 WEST ROAD,MOORE,SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
US Fish and Wildlife Service May 3,2011
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville,NC 28801-1082
Ref: NPDES Permit Application
High Vista Falls WWTP
Henderson County,NC
This letter is written on behalf of A&D Water Service,owner and operator of High Vista Falls
Wastewater Treatment Plant. An NPDES permit application has been submitted to NCDENR
for a direct discharge of treated effluent into Line Creek adjacent to the plant site.
Enclosed are a location map of the plant site and a copy of the text of the Engineering
Alternatives Analysis(EAA)that was prepared for the permit application package. On Page 3 of
the EAA is a section on Endangered Species considerations in the High Vista location of the
French Broad River drainage.
Review comments on the permit application package have been received from DENR and one of
the comments is as follows:
"For support of no endangered species threaten,contact US Fish and Wildlife and request
documentation on their position. Provide a copy of this documentation so it can be
attached to this application. Additional recommendations may be made."
We herewith request that you provide documentation of the USFWS position on the NPDES
permit application for High Vista Falls W WTP as required by DENR. Thank you for your
consideration and if you have any questions,please write or call me.
Yours truly,
Richard A. Lenderman, P.E. _
r '' . __ _. Q�ICSD
Cc: Mr.Aubrey Deaver—A&D W r Service MAY 0 6 2011
Mr. Ron Berry-NCDENR
i ,DENR4VATER QUALITY
POWT SOtiRCE BRANCH

Metropolitan Sewerage District
FY 2010 Rates, Fees and Charges
Effective July 1, 2009
Adopted
FY10 Rate
Effective July 1,2009 - -
Average Monthly Sewer 6—m a (Without Billing Charges) $ 23.81'
Avers a Monthly Sewer Charge (Wdh 1/2 Billing Charges-COA example) $ 24.84
Collection Treatment Charge
Residential &Commercial Volume Charges(per CCF)Inside $ 3.64
Industrial Volume Charges Inside $ 2.270
Industrial Surcharge for Boo (per lb., BOD >170 mg/1)Inside $ _0.378
Industrial Surcharge for TSS lb.,TSS >170 mg/1 Inside
Residential&Commercial Volume Charges Outside $ 3.65
Industrial Volume Charges(per CCF) Outside $ 2.280
Industrial Surcharge for BOD Ib.,BOD >170 mg/1) Outside $ 0.378-
Industrial Surcharge for TSS (per Ib.,TSS >170 mg/1)Outside $ 0_281
Base Meter/Maiintenance Charge&Billing Fee
5/8" $ 5.61
3/4' $ __ 8.17
1' $ 14.47
1 1/2' $_ - -33.17
2" $ 58.68_
3' $ 130.12
4' $ 232.17
6' $ _523.01
8' $-_ 928.69
10' $ 1,454.26
Billing Fee (per bill) $ -_ 2.05
Sewer Fadlity Fees
Residential
Per Unit(non-mobile home) $ 1,900
Mobile Home $ 1,320
Affordable Housing $, 490
Nonresidential (modifiable per economic development waiver)
5/8' $ 1,400
3/40 $ _ -_ _ 2,200'
1' $ 4,200
11/2' $ , 8,600
2' $ 15,200
3' $ 34,200
4' $ 66,500
6' $ 158,200 4EZ--�
8' _ $ 180,500._
Additions < 1,400 GPD $ 660
Note: Facility fees being raised to actual allocated cost at March 2006 over 5 years
A one-year moratorium has been enacted on Facility Fee increase

-Berry, Ron
From: Bert', Ron
Sent: Thursday,April 14, 2011 11:48 AM
To: 'Richard A. Lenderman'; 'Aubery Deaver
Subject: Request for addtional information for NPDES application-High Vista Falls WWTP
Mr. Lenderman,
The Division has completed a preliminary review of the NPDES application you submitted on behalf of A&D Water
Service,Inc.for High Vista Falls WWTP.We have the following comments,and also need the following additional
information to complete our evaluation:
1) Provide USGS data for 7Q10 winter flow and QA flow(average stream flow)at the discharge location and the
mouth of Line Creek(French Broad River). USGS may provide this data in terms of cfs/mil which would be
sufficient.
2) For support of the EAA projected growth,provide a copy of the site development plan for High Vista Falls.
3) For support of no endangered species threaten,contact US Fish and Wildlife and request documentation on
their position. Provide a copy of this document so it can be attached to this application.Additional
recommendations may be made.
4) For EAA documentation,a letter from MSD should be obtained stating their position or whether they will or will
not take the existing flow.Provide a copy of this letter so it can be attached to this application. How did you
arrive at the tap fee,$158,200?
5) For EAA documentation,a cost estimate for land application(beyond the Golf course use)for the existing flow is
required. Provide an estimate so it can be attached to this application.
6) The EAA cost estimate for direct discharge is incomplete,provide revised estimate with added contingency.See
items 7,8,9,and 10 below.
7) The current conceptual configuration shows the new outfall pipe connecting at a point where it is not clear how
the flow from the effluent holding pond may impact the flow to the proposed outfall.All NPDES permit
requirements apply at the end of pipe(discharge point in Line Creek)so permitted flow and effluent sampling
must be representative of end of pipe with no blending. How will the effluent holding pond be used if this
facility is granted a NPDES discharge?
8) If chlorination is the disinfectant process then dechlorination will also be mandated as a Total Residual Chlorine
limit will apply.
9) As a domestic treatment facility,more stringent toxicity-based effluent ammonia as nitrogen limits will apply
primarily in the summer,and a new effluent dissolved oxygen limit will apply.Additional treatment and/or
equipment may be necessary. For potential impact evaluation,provide the reported monthly average ammonia
as nitrogen values for each of the past months starting with January 2008.
10) Be aware that an Authorization to Construct approval must be obtained from the Division's Construction Grants
and Loans Unit and will be part of the NPDES permit. An issued NPDES permit is a prerequisite for an
Authorization to Construct request.
1

11) For EAA documentation, need clarification of components listed on Alternative E-Year 20 Operations and
Maintenance Cost Analysis.Are these component and their related activities currently on going?Which are new
activities?
12) The Division strongly promotes reuse and reduction in surface discharges including conjunctive reuse. Is it the
intent of the owner to abandon all reuse activity in favor of 100% NPDES permitted discharge?
If you have any questions and/or need further clarification contact me.
Ron Berry [e-mail]
Engineer
DWQ/Point Source/NPDES Complex Permitting Unit
NCDENR
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Office:Archdale Building Room 925N
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
2

ine creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USG'_
From: John C Weaver [[e-mail]]
sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 4: 52 PM
TO: R A Lenderman
Cc: [e-mail]; Jeanne C Robbins; Berry, Ron; Curtis
Weaver
subject: Low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS
Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re: Low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at NC
Highways 191'/ 280 near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770825) . :.Re: High
Vista Falls WWTP
Mr. Lenderman,
using the low-flow yields provided in response (email dated May 25, 2011) to the
low-flow request for
Sta. 0344770825, the following flow estimates would be applicable at the mouth of
Line Creek.
sta. 0344770875 Line creek at mouth near Fletcher (drainage area at 1.55 sgmi
according to drainage-
area files)
7Q10 low-flow yield range is from about 0.17 to 0.49 cfsm (with an average of about
0.38 cfsm)
30Q2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.39 to about 0.95 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.75 cfsm)
w7Q10 low-flow yield range is from about 0.25 to about 0. 56 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.47 cfsm)
7Q2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.31 to about 0.81 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.62 cfsm)
Mean annual runoff for streams in this area is mapped in the abovereferenced report
.as being 1.5 to 2.0
cfsm. -
Applying a drainage area of 1. 55 sgmi results in the following flow estimates:
7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.25 to 0.75 cfs (with an average of
about 0.6 cfs)
30Q2 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.6 to about 1.5 cfs (with an average of
about 1.2 cfs)
W7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.4 to about 0.9 cfs (with an average
of about 0.7 cfs)
7Q2 low-flow .estimated range is from about 0.5 to about 1.3 cfs (with an average of
about 1.0 cfs)
Mean annual runoff estimated range is from about 2.3 to about 3.0 cfs
Hope this information is helpful . _ .
Thank you.
Curtis weaver
J . Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE
USGS North Carolina Water Science Center
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: (919) 571-4043 // Fax: (919) 571-4041
Mobile: (919) 830-6235
E-mail address -- [e-mail]
Internet address -- http://nc.water.usgs.gov/
Page 1

t
ine creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USG!
From:
R A Lenderman <[e-mail]>
TO:
John C weaver <jcweaver@usgs:gov> '
Cc:
[e-mail], [e-mail], Curtis weaver <[e-mail]>,
Jeanne C Robbins
<[e-mail]>, Rose D Pinnix <[e-mail]>, James C Finnerty
<[e-mail]>
Date:
05/26/2011 09:17 AM
Subject
Re: Low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at NC Highways 191 / 280 near Fletcher
(USGS Sta. 0344770825) . . .Re: High vista
Falls WwTP
Dear Mr. weaver:
Thank you for the flow information on Line creek as provided below. It does,
however, appear that all
your data is for Line creek at NC Hwy 191. The request .we received from NCDENR also
asked for low
flow and average flow at the mouth Of Line creek at French Broad River. could you
please expand your
flow calculations to include the larger drainage area at the mouth of Line Creek?
Thank you for youe
help.
Rick Lenderman
-----original Message-----
From: John C weaver
Sent: May 25, 2011 10:04 AM
To: R A Lenderman
cc: [e-mail], [e-mail], Curtis weaver , Jeanne C Robbins ,
Rose D Pinnix
, James C Finnerty
Subject: Low-flow characteristics for Line creek at NC Highways. 191 / 280 near
Fletcher (USGS Sta.
0344770825). . .Re: High vista Falls WWTP
U.S. Geological Survey North Carolina water Science center
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Date: May 25, 2011
TO: Mr. Richard A. Lenderman, P.E.
Lenderman Engineering
228 west Road
Page 2

ine Creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGs Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USG
Moore, Sc 29369
Mr. Lenderman,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics for a location on
Line Creek at NC
Highways 191 / 280 at the Henderson / Buncombe County lines near Fletcher (station
id 0344770825,
drainage area 0.32 sgmi) , the following information is provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGs North Carolina water Science Center
does not indicate a
previous determination of low-flow characteristics for the specific point of
interest identified in your email
dated May 3, 2011. No USGs records of discharge are known to exist for your point
of interest.
where no or insufficient data is available for a low-flow analysis, a determination
of low-flow
characteristics is based on assessment of low-flow yields at nearby locations where
such statistics have
previously been determined. The low-flow characteristics that are provided have
been computed. by
correlating the runoff characteristics of nearby streams in vicinity of the request
site.
Please note the flow estimates do not account for the presence of any diversions or
regulation, present
or future, which may occur upstream of the request site.
Previously published low-flow information for streams in your area of interest. . .
For streams in Henderson and Buncombe Counties, the most recently published low-flow
information is a
statewide report completed in the early 1990's. It is USGS water-Supply Paper 2403,
'Low-flow
characteristics of streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993) . An online
version of the report is
available through http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/wsp/wsp2403. The report provides
the low-flow
characteristics (based on data through 1988) via regional relations and at-site
values for sites with
drainage basins between 1 and 400 sgmi and not considered or known to be affected by
regulation
and/or diversions.
If you access the report, please note the online report files are provided in the
".DJVU" format and
require a particular Lizardtech plug-in, also available through a link displayed on
the page. or you can
click an or
link that will allow you to view the report as a group of images
without the need for a
plug-in.
several pieces of information to consider. . .
(1) A drainage area of 0.32 sgmi was determined for your point of interest on Line
Creek at NC Highways
191 / 280 near Fletcher (station id 0344770825) .
(2) In Table 1 of the above referenced report, there are nearby partial-record sites
and continuous-record
Page 3

