NC0057703_Permit Issuance_20070718

of WA
�0� pG Q '
yr' co
NCDENT
o llc
Mr. Mike Harwood
Aqua North Carolina, Inc
202 McKenan Drive
Cary, NC 27511
Dear Mr. Harwood:
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
July 18, 2007
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NCO057703
The Cape Regionalization
New Hanover County
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal and regionalization of the
subject permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued
pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently
amended).
The following changes from the draft previously sent to you for review are:
➢ Actual dates for when certain limits become effective will be included
➢ Limits and monitoring for fecal coliform will expire when revisions to rule 15A NCAC 2B become effective.
➢ A daily maximum of 276/ 100 ml for enterococci has been added in accordance with EPA requirements.
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 permit that may be
required. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Jim McKay at telephone number (919)
733-5083, extension 595.
Sincerely,
� /S.--
/' ' Coleen H. Sullins
cc: Central Files
Wilmington Regional Office/Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit
N. C. Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit Phone: [phone]
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 fax: [phone]
Internet: h2o,enr.state.nc.us DENR Customer Service Center.1800 623-7748

Permit NCO057703
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-2IS. 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,
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Fairways -The Cape
900 Cape Boulevard
Wilmington .
New Hanover County
to receiving waters designated as the Cape Fear River in the Cape Fear 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 September 1, 2007.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on December 31, 2011. .
Signed this day July 19, 2007
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NCO057703
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.260 MGD wastewater treatment system with
the following components:
♦ Influent pump station
♦ Bar screen
♦ Flow splitting device
♦ Four extended aeration package treatment plants
♦ Aerated sludge holding tank
♦ Tablet chlorination
♦ Chlorine contact chamber
♦ Recording flow meter
♦ Effluent pump station
♦ Eight -inch force main (approximately 7750 feet)
The facility is located at Fairways -The Cape at 900 -Cape Boulevard, Wilmington
in New Hanover County.
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality,
expand the wastewater treatment plant capacity to 0.40 MGD, and,
3. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality,
expand the wastewater treatment plant capacity to up to 0.75 MGD, and
4. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into the Cape Fear River, classified SC waters in the Cape Fear River Basin.

m,r�mm
F�
&--� e-�t
Discharge Location
I Facility Information I
tude:
34'04'34" Sub -Basin: 03-06-17
Eitude:
77'55'36"
A Name:
Carolina Beach
am Class:
SC
eiving Stream:
Cape Fear River
Facility
Location
Fairways -The Cape
t=orth NCO057703
New Hanover County

Permit NC0057703
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expansion
above 0.260 MGD or expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
;?. � �'ru+3
`,�z' `�. -`� F; � "4:
`'#`�' "=
c� a � 't�kbf
� ` 1s"Y. .. zf"�"i
;
`'k S'i� '".iY'" fin.. `•�^.:t Y^"4'. iF''.. '�`&'4�^ :a
y*kCHARACTERISTICS�ktk
� v' ri`.^ .a`�.vy°3r":u"w, �..} +,:; pk �:.4 :+.'.. �a :`„'f: 'v�2
�,SZ
.H,, }2+Y4 �J 'xY qL7 xz i `x �.}flS t t �i
N LfSi'S SxGfi 'r sY '��'4 -?�1 ',�� "�`'u"y teTrz�`�3 3n•
Monthly ;
Weekly y�`
� {Daily , <
Measurement
Sample�Type
Sample—ocaSf�on, w
; � ", s
{ Z Y
§. i
k}'
Maximum-
Frequency
F .k ,t� ..k.� $., _ ;' ;;
,Average '
...Average �
r
.
Flow
0.260 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or.Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Fecal Coliforml (geometric
200/ 100 ml
400/ 100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
mean
Enterococci2 (geometric mean)
35/ 100 ml
276/ 100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine3
13 ug/ L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°G)--
/
Weekly
Grab -'
-Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
pH4
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The limits and monitoring for fecal coliform will expire when revisions to rule 15A NCAC
2B become effective.
2. The enterococci limit becomes effective on March 1, 2008. Monitoring is required
beginning on the effective date of the permit.
3. The Total Residual Chlorine limit shall become effective March 1, 2009. Monitoring and
reporting shall begin on the effective date of this permit.
4. The pH shall not be less than 6.5 standard units nor greater than 8.5 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

Permit NCO057703
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
During the period beginning upon expansion above 0.260 MGD and lasting until expansion
above 0.400 mgd, or expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location
Flow
0.40 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
(April 1 - October 31
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
November 1 - March 31
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1 -October 31
2.0 mg/L
10.0 mg/ L
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
November 1 - March 31
4.0 mg/L
20.0 mg/ L
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Enterococci (geometric mean)
35/ 100 ml
276/ 100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
13 ugl L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygenl
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
PH2
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/ L.
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.5 standard units nor greater than 8.5 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

Permit NCO057703
A. (3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
During the period beginning upon expansion above 0.400 MGD and lasting until
expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges
shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location
Flow
Up To 0.750
MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
(April 1 - October 31
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
3/ week
Composite
Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)
November 1 - March 31
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
3/ week
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/ week
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1 - October 31
2.0 mg/L
10.0 mg/ L
3/ week
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
November 1- March 31
4.0 mg/L
20.0 mg/ L
3/ week
Composite
Effluent
Enterococci (geometric mean)
35/ 100 ml
276/ 100 ml
3/ week
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
13 ug/ L
3l week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygenl
3/ week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
pH2
3/ week
Grab
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/ L
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.5 standard units nor greater than 8.5 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts

Permit NCO057703
A.(4.) ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REQUIREMENT
Prior 'to expansion stages, the permittee shall submit a detailed analysis of all available
means to dispose of this facility's wastewater. -This Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA)
shall be prepared in compliance with the Division's guidance document for EAAs.
If no EAA is submitted, the Division may reopen and modify this permit to increase
monitoring frequencies or change the effluent limits as necessary to protect the receiving
stream.
A.(5.) PERMIT RE -OPENER: TMDL IMPLEMENTATION
The Division may, upon written notification to the Permittee, re -open this Permit in order to
incorporate or modify effluent limitations, monitoring and reporting requirements, and
other permit conditions when it deems such action is necessary to implement TMDL(s)
approved by the USEPA.

FACT SHEET FOR EXPEDITED PERMIT RENEWALS
Reviewer/Date
Jim McKay/ 02/15/2007
Permit Number
NCO057703
Facility Name
Aqua North Carolina, The Cape
Basin Name/Sub-basin number
Cape Fear/ 03-06-17
Receiving Stream
Lower Cape Fear
Stream Classification in Permit
SC
Does permit need NH3 limits?
Has already
Does permit need TRC limits?
Yes, add
Does permit have toxicity testing?
No, not required
Does permit have Special Conditions?
Yes
Does permit have instream monitoring?
No, add
Is the stream impaired (on 303(d) list)?
Yes, low DO
Any obvious compliance concerns?
No
Any permit mods since last permit?
No, but this revision is a mod
Existing expiration date
12/31/2006
New expiration date
12/31/2011
New permit effective date
5/l/2007 (estimated)
Miscellaneous Comments:
•
This permit revision is a regionalization. The Cape, permitted for up to 0.35 mgd is
combining with Ocean Forest Lakes (NC0059978), permitted for 0.4 mgd but never
built. The Ocean Forest Lakes permit will be rescinded.
•
Added enterococci limits and compliance schedule. Fecal Coliform limit is phasing
out.
•
Added TRC limits and compliance schedule.
•
Revised effluent and limits pages,for staged expansions to 0.4, and up to 0.75 mgd.
•
Expansions above 0.5 mgd will change the facility from Grade II to Grade III,
resulting in more frequent sampling.
•
Dissolved oxygen reporting has been added to the permit.
•
Added Cape Fear TMDL re -opener clause.
•
Added weekly average ammonia-N limits at 3 times the monthly average limits.
•
A TMDL is being developed for the Cape Fear River. Once it is finalized and
allocations made (2008 or 2009 time frame), this permit may be re -opened and limits
added. Sample requirements will be changed as needed. A full fact sheet should be
prepared at that time:

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of Said County and State,
T. Weil-Tallmadge
Who, being duly sworn or affirmed, according to the law, says that he/she is
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING MANAGER f
.-4
of THE STAR -NEWS, a corporation organized and doing business under the Laws of the State of
North Carolina, and publishing a newspaper known as STAR -NEWS in the City of Wilmington
PUBLIC NOTICE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION/NPDES UNIT 1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A NPDES WASTEWATER PERMIT On the basis
of thorough staff review and application of NC Gen
pit -�fo the�person�s) � ••
d t elow effective+.45
ufrom the,puglish
of:this notice: +,� �,I T
.,,en:,,.
co nmer,ts was inserted in the aforesaid newspaper in space, and on dates as follows:
rdmg the„p'foposed`a
ut :will be accepfed�X
111�30 days.i after .thee
3/3 Ix
sh ;date ;of
e ';All comments
ved: pnor ,to that'!• �
are, constde�ed m, ,!
finals determinatioris. And at the time of such publication Star -News was p newspaper meeting all the requirements and
It r- Thep Die oes oa,, qualifications prescribed by See. No. 1-597 G.S. of N.C.
y Division of, Water:
- may decide or
ipppbf i edeanng for'
the .'JDvesioo
e =a significant;'
of public interest Title: CLASSIFIED ADVER. MGR
.;
ofahe draft permit' Sworn or affirmed to, and subscribed before me this yo��°Sp°eye®
other supMilporting) �,1 n p Ct�7lI ��, d.�{� ekeed
atton on e.>used /"`n � , A.D., , D o 7 ev,
temilne conditions % `°
t in the draft' • In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affxd fficial seal, �Cl and
are;a4lable upori i . r
t and payment oh year aforesaid.
t(� �0�� (ti
is f reproduction y J`'� `ti
orTrmentsei and/orN' ( s 17
is for information,:) o
¢ NC Division 3oi774WAJQAA--°CIA 2?
Quality et-T the ;
address orcall the' N lic
�our4e Branch at'i �. � e�
m„ xsa ��:363 Y P day of �1 Co - 20�
nts can � tso ne M commission expires se �#101Pt✓� ®oar
ant ncmail net ;�
nc u!e t e NPDES�
lumber {attacfiedj �-
"A pe suos at ay a aforegoing affidavit with the advertisement thereto annexed it is adjudged by the Court that the said
t•;�he division of: ro erl made and that the summons has been duly and legally served on the defendant s
iva(ity at,:53z-lv:; P P Y Y g Y � )•
/_�Street,�:Raleigh; _
14 1148 between"•.
rs :of s tlo a m of
1 p;m to review' D
ion
L� Mir-
M.m o�-. _' o ar Qv+_ w = v 3 0 0„�,, Clerk of Superior Court
m -omno� pc� U: -
nz �(v °-ou moo:= w�
r,i�Uuc�o�Omm�vy= 'uo°ow``mZ t no
u m >1 >w v'-
m°1Nv mo.Em oo m;; vOcc01,'�ccom•cw Em3c2'R`_` mlL0/oL
Dv,�mEmaw°. Q U =m vLa atr+m"rxv as^vrnm ._'. 3 mai
mLL E:.t m3 m =z o�w° oa a=i of Tc uo
L3 von .� E 3��'t�U�Qom wmcava,3=�
a/.p_O ma/00 Ul m o,L ,✓,Nm,n LLU,n Jm°J m` .
�avzQoam aMU-0N f='m'�'c"amYw u o�ow pDv In,
U y`oEm-0.>Lmm.::>rnm_,.vymJ,,,oam•°mdi=o -o. win 1`� ;•..� ,.
--'vyne'u.�+ mUoa) .3o LamEc�nU• m=�aQO oc mmL,
myy,mmit?oCi�rn€♦Uin,.m�owcw:ou E'— " v0E�-m:a€=U .. ,y cn
m3-v�y�1-Um�m.vv-" °vw:U0:c 0), Z41U--� o-o Ong `=i E�mvm>
- - � L Q'p �LL.-y o'O-L'E m ua+ w.X E:N L a) m_.=,�
U Z IL o -7 o X•, o •,n H C� �' >'. � m U7 U v /

30.3.7 Cape Fear River from L&D 3 to L&D1
The following permit limits from the 2000 basin plan continue to be recommended for oxygen -
consuming wastes.
New and expanding municipal discharges >1 MGD: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = lmg/1
New and expanding municipal discharges <1 MGD: BOD5 = 12mg/l, NH3-N = 2mg/1
New industrial discharges >1 MGD: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = Img/1
New industrial discharges <1 MGD: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = 2mg/1
Expanding industrial discharges: site specific best available technology or
130135 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = 2mg/1
30.3.8 Cape Fear River from Lock and Dam #1 to the Lower Cape Fear River Estuary
The following permit limits from the 2000 basin plan continue to be recommended for oxygen -consuming
wastes.
New and expanding municipal discharges >1 MGD: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = I mg/1
New and expanding municipal discharges <1 MGD: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = 2mg/l
New industrial discharges: BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = 2 mg/I
Expanding industrial discharges: site specific best available technology or
BOD5 = 5mg/l, NH3-N = 2mg/I
A TMDL is being developed to address low dissolved oxygen levels in the Cape Fear River
estuary. This may require further reductions in permit limits for discharges of oxygen -
consuming wastes into this segment of the Cape Fear River. Expanding discharges will be
carefully considered on a case -by -case basis.
30.4 Animal Operations Wastewater Treatment and Disposal
In 1992, the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) adopted a rule modification (15A
NCAC 2H.0217) establishing procedures for managing and reusing animal wastes from intensive
livestock operations. The rule applies to new, expanding or existing feedlots with animal waste
management systems designed to serve animal populations of at least the following size: 100
head of cattle, 75 horses, 250 swine, 1,000 sheep or 30,000 birds (chickens and turkeys) with a
liquid waste system.
These systems are design to treat liquid waste and spray the waste at agronomic rates onto fields
where the nutrients are assimilated by crops. Failures in the waste treatment systems that impact
surface waters are discussed in the subbasin chapters.
Chapter 30 — Wastewater Treatment and Disposal 275

RE: The Cape
Subject: RE: The Cape
From: "Mark McIntire" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 08:48:01 -0500
To: "James McKay" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Gil Vinzani" <[e-mail]>, "Vanessa Manuel" <[e-mail]>
Thanks for the note Jim. I must admit that I'm confused. When the package for
The Cape was submitted, it was explicitly for renewal with modification. The
cover letter to the package specifically indicated that the request was for
renewal with expansion.
You did indicate that the flow from Ocean Forest could be regionalized to The
Cape but that the flow from Dolphin Bay could not because of TMDL issues. I
recommend that the draft permit for The Cape be developed and include phased
flow to accommodate connection of the Ocean Forest flow. Once those permits
are issued, I'd expect Aqua to request rescission of the Ocean Forest permit
sometime in 2007.
I've attached the cover letter that accompanied the submittal for The Cape.
Mike at Aqua has still not seen the draft permits for Ocean Forest and
Dolphin Bay. Vanessa e-mailed me the text of those permits so I will look
them over and get back to you no later than Monday of next week so that they
can be issued.
Thanks for your help with this. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you
have additional comments or questions.
Regards,
Mark
-----Original Message -----
From: James McKay [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:13 AM
To: Mark McIntire
Subject: Re: The Cape
Mark:
This is the last correspondence I have with regard to the Cape permit.
Jim McKay
Mark McIntire wrote:
IThanks Jim. Not sure how Aqua will respond. I'll let you know as soon as I
get a chance to sit down with them.
Regards,
Mark
-----Original Message -----
From: James McKay [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 9:44 AM
To: Mark McIntire
Cc: Gil Vinzani
Subject: Re: The Cape
Mark:
We did get partial resolution of your request for regionalization at The
Cape. We found out that the TMDL being developed for the Lower Cape
1 of 2 1/4/2007 8:50 AM

RE: The cape
Fear estuary ends just above Snows Cut. The Cape.and the proposed Ocean
Forest WWTPs are within the TMDL area, but the Dolphin Bay plant is
outside of it. We were able to get agreement for regionalization of The
Cape and Ocean Forest WWTPs, but not Dolphin Bay. How does your client
want to proceed?
Best regards,
Jim McKay
Mark McIntire wrote:
.Good morning guys. Just wanted to check in with you for any news on
your meeting with Michelle.
Thanks,
Mark
***Mark McIntire, PE*
*Stearns & Wheler,** P**LLC*
*3128 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 140*
*Raleigh, NC 27615*
*P [phone]*
*F [phone]*
Content -Description: renewal letter.doc
renewal letter.doc Content -Type: application/msword
Content -Encoding: base64
2 of 2 1/4/2007 8:50 AM

To: NPDES Permitting Unit
Surface Water Protection Section
Attention: Vanessa Manuel GEC 1 3 ZUuo
Date: 12/06/06
a �.t
�rr.rMA H
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION -
County: New Hanover County
Permit No. NCO057703
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address:
Facility: Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
900 Cape Boulevard
Wilmington, NC 28412
Mailing: Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
202 McKenan Drive
Cary, NC 27511
2. Date of Investigation: File Review
3. Report Prepared by: Linda Willis
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: N/A
5. Directions to Site: From Wilmington, take US Hwy 421 S to The Cape Golf and Racquet
Club (approximately one mile north of Snow's Cut Bridge). Travel into the subdivision and
turn right on the dirt access road '/4 mile from the entrance.
6. Discharge Point, List for all discharge points:
Outfall 001:
Latitude: 34' 4' 26" Longitude: 770 55' 26"
U.S.G.S. Quad No: U-52 U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Carolina Beach, NC
7. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): 10' AMSL.
8. Location of nearest dwelling: Approximately 500 feet south
9. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Cape Fear River
a. Classification: Class "SC" Waters
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: CPF 03-06-17

C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Fishing, boating,
secondary recreation and commercial shipping.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted: 0.26 MGD
b. What is the current permitted flow limit? 0.26 MGD
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility? unknown
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to Construct
issued in the previous two years: None.
Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater
treatment facilities: influent pump station, flow splitter box, bar screens, 4 train
extended aeration package plants utilizing diffused air, four secondary clarifiers,
chlorine feed disinfection with contact chamber, effluent pump station, aerated sludge
holding tank, continuous recording flow meter.
e. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: N/A
f. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Chlorine
g. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Lewis Farms Permit No. WQ0000455
3. The compliance history for this facility within the past permit cycle is as follows:
The facility has had a good compliance record during the past permit cycle with the
exception of two violations. Two daily Fecal Coliform exceedances in June 2006 (not yet
assessed) and one pH violation in November 2004 resulting in a notice of violation.
4. Treatment plant classification: Class 2
5. SIC Code(s): 4952
PART III -OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
(municipals only) involved? N/A
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: N/A.
5. Other Special Items: N/A

PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The permit renewal application requested the permit be reissued with an increase in flow to
accommodate expansion to 0.83 MGD. This request is based on the premise that Dolphin Bay (.08
MGD) and Ocean Forest Lake (0.40 MGD) would be eliminated and those flows accommodated by
The Cape WWTP. The Wilmington Regional Office is in favor of regionalization.
Dolphin Bay (as stated in the staff report dated 12/06/2006) has an average flow of 0.02 MGD, with
flow exceeding 0.10 MGD during rain events. This data suggests inflow and infiltration problems.
The remedies may be as easy as inspecting residential clean outs to ensure residents are not
dewatering their property during rain events and inspecting manholes for inflow: Manhole inserts
can prevent stormwater from entering the collection system. Ocean Forest Lakes is primarily built
out and is primarily (-80%) served by septic systems. The flow allotted- to NPDES Permit No.
NC0059978 for Ocean Forest Lakes was never utilized, nor needed.
The Cape WWTP has no backup capacity to allow for any of the 4 treatment trains to be taken out of
service completely for major repairs. The facility is showing signs of age and corrosion. The
structural integrity inspections identified tension members, top cap and wall gussets that need repair
in Aeration Basins 1, 3 and 4. The clarifier and chlorine contact chamber require repair to corroded
sections. The facility has no effective means to lime stabilize sludge. Manual mixing is required
and appears to be somewhat ineffective. The facility has very limited sludge storage capability. The
facility should exercise more frequent sludge disposal. Inadequate wasting appears evident, as the
past several compliance evaluation inspections have commented on the appearance of an old
activated sludge and problems with ashing in the clarifiers.
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. has submitted (with their permit renewal application) an EAA, which
identifies the need for 0.83 MGD to provide regionalization. Although the estimated flow need
appears excessive, the benefits of a new facility will provide improved wastewater treatment (Aqua
North Carolina, Inc. will be expected to add tertiary treatment as stated in the EAA), reliability and
the opportunity to achieve minimum design criteria that does not currently exist with Dolphin Bay or .
The Cape. The speculative permits limit page to accompany the expansion to 0.83 MGD will require
a change in facility classification. The new plant will be a class 3 (currently a class 2) facility which
will increase effluent sampling frequencies to 3/week (rather than weekly) for pH (effluent (E)),
temperature (E), BOD, 5-day (Influent (1), E), total suspended solids (I,E), Fecal Coliform (E),
Enteroccoci (E), dissolved oxygen (E, upstream (U), downstream (D)), ammonia (E), total residual
chlorine (TRC) (E), and conductivity (E, U, D). Enterococci monthly average limit of 35/100 ml
shall be added (discharge to Snow's Cut). TRC limits of 17 µg/L shall be imposed. BOD-5 day
monthly average limitations will be 5.0 mg/L and 7.5 mg/L (April 1-October 31 and November 1-
March 31) and daily maximum limitations of 7.5 mg/L and 15.0 mg/L (April 1-October 31 and
November 1-March 31). Total nitrogen and total phosphorus monitoring will be included with a
quarterly frequency. The permit should require that an A to C for the expansion be submitted to the
Division and construction of the new facility complete before the expiration of the upcoming permit,
otherwise upon the next renewal, the permitted flow of 0.83 MGD and it's associated speculative
limits will be removed from the permit.

With the inclusion of a 17 µg/L TRC limit (2/week frequency), the current 0.26 MGD permit
limitations page appears to be in accordance with the Cape Fear River Basinwide permitting strategy
and 15A NCAC 2B.0500 (for a class II facility).
With the incorporation of the recommendations of this staff report, the Wilmington Regional Office
recommends renewal of the NPDES Permit NC0057703 provided no significant adverse public
comment is received. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
kyz
port Preparer
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Date
Date
cc: WiRO NPDES Permit File New Hanover Co. The Cape NC0057703
Central Files
Linda Willis

RE: The Gape
Subject: RE: The Cape
From: "Mark McIntire" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 09:56:01 -0500
To: "James McKay" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Gil Vinzani" <[e-mail]>
Thanks Jim. Not sure how Aqua will respond. I'll let you know as soon as I
get a chance to sit down with them.
Regards,
Mark
-----Original Message -----
From: James McKay [mailto:james.mckayCncmail.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 9:44 AM
To: Mark McIntire
Cc: Gil Vinzani
Subject: Re: The Cape
Mark:
We did get partial resolution of your, request for regionalization at The
Cape. We found out that the TMDL being developed for the Lower Cape
Fear estuary ends just above Snows Cut. The Cape and the proposed Ocean
Forest WWTPs are within the TMDL area, but the Dolphin Bay plant is
outside of it. We were able to get agreement for regionalization of The
Cape and Ocean Forest WWTPs, but not Dolphin Bay. How does your client
want to proceed?
Best regards,
Jim McKay
Mark McIntire wrote:
Good morning guys. Just wanted to check in with you for any news on
your meeting with Michelle.
Thanks,
Mark
***Mark McIntire, PE*
*Stearns & Wheler,** P**LLC*
*3128 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 140*
*Raleigh, NC 27615*
*P [phone]*
*F [phone]*
1 of 1 11/9/2006 10:32 AN

l �`iy� f�JJ•t t � 1 Lny
Ocean Forest
�Y' f i " h 3�" t t,. '`. �;� ��. •. 'L.. 6 g f •" y } •'J'X�� OZI� C`J,�y,•!�
O"`�
C y
t
�;22 i• �� f S t � x' j4 7 r '....� a-, � S�'S N"�
Ai$ i
W
1� t�-�t� t The Cape
1,. 76� t; .
"M
vie
( J i
fCsc t� cCs�'r
>
m(�, n j.+s Jt 3YA
' TONJ PT' , nY zL! i • F .
'!
rr 01-IGN`r�
kt,�; ' CGHT� f
,+� �.� � �iS # s a I � � �,. �. .,:j,,,� 7 ' �� .,r ,F i•yy, Y t��,�qx
fi a'�, ;r t.�•��1
�
JO "� �,f E t
LfGHTS ��• � v:'.
�� ��'
trf�
z
i
('.nnJrinh4 !Cl 1 QQR
Dolphin
Bay

The Cape WWTP Regionalization Engineering Alternative Analysis
Subject: The Cape WWTP Regionalization Engineering Alternative Analysis Report
From: Narayan Rajbhandari <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:54:38 -0400
To: [e-mail]
CC: michelle Woolfolk <[e-mail]>
Dear Jim,
As we discussed yesterday I briefly went through the Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternative Analysis Report. The Cape Plant proposes to discharge
affluent collected from the existing Dolphin Bay System and currently allocated plant
to the Lower Cape Fear River. Because the Cape Fear River is current listed in
303(d) list as an impaired water body due to low dissolved oxygen, assessment of this
proposal is not possible without a TMDL document. We are currently working with
UNC-Charlotte to develop a TMDL document for the Lower Cape Fear River basin. As of
today, we anticipate to get this document done by 2008. Until then, we would not be
able to make any decision in this regard. I am sorry for the inconvenient. Please
let me know if you need further information. Thank you.
With regards,
Narayan Rajbhandari
NC DWQ/ Planning/ Modeling Unit
1 of 1 9/27/2006 8:25 AM

Local Government Review Requirements
for the Issuance of New Non -Municipal Domestic Wastewater Discharge Permits
General Statute Overview
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 (c)(G) allows input from local governments in the issuance 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 -municipal domestic wastewater discharge facility until it has received a written statement from
each city and county government having jurisdiction over any part of the lands on which the proposed facility and its
appurtenances are to be located. The written statement 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
E;%fC shall not approve a permit application for any facility which a city or county has determined to be inconsistent with zoning
or subdivision ordinances unless the approval of such application is determined to have statewide significance and is in the best
interest of the State.
Instructions to the Applicant
Prior to submitting an application for a NPDES Permit for a proposed facility, the applicant shall request that both the
nearby city and county government complete this form.
The applicant must:
♦ Submit a copy of the permit application (with a written request for this form to be completed) to the clerk of the
city and the county by certified mail, return receipt requested.
♦ If either (or both) local government(s) fail(s) to mail the completed form, as evidenced by the postmark on the
certified mail card(s), within 15 days after receiving and signing for the certified mail, the applicant may submit the
application to the NPDES Unit.
♦ As evidence to the Commission that the local government(s) failed to respond within 15 days, the applicant shall
submit a copy of the certified mail card along with a notarized letter stating that the local government(s) failed to
respond within the 15-day period.
Instructions to the Local Government
The nearby city and/or county government which may have or has jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the
proposed facility or its appurtenances are to be located is required to complete and return this form to the applicant
within 15 days of receipt. The form must be signed and notarized.
Name of local government G (TY OF WiLM 6GrTW
(City/County)
Does the city/county have jurisdiction over any part of the land on which the proposed facility and its appurtenances
are to be located? Yes [ ] No [4 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 ordinance? Yes [ ] NoVN
If there is a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is the plan for the proposed facility consistent with the
ordinance? Yes [ ] No to
Date d Signature
ity Manager/County Manager)
State of609TH CA Kam: LWA , County of ?�Ew PM(NE91
On this day of k1 iiJ ,2LCyc, personally appeared before me, the said
name ����—i tSc 6 to me known and known to me to be the person
described in and who executed the foregoing document and he (or she) acknowledged that he (or she)
executed the same and being duly sworn by me, made oath that the statements in the foregoing document
are true. ��22
My Commission expires -7!.-Y'J .(Signature of Notary P blic
REBECCA LU1; Notary Public (Official Seal)
NOTARY allBLIC
�,+ '�4EW f1ANOVER FOt1 ti �`l, l�

Aqua North Carolina Inc
Aqua North Carolina owns and operates several small waste water treatment facilities in North Carolina,
mostly in the Piedmont and Coastal areas. They currently hold about 22 NPDES permits in N. C. They have
bought several facilities in the past few years, and are actively working to expand their market. They serve
subdivisions, golf courses and townhouse/ condo communities primarily, but do have some light industries also.
Aqua currently owns four NPDES permits in New Hanover County south of the City of Wilmington.
They are for facilities serving residential and light commercial development:
Facility Name
Permit Number
Permitted Capacity
Beau Rivage
NC0065480
0.5 mgd
The Cape
NC0057703
0.26 mgd expandable to 0.35 mgd
Dolphin Bay
NC0055107
0.08 mgd
Ocean Forest
NC0059978
0.4 mgd permitted, not constructed.
They would like to keep the Beau Rivage plant as it is, but to regionalize and consolidate the Cape,
Dolphin Bay and Ocean Forest (not built yet) into the Cape facility. To do this, they would like to increase the
permitted capacity of the Cape plant to 0.83 mgd in several stages (0.26>0.4>0.6>0.83). This is 0.09 mgd over
the currently permitted capacity of the three. They would then rescind the permits for the two other plants,
taking Dolphin Bay off-line, and not build the Ocean Forest plant. The area that would send waste water to the
Ocean Forest WWTU is currently on septic tanks; this proposal would connect these homes to the WWTP.
Aqua currently has 23 approved permits for sewer collection system extensions to connect subdivisions, and is
working on 18 other permits to add more developments to the system. Most of the homes are either under
construction, or planned for the future. They are requesting 0.09 mgd allocation for future growth.
Mark McIntire of Stearns & Wheler, PLLC has prepared an EAA for this proposal. In it, he points out
that this approach would significantly reduce the emissions from the current permitted values. At permitted
flow and current limits, the three combined could discharge 102 lb/day of BOD5. The expanded plant with
tighter BOD5 limits would discharge 34.61b/day, a 66% reduction of permitted BOD5-
Steams & Wheler has evaluated three alternatives to direct discharge. Their analysis, including capital
costs and present value of recurring costs is:
Alternative Net Present Value
Connection to a WWTP (Wilmington Southside WWTP) $16,154,000
2. Land Application $15,316,000
(There is not enough suitable land area available, but evaluated anyway)
3. Wastewater Reuse
$15,722,000
(Aqua does have some reuse facilities elsewhere, but no one in this area is available)
4. Direct Discharge $11,963,000
Details are available if anyone would like to review the application.
Jim McKay
9/14/2006

Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Environmental Engineers and Scientists
June 30, 2006
NC DENR—DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Point -Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Attn: Mr. Gil Vinzani, P.E.
RE: NPDES PERMIT RENEWAL
NCO055703 — AQUA NORTH CAROLINA, THE CAPE WWTP
Dear Mr. Vinzani:
3128 Highwoods Boulevard
Suite 140
Raleigh, NC 27604
tel. [phone]
fax. [phone]
web. www.steamswheler.com
On behalf of AQUA North Carolina, Stearns & Wheler hereby requests renewal of NPDES permit
number NCO055703 for The Cape WWTP.
With this renewal application for The Cape, AQUA is requesting expansion from 0.26 mgd to 0.83
mgd to accommodate flows from the Dolphin Bay WWTP (NC0055107) and Ocean Forest
(NC0059978). Aqua wishes to regionalize its Southern New Hanover County operations at The
Cape. The attached Engineering Alternatives Analysis is intended to support this request. While
an expansion in the strictest sense, increasing the permitted flow at The Cape to 0.83 mgd is more
accurately described as regionalization.
The current NPDES permit for The Cape has flow tiers of 0.26 and 0.35 mgd. In order to
facilitate bringing flows from the Dolphin Bay and Ocean Forest service areas online at The
Cape, Aqua requests flow tiers for The Cape of 0.26, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.83 mgd. Upon completion of
construction activities at The Cape WWTP, AQUA will submit a request for permit rescission for
the Dolphin Bay and Ocean Forest permits. Expansion of the treatment facility at The Cape to
accommodate flows allocated to the proposed Ocean Forest WWTP will preclude construction of
that facility.
Thank you for your efforts with this renewal. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not
hesitate to contact me at [phone] or Mike Myers at [phone].
Yours truly,
STEA & WHELE L C
Mark McIntire, P.E.
Project Engineer
cc: Mike Myers, Aqua North Carolina
AN
Stearns & Wheler
Companies
J U L 3 2006
QENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Connecticut Maryland Massachusetts New Hampshire New York North Carolina Virginia

NPDES APPLICATION - FORM D
For privately owned treatment systems treating 100% domestic wastewaters <1.0 MGD
Mail the complete application to:
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit 000055703
If you are completing this form in computer use the TAB key or the up - down arrows to moue from one
field to the next. To check the boxes, click your mouse on top of the box. Otherwise, please print or type.
1. Contact Information:
Owner Name
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Facility Name
The Cape
Mailing Address
202 McKenan Drive
City
Cary
State / Zip Code
NC, 27511
Telephone Number
[phone]
Fax Number
[phone]
e-mail Address
MJMyers®aquaamerica.com
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Check here if same address as above ❑
Street Address or State Road 900 Cape Boulevard
City Wilmington
State / Zip Code NC, 28412
County New Hanover
3. Operator Information:
Name of the firm, public organization or other entity that operates the facility. (Note that this is not
referring to the Operator in Responsible Charge or ORC)
Name Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Mailing Address 202 McKenan Drive
City Cary
State / Zip Code NC, 27511
Telephone Number [phone]
Fax Number [phone]
1 of 4
Form-D 1/06

NPDES APPLICATION - FORM D
For privately owned treatment systems treating 100% domestic wastewaters <1.0 MGD
4. Description of wastewater:
Facility GeneratinZ Wastewater(check all that apply):
Industrial
❑
Number of Employees
Commercial
®
Number of Employees 10
Residential
®
Number of Homes 700
School
❑
Number of Students/Staff
Other
❑
Explain:
Describe the source(s) of wastewater (example: subdivision, mobile home park, shopping centers,
restaurants, etc.):
This facility currently serves a number of subdivision with approximately 700 dwellings and a
clubhouse for the golf and racquet club. Upon expansion, the facility will serve approximately 2300
dwellings.
Population served: currently +/- 2200: upon expansion +/- 6900
5. Type of collection system
® Separate (sanitary sewer only) ❑ Combined (storm sewer and sanitary sewer)
6. Outfall Information:
Number of separate discharge points 1
outfall Identification number(s) 001
Is the outfall equipped with a diffuser? ❑ Yes ® No
7. Name of receiving stream(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall):
Cape Fear River
8. Frequency of Discharge: ® Continuous ❑ Intermittent
If intermittent:
Days per week discharge occurs: Duration: _
9. Describe the treatment system
List all installed components, including capacity, provide design removal for BOD, TSS, nitrogen and
phosphorus. If the space provided is not sufficient, attach the description of the treatment system in a
separate sheet of paper.
The existing facility is an extended aeration package plant consiting of influent pumping,
manual screening, flow sputter, aeration, aerated sludge holding, secondary clarification,
chlorine disinfection, effluent pumping and effluent flow measurement/recorder.
2 of 4 Form-D 1/06

NPDES APPLICATION - FORM D
For privately owned treatment systems treating 100% domestic wastewaters <1.0 MGD
10. Flow Information:
Treatment Plant Design flow 0.26 now, 0.83 upon expansion MGD
Annual Average daily flow 0.17 MGD (for the previous 3 years)
Maximum daily flow 0.54 MGD (for the previous 3 years)
11. Is this facility located on Indian country?
❑ Yes ® No
12. Effluent Data
Provide data for the parameters listed. Fecal Coliform, Temperature and pH shall be grab samples, for all other
parameters 24-hour composite sampling shall be used. Effluent testing data must be based on at least three samples .
and must be no more than four and one half years old.
Daily
Monthly
Units of
Number of
Parameter
Maximum
Average
Measurement
Samples
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
3.0
2.0
mg/L
65
(BOD5)
260
3
geometric
65
Fecal Coliform
mean
Total Suspended Solids
27
7.7
mg/L
65
Temperature (Summer)
30
24.8
oC
65
Temperature (Winter)
22
17
oC
65
PH
7.2
7.0
Standard Units
65
13. List all permits, construction approvals and/or applications:
Type Permit Number Type
Hazardous Waste (RCRA) NESHAPS (CAA)
UIC (SDWA)
NPDES
PSD (CAA)
Non -attainment program (CAA)
NCO055703
14. APPLICANT CERTIFICATION
Ocean Dumping (MPRSA)
Dredge or fill (Section 404 or CWA)
Special Order of Consent (SOC)
Other
Permit Number
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in the application and that to the
best of my knowledge and belief such information is true, complete, and accurate.
3 of 4 Form-D 1/06

NPDES APPLICATION - FORM D
For privately owned treatment systems treating 100% domestic wastewaters <1.0 MGD
Michael J. Myers Division Manager
Printed name of Person Signing 'title
Signature
Date
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6 (b)(2) states: Any person who knowingly makes any false statement
representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document files or required to be
maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission implementing that Article, or
who falsifies, tampers with, or knowly renders inaccurate any recording or monitoring device or method required to be
operated or maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental Management Commission implementing
that Article, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $25,000, or by imprisonment not to
exceed six months, or by both. (18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides a punishment by a fine of not more than $25,000 or
imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both, for a similar offense.)
4 of 4 Form-D 1106

FACT' SHEET' FOR CXPCDI'1'CD REMENAL
Permit Number
NC OU 1747 3
Facility Name
UA N
Ot;rW-A
Reviewer
C11 V1"14
C'h
Basin/Sub-basin
0 3n6 -
17
Receiving Stream
C.4 F�;-,,, r Pt vc r
Stream Classification in permit
SG
Stream Classification in BIMS
_
Is the stream impaired (listed on 303(d))?
((e`, ver .
Is stream monitoring required?
No
Does the permit need NH3 limit(s)?
C $
-- q YE
Does the permit need TRC limit(s)?
E.5
3
Does the permit have toxicity testing?
A10
Are there special conditions?
Ye
Any obvious compliance concerns?
ZVVV
N
Existing Expiration Date
1,2 _ 3 1 _
20c)
New Expiration Date
12 _ 31 -
2 a
Miscellaneous Comments:
FWA
If expedited, is this a simpler permit or a more difficult one?

AQUA
North CarolinaTM
The Cape WWTP
Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
June 2006
/j\ Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Se� Environmental Engineers and Scientists
3128 Highwoods Blvd., Suite 140
Raleigh, NC 27604
[phone]

The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Prepared by:
Mark D. McIntire, P.E.
Project Engineer
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Approved for submittal by:
Michael J. Myers
Division Manager
AQUA North Carolina, Inc.

-'l
AQUA NORTH CAROLINA, THE CAPE WWTP
ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
NEw HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section1: Background............................................................................................
Section 2: Existing Conditions................................................................................
Section 3: Future Conditions...................................................................................
Section 4: Wastewater Disposal Alternatives.........................................................
Section 5: Summary and Recommendations...........................................................
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1 Use Support for the Lower Cape Fear River
2 Southern New Hanover County Parcels
3 Aerial View of the Project Area
4 Wetland Overlay of Parcels
2
4
8
10
23

The Cape Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
I Background
}
1.1 General Information
The Cape Wastewater Treatment Plant is located south of the City of Wilmington
in New Hanover County, North Carolina. It is situated at 900 Cape Boulevard in
Wilmington. The facility discharges via NPDES,permit number.NCO057703 to the
Cape Fear River approximately 1.35 miles due west of the plant site and
approximately 1.5 miles north of the confluence of the Cape Fear River and
Snows Cut.
I Originally permitted in 1.984, The Cape was owned by Fairway Utilities,
L�
Incorporated prior to 2003 and serves The Cape Golf and Racquet Club and
other light commercial establishments. Ownership was officially transferred to
AQUA North Carolina in -November of 2004.
The NPDES permit currently authorizes discharge of up to 0.26 mgd with a
second phase of 0.35 mgd. Condition A(3) of the subject permit requires
submittal of an Engineering Alternatives Analysis prior to expansion above 0.26
I mgd
1.2 Proposed Project
AQUA North Carolina currently holds four individual NPDES permits in New
Hanover County south of the City of Wilmington. These permits are for facilities
serving residential and light commercial development and are summarized in
Table 1.2.1.
3 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
LDS Engineering Alternatives. Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Emlmmnmtal Fsaw Scents

Table 1.2.1— AouA NPDES Permits South of Wilminaton
Facility Name
Permit Number
Ultimate Permitted Capacity
Beau Riva e
NCO065480
0.5 mgd
The Cape
NCO057703
0.35 mgd
Dolphin Bay
NCO055107
0.08 m d
Ocean Forest
NCO059978
0.4 mgd
Total
Permitted Flow
1.33 mgd
In an effort to regionalize operations and minimize discharges to surface waters,
AQUA intends to consolidate its southern service operations at The Cape, taking
Dolphin Bay off-line and making construction of the Ocean Forest treatment
facility unnecessary. Consolidation of these three facilities at The Cape
necessitates an ultimate permitted flow of 0.83 mgd. This Engineering
Alternatives Analysis is intended to support consolidation of wastewater
discharges at The Cape with expansion from 0.26 mgd to 0.83 mgd. NPDES
permits for the subject facilities are provided in Attachments A — C.
A\ 4 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Enrno­ Engineers — $demob

2 Existing Conditions
2.1 Current Facility Effluent Limitations
AQUA North Carolina currently holds four individual NODES permits in New
Hanover County south of the City of Wilmington. Under the proposed project the
Beau Rivage Plantation facility will continue to serve the northern portion of
AQUA'S service area discharging to the Cape Fear River. Southern operations will
be consolidated at The Cape. -
Facility effluent limitations for the impacted facilities are summarized in Tables
2.1.1 — 2.1.4.
Dolphin Bay — NCO055107
Originally permitted in 1984, the Dolphin Bay facility is currently permitted to
discharge up to-0.08 mgd to the Cape Fear River. -
Tahla 2 1 1— Fffhianf I imitations fnr Dninhin Bay
Parameter
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
Flow (mgd)
0.08
BOD5
30.0 mg%L
45.0 m /L
TSS
30.0 m /L
45.0 m /L
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
pH
- Between 6.8 and 8.5 Standard Units
Ocean Forest — NCO059978
The Ocean Forest permit was also originally issued in 1984. The current
permitted capacity is 0.4 mgd, though the facility has not been constructed.
Tahip 2-1.2 — Effluent Limitations for Ocean Forest
Parameter
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
-Flow (mgd)
0.4
BOD5 summer
5.0.m /L
7,5 m /L
.BOD5 (winter)
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
TSS
30.0 m /L
45.0 m /L
NH3-N summer
2.0 m /L
NH3-N winter
4.0 mg/L
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
pH
Between 6.8 and 8.5
Standard Units
5 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Steams &Wheler,PLLC Engineering Alternatives. Analysis
ErW—W a� ScewAft

The Cape — NCO057703
The Cape currently has a phased permit with effluent limitations for 0.26 mgd
and 0.35 mgd.. This -permit requires. submittal of an engineering alternatives
analysis prior to expansion above 0.26 mgd. The discharge is to the Cape Fear
i
River.
Table 2.1.3 — Effluent Limitations for The Cane. Phase 1
Parameter
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
Flow (mgd)
0.26
130135 .
30.0 mg/L
45.0 m /L
TSS
30.0 m /L
45.0 m /L
Fecal-Coliform
200/100 m1
400/100 ml .
H
Between 6.8 and 8-5
Standard Units
Table 2.1.4 — Effluent Limitations for The Cane. Phase 2
Parameter
Monthly Average
Daily Maximum
Flow (mgd)
0.35
-130135 (summer)
5.0 mg/L
7.5 m /L .
BOD.s winter
10.0 m /L
15.0 m /L .
TSS
30.0 mg/L
45.0 m /L .
NH3-N summer .
2.0-m /L
-NH3-N (winter)
4.0 mg/L
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
pH
Between 6.8 and 8.5 Standard Units
Existing permitted BOD5 load from AQUA's three southern New Hanover County
facilities is approximately 102 Ibs/day (Dolphin Bay, Ocean Forest, and The Cape
phase 1). With The Cape operating under phase 2 limitations, the permitted load
would drop to approximately 51 Ibs/day.
2.2 Water Quality
-- - AQUA's facilities in New Hanover County discharge to the Cape Fear River in
sub -basin 03-06-1.7 of the Cape Fear River Basin. Of the . 41 permitted
discharges in this sub -basin, the three facilities impacted by this EAA constitute
0.83 mgd of the 99.9 mgd permitted.
U The Cape Fear River from Toomers Creek to Snows Cut is listed on North
r Carolina's current 303(d) list as impaired for aquatic life because the dissolved
LJ
BAN 6 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Emit—nW EnWn a Sti bSM