ine creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USG'.
gaging stations in vicinity of your point of interest for which low-flow discharge
estimates are provided.
Expressing these estimates as low-flow yields (again, flow per square mile of
drainage area, or cfsm)
provides some indication of the yield ranges that could potentially be applicable to
your point of
interest:
7Q10 low-flow yield range is from about 0.17 to 0.49 cfsm (with an average of about
0.38 cfsm)
30Q2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.39 to about 0.95 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.75 cfsm)
w7Q10 low-flow yield range is from about 0.25 to about 0.56 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.47 cfsm)
7Q2 low-flow yield range is from about 0.31 to about 0.81 cfsm (with an average of
about 0.62 cfsm)
(3) The regional low-flow relations presented in the above referenced report for
this hydrologic area
(HA10) do not apply to drainage areas less than 0.5 sgmi . Use of the relations for
this small drainage
represents an extrapolation beyond the range in drainage area for which the
statistical analyses were
completed.
(4) Mean annual runoff for streams in this area is mapped in the above referenced
report as being 1.5 to
2.0 cfsm.
(5) Considering the above information, please be aware of the following: The data
provided in the above
referenced report are based on periods of record ending in advance of the drought
conditions that have
occurred since publication of the report. In some North Carolina basins, the
low-flow conditions
observed during the recent droughts (1998-2002, 2007-09) have resulted in lower
low-flow statistics. No
formal statewide investigation has been completed to document the changes in
low-flow statistics since
the droughts. However, where updated analyses have been completed for selected
stations, the
changes in pre-drought versus updated 7Q10 discharges have shown varying percentage
changes of
decline.
For instance, at the nearby long-term gaging station on Mills River near Mills River
(station id 03446000,
drainage area 66.7 sgmi , continuous records October 1933) , the 7Q10 declined about 7
percent between
the 1998 and 2009 climatic years. Based on analysis of available period of record
through the 2009
climatic year, the 7Q10 and 30Q2 low-flow estimates have yield values of about 0.43
cfsm and 0.91
cfsm, respectively.
Note: The climatic year is the standard annual period used for low-flow analyses at
continuous-record
gaging stations. It runs from April 1 through March 31 and is designated by the
year in which the period
begins. For example, the 2009 climatic year is from April 1, 2009, through March
31, 2010.
Putting together the above pieces of information. . .
Page 4

ine Creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USG'_
Applying the above low-flow and mean annual runoff yields (in item #2, #4) to a
drainage area of 0.32
sqmi results in following flow estimates:
7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.05 to 0.16 cfs (with an average of
about 0.12 cfs)
30Q2 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.12 to about 0.30 cfs (with an average
of about 0.24 cfs)
W7Q10 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.08 to about 0.18 cfs (with an average
of about 0.15
cfs)
7Q2 low-flow estimated range is from about 0.10 to about 0.26 cfs (with an average
of about 0.20 cfs)
Mean annual runoff estimated range is from about 0. 5 to about 0.6 cfs
Invoice information. . .
A charge of $250.00 for accessing and processing information has been assessed to
partially offset
these costs. An invoice covering the processing costs for these data will be sent
via regular mail from
the U.S. Geological Survey to the billing address shown below. Instructions for
sending your payment
will be shown on the invoice.
Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President
A & D Water Service
P.O. Box 1407
Pisgah Forest, North Carolina 28768
This information is considered preliminary and subject to revision pending further
analysis as further data
were to become available, and is made available through our cooperative program of
water-resources
investigations with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources.
Hope this information is helpful . if you have any questions regarding this
information, please contact me
at the phone number listed below.
Thank you.
Curtis weaver
irrt rt'.:rt4rtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtrtbrtrtrtrtrtirrtkrtk rtrtrtrtrtrthrtrtrtrtitrtrtrtrt4rttr's 3k is rtrtdrtrtdhrtrtrtrtrt
J . Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE
USGS North Carolina Water Science Center
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, Nc 27607
Phone: (919) 571-4043 // Fax: (919) 571-4041
Mobile: (919) 830-6235
E-mail address -- [e-mail]
Internet address -- http://nc.water.usgs.gov/
rt irhrtbbtrrtA6rtrtti.`4 Airrt 0*irbttrtirraartrtrtartrtae,trt tr tr tra irrtertart,trtrtxtrr,t ir,t irrt it
From:
Page 5

•
ine Creek at mouth near Fletcher (USGS Sta. 0344770875. . .)Re Low-flow characteristics for Line USGS
R A Lenderman <[e-mail]>
To:
[e-mail]
Cc:
[e-mail], [e-mail]
Date:
05/03/2011 10:28 AM
subJject:
High' vista Falls wwTP '
To: Mr Curtis Weaver, USGS, Raleigh, NC
From: Richard A Lenderman, P.E.
Subject: NPDES Discharge Permit Application, High vista Falls WWTP, Henderson
County, NC
This email is written on behalf of Mr. Aubrey Deaver, President of A & D water
service, owner and
operator of the subject WWTP. Attached is a scan of an email .from you previously
received by Mr.
Deaver concerning low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at NC Hwy 191 at the
Henderson / Buncombe
County line.
An NPDES permit application for High vista WWTP has been submitted to NCDENR for a
direct
discharge into Line Creek immediately adjacent to the plant site. Review comments
have been received
from NCDENR. one comment is as follows:
"Provide USGS data for 7Q10 winter flow and QA flow (average stream flow) at the
discharge location
and the mouth of Line creek (French Broad River) . USGS may provide this data in
terms of cfs/sq mi
which would be sufficient."
The discharge location on Line creek is approximately 700 feet downstream from Hwy
191 and the mouth
is at French Broad River about one mile downstream from Hwy 191.
we herewith request that you provide the flow characteristics for Line Creek as
specified in the NCDENR
review comment. Thank you very much for your assistance. if you have any
questions, please email me
or call at [phone].
Any fee for your response should be billed to A & D water service, P. o. Box 14079
Pisgah Forest, NC,
28768 or email at [e-mail].
Yours truly,
Rick Lenderman
[attachment "HighvistauSGS032610.pdf" deleted by John C Weaver/WRD/USGS/Doi]
Page 6
• f

LENDERMAN ENGINEERING,LLC
RICHARD A. LENDERMAN, P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
228 WEST ROAD,MOORE,SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
DWQ/NPDES Unit April 4, 2011
NCDENR
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617
Re: NPDES Permit Application
High Vista Falls WWTP
WQ0015929
Henderson County
To NPDES Unit:
Enclosed for your review is an NPDES permit application package for the above described
wastewater treatment plant. The following items are enclosed:
1. NPDES Application Form(3 copies)
2. Application Fee—check for$860.00
3. Engineering Alternatives Analysis (3 copies)
4. Local Government Review Form for Henderson County
5. Owner's Letter concerning Local Government Review Form for Town of Mills River
If you have any questions or need any additional information,please advise.
Yours truly,
Richard A. Lenderman, P.E. @ Q D
Cc: A&D Water Service, Inc. APR 0 7 2011
DENR-WATER QUALITY
+` POINT SOURCE BRANCH
(gr^dr-

♦ a
1'
O
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
FOR
HIGH VISTA FALLS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
WQ0015929
HENDERSON COUNTY,NC
MARCH 2O11
OWNER
A& D WATER SERVICE, INC.
P. O. BOX 1407
PISGAH FOREST,NC 28768
AUBREY DEAVER, PRESIDENT
TELEPHONE: [phone]
ENGINEER
LENDERMAN ENGINEERING LLC
RICHARD A. LENDERMAN,P.E.
228 WEST ROAD
MOORE, SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
�a
s

V
1
0
LENDERMAN ENGINEERING,LLC
RICHARD A.LENDERMAN,P.E.
CIVIL ENGINEER
228 WEST ROAD,MOORE,SC 29369
TELEPHONE: [phone]
EMAIL: ral212560,earthlink.net
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS (EAA) FOR NPDES PERMIT APPLICATION
HIGH VISTA FALLS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
MARCH 2O11 Page 1 of 7
GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility Information:
Name—High Vista Falls WWTP
Permit No.—WQ0015929
Physical Address—Creasman Hill Road, Mills River,NC,28759
County—Henderson
Telephone—[phone]
Contact Person—Aubrey Deaver, Operator
Applicant Information:
Owner—A &D Water Service, Inc.
Mailing Address—P. O. Box 1407,Pisgah Forest,NC,28768
Telephone—[phone]
Email: admaint(acomporium.net
Contact Person—Aubrey Deaver, President
Project Information:
High Vista Falls WWTP is an e i� c_s_tu1_g 45,000 GPD extended aeration plant with tatiary filtration. It is
located just off NC Hwy 191 at the Henderson/Buncombe County line. The plant serves the High Vista
residential development and the High Vista golf club. The current average daily flow for the plant is
approximately 30,000 GPD. Treated effluent disposal is through a reclaimed water utilization system
used for irrigation at the golf course. Solids are trucked offsite for disposal at a wastewater plant owned
by the City of Hendersonville.
The WWTP was constructed in 1999 by the original High Vista development group, K& M Development
Resources. Plant ownership was transferred in 2004 to NC Four C's, LLC. In 2006, the current operator,
A& D Water Services, Inc.,assumed ownership and operational responsibilities. A & D is a privately
owned water and wastewater system operation company.