f
oxygen standard was violated at monitoring sites BA642, BA644, BA709, BA713,
BA708, and BA716 (see Figure 1). The- Cape Fear River Basinwide Water
Lj Quality Plan indicates the percentage of samples collected at the aforementioned
ambient sites registering a dissolved oxygen content .less than the 5.0 mg/L
} standard. These percentages are summarized in Table 6.
As is illustrated by the data in Table- 2.2.1, dissolved oxygen improves
dramatically upon approaching the Cape Fear River estuary. Furthermore, at
LJ monitoring station BA716, samples with dissolved oxygen "concentrations less
? than the standard occurred only 10.4 percent of the time, approaching the point
of delisting. Monitoring station BA716 is located at marker 42 in the Cape Fear
-� River and is approximately 1 mile upstream of The Cape's discharge.
U
Table ZZ 1 Percent of DO Samples > Standard at Indicated Ambient Station
Monitoring Station
Approximate Distance
Upstream of The Cape miles
% of Samples .> -DO
Standard . .
BA642
13.5
42.9
BA644
13
37.1
BA709
9
29.5
BA713
5.7
23.2
BA708
5.6
16.4
BA716
1
10.4
It is evident ,from the above data that water quality improves significantly in the
Cape Fear River downstream of the City of Wilmington. It is evident that the
facilities operated by AQUA south of Wilmington do not appear to be contributing
to dissolved oxygen problems. in the River. This is not surprising in light of the
- River's 1,150 cfs 7Q10 at Wilmington's Southside WWTP.
The basinwide plan also cites the. considerable flushing of blackwater from the
Northeast Cape Fear River as a naturally occurring source of oxygen -demand.
The Cape Fear River's supplemental water quality classification of SW (swamp
waters) is recognition of the naturally occurring low dissolved oxygen.
7 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Eft—.,U Erg—ar d Swn fish

f '
2.3 Current Wastewater Flows
Of the three facilities to be regionalized, two are currently constructed and
discharging.
The Cape is currently permitted to discharge 0.26 mgd. Since June 2005, the
facility has averaged 0.195 mgd with a maximum monthly average of 0.227 mgd.
Dolphin Bay is currently permitted to discharge 0.08 mgd. Since June 2005, the
facility.has averaged approximately 0.02 mgd.
While existing flows are somewhat low, they are not a reflection of the pace of
�f development in the area. Additional permitted extensions are being constructed
monthly with a number of additional extensions poised to be permitted (see
i Section 3). .
I
L, 8 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
J Steams & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Envi—W engiwe Scw n

P
- 3 Future Conditions
Projected Wastewater Flow . .
AQUA North Carolina currently holds four individual NPDES permits in New
Hanover County south of the City of Wilmington. Under the proposed project the
Beau Rivage Plantation facility will continue to serve the northern portion of
AQUA's service area. Southern operations will be. consolidated at The Cape with
an expanded wastewater flow of 0.83 rhgd.
f AQUA North Carolina currently has sewer extension permits from the Division of
1-7 Water Quality for 396,780 gallons per day. These permits and flows are identified
in Table 3.1. In addition to existing extensions, AQUA is preparing sewer
extension permit applications for 18 additional properties. These additional
,G properties are identified in Table 3.2.
17 .
The flow currently permitted via sewer extensions and. the flow allocated -but not
- yet permitted account for 740,000 gpd. This flow includes the 80,000 gpd
LJ currently allocated in the Dolphin Bay service area, the 400,000 gpd allocated in
— the Ocean Forest service area, and the 260,000 gpd currently allocated in The
Cape's service.area. An additional 90,000 gpd of permitted flow will be needed to
- ; serve expected, but as yet unidentified growth.
Table 3.1— Sewer Extension Permits For AouA's Southern Service Area
Permit Number
Permitted Community
Allocated Flow
(gpd)
WQ0012407
Beckerwoods
10440
WQ0007355
Cape Villas.
6480
WQ0007439
Ca eside Village
22200
WQ0013046
Cypress Island - Saprano Point Ph 1
32640
W00016445
Cypress Island - Saprano Point Ph 2 .
10560 -
W00006146
Fairways at The Cape
14760
WQ0011647
Live Oaks Cassimir Commons
10800
WQ0011143
Old Cape Cod
33480.
W00011023
Pinehurst
14760
13961
Riparian Villas
36000
WQ0016941
Sedgley Abbey
20880
L, 9 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Steams & Whaler, PLLC
Ermo ml ErKp a and SewUsb

13828
Shi watch & East Bank Landing
47400
WO0022815
Snow's Cut Landing
19440
WO0009892
Sound Side
27000
WQ0010341
Telfair Forrest
13320
WO001.3168
Telfair Summit
7200
13829
The Sanctuary
6630
WO0011947 _
Tiara Park
7920
WQ0013045
Village at the Lighthouse
6630
WQ0010459
Dolphin Bay Subdivision
14400
.WQ0002862
Inlet Watch
23400
WQ0014972
Inlet Point Harbor
6840
WO0015325
Josephs. Landing
3600 -
Total Permitted Flow
396,780 gpd
Table 3.2 Additional Allocated Flow For AQUA'S Southern Service Area
Permit Number
Community
Allocated Flow_ .
(gpd)
Not Yet Permitted
Sylvester Property
12600
Not Yet Permitted
The Preserve at The Cape
10080
Not Yet Permitted
1800 River Rd Tract
18480
Not Yet Permitted
River Oaks Sect 8
34440
Not Yet Permitted
Nautical Green
14700
Not Yet Permitted
Windswept
19320
Not Yet Permitted
Oak Hill
63000
Not Yet Permitted
Pilot Ride
4320
Not Yet Permitted
Watermark Landing
27720
Not Yet Permitted
Light House
12000
Not Yet Permitted
Becker -Woods
12180
Not Yet Permitted
Sacchi Property
14400
Not Yet Permitted
Snow's Cut
25200
Not Yet Permitted
Lacy Property
7200
Not Yet Permitted
Seebreeze
21000
Not Yet Permitted
Webb Property
12600
Not Yet Permitted
Bonaire Road Property
21000 .
Not Yet Permitted
Other inquiries along existing mains
L 12980
Total Unpermitted But Allocated Flow
343,220 gpd
The total flow allocated to date is 740,000 gpd. The additional 90,000 gpd
making up the balance of the requested 830,000 gpd will provide a reserve
needed to accommodate future growth.
L, 10 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Env�owentW engl—aria soentc o

4 Wastewater Disposal Alternatives
-i As is required by the State of North Carolina's Anti -degradation Policy, codified in
Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code 2B :0200, alternatives to a
surface water discharge must be evaluated prior to construction of a new facility
or expansion of an existing facility. A discharge to surface waters is generally
considered the option of last resort. In accordance with this policy and the
Division of Water Quality's Engineering_ Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance
Document, a number of wastewater disposal alternatives have been evaluated
herein. These alternatives include connection to_ an existing wastewater
collection and treatment system, land application, wastewater reuse, surface
water discharge, and combinations of these alternatives.
4.1 Cost Sources
Substantial information is available for estimating capital and operation and
�- maintenance costs of the various alternatives. Where recent contractor bids are
-, available for similar AQUA North Carolina jobs they have been used to estimate
- capital costs. In the absence of bid information, cost curves published in US
EPA's Cost Summaries of Selected Environmental Control Technologies (EPA-
600/8-84-010) and Costs of Wastewater .Treatment .by Land Application (EPA-
7 430/9-75-503) have been used. Where cost information is published in dollars
other than 2006, the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Indices
(ENRCCI) have been used to express costs in present-day dollars. Example cost
curves are provided as Attachment D.
By far the most reliable source of cost information, is recent contractor bids .for
similar projects. That said, the dramatic increase in the cost of materials for
construction seen over the past several years makes cost estimation difficult.
11 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
� EAO&OIOOB1 W ErG,.--d StlBnf

4.2 Connection to an Existing System Alternative
There are currently 27 NPDES permitted facilities operating in New Hanover
County north of Snows Cut and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. In evaluating
the connection alternative, these existing facilities .were reviewed to identify
potential candidates for connection.
A facility is considered a .prel'iminary candidate for connection if it operates an
existing biological wastewater treatment system. After these facilities are
identified-, they are further reviewed for proximity to the facility being expanded.. In
this case, distance to the nearest accessible point. in a candidate's collection
system from The Cape was determined. A facility 'is further considered a viable. .
candidate for connection, if it is within a reasonable distance (about 5 miles) from
The Cape WWTP. All permitted facilities as of May 2006 are identified in Table
4.2.1. Facilities are identified as either a viable, candidate for connection or not.
For those facilities identified as candidates, miles from of The Cape WWTP is
provided.
Y�Al/ d 9 7 - Awnre Dnrmifforf Faciiifiac in Npw Hannvpr CnUnfv
Facility Name -.,
NPDES Permit .
Number
Connection:
Candidate?.
-Miles. From
'The,Cap-
AAF-McQuay, Inc.
_-
NCO083658
No
NA
Amerada Hess Terminal
NCO066711...
No
NA
Aqua — Dolphin Bay
NCO055107 -
-
NA
Aqua — Ocean Forest
NCO059978
-
NA
Aqua —_ The Cape
NCO057703
-
NA
Aqua — Beau Rivage
NCO065480
No .
NA.
Arteva Specialties
NC0001112
Yes
19
BASF
NCO059234
Yes
21
Hermitage House Rest. Home
NCO051969
No
NA
Wilmington — Sweeney WTP
NC0002879
No
NA
Wilmington — Northside WWTP
NCO023965 _ . _
Yes
12
Wilmington = Southside.WWTP
NCO023973
Yes
6.5
Corning,inc.
NC0003794 .
No
NA
CTI of North Carolina
NCO082970
No
NA
Elementis .Chromium
NC0003875
Yes
36
Exxon Mobile
NCO073181
No
NA
Flint Hills Terminal
NCO076732
No.
NA
Forton.Industries
NCO082295.
Yes
17
Global Nuclear Fuels
NC0001228
I Yes
1 19.5
12 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLG
EnWonme W Engineers and Seienfis