a
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 2 of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
A& D has no ownership or contractual connections at all with the golf club and this disconnect has
caused operational difficulties for effluent disposal at the golf course. Only one storage pond on the golf
course is available to the plant operator and during winter and wet weather periods the golf course does
not irrigate which has caused problems with pond overflows.
The original p 'ems d current operations permit list three effluent storage ponds. Pond #1 at
approximatel 1,000,000 ga ons is located on the golf course a d is the only pond available to A & D at
this time. Pon ed farther,up into-the golf course layout and A & D has no pumping facility
available top to this pond Pond#3 was located immediately adjacent to the treatment p�ant�iove ems_
the.property it was located on was later sold by the original developers and a large building has been
constructed on the
The H'i'g1'i vistaFa1 sl WWTP was originally designed for a 90,000 GPD wastewater flow based on 252
residential connections, one golf clubhouse, and a small reserve capacity for future use. At this time the.'
plant serves approximately 125 residences along with the clubhouse. The wastewater flow is 100%
domestic. The plant is designed for two 45,000 GPD treatment trains. Phase I with one 45,000 GPD
treatment train was constructed in 1999. Phase II with the second 45,000 GPD treatment train has not yet
been constructed. The need for the second 45,000 GPD treatment capacity is dependent on the rate of
new residential construction in the High Vista development. ro 1 '�
A & D has decided to apply for an NPDES permit for a direct discharge into the stream located along the
northern property line at the WWTP plant site. The stream is Line Creek, a tributary to the French Broad
River which is located abo a east of the plant site. The proposed discharge can be accomplished
simply by installation of 100 linear of section of 8"gravity sewer pipe from the existing effluent line
to the creek. No other o c anges are proposed for the plant at this time. All new outfall
construction would on existing plant property. C4A,/ fY �J vuJ -�?e s�)- "n
Location, vici 'ty, and USGS maps are attached to this EAA document. l
�- S liih -ctr,� / �•r c�-Q/ �j l L
STEP 1. DETERMINE IF THE PROPOSED DISCHARGE WILL BE ALLOWED
In order to determine if the proposed wastewater discharge can be allowed, several areas of potential
restrictions were examined:
1. Stream Flows—the proposed discharge will be into Line Creek which flows easterly from the WWTP
for approximately 1.5 miles to join the French Broad River at approximate river mile 54. Line Creek is a
perennial stream that will not have zero flow restrictions. An email from USGS concerning low flow
characteristics in Line Creek is attached. Their estim tions show 7Q10 at 0.12 cfs and 30Q2 at 0.246 cfs.
2. Stream Classification—Line Creek is currently classified as Class C. This classification should not
cause discharge restrictions. A copy of the DENR stream classification list showing Line Creek is
attached.

a
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 3 of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
3. Basinwide Water Quality Plans—a review of the basinwide plan for French Broad River did not
reveal any information concerning lack of stream assimilative capacity or NPDES strategies for Line
Creek or the affected section of French Broad River.
4. Impaired Waters—a review of the 303(d) list and the Basinwide Water Quality Plan for French Broad
River does not show the affected section of the river as impaired. The Use Support Rating is listed as
Supporting for both aquatic life and recreation.
5. Endangered Species—an internet search of US Fish& Wildlife Service websites yielded the following
results for aquatic species of concern in the High Vista area of the French Broad River drainage:
* Appalachian elktoe mussel—Endangered
* Tan riffleshell mussel—Endangered
* Spotfin chub minnow—Threatened
* Bog turtle—Threatened
Approximately seven other aquatic vertebrate and invertebrate species are listed as federal species of
concern. The only critical habitat designation listed is for the Appalachian elktoe in the Little River
which is tributary to French Broad River upstream from the confluence with Line Creek.
High Vista Falls WWTP is a relatively small plant that has a high degree of treatment through its tertiary
filters. Discharge limits are already low for all listed parameters and a direct discharge is not anticipated
to significantly degrade existing endangered species habitat. — A-t-e�, .i 1a A, L ),—
6. Local Government Restrictions—the High Vista Falls WWTP is located within the town limits of The
Town of Mills River in Henderson County. No local zoning ordinances are known that would restrict
wastewater discharges at this location. Local government review forms were sent to Henderson County
and Town of Mills River on April 19, 2010. A response was received from Henderson County indicating
no zoning conflict. A notarized letter from the applicant is attached which states that no response was
received from Town of Mills River.
Therefore,based on the review of the above described potential restrictive areas, it is believed that the
proposed wastewater discharge into Line Creek can be allowed.
STEP 2. PROVIDE REASONABLE PROJECTIONS FOR POPULATION AND FLOW
The High Vista development is a private, gated, highly restricted residential and golf course subdivision
catering to upper middle class families and well-off retirees. This demographic is not expected to change
during the next 20 year planning period. Detailed population data such as number of persons per
residence are not known, however good records of water useage per residence are available. Therefore
this section on population and flow projections can use residence counts and average flow rates to develop
accurate projections.

4
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 4 of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
Residential Population Projections:
The High Vista Falls WWTP was constructed as part of the High Vista development project to
exclusively serve a platted subdivision with 252 residential units and one golf clubhouse along with a
small amount of reserve capacity for future use. If it is assumed that all the reserve capacity is used for
residential growth, an additional 40 residential units can be added to the service area, giving a total
residential build-out of approximately 292 units.. It is not anticipated that the service area will change in
the future, therefore population projections will be based on the original subdivision plans.
The development has been in existence for approximately ten years, a time period of booming residential
construction, and to date approximately 125 residential units and the golf clubhouse have been
constructed. Even though residential construction has slowed in recent years, it is expected to rebound
somewhat as the economy improves and the national migration trend into desirable southern areas such as
Henderson County continues. The French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Plan also supports this
position. Steady residential construction is expected in High Vista over the next 20 years, although at a
lesser rate as experienced over the past decade.
Therefore a reasonable projection can be made that the remaining 167 residential units will be constructed
during the next 20 year planning period giving an average of 8.35 new units per year. This gives a linear
population projection for growth in the High Vista Development as follows:
Years 2000 thru 2010— 125 residences and golf clubhouse constructed
Years 2011 thru 2015 —an additional 42 residences constructed (167 total-to date)
Years 2016 thru 2020-an additional 42 residences constructed (209 total-to-date)
Years 2021 thru 2025—an additional 42 residences constructed (251 total-to-date)
Years 2026 thru 2030--an additional 41 residences constructed (292 total-to-date)
Wastewater Flow Projections:
The annual average daily flow rate for the past year for High Vista Falls WWTP is 0.028 MDG. This
flow is for 125 residences and the golf clubhouse. The applicant uses 6 residential equivalent units for the
clubhouse. Therefore the average flow per residential unit is 28,000 GPD/ 131 residential units= 214
GPD per residence. Applying this average to the population and residential projections given above
produce the following wastewater flow projections:
Year 2010—average Q/day =28,000 GPD
Year 2015—average Q/day= 125+6+42= 173 REU @ 214 GPD =37,022 GPD
Year 2020—average Q/day=-173+42 =215 REU @ 214 GPD=46,010 GPD
Year 2025 —average Q/day=215+42 =257 REU @ 214 GPD=54,998 GPD
Year 2030 average Q/day=257+41 =298 REU @ 214 GPD =63,772 GPD
The current permitted flow rate for High Vista WWTP is 45,000 GPD. Generally when average flow rate
is at 800/co of rat ap lanning will begin for a plant expansion. The flow projections listed above
indicate Year 2015, lant expansion planning should begin, and the expansion should be in place
by Ye 202 .

•
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 5 of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
STEP 3: EVALUATE TECHNOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES
Treated effluent disposal for High Vista WWTP is currently through a reclaimed water utilization system
used for golf course irrigation. As stated previously the current owner of the WWTP has no control over
the golf course operation and this has caused problems. Other alternatives for effluent disposal are
evaluated as follows:
Alternative A. Connection to another Wastewater Treatment System:
The closest available public sewer system is the Metropolitan Sewerage District of Buncombe County
(MSD). Their closest connection point is approximately 6,900 linear feet north of the High Vista plant.
Connection to MSD would require an effluent pump station upgrade and installation of approximately
6,900 linear feet of force main along NC Hwy. 191 through territory that A & D Water Service is not
franchised to serve. Meetings were held and correspondence generated between A & D and MSD,
however to date no official information has been received from MSD indicating that they are capable of
or willing to accept the bulk waste flow from High Vista WWTP. MSD also verbally indicated that they
have no sewer system expansion planned near the High Vista area in the next five year planning period.
Since at this time it is not known whether MSD will accept the wastestream from High Vista, this
alternative will be considered technological feasible and is included in the economic evaluation of
alternatives.
Alternative B. Land Application:
Alternative C. Wastewater Reuse:
High Vista Falls WWTP already uses a golf course irrigation land application/wastewater reuse system.
Due to circumstances beyond the Owner's control,the current reuse system is unworkable on a sustained
basis due to wet weather saturation and winter freezing conditions.
High Vista is located in a very desirable corridor between Hendersonville and Asheville. Topography is
generally mountainous steep slopes although some flat river bottom land exists along the French Broad
River to the east. Land is expensive and is generally used for residential and commercial applications.
The original design criteria for this WWTP called for 793,780 SF(18.22 acres) of spray irrigation area for
the 45,000 GPD plant. The area needed for the future plant expansion up to 90,000 GPD would be at
least double the original land requirement. Any new calculations for land application options such as
subsurface disposal, crop irrigation, athletic fields, or landscape uses would require at least the same
magnitude of land area requirement. This much land in this area is not available to the plant Owner.
A recent search of the Real Estate Multiple Listing Service for vacant tracts from 20 to 40 acres in the
Mills River area yielded only three properties, ranging in size from 23 to 35 acres with list prices from
$25,000 to $35,000 per acre. The MSL list is included in this EAA.

4
4
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 6 of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
The High Visa plant is owned by a small private company, A&D Water Services, with limited resources,
and it serves a small number of customers in a limited geographical area. Even if the required land area
was available in the vicinity of the plant,the cost of the land and the equipment and facilities needed for
expanded land application is deemed to be economically prohibitive.
Therefore land application and wastewater reuse alternatives are not considered to be technological
feasible and is not included in the economic evaluation of alternatives.
Alternative D. Direct Discharge to Surface Waters:
Direct discharge from High Vista Falls WWTP is considered to be the most economical and
technologically feasible alternative. Flow information received from USGS for the stream adjacent to the
plant, Line Creek, is included with this EAA. Line Creek is not a zero stream flow waterbody.
The WWTP already utilizes a tertiary filtration system with weekly sampling regime. Plant performance
through the years has generally been very good. A copy of the site plan from the original project plans
and a hydraulic schematic diagram are enclosed.
Direct discharge is considered technologically feasible and is included in the economic evaluation of
alternatives.
Alternative E. Combination of Alterna ' •,
The only feasible combination of alternatives would be to continue the current operation of golf course
irrigation during dry periods and to operate an NPDES direct discharge system during wet weather
periods. This alternative would not be optimal for the plant Owner since he would still be vulnerable to
the operations of a third party over which he has no control.
A combination of continued operation of golf course irrigation and NPDES direct discharge is considered
technologically feasible and is included in the economic evaluation of alternatives.
Alternative F. No Action
Retaining the existing reclaimed water utilization system for treated effluent disposal with no further
action is not a feasible option. Since the High Vista Falls WWTP owner has no control over golf course
operations and weather conditions, continued operation of the existing system will continue to present
operational difficulties.
STEP 4. EVALUATE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF ALTERNATIVES
The Owner/Operator of High Vista Falls WWTP,A & D Water Services, has prepared present worth
analysis's for the following alternatives:

i
Engineering Alternatives Analysis Page 7of 7
High Vista Falls WWTP
Alternative A. Connection to an Existing Wastewater Treatment System (MSD)
Alternative D. Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
Alternative E. Combination of Alternatives
Work sheets are attached. A&D not only owns and operates water and wastewater facilities, they also
construct new facilities and perform repair and maintenance on existing systems. The capital costs and O
& M costs used in their calculations come from actual experience in material, labor, and equipment costs.
Summary Cost Table
Replacement Costs O&` Total
Alternative Capital Costs Present Worth Present Worth Present Worth
A. Connection to $647,750.00 $459943.00 $733,644.00 $767,337.00
n, System
9v2W
D. Direct Discharge $21,750.00 $0 $0 $2,750.00
E. Combination $139530.00 $302016.00 $1859390.00 $228,936.00
EAA SUMMARY
The present ownership of High Vista Falls WWTP believes the only feasible option for both economic
and operational long-term success for this system is to receive a NPDES permit for continual direct
discharge into Line Creek. The environmental impacts of a direct discharge are considered minimal, and
other alternatives would be cost prohibitive for such a small system as.High Vista.

MAPQYES o�400
T.
Cl 8 L6wbe-Dr a -N0111Hijn Vow,Dr
L ,? 5 q d' Ch Irl StIdge Rd Bfdn Ride Ln
Vtat Rd
_y V
y
O P
Q'
`„« P,,,gb +�
4 vstecountry
�` 4 Grey.t ' tAI1
$' Club
Fiddlers09
�p
High V1541 Di _ d : $ CD ok iy
s m
©2t{09 llapCuest Irc. � � (vlap Data '732<109NAV7EQ or TrJeANas
141 f� Vj s f-rc �a 1�s W"IV77P

el may' •� � �, ,; _ � ;
fY � 1
- I^1 a i.: w •' .', - �- $ _J -ram �Ee i
tro
`ramp # s., zoar
P
} _
HIGH VISTA FALLS ✓ 1 C �\`' ° =- t �1 w J^ - j
DEVELOPMENT US
jp
•`� is "' i :•�•��, 8.1h ,Eh � r_I r.nn nFBn ' _ 'V� j\.
LOCATION . 4 UFS '9
- 1 R ,' Y i - ♦ a �S..wuroaR oaitJ '1
t J .
Sze
JI
SCALE IN FEET f: HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
0 211 000 4,000 HENDERSON COUNTY

iviC�sdgC wn�Cn�s rage i ui �
t
Date: Fri 26 Mar 09:40:30 EDT 2010
From: John C Weaver<[e-mail]>Add To Address Book I This is Spam
Subject: Low-flow characteristics for Line Creek at Henderson/Buncombe Counties line... Re: Stream Flows
To: <[e-mail]>
Cc: Curtis Weaver<[e-mail]>
Mr. Deaver,
In response to your inquiry about the low-flow characteristics(7Q10)for a location on Line Creek at NC Highway 191 at
the Henderson/Buncombe Counties line near Fletcher, the following information is provided:
A check of the low-flow files here at the USGS Water Science Center does not indicate any previous determination of
low-flow characteristics for your specific point of interest on Line Creek. A"quick-n-dirty"drainage area delineation using
mapping software indicates the drainage area for Line Creek at your point of interest is about 0.3 sqmi.
Where no or insufficient data is available for a low-flow analysis, a determination of low-flow characteristics is based on
assessment of low-flow yields(expressed as cubic foot per second flow per square mile drainage area, or cfs per sqmi)
at nearby locations where such statistics have previously been determined. The low-flow characteristics that are
provided have been computed by correlating the runoff characteristics of a nearby stream in vicinity of the request site.
The low-flow files do indicate previous determinations of low-flow characteristics at two downstream locations(station id
0344770850, drainage area 0.69 sqmi; 0344770875 at the mouth of Line Creek, drainage area 1.65 sqmi). In both
estimates, the 7Q10 low-flow yield used was approximately 0.4 cfs per sqmi, based on the runoff characteristics at
nearby Avery Creek near Fletcher(station id 03447766; drainage area 8.59 sqmi). Similarly, the 30Q2 yield used for the
two previous estimates was about 0.82 cfs per square mile.
Multiplying the drainage area for your point of interest(0.3 sqmi)to the above two yields will result in flow estimates
expressed in units of cubic foot per second (cfs).
Please be aware there is a$250 fee for a response to provide low-flow estimates. The flow estimate would be provided
via email with an attached invoice(billed to the address you provide). If you need us to further confirm the low-flow
characteristics for this location, please let me know and we'll proceed from there.
Hope this information is helpful.
Thank you.
Curtis Weaver
J. Curtis Weaver, Hydrologist, PE
USGS North Carolina Water Science Center
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Phone: [phone] H Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
E-mail address—[e-mail]
Internet address—http://nc.water.usgs.gov/
https://webmail.comporium.net/wm/mail/read.html?sessionid=g4etmp2526adfD4abefa7182e949cc... 4/14/2010

Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Work Sheet For Low-Flow Characteristics For Line Creek
Drainage area=approximately 0.3 square miles
Near by stations(id#'s 0344770850& 034477085)
The 7Q 10 low-flow yield at both locations indicate approximately 0.4 cfs per sqmi
The 30Q2 yield at both locations indicate approximately 0.82 cfs per sqmi
7Q 10 at High Vista WWTP : 0.3 sqmi x 0.4 cfs per sqmi=0.12 cfs
30Q2 at High Vista WWTP : 0.3 sqmi x 0.82 cfs per sqmi=0.246 cfs

0
NC DENR-DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY 2 B .0300
.0304 FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN
Class
Name of Stream Description Class Date Index No.
Licklog Branch From source to Rocky Fork C 04/01/96 6-57-4-1
Flat Branch From source to Rocky Fork C 04/01/96 6-57-4-2
Laurel Branch From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-5
Garren Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-6
Trantham Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-7
Ballard Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-8
Cane Creek From Ashworth Creek to C 04/01/96 6-57-(9)
French Broad River
Ashworth Creek From source to Cane Creek C 04/01/96 6-57-10
Reed Branch From source to Ashworth C 04/01/96 6-57-10-1
Creek
Shoal Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-11
Brush Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-12
Gap Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-13
Woodall Lake Entire lake and connecting C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-13-1
stream to Gap Creek
Reed Creek (Spivey Lake) From source to Gap Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-13-2
Webb Creek From source to Gap Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-13-3
Little Webb Creek From source to Gap Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-13-4
Gravelly Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-14
Moore Lake Entire lake and connecting C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-14-1
stream to Gravelly Creek
Tweed Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-15
Merrill Cove Creek (Brown From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-16
Lake, Groves Lake)
Skelton Twin Lakes Entire lakes and connecting C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-16-1
stream to Merrill Cove Creek
Robinson Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-17
Weston Branch From source to Robinson C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-17-1
Creek
Pinner Creek (Morgan Lake) From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-18
Capps Lake Entire lake and connecting C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-18-1
stream to Pinner Creek
Hoopers Creek From source to Cane Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-19
South Fork Hoopers Creek From source to Hoopers Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-19-1
Duncan Creek From source to Hoopers Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-19-2
Flynn Branch From source to Hoopers Creek C;Tr 04/01/96 6-57-19-3
Cushion Branch From source to Cane Creek C 04/01/96 6-57-20
Kimsey Creek From source to Cane Creek C 04/01/96 6-57-22
Frady Lake Entire lake and connecting C 04/01/96 6-57-22-1
stream to Kimsey Creek
Higgins Branch From source to Kimsey Creek C 04/01/96 6-57-22-2
McDowell Creek From source to French Broad C 04/01/96 6-58
River
Soapstone Branch From source to McDowell C 04/01/96 6-58-1
Creek
Line Creek From source to French Broad C 04/01/96 6-59
River
Page 28 of 63 2011-01-15 07:18:36

Sel P MILS ST List $ Address County Subdivision Unit/ Acres $ LO LA List Date
Lot # Per d
T 7 � 3 C> G 7 Acre j
© V H420982A A $599,000 0 Off 280 Henderson None 23.04 1257 63000 08/05/2008 ,Q
R14
V B442855A A $963,200 David Henderson None 27.52 816 43 06/10/2009 12
Whitker
❑r V A480781A A $875,000 Pennsylvania Henderson None 35.7 24510 1072 548502543 02/02/2011 7
Road
Displaying matches 1 through 3 of 3
/ti LS G1'5,4�j� S Az,� Z) C I
144 S /:2.lf-ek- /J L

i'
` A & D Water -Service, Inc.
P.O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
April 15, 2010
Terry Wilson, County Clerk
County of Henderson
1 Historic Court House Square
Suite 1
Hendersonville, N C 28792
RE:.Local Government Review
Dear Terry,
A& D Water Service, Inc. is the owner of the Waste Water Treatment Plant at High Vista
Falls.We are working on having our NPDES Permit modified. In accordance with NC
Statutes we are submitting a copy of the permit application along with a local government
review form.
Please review the enclosed. If there are any questions, I can be contacted by phone at
[phone] or at the above listed numbers.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
Aubrey Deaver, President
A& D Water Service, Inc.

0 ,
t
A & D Water Service, Inc.
P.O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
April 15, 2010
Susan Powell, Town Clerk_
Town of Mills River
5046 Boylston Hwy
Suite 3
Mills River, N C 28759
RE: Local Government Review
Dear Susan,
A& D Water Service, Inc. is the owner of the Waste Water Treatment Plant at High Vista
Falls. We are working on having our NPDES Permit modified. In accordance with NC
Statutes we are submitting a copy of the permit application along with a local government
review form.
Please review the enclosed. If there are any questions, I can be contacted by phone at
[phone] or at the above listed numbers.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
Aubrey Deaver, President
A& D Water Service, Inc.

s00
Wet
• ,elydlaoE'\\ae36Ett�a\lltO U0't 0, Je✓sa tra ipl lesesld'OSIAt h s
Ao;'ea^p o1 s Ea1et.-rva+eo., ,n o;,plEu1'.�i�v0 301Sdtitt nenNao x
4 +a ePM dwm .iflW Pat2a1 Udd of '`�Yn EVlasa �tUX�13eW PatxUa dWi
}o '1taW pen�a UoN u e3 SIA
es P flu ywoo a A���a pu awaH ouooaC Id Y
OkldlO'�1\EW 3SEYJ'\ uµaS l�sodautrQrati�10e141uaet Ruult!awdx SECTION. DELIVERY
ro-anG3:Also complete dleo�" A Signature
--1tem 4 if Restricted Delivery Is desired. �,�,i ❑Agent
X
■ Print your name and address on the reverse \ y' ❑Addressee
so that We can return the card to you. S. Received by(Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
t' ■-Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? 0 Yes
1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑No
.wgn
3. servIceType ------
❑
pad ❑Certified Mail Express Mail
It, ar1 � -�/ lam. ❑Registered ❑.Return Receipt for Merchandise
1 ❑ Insured Meil ❑C.O.D.
\4 9 4. Restricted Delivey!(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
fo
st tdl' 2. Article Number -
lot' (Dansfer from service labep 7009 1410 000'2,-Q614 1262
4341
W 1 PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return.Aece(pt 102595-02-M-1540
w _
wd 11ewuoll SUS
IO1, U1Y^psulQwoo aG A\r¢spu1WaN7uor
solo- a }o P>oowd IL
1l'®IIEW MpoOd ao®11EW a41 A41daA fuanlla plan t V •
1 yEeRoaa40}woes tateo dllsw ino&to/i 0; fiUlltaWV • -.
saPlboad 1la pa1111ia3
S SECTION ON DELIVERY
lComplete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A g ature
Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. ❑Agent
■ Print your name and address on the reverse ❑Addressee
80 that We can return the card to you. B. Received by( nted e) C. a of Delivery
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailplece,
or on the front If space permits. - D
1. Article Addressed to: - D, Is delivery address different from Rem iT ❑Yes
n 9jo9�� If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No
3. ice type
Allied Mali ❑Express Mail
❑Registered ❑Return Recelpt for Merchandise
JJJ ❑ Insured Mall ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑yes
2. Article Number - -
(Trans/e irc andce Islieq 7009 1410 . 0002 0 614 1255
j PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540