New Hanover County —Walnut
NC0039527
Yes
17
New Hanover Count — Landfill
NC0049743
Yes
20
New Hanover County — Wastec
NC0058971
Yes
15.75
New Hanover County — Airport
NC0081736
Yes
13.6
Progress Energy — Sutton
NC0001422
No
NA
South States Chemical
NC0023477
No
NA
Vopak Terminal
NC0073172
No
NA
Dixie Boy Number 6
NCO065307
No-
NA
Facilities not considered as viable candidates for connection include those
identified above as well as the Carolina Beach and Kure Beach WWTPs. These
facilities are south of the Intracoastal Waterway. Connection to these facilities is
considered environmentally infeasible. The hanging of an 18-inch sewer main
from the Highway 421 bridge conveying raw sewage is not. considered a
responsible option given the sensitive nature of the environment and the potential
for damage during active hurricane season. Furthermore,. the North Carolina
Department of Transportation would not permit such a crossing.
.Of the individually permitted facilities in the area considered. candidates for
connection, only Wilmington's Southside WWTP is less than 10 miles from The
Cape. At 6.5 miles distant, it is beyond the 5 mile recommended radius
articulated in the Division's Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance
-Document. Regardless, connection to Wilmington's Southside facility was
evaluated. This evaluation assumes that the City has capacity at the treatment
facility and would be willing to connect AQUA's southern New Hanover County
service area.
The City currently charges $1,620 to a typical residential customer outside City
limits for connection. Assuming 360 gpd per dwelling, the proposed project at
The Cape yields approximately 2,300 equivalent dwelling units. The connection
fee alone for 2,300 residential units outside City limits is approximately
$3,726,000. This figure does not include the costs associated with pumping and
piping.
13 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis

The County operates the Barnards Creek and Motts Creek Pump Stations
delivering wastewater to the Southside WWTP. The Barnard's Creek Station
currently has a. capacity of 800 gpm while the Motts Creek Station has a capacity
- of 1,200 gpm.- In order -to accommodate the 830,000 gpd contributed by. The
Cape, each pump station would need to be expanded by 1,450 gpm (accounts
for a peaking factor of 2.5). In addition, all forcemains and gravity sewers serving
I the treatment plant from the stations would likely also need to be replaced.
Without detailed information regarding the condition of the pump stations and the
condition and capacity of the sewers, costs for implementing this alternative
should be considered low -end estimates. Table 4.2.2 summarizes the capital
costs for this alternative. Table 4.2.3 summarizes the recurring costs for this
alternative. Table 4.2.4 summarizes the 20-year present value for this alternative.
Table 4.2.2 — Canital Costs. Connection to.INilminartnn Sniithside WWTP
'Ca- it - Costs -
Item
Quantity
Unit
Unit
Total
1450 gpm Pump Station at The Cape
1
LS
$ 600,000
$ 600,000
Pump Station Improvements @ Barnards Ck.
1
LS
$ 300,000
$ 300,000
Pump Station Improvements @ Mott's Ck.
1
LS
$ 300,000
$ 300,000
24-inch force main .to Motts Ck.
46,000
LF
$ 80
$ 3,680,000
30-inch force main to Barnards Ck.
15,000
LF
$ 115
$ 1,725,000
30-inch force main. to.Southside WWTP
4,000
LF
$ 115
$ 460,000
Engineering @ 10%
$ 707,000
City of Wilmington Connection Fee
2300
Each
$ 1,620
$ 3,726,000
Subtotal
$ 11,4981-000
Contingencies @ 30%
$ 3,450,000
Total Capital Costs
$14,950,000
14 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC - Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Em� � S�bSm

T..►.L. A 120 A n"�1 Dno_"rrinn /ncfc CnnnAr_finn fn Wilminatnn Sewthside WWTP
Recurring Costs
Item
Quantity
Unit
Unit
Total
The Cape Pump Station O&M Costs
1:
LS
$ 35,000
$ 35,000
Barnards Creek Incremental_O&M-Costs
1
LS
$ 35,000-
$ 35,000
Motts Creek Incremental O&M Costs
1
LS
$ 35,000
$ 35,000 -
Total Recurring Costs
$105,000
Includes electrical costs and maintenance.
7nALm A 9 A— Drnennt 1/ah.a flnnnar_finn fn Wilminnrfnn Sntithside WWTP
Present Value — 20-year @ 6% Rate -of Return
Capital Costs
$ 14,950,000
Present Value of Recurring Costs
$ 11204,000
Net Present Value
$ 16,154,000
4.3 Land Application Alternative
Land application of treated wastewater is becoming more common for smaller
treatment facilities.- Successful disposal requires application rates compatible
with the natural processes that occur in soils. The proposed 2T rules (scheduled
to replace the 2H rules) stipulate maximum loading rates, buffer requirements,
and treatment levels. These rules have been used as a guiding principle in this
analysis.
The highly developed nature of the service area combined with the high cost of
real estate and the poor soil quality make land application a questionable
alternative for wastewater disposal in this case. It has been evaluated assuming
a best case scenario. While the 2T rules stipulate a maximum loading rate of 50
inches per year for residential spray systems, this is on the higher end of loading
rates for systems comparable to the one described herein and has been used for
the purposes of this analysis (a recently. approved EAA for the Beau Rivage
WWTP assumed annual loading rates of 36 inches per year). The use of a 50
inch per year loading rate will decrease the required land area dramatically.
15 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
_j Emlmnme WErgjn and Stienrab

t
Consolidation. of the Dolphin. Bay WWTP and -the'. flow currently permitted to
- Ocean Forest at The Cape WWTP necessitates a permitted flow of 830,000
gallons per day. Assuming the very aggressive loading rate of 50 inches per
year, an area of approximately 223 acres is required for disposal alone. Buffer
requirements add an additional 12.1 acres. A 60-day storage lagoon with an
average depth .of 6 feet adds an additional 25 acres. The total land. requirement
for a surface irrigation disposal system is approximately 370 acres.
'Figure.2 is a parcel map of the project area -and identifies several large, adjacent, .
undeveloped parcels.- Figure 3 is an aerial photo of the project area revealing that
a number of the larger parcels are, or are in the process of being, developed.
The required land area for surface disposal assumes the suitability of sites. As
can be seen from Figure 4, the majority of the large parcels are designated
wetlands. Making these tracts suitable for surface irrigation would require
additional expenditures, to say nothing of the cost of wetlands mitigation. In
addition, the seven identified parcels total only 216 acres, well short of the 370
acres required..
Assuming additional suitable land can be identified, application of municipal
wastewater would require a. level of treatment substantially less than that
required for a surface water discharge. The 2T rules stipulate effluent quality no
4 worse than 30 mg/L BOD5, 30 mg/L total suspended solids, 15 mg/L ammonia -
nitrogen, and 200 fecal colonies per 100 mL, Treatment currently. exists for
260,000 gpd, meaning additional treatment of 570,000 gpd is required. Tables
4:3.1' — 4.3.3 summarize the capital costs, recurring costs, and present value for
this alternative. Note that the $5,000 per acre cost for land acquisition is
consistent with costs used for previous analyses. However, the unit cost per acre
is likely significantly higher than $5,000 due to the popularity of the area as a
vacation destination. These tables do not include wetland mitigation costs that
would likely be incurred for conversion of parcels for surface irrigation.
A06 16 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
I`F Steam &Wheler,PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
ENaumenW Eginneeis and Scientists

Tah/n A 3 1 _ rmnital !'nctc_ I and Annlinatinn
Capital. Costs - =
Item
Quantity
Unit
Unit Price
Total
570,000 gpd -conventional WWTP
T
LS
$ 3,000,000
$ 3,000,000
Pumping Station at Treatment Plant
1-
LS
$ 600,000
$ 600,000
50 Million- Gallon -Storage Reservoir
1
LS
$ 1,200,000
$ 1,200,000
Irrigation -System
370
Acres
$ 6,000
$ 2,220,000
Fencing
13,200
LF
$ 10
-$ 132,000
Engineering @ 10%
$ 715,000
Land Acquisition
370_
Acres
$ 5,000
$ 1,850,000
Subtotal
$ 9,717,000
Contingencies @ 30%
$ 2,915,000
Total Capital Costs
$ 12,632,000
Table 4.3.2 — Annual Recurrina Costs. Land ADDlication
Recurring Costs -
Item,
Quantity
Unit
Unit
Total
WWTP O&M
1
LS
$ 55,000
$ 55,000
Residuals Disposal
1
LS
$ 20,000
$ 20,000
Pump Station O&M Costs
1
LS
$ 35,000
$ 85,000
Irrigation System O&M
1
LS-
$ 55,000
$ 95,000
Staffing.
1040
Hours
$ 18
$ 18,700
Analytical Costs
1
LS
$ 10,000
$ 10,000
Total Recurring Costs
$ 234,000
InCIUtles electrical costs, cnemicai costs (IT necessary), ana maintenance.
Tahlp 4.3.3 — Present Value_ Land Annlication
Present Value- 20-year @ 6% Rate of Return
Capital Costs
$ 12,632,000
Present Value of Recurring, Costs
$ 2,684,000
Net Present Value
$ 15,316,000
4.4 Wastewater Reuse Alternative
Reclamation of treated wastewater is an increasingly common method of
wastewater disposal. The dominant users of reclaimed water are golf courses, of
which there is one in the service area. Use of reclaimed water for golf course
L+, 17 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
E�mtal Enpn a d SC tsts