Attachment A. Local Government Review Form
Gen Statute Omni= North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1(c)(6)allows input from local governments in the issuance
of NPDES Permits for non-municipal domestic Wastewater treatmeat fiddities. Specifically,the Envu+ommeatal Management
Commission (EMC) may not act on an application for a new icipal domestic Wastewaterdischarge facility until it has
received a written statement from each city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the
proposed facility and its aJ6 J6 .- ances are to be located. The writhed swement shall document whether the city or county has a
zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect and(if such an ordinance is in effect)whether the proposed facility is consistent With.the
ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application f)r any facility which a city or county has deteamined to be
inconsistent with, zoning or subdivision.ordinances unless the approval of such application is deummined to have statewide
sigpiitcance and is in the best interest of the State.
InstmCdows to the Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for 4 proposed amity,the applicant
shall request that both the nearby city and county governmeeat complete this form. The applicant must
■ Submit a-copy of the pem*application(With a written,request for this fora to be completed)to.the clerk of the arty and
the county by certified mail,return receipt requested.
• If eider(or both)local govemmeat(s)fa*s)to mad the completed form,as evidenced by the postmark on the eertif ed
mail card(s),Within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail,the applcant may submit the application to
the NPDES Unit
■ As evidence to the Commission that the local governmeut(s)fidled to respond Widen 15 days,the.appkcant-shall submit a
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarised letter stating that the local government(s)faded to respond Within the
15-day period.
hastmct[ons to the I asd Government The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdictioii over
any part of the land on which the proposed facility or its app, are to be located is required to complete and return this
form to the applicant Within 15 days of receipt The form most be signed and notarized.
Nance of local goverQmen WeAOkmOA couuni:n=
(City/County)
Does the city/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurt�euances are to be
located.? Yes[v<No[ J If no,please sign this form,have it notarized,and return it to the applicant
Does the city/county have in effect a zoning or subdivision ordinances Yes B 'No[
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance is effect,is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes[
No[ J
Date A/Z 0 1.� gnaa •S4,M= tL
CtM�l� a�AI A l�inLcsl`ta:r
Stage of 1419 1mu 1.11j p+ ,County of `
C+n this r' day of h)f.'_ 1 O-personally appeared before me,the said
name • � to me known and known to m e to be the descid3ed in
Pelson
and who executed foregoing document and he(or she)acknowledged that lac(or she)es crated the and drily sworn
by me,made oath that the statements in the foregoing document are true
My Commission espines_ p+or f D .(Signature of Notary
Aft
tea_� �,: G - _ ,;.Q`�,'. Y�•.. -
.
(
EAA GVkku oe Document Version: June 23,2005 �-= r.,_ .. a•-`= L

c
■
A & D Water ervice nc.
P.Q. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
March 30,2011
Rick Lenderman, PE
228 West Road
Moore, SC 29369
Rick,
Please find enclosed the government review form from Henderson County.We never recieved the signed copy back from
Mills River. I sent the form to them twice.
YDeaver., sident
A&D Water Service, Inc.
State of North Carolina
County of Transylvania
I, Pamela H L th, a Notary Public for said county, do hereby certify
that Aubrey Deaver personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged
the execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and seal this
the 30th day of March, 2011.
1 ao is
Notary Public DRFj Expiration�!.
10
.10
3SI0N.���
s�iits��

EFFLUENT
LIFT STATION
EFFLUENT
HOLDING
VALVE POND
PROPOSED DIRECT DISCHARGE
— — rN- - - - -- -
TO LINE CREEK
I EFFLUENT FLOW EXISTING 45,000 GPD
EQUALIZATION TREATMENT PLANT Z SPUTTER
BOX
AERATION CLARIFIER
Y z INFLUENT FLOW TERTIARY
W O EQUALIZATION FILTER
w a
U
W O
Z �
J
� SLUDGE
L
MANHOLE HOLDING CHLORINE
o CONTACT
FLOW
r — MONITORING
I I I
o = I LTJ I
o I r - --i r - - - - - �
w w
W �
J
Z FUTURE 45,000 GPD
- TREATMENT PLANT
HIGH VISTA FALLS WWTP
W00015929
FLOW SCHEMATIC

xv-
A70W \ C U' ' ' \ 2 .0 C WASTEWATER FLOW
\\\\ �-4 I \ x r HIGH VISTA FALLS
t _ 1 -Mgm-'7Y44ED'- \ �\ 0A 7 acres
2Hb.9 r \ s I x 2153.5 JAMES A. GOODS SINGLE FAMILY HOMESITES(2.5 BDR) r88 EA 0300 gpd= 26.400 gpd / r
t\ - - ---- \\ \\ P PIN
= 1 r INq 9 0a-61=1 4 DS 1692 PG. 311 DUPLEX UNITS(2.5 BDR) ! 16 EA 0 300 gpd= 4.800 gpd.
'- 1 \ I Y 633-04-61-4899 1525 PG. 228 '
s - - - 69LF OOVR58 ` t__---- ---i I PATIO HOHES,(ZfBDR) 32 EA 0 240 gpd= 7,680 gpd> �i
___� 1 x 2156.9 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS(2.0 BDR) I` 96 EA 0 240 gpd= 23.040 gpdSTAIM �i
Reserve Capacity = 6,080 gpd
i.
Subtotal = 68,000 gpd a
AY..FAt 215Lg O HIGH VISTA ESTATES
214E 105 21�.2 SINGLE FAMILY HOMESIT ( BDR) 20 EA 0 300 gpd = 00 gpd
X 0. 1 atrr- _ I VENIFNCE II\ X ES 2.5 80
GAS Si \ RESIDENCE 1 HICH VISTA GOLF COURSE CLUBHOUSE 500 Members®20 gpd =10,000 gpd f:4
_ V
, I I
2147.4 \,.... O
_ R
t
PROP D X 21 J FINCH PROPERTY RESERVE= 8,000 GPI)
t .1 H h A 2��o x % TOTAL.= 90,000 CPD
PROPOSED
' SANITARY-Sr*M LINE-Z �' 2147.1
P x :-
_, ��a• ` ._ _ _/ z
--\ ---`- / \ \ x 2146.4106
0.59 V. - i � PROPOSED ����
F ,S. PROPOSED i 186'31'26"E ^� `R `cam •.i H/1 COMMUNITY
. SSMH/3 / i 90. �� �� t�`• i r7 (�
_•-.. r�.�_` �.�� 6-a GATE VK\ES
�'`- •7 � ��' / � i 39 \�\`�\ � �� �� I 1� try!ar:DlcAsarw - `_- �_ _..._--" � I
31.1 ` - 1-\ PIiOPgSfD EFFLUENT j
-D.sr-aves
?I v - �_., \ \38
FORCE MAIN
M
6'/F EFFLUENTPIR FORCE MAIN
I O
-�G V
__ 9'o LINE� .�
_JPROP J V v
PROPERSM UNE
� :� - -� SSMH•IE' OF
_ PROPOSED ` _ CMU
TAPER 1; SSMH-1 C-
'--� r
21 i;1, r ROPO5E0 ' 11' QI' iaT aartE A EwcAsort7l .\ \ I STANOR7 POMER Ea•„ '�+ 6
' (0. 9 AC.) ;Q m 20 I , � 1 =I _ 2757. VALVES ASS I'.DEVELOPMENT SSO *ES,L \ EX"14C
�= O D.B. PG. PROPERT'!uN O `�
O .� IMA►tTAIN 3 FEET _ \ ��� PRDI'O5@ EFFLUEHT
_ OFIC.OVER OVER \ _ _._'{ 1 ����. '[7�-' U
-,•4, , �284 d0'-� _ L . 11 S\NITARY SEWER U E"B' I ' SE'(IER LINE _ _ t, i I -=OW EOUIl12ATON TANK (-I sr T 8 2.6 N r'39'24"W + r I I + r\ t 1 t't 1 11 _\\ 1 OPO
T. - ENT LIFT STA N I G>» x O
�2149. SUPPLEMENTAL ' �•l 1'1 L l \'--- F
a' ,� 1,; I IRRIGATION I ; �, '1 1 PROPOe39 EFFLUENT
•4 % ' t t POND 3 , t I \ , 1 MH~ 8WA55 LINE _;` �✓
, PROPOSED STORAGE 1-; 21J8.0' t 1 1 t t '�
SSMH/12A ANE x t t 3,300,000 GALLONS t 1 \,1 \ t _-_ C4 P.V.C./SDR 5
\ LO I
y -CV7,, �J I ,� , ,t ,t I 1l \ '\ ,t -_ t\ EFFLUENT HOLDING POND 1O••1
1' �ff ,r+-!{�-." + .. , � 1 I ; , 1 ,i - 1� - MNri 40 MtL LINER 2118.8
.VTT{d/'EiJ II-Y& .F <:S: II t ' t ' _ - - - (IOOX100X 8') X
`V . I i t TDP E V.- 2142.0' 1 t '1 i _ _ 1 (500.000 GALLONS)
L. , a 17 / A •` •C• n I \ , 't WS EOEVELE 14D 0132.0' :, ;, I' �I i t ; --__ 1 2122.7
SSMH.al t + i, f. \ \., i t x 45' R�W
`; y�} II 2142.8 #`i
.� , d X `\ '., 2138.0 •1
_ 1
n a r s E
2132"
2191.91 1 40 '1 t t ' 11 p - - - - PROPOSED
yy �{ _
•C' / J a /) \ / \ 1 \ I t,' _- 1 OB):,. DRIVEWAYL A
r�/ ti _ 1 _ 21380 '�1
77 \C.) �r 7(0.332 AC.), r i -t �, t .�-'-'-' •' .'�--. .HIU--ROPD 21224 O�li
l20- I I x 2142.5 �"� '_.!- s � .I FLOW SPLI BOX- SECONDARY WAS7EW
rn r I TAPER _ - "
-r1- LO INA TREATMENT PLANT(45,000 GPD �1 ai E
'es .. :-.. /i - •� TANK -2126. PROPOSED 1145ASE I PHASE I CA 11 I W-1
x H....? Eo1
TERTIARY FRIER
FUTURE (51,000 GPD) ;=raFE
RE yF1 ASE II
TERTIARY FlLTER WNIAII G;LAP81Er A:AI1sI tuns P.L =fi W9
*j$0. i 1 ' l >► '_ f "-�' I _ ! {{� x 131.6 4 ASURING -WP fir:revs P4
k_ s=
O!� ' / p &SAMPiINC 90X I LhMllr Nif -:9,�''•$yN ING.E<•'
PROP IE
OSED. t I WWTP 45 000 GPD floe°"'°"am\ N�°'iv0vi sa\sa_ 12.0 V D UF •.,�RECXR!,o`O
SSMH �� ���__-- (SDR 5 OI � � +a-eoi-rax Z r-va-an-•rest
EASTINc 214u.0 GRAPHIC SCALE Revisions i
'I
�• I - % -l-� � 1a'GRAVEL DRIVEWAY
$ ; date: 6/98
job: 98146 sheet
tiFW
t 1rE drawn: KHC
iofe

3/17/2011
Present Worth Analysis(Alt+A+-+connect+to+MSD)(1).xls
Total Present Worth
Alternative: Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer District
Replacement Costs O&M Costs Present Total Present
Capital Costs Present Worth Worth Worth
$647,750 $45,943 $73,644 $767,337
Present Worth Analysis(Alt+A+-+connect+to+MSD)(1).xis Page 1 of 1

1/S/2011
Present Worth Analysis(Alt A-conned to MSD)
Capital Cost Analysis •
Complete the gray areas of the spreadsheet. Your capital cost for this particular alternative will be found in bold below.
Alternative.Alternative A 'discharge to;Metro�=dkan Sewer D1stHct
Construction Contingency: _1096 _
Project Engineering&Administration:
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost
V2. $158,200
._�' .�
6466 fierce 50 fL K_ 5345,000
.jam '�yC�. y..�i' .k :w f+. t .`Jy'• �t..�� /�,�
�1i1<' n,L .}^ w r• Esccr .'° -rx,`y� ham. 4 r -.. _ 1_:t ea-"S.=r°�: �Y ':_ 1 .u'. ..� •'y'-: �:� $15,OW- .u.ii - �}�j� -.;=�v�y� 5 f },x.�^ -.w'r a i='Y:::+�` .•...� �= .Z: �ys.._�.;�� r r i -.y..a
�`r«`.. 3'a*;:�,sy' :�:r-;'vim. - 'fT�;✓i Tom.?- `'+C k-�. �"".'.s..ilt'..3. ."Yl '�'t'" _at-r�"' '-' 71?'�~�':={'..YSr.;'�:�..Ls.. 2'✓ - � ... -•?�':•�.r.'. $0
�,�, i�:ir,�S'i•�
^T"t' f '•o" ,.Y.''Y F.` K..' .•�s,1.#'.-��ir jc..%ST�..; .i.4,.S..t=` -iCt'.... •S�r''j ?s.* .:. '�:CJaTyi4:.'?ice •%=.`. ... "F,t'r $O
-.£'S BPS` .`'.�•4 •�. +�•`i a 15".r"=�}3%:t. 7' �..+%�`'Gc' t'F:a r(. .�.3..'{3�`` '"T"'i` �'F,:. 'c' �,;�,� -°`?� - �.a•1',. "• aN ,
'..i'`'.�3'.-, is '..:fhf-.f, '/. �.,Fri"a.:'=+�i '?i ,�� i rt ,<rh•� �',St ��i ?rw _. �'+ 'v^f-+, F s�``�:i�f'i ...1 C 's' - ;,.r '� ?'1.....w•' $0
-::r..�. �-:y',7�.-.�, __.. a�? ..r^"st✓ :�.-. -ice. i 4,,. k�i-:'b.�' .� ?- .Ts!L. ^..4: �`F•.•1�^.`�. ; .'-n r i`
�.<.��y� «.... cr l�,a _•' _ .__yr.'-�r. �F�L,. :f �^'t r � h ' ., 3tirr N� t.,'f'4� �c - '� i ,J{p'.1'L`•y $0
�` T'i. ti� 3f.-�"�yp �'� �vi� _ Ate. a-�•�-• t .J�•Y '� .n� �L �- � i�,Y. �'. '. gip.,� -d _ M -��
- rIL_..z r a- J �.. ,-e, .•r ^f -2`. > .,J"' :.+-F1 > �� r-.X' $0
.. ~�-i3•c'G+4'"_. CIF- ,;. ,.Y�••,Nsa, ,,� j -.+x� _ yJ-` $0
is ,Y, '.}.. ---7.i.r.,.' .1'i.'°I, .M-i<�x_ i.,•s,--?::' 4 �t�� i J ...«n..7 .-.Y'.. .f
��Y �M 46.•s••��,��..�,�.,.y�l.�,� s`f-�'F. i �i'. yryr�at �s4 S -`'� :�,Ic v cS '• •t •F Tc.}f 'i�,,.45 t f Y $O
ytr'm.'�-t -i3. .a.au•�' .t.'•* .,+•�!� i'•f7,�s..:!%."<f.,T...-�,f .: '?''i'n•`�., .c'°i ire q •F�; :t7i 't."C.r.�d ''.�' �;
V
c_;`'�i.-_�•�-.`'"�vs..�F"•+ �s 1.•n i`• ? '- ''.-r-5: �; r�rt;y�L _E;'.S"'? „5'r �_2.., jC. ti 't` :r. '�+y�•; '' r1 fin-' 4 f' .�'. $0
$1,l .':.♦hx...sf - ti -x. 'n'.. - :�; - �, 2." a kid - 'i v.. 0
$0
` - - $0
$0
$0
y $0
$0
$0
$0
Total Construction Cost: $S18,200
Construction Contingency: $S1,820
Administrative Costs: $77,730
Total Capital Costs: $647,750
Capital Costs Page 1 of 9

1/5/2011
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt A-connect to MSD)
Replacement Cost Entry
Alternative:Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer District
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Year Replacement Needed?
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Tap fee $158,200 ea 1
6-inch force main $50 It 6,900
Duplex lift station upgrade $15,000 ea 1 Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 So 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 So 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 So 0 0
0 So 0 0
o $a 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 2 of 9

1/S/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt A-connect to MSD) Ib
Alternative: Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewe
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
' (Insert Y in year where replacement is needed.)
Component Unit Cost Unit quantity 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18
Tap fee $158,200 ea 1
6-inch force main $50 ft 6,900
Duplex lift station upgrade $15,000 ea 1 Y Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 3 of 9

1/5/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt A-connect to MSD)
Akernative:Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewe
For each component,enter"Y"In the year In which replacement,If any,will occur.
Component Unk Cost Unit Quantity 19 20 '
.Tap fee $158,200 ea 1 k ; '=
6-Inch force main $50 ft 6,900 � '-
Duplex lift station upgrade $15,000 ea 1
0 $0 0 0 f �
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0 F'
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0 }`°
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0 =
0 $0 0 0 -
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0 -.
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 4 of 9

1/5/2011
a
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt A-connect to MSD)
Alternative:Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer District
i= 2.220%
Replacement Cost at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 ;
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6-Inch force main $50 ft 6,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Duplex lift station upgrade $15,000 ea 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,440 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 . $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,440 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 5 of 9

1/5/2011
s
Present_Worth_Analysis(Att A-connect to MSD)
r
i
Alternative:Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer
i=2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Discharge pi $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0. $0 $0 $0 $0
64nch force main $50 ft 6,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Duplex lift station upgrade $15,000 ea 1 $0 $0 $12 043 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $o $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 • $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 So $0 $o $o $o iso
Total Re lacement Costs: $0 $0 $12,043 $0 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 6 of 9

1/5/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt A-connect to MSD)
a.
Alternative:Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer
i=2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cast Unit Quantity is 16 17 18 19 20 ;
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6-inch force main $50 ft 6,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Duplex lift station upgrade $15 000 ea 1 $10,791 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9 669
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $o $o $o
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $o $o $o
Total Replacement Costs: $10,791 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,669
Total Replacement Costs: $45,943
Replacement Costs-Results Page 7 of 9

3/17/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+A+ onnect+to+MSD)(1).xls
Year 20 Operations and Maintance Cost Analysis .
Complete the areas in gray.
Alternative: Alternative A-Discharge to Metropolitan Sewer District
i= 2.220%
Component Unit Cost Unit quantity Total Cost Year20
Lift station 0&M - $3,DD0 yr -1 $3,000 $48,029
Lift station utility costs $SO mon 12 $600 $9,606
Force main maintenance and repair $1,000 yr 1 $1,000 $16,010
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
5o $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$o $D
$0 $0
50 $0
Total O&M Costs(allyeam): $73,644
O&M Costs Page 1 of 1

1/14/2011
Present—Worth Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
Total Present Worth
Alternative: Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
Replacement Costs O&M Costs Present Total Present
Capital Costs Present Worth Worth Worth
$2,750 $0 $0 $2,750
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge) Page 1 of 1

1/14/2011
e
Present—Worth Analysis(Att D-Direct discharge)
A
Capital Cost Analysis "
Complete the gray areas of the spreadsheet. Your capital cost for this particular alternative will be found in bold below.
Alternative:;Altema#ive D Direct Discharge to Su�cfaGe W3tets
_. =�
Construction Contingency: 10%
Project Administration:
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost
il�.�r�W R Emir .Y-!rC• �.sY.Y.k�t'� s.tom, cl E .'♦,R`!rl .� } ✓- .:: �� �"�W
- `�"-�2 _ �...�',�4 . ts'r5 Y.. -G .:w...'7;. C.1�:~�riu' -'� -f.'��,-.-J''c.' -�°u i,v.t �i a-rS r v -x_ .;vt$5,?l ,C;f3„s _ii.Y',•
ve.- -i-�...rS.-.Z:.'i; _5.:. -ce r,., '+'"��. cr«.,,, ••T.?. it.. ,..a� r.s f ..:•'. i; 1.�'}r-.
k,�y.,i.3` !'+'•�.� r M Y-M]�y � xY.y's...'w,.:,l�'3F`e� r r ,y>•!.r• .c�.' {:� `Y 1.�.�S r,�t h%a'�•..�"�i+�k,:1'�i•w <� r y. .r.i, F�, � ,/��, ty^,.
..r�i<` _ F^.....E-�. .�a.♦+'.�i^ rc.. -�'-' .n�.'r.�,. +.�.i _t ..':17.. Sr..x.. _ .�`,.._ _ •s.;� u... ,•F/3<" .. r °.....-..
� �'� F a .a•• s 1 t '1- � a,� r ,T t •v roe.o+ ��.•+. i �. „ - ♦ -' { .�
.y T .`7a 1, '�i r ' r. .iR`✓a'-G`Y- Y_:�4.- FY "•r'#_�v i i1_ "F i +�`-: w-'q�':W T t yr yx�,�r•,_ ""{.. ` Y^ r 'l .�a.r'5rn so
'T+r .�. �..l r: ..Y r.. v�._'$•3`:_r-_,�-.'^.s�, t.. 1 �.:^!2� -•�.�' i.• :.5. ,',2.5 .t`r�.:aC_.. h,-.a._....
' Yi_y.a,._ 7'S ". rn's'S.. r'"'�.3* }`y�`•4` •`� �- -t.r' .'.'.Jf.'�" �."-,. i'�.,_"n e"a'T f t y. ' .r.,a'1�-�r�i-:'!4?'rfi:r7 'w,ma'X?{r x3 �++K Ti.�_i•� 1}„� .Y s.Y'J_4 2':eTwe.Y'�•-J' �m_ r. .n ..,R:. a..
-+..a r'�.s r�r.kx +J; _ r,E.''r``'4••• i .j
>i�+r -3 '- r - C: a - ♦ Y 5 � ?;X->..`� �""'4_',z�`i.�'r,'�' ` ' :'td's- �X3�7 �.."� '�3'a.-�r'?�" � - �.:�4''Par'�.F '' � t�=t'� K - $0
y'
%R�� :`"- a-i..-`�.♦ t. 'r rv'� £„4-C- t r7'�- f< :"M "s�'C -�.� s�"{ t Vie. -♦ir"..'�s `i h�1tS�3'tt -�.= _
t ..fir -.�-s•V t Jr•1. 't'S '1 F�.�.i' �� T
�L $/�
Yk f,::t-'3' '.;may":` -r.i. `' °-y �.:+ .c:.�z. ;�,ss✓ ',.r- ".J .x ^>''� - so
Y 7 :.�. ,w r,Wi•.'_`?..1y♦'`r�} r w .n, t + .�. ^. "i",}.t �.:,- rr�-' ti J'r J�a.:. A.•5y -L Y 'r n.. ♦.��J1♦ .!tea
�.cv4+..',f ♦-s- .. � S..:C` g'-G�- .-+r.-. `..1 rr i', - s: z- `"ti 1 t t= �^+. _ 1-�"' �4" 5j.- � 5;
;yyS� R r gay_{
«a r «' iT -.. .C�'{ ,r.-.-. _ t.E. ...w_ ,'� :•} _r. i- 'FT ^
. $0
$0
a- _ r .+,4} '-� >.', - _ - '-� ram_ -:i<ri aL♦�•'`�Y P;'. -- - $0 .
w $0
' $0
! - ♦. $0
72
$0
$0
: - - try
Total Construction Cost: $2,S00
Construction Contingency: $250
Administrative Costs: $0
Total Capital Costs: $2,7S0
Capital Costs Page 1 of 1

1/14/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt 0-Direct discharge)
Replacement Cost Entry
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Year Replacement Needed?
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 So 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 1 of 3

1/14/2011 0
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
o
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Wat(
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
' (Insert Y In year where replacement Is needed.)
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 10 11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 2 of 3

1/14/2011
Present—Worth—Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Watf
For each component,enter*Y"in the year In which replacement,If any,will occur.
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 19 20
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 3 of 3

1/14/2011
Present—Worth Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
i=2.220%
Replacwnent Cost at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 S 6 7
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $0
0 $o 0 0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $o $o $o $o $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $o $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $o 0 0 $o $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $o
o $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o % $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
o $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $o 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $o 0 0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 d$%o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $o $o
0 $o 0 o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $p
Replacement Costs-Results
Page 1 of 3

1/14/2011
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Wate
i= 2.220%
Re Wmment Costs at Year X
-Compopent Unit Cost Unit Quantity 9 9 10 11 12 13 14
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $o 0 0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $a $0 $a $0 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 2 of 3

1/14/2011
Present—Worth Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
w
O
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Wate
i= 2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1S 16 17 is 19 20
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $o 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o So $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $01 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $o
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 3 of 3

1/14/2011
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt D-Direct discharge)
Year 20 Operations and Maintance Cost Analysis e
Complete the areas in gray.
Alternative:Alternative D-Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
i+ 2.220%
S2mnent Unit Cost Unit Qua Total Cost Year 20
i.'0 $0 $0
-•,_ ° { r✓- :..�lk� i 1i�..'a� ty T x. ..t „ ':`ZF -ra a.,. �_�,,}�, •}J
rL': .7 �]_. !'. �� .f. f• Y.>. R th. ;'.r $$�w01 w�${w0)
_f y. ..4. Y'tiY i YTM�,.- s T_ T_
>r i $0 $0
'r rim' i...,..•.. .L. � - - • r7— -r _ .:r y
-P-
$0 $0
.�ti3 -° 3s�' .r•'� I:i' $0 $0
't ,r Lt�"ry? !yl ,1. > '.ss ^3 wr,,,�. ♦4'7C"':^sL- -,+. }'' ,F.' `,- $0 $0
jj
J $$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
- $o $0
$0 $0
1. $0•l
x r - $0
$0 $0 .
$0 $0
- $0 $0
Total O&M Costs(all years): $0
O&M Costs Page 1 of 1

f
3/11/2011
Present Worth Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)[1].xls
s
Total Present Worth
Alternative: Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigation and Direct Discharge
Replacement Costs O&M Costs Present Total Present
Capital Costs Present Worth Worth Worth
$13,530 $30,016 $185,390 $228,936
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)[i].xls Page 1 of 1

3/11/2011
Present_W orth_Analysis(Alt+E++conj unctive+use)[1].xls
Capital Cost Analysis '
Complete the gray areas of the spreadsheet. Your capital cost for this particular alternative will be found In bold below.
Alternative:[Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigation and Direct Discharge gj"� ATgI?
Construction Contingency:�r 10%
Project Administration: L. 0%
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100 $2,500
Effluent Lift Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $9,800
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Total Construction Cost: $12,300
Construction Contingency: $1,230
Administrative Costs:1 $o
Total Capital Costs] $13,530
Capital Costs Page 1 of 1

3/11/2011
Pr esent_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)(1l.XIS
Replacement Cost Entry
Alternative: Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigation and Direct Discharg
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Year Replacement Needed?
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100
Effluent lift Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
lif-pl:r(enu-nt(0s11 1 ntry 11a1ty 1 o1 3

3/11/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive-#use)[I I.xls
P
� 0
Alternative:Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigatic
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
' (Insert Y in year where replacement is needed.)
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100
Effluent Lift Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs I ntry Page 2 of 3

3/11/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+ conjunctive+use)j lj.xls w
1 �
Alternative: Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigatic
For each component,enter"y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 19 20
Discharge Pipe $25 ft 100 -
Effluent Uft Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 3 of 3

3/11/2011
4
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)[11.xis
D
Alternative:Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigation and Direct Discharge
i=2.220%
Replacement Cost at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Effluent lift Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,781 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 So $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 So 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 U $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 o So $0 $0 $01 Sol So $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $o $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,781 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 1 of 3

3/11/2011
a
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)[1].xls ..
'R
Alternative:Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigatloi
1=2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 8 9 18 11 12 13 14
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Effluent Lift Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $7,868 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $o So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 So $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 0 Sol Sol sol 501 $a
0 $0 0 0 $o Sol Sol Sol Sol So $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $7,11681 Sol $0 $0 $8
Replacement Costs-Results Page 2 of 3

3/11/2011
v
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+-+conjunctive+use)[1].xls .,
Alternative: Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigatioi
i=2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 15 16 17 18 19 20 ;
Discharge pipe $25 ft 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Effluent Uft Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $7,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,317
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $o
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $o $o $o $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 to
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $o $0 $0 $o $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $o $o $o $0 $o $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 Sol So $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 Sol $o $0
Total Replacement Costs: $7,050 $0 $0 Sol SO $6,317
Total Replacement Costs: $30,016
Replacement Costs-Results Page 3 of 3

3/11/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+E+- onjunctive+use)(1].xls
Year 20 Operations and Maintance Cost Analysis r • 'E-
Complete the areas in gray.
Alternative: Alternative E-Conjunctive use of Spray Irrigation and Direct Discharge
1= 2.220%
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost Year20
Dischsarge Pipe $25 ft 0 $0 $0
Lab costs-monitoring wells $2,160 yr. 1 $2,160 $34,581
Spray Irrigation pump station O&M $3,000 yr. 1 $3,000 $48,029
Spray Irrigation Operator and support staff $250 Mon. 12 $3,000 $48,029
Irrigation pump sation utilitycosts $35 mon. 6 $210 $3,362
Effluent lift station O&M $3,000 yr. 1 $3,000 $48,029
Effuent lift station utility costs $35 mon. 6 $210 $3,362
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
Total O&M Costs(all years): $185,390
O&M Costs Page 1 of 1

5/12/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1)
Total Present Worth
Alternative: Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewater Reuse
Replacement Costs O&M Costs Present Total Present
Capital Costs Present Worth Worth Worth
$1,141,938 $83,553 $192,114 $1,417,605
Present—Worth Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1) Page 1 of 1

5/12/2011
Present_W orth_Ana lysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1)
Capital Cost Analysis
Complete the gray areas of the spreadsheet. Your capital cost for this particular alternative will be found in bold below.
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewater Reuse
Construction Contingency: 10%
Engineering&Administration 15%
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost
Effluent Pump Station Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $9,800
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25 $25,000
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1 $40,000
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1 $75,000
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500 $97,500
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 $16,250
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1 $25,000
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4 $40,000
Security Fencing $20 If 500 $10,000
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23 $575,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Total Construction Cost: $913,550
Construction Contingency: $91,355
Administrative Costs:l $137,033
Total Capital Costs:1 $1,141,938
Capital Costs Page 1 of 1

5/12/2011
Prese nt_W orth_Ana lysis(Alt+B+C+La nd+Appl ication)(1)
Replacement Cost Entry
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewater Reuse
For each component,enter Y'in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Year Replacement Needed?
Component Unit Cost Unit quantity 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 8 9
6"PVC Force Mafn $1,000 If 25
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4
Security Fencing $20 If 500
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 1 of 3

5/12/2011
Present-Worth-Ana lysis(Alt+B+C+La nd+Ap plication)(1)
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewa
For each component,enter"Y"in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
' (Insert Y in year where replacement is needed.)
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
y
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 y
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4
Security Fencing $20 If 500
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 y Y
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y Y
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry Page 2 of 3

5/12/2011
Present-Worth-Ana lysis(AIt+B+C+La nd+Appl ication)(1)
Alternative: Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewa
For each component,enter Y'in the year in which replacement,if any,will occur.
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 19 20
Y
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1
S ray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 Y
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4
Security Fencing $20 If Soo
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 Y
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
o $o 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
o $0 0 0
0 $0 0 0
Replacement Costs-Entry
Page 3 of 3

5/12/2011
Present_Worth_Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1)
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewater Reuse
i=2.220%
Replacement Cost at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Security Fencing $20 if 500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,781 $0 $0
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,781 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $o 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o $o $0
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,562 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 1 of 3

5/12/2011
Present—Worth Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1) .
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewal
i=2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 $0 $0 $13,047 $0 $0 $0 $0
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Security Fencing $20 If 500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $7,868 $0 $0 $0 $0
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $0 $0 $7,868 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
Total Replacement Costs: $0 $0 $28,783 $0 $0 $0 $0
Replacement Costs-Results Page 2 of 3

5/12/2011
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1) ,
Alternative:Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewai
i= 2.220%
Replacement Costs at Year X
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity is 16 17 18 19 20
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6"PVC Force Main $1,000 If 25 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Holding Pond $40,000 ea 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Pump Station $75,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Piping $15 If 6,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Field Discharge Heads $250 ea 65 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,475
Electrical and Controls $25,000 Is 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Monitoring Wells $10,000 ea 4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Security Fencing $20 If Soo $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Land Cost $25,000 ac 23 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Spray Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $7,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,317
Effluent Pump Replacement $4,900 ea 2 $7,050 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,317
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $o $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0
0 $0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $o $o $0
o $0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $0
Total Replacement Costs: $14,100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $23,108
Total Replacement Costs: $83,553
Replacement Costs-Results Page 3 of 3

5/12/2011 ;
Present Worth_Analysis(Alt+B+C+Land+Application)(1)
Year 20 Operations and Maintance Cost Analysis
Complete the areas in gray.
Alternative: Alternative B&C-Land Application&Wastewater Reuse
1= 2.220%
Component Unit Cost Unit Quantity Total Cost Year ZO
Lab Costs-Monitoring Wells $2,160 yr 1 $2,160 $34,581
Effluent Pump Station 0&M $3,000 yr 1 $3,000 $48,029
Spray Field Pump Station 0&M $3,000 yr 1 $3,000 $48,029
Effluent Pump Station Utilitiy Costs $35 mo 12 $420 $6,724
Spray Field Pump Station Utility Costs $35 mo 12 $420 $6,724
Spray Field Operator and Support Staff $250 mo 12 $3,000 $48,029
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
$0 $0
Total O&M Costs(all years): $192,114
0&M Costs Page 1 of 1

A & D Water Service, Inc.
P.O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
April 15, 2010
Terry Wilson, County Clerk
County of Henderson
1 Historic Court House Square
Suite 1
Hendersonville, N C 28792
RE: Local Government Review
Dear Terry,
A&D Water Service, Inc. is the owner of the Waste Water Treatment Plant at High Vista
Falls.We are working on having our NPDES Permit modified. In accordance with NC
Statutes we are submitting a copy of the permit application along with a local government
review form.
Please review the enclosed. If there are any questions, I can be contacted by phone at
[phone] or at the above listed numbers.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
Aubrey Deaver, President
A&D Water Service, Inc.

A & D Water Service, Inc.
P.O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
April 15, 2010
Susan Powell, Town Clerk
Town of Mills River
5046 Boylston Hwy
Suite 3
Mills River, N C 28759
RE: Local Government Review
Dear Susan,
A& D Water Service, Inc. is the owner of the Waste Water Treatment Plant at High Vista
Falls. We are working on having our NPDES Permit modified. In accordance with NC
Statutes we are submitting a copy of the permit application along with a local government
review form.
Please review the enclosed. If there are any questions, I can be contacted by phone at
[phone] or at the above listed numbers.
Thank you for your time and assistance.
Aubrey Deaver, President
A& D Water Service, Inc.

vyod`;d
LNadla�98 slttl uses�1k1'�1'd��S
'` ,1,pa-aun' y�g8 Ldte eau tou n}dp at0
° dW#0�y,M i3ael u�uwtsod PyaJ'H}o y°a�V"
.ydgritu!ae;Iu A
.�w eaa uoaala iseGs dteoal�QAII 8`a P WnlPPa o,,:+oal®
taW a uasald esaet ato a4l as.p(uanitap eotidnPa
'lµa SIA
a4i�1ew j0 e1 eQ Rwu anal w asiOP"s aaf
aU14V.N`ooaldalfa+4t ' Paloula oasod®SdSultuaiilaoaldi� dgdl tMbtaveP
e aassaPP a0lnoRuo Pa ldaoeB Beo1�4Isv omoo,01Bualod
e0fl1 0 ,11a1seoa Poe aloW 0ed lulneti oo!NPPSA
l 6111 .ams, sod961a°o°g !°.eW1"ia�d "to
eplau SOVII(lId �t OvA
wao a
,1 oleo d'p ru Pat` w 43� Odd Sall Plaj"Is�o,a4aA twili loRVw l�P ueld�Wi
1=, lod_'Ita9,80013
9,80 duo gwaW�t�u�M pautGwoa a4 AWN siaanl o Plooen d �±e
I;.mpoW wolld to gleW It asa10101 aoudes Is I 1 wQ o6111ala aae 5up�wd e
s1¢eR
3 Also complete A. signature
+ -item 4 ifRestricted Delivery is desired. C- Agent■-Print your name-and address-on the reverse X l I I j� ❑Ad ddressee
1 so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Pdnted Name) C.Date of Delivery
I'■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
�r. or on the front if space permits.
D. Is delivery addressdifferentfromitem l? OYes
!- 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑No
I �P /� � 3. Service Type
�0 tM/I
❑Certified Mail ❑Ekpress Mell
E3 Registered ❑Return Receipt for Merchandlse
❑ Insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
9 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) Cl Yes
2. Article Number
(Transterfromservicelabeq 1 7009 1410 0002 0614 1� 2_62
PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Re 102595-02-WIe40

009^o unoa Ed
5uc»-.� �"E��I�g1Uae 42 UFeS t1M�i80deW
isnd°v q
r s,.se s ydl�
q UW UUIgN.Iq gea9alQ ltp ua u1®P ao V° de>ux
.�geUUq au o 1s©s as
p'q a�B 91, ^alCfl¢P°ujplu�oiNPSao
Pa trod
ItsPBIV%9 ld eoSo\ ps\r.PY I-- aai •Wald 4°°
eUl W 1O slo a4?1,aW NBMiat1 N01 a1�1i1 a0q
N �a,dlew e a Wu ®sal uA a
g'tdle ew eoatl
auyLI1 PPs e41 .,law 14'Iflovale°aHuned UEwtodoofR1an60�w
10 d1 OoWyOal�� 614
60 of r,4ade PP Kag dii eoya esgl�0ald qqe ON.m
I 19NUN' 613
a e6elsodae dw\oc asea�{eW I�eti I1ePISuoo-400'd S. e0
W°Is
¢4°�nO&ol Paysa°bet°�1515e>j 10s,3`CtlH3F001W sllleWp"A 00 •
a°aoold pa,4Na0 'UyM a up;�05ako nul4u q°eQ11'"IN�FopulWaEl W •
,leWIauol .1'A4`AV^4a daN Nan4eP q°e b°°tl •
i Fypopd to®IIaW synod a4l F?noF lov 10081 WIN
` yuaFoNa�o}ooVaoqI a.eldilow Ldlaoa .dg111113
-�-1,L THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
i sa4tno►d 4sW 2 -
i
-=wmpfete jteims 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. g ature
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent
■ Print your name and address on the reverse - ❑Addressee
so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by( nW e) C.Date of Delivery
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
D. Is delivery address different from item l? ❑Yes
1. Article Addressed to:
�0ti17'r�lX��"t� If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑No
1M
6 - S.Nrrvice Type
miffed Mail ❑Express Mail
❑Registered ❑Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑Insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
2. Article Number ---
(rransferfrom servlcelatiegl 7009 1410 0002 0614 1255
Ps Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.02-M-1540

Attachment A. Local Government]review Form
feral Stauft Oh"w view: North Carolina General Stature 143-215.1(c)(6)aflows input ftom local goveinmen in the'
of NPDES Permits for non-municipal domestic wastewater treatment facilities. Specifically, the Environmental Management
Commission (EMC).may not act on an application for a new non-ma 1 -pa domestic wastewater discharge fatty until it has
received a written statement firm each city and county government having jutisdiction over any part of the lands on which the
proposed facility and its appnxeenannces are t o be located. The written smtiement shall document whether the city or county has a
zoning or subdivision ordi n=ce in effect and(if such an ordinance is in effect)whether the proposed farms is consistent with the
ordinance. The EMC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has wed to be
inconsistent with zoning or subdivision ordinances unless the approval of such application is demnained to have statewide
sigpificsnee and is in the best interest of the State.
Istcucdons to the Aim Prior to submitting as application for a NPDES Permit for 4 proposed f mility,the applicant
shall request that both the nearby city and county gowemment eomglebe this form. The applicant must:
• Submit as copy of the pe=it application(with a written request for this form to be completed)to the clerk of the city and
the county by certified mail,cretutn receipt requested.
e If either(or both)local gav+etnmeat(s) fa (s)to mail the completed form,as evidenced by the postmark on the certified
mail card(s),within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail,the applicant may submit the application to
the NPDES Unit
■ As evidence to the Commission that the local govetnment(s)failed to respond within 15 days,the.applicant-shaR submit a
copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter sting that the local govemment(s)failed to respond within the
15-day Period.
bu uc-dons to the XAc:al G mermment The nearby city and/or county goveaunent which may have or has jurisdiction over
any part of the land on which the proposed facHity or its apt tenanees are to he located is required to complete and retam this
form to the applicant within 15 days of receipt The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local governmen
(City/County)
Does the city/county have Orisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facikt'y and its appurtenances are to be
located? Yes M14o[ ] If no,please sign this form,have it notarized,and return it to the applicant
Does the city/county have is effect a zoning or subdivision ordinance? Yes boor No[ j
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect,is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the ordinance? Yes[ ]
No[ ]
Date - � 2©!� � •5 !L�
State of Nognt P�- 'County ofel LL
l✓�
4n this day of -a i O_personally appeared before mie,the said
name - • V�� t o me known and known to me to be the Peizon described in
and who executed foregoing document,and he'(or she)acknowledged that he(or she)executed thesanift and b ' duly sworn
by me,made oath that the statements in the foregoing,document are true.
My Commission expos �Q"a�'.• In .(Signature of Notary _
No
ZZ
- - fir.✓. •`' :r`', •..`: nt � :� � ..
FAA Giddas:oe Document Version: June 23,2005
Dnisis R nfR

l �
A & D Water ervice nc.
P.O. Box 1407 Pisgah Forest, NC 28768 828-884-9772 Fax [phone]
March 30,2011
Rick Lenderman, PE
228 West Road
Moore, SC 29369
Rick,
Please find enclosed the government review form from Henderson County.We never recieved the signed copy back from
Mills River. I sent the form to them twice.
Jreyyaver, President
A&D Water Service, Inc.
State of North Carolina
County of Transylvania
I, Pamela H LandUth. a Notary Public for said county, do hereby certify
that Aubrey Deaver personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged
the execution of the foregoing instrument. Witness my hand and seal this
the 30th day of March, 2011.
Notary Public ���,, NDR��y•�• Expiration