irrigation is not considered a year-round alternative in North Carolina because of
the colder winter climate. While no storage requirements are explicitly required
by the proposed 2T rules, storage is highly recommended to accommodate flows
when irrigation is not feasible either due to weather or other unforeseen
circumstances. A minimum 60-day storage reservoir is recommended. Such a
reservoir would require approximately 25 acres (currently not available at the
treatment plant site). Setback requirements increase the land area needed for
wastewater storage to 60 acres.
The proposed 2T rules require a tertiary level of treatment for reclaimed water
because of the potential for human contact. These rules require a quality no
worse than 10 mg/L BODS, 5 mg/L TSS, 14 fecal colonies per 100 mL, and 10
NTLI.
While The Cape Golf Course is in the immediate vicinity of the treatment facility,
the course's managers have shown no interest in the use of reclaimed water for
landscape irrigation. They are currently served by existing irrigation ponds on the
golf course and have no need for alternative sources of irrigation water.
Furthermore, there is no incentive for the golf course to employ a reclaimed
water system as doing so would likely increase operating expenses.
Nonetheless, implementation of a reuse program has been evaluated with costs
identified in Tables 4.4.1 — 4.4.3. While it is evident that implementation of a full-
scale reuse program is not economically viable for The Cape at this time, AQUA
owns and operates numerous reclaimed water systems in North Carolina and will
continue to evaluate potential opportunities for reuse in the subject service area.
41\, 18 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Stearns R Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Evnvnieaet EKp+e ar S Deb

Tnhln A A 4 — f'nr%;#al !`ncfc Ranca Prnnram
.Capital Costs =
Item
Quantity
Unit
Unit Price
Total
830,000 .gpd. tertiary WWTP
1
LS .
$ 61600;000.
$ 6,600,000
Pumping Station -at Treatment - Plant
1
LS' -
.$ 600,000
$ 600,000
50 Million Gallon Storage Reservoir
1
LS
$ 1,200,000
$ 1,200,000
Irrigation System Modifications' @ GC
1
LS
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
Fencing
6500
LF_
$ 10
$ 65,000
Engineering @ 10%
$ 897,000
Land Acquisition
60
Acres
$ 5,000
$ 300,000
Subtotal
$ 10,162,000
Contingencies @ 30%
$ 3,050,000
Total Capital Costs.
$13,210,000
Tah/n A A 9 _ Annnal Racnrrinn f`ncfc_ RpucP_ Prnnram
Recurring Costs -- =
Item
Quantity
Unit
Unit-
Total
WWTP O&M
1
-LS
$ 75,000
$75,000
Residuals Disposal
1
LS
$20,000 -
$20,000
Pump Station O&M Costs
1
LS
$ 35,000
$ 35,000 =
Irrigation System O&M
1
LS
$ 55;000
$ 55;000-
Staffing
1040
Hours
$ 18
$ 18,700
Analytical Costs
1
LS
$ 15,000
$ 15,000
Total Recurring Costs
$ 219,000
'Includes electrical costs, cnemicai costs (IT necessary), anu maintenance.
Tahln A A 2 _ Drneant 1/alma Raiica Prnnram
Present -Value- 26-year @ 06 Rate of Return
Capital Costs
$ 13,210,000
Present Value of Recurring Costs
$ 2,512,000
Net Present Value
$ 15,722,000
4.5 Direct Discharge Alternative
While The Cape currently has phased effluent limitations for 0.26 and 0.35 mgd, .
in order to accommodate the flows from Dolphin Bay and the Ocean Forest
service area an additional 570,000 gpd of permitted capacity is needed. Effluent
limitations for the 0.35 mgd phase at The Cape currently require-5.0 mg/L BOD5
19 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
LON Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
_ .Emtronmental Engi- and SCe 6

and 2.0. mg/L NH3-N. during the summer months. Based on recommendations
outlined in -the Cape Fear .River Basinwide Plan, AQUA anticipates. summer
effluent limitations for BOD5"and NH3-N of 5.0 mg/L and 1.0 mg/L respectively:
- Because of the current limitations contained in the three. NPDES- permits to be
consolidated- at The Cape, expansion from .0.26 mgd to 0.83 rngd."will actually
result.in a decrease.irrthe permitted organic load to the Cape.Fear'River. Current .
-- - permitted BOD5 -load for the three facilities is -102 Ibs/day. Consolidation of these
4 .
discharges at The Cape with .an expanded.flow of 0.83 mgd will -yield. a permitted
BOD5 load of 34.6 Ibs/day. This constitutes a 66% reduction in the permitted
- BOD5 load. Furthermore;. expansion of operations at- The --Cape willrequire an
ammonia -nitrogen limitation of 1.0 mg/L..No ammonia -nitrogen -limit_ currently
exists for 0.34.mgd of. permitted flow between The Cape and Dolphin -Bay." "
In order to meet the effluent limitations expected to..be present in a modified
Perm -it, tertiary treatment will be required. An expanded- treatment facility at The
Cape will .include flow equalization to dampen peak, flows, multiple treatment
trains each including, extended aeration basins, and secondary clarifiers. Tertiary
+_ filtration will be included.
Pump station modifications- for delivery of treated effluent to the existing location
of. The Cape's. outfall will be- required to accommodate the higher flows. In
addition, it is. anticipated that modifications to the'._outfall structure .will be
necessary to accommodate the .higher. flows. Tables 4.5.1 4.5:3 summarize the
costs associated with the direct discharge alternative.
20 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
Emimmnental Engineers mW Sc6bm."

Capital_.Costs'
Item
Quantity
Unit
Uni'Price
Total
830,000 gpd tertiary WWTP.
T
LS
$ 6,600,000.
$ 6,600,000
-Pumping Station Modifications,
1
LS'
$ 300;000 -
$ 300;000
Outfall Line and'Steucture Modifications _
1
LS .
$ 150,000
$ 150,000
Engineering@ 10%:
$ 705,000
_
= Subtotal
$7,760,000
Contingencies @ 30%
$ 3,050,000
Total Capital Costs
.$103082,000
Table 4.5.2 -Annual Recurring Costs; Direct. uiscnarge
Recurring Costs .
'Item. � _
Quantity
.. Unit
Unit
Total
WWTP O&M
1
LS : _
$ 75,000
$75,000
Residuals Disposal
LS
$20;000
$20,000
Pump Station .O&M Costs
1
LS
$ 35,000 '
$ 35,000
Staffing
1040
Hours
$ .18 _
- $ 18,700
Analytical Costs
1 -
LS
$ 15,000
$,15,000
Total Recurring Costs.
$ 164,000
Incl(irles electrical costs. chemical costs 7if necessarv), and maintenance.
'r-ki- A C- ? _ Oreeenf 1/�/no
Present -Value = 20-year @ k Rate of Return _
-
Capital Costs
$ 1:0,082,000
Present-Value.of Recurring Costs'
$ 1,881,000
Net -Present Value
$11,963,000
4.6 Combination of Alternatives
Combinations of alternatives- are - difficult' to ,implement and effectively quantify
from a cost. perspective. Because the direct discharge alternative -is the least cost
—i alternative by a . considerable margin, implementation of -a combination of
�. alternatives will certainly cost more than the direct discharge.
—
Any combination of alternatives -must include.a surface water discharge because -
of cost. considerations: Connection of a portion of the wastewater flow to, be
- 21 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
1-06 Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC
. ErdimemenW Engineers ind S6enb.

regionalized at The Cape to another system does not make economic . sense:
— Connection to the South Wilmington facility_ should be considered an all -or -none
alternative because of the benefits realized -by economies of scale. Furthermore,
the proximity of.Wilmington's Southside facility from The Cape makes connection
an impracticable solution, either in part or in whole.
A combined surface water discharge -land application alternative is also -not .
practicable as this analysis has. very likely substantially underestimated the cost .
and overestimated the availability_of-suitable land in this portion of the county. In
addition, the incremental cost associated with. land application of :a portion of the
effluent .compared..to the decreased organic loading realized by an expanded_
surface. -water discharge does not make'economic-sense.
The only. combination that is practicable is a conjunctive use. operation with a
portion of effluent being reused during those periods when. climate. and operating
conditions permit. While there is an incremental cost associated ,with reuse on
The Cape Golf Course, a portion, if not- all, of the additional expenses. -for
distribution could. potentially be passed along _to the golf course._ . AQUA is,
committed to operating in an environmentally sensitive manner and will. continue
to investigate wastewater reuse opportunities.
LO,
Stearns & Wheler, PLW
a—W EMm_S.�..r.m
22
The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

5 Summary and Recommendation
This Engineering Alternatives Analysis has been prepared in support of an
expansion at AQUA North Carolina's The Cape WWTP, permitted- by NPDES
permit number NC0057703. Table 22 summarizes the present values computed
for each alternative evaluated herein.
Table 5.1— Alternatives Cnst Cmmnarisnn
Present Value of Alternatives for -Expansion. of The Cape to 0.83 mgd
Connection to Wilmington's Southside WWTP
$ 16,1.54,000
Land Application of Effluent
$ 15,316,000
Implementation of Reclaimed Water Program for Golf Course Irrigation
$ 15,722,000
Direct Discharge to the Cape Fear River
$ 11,963,000
Based on the present value analysis summarized in Table 22, the direct
discharge alternative is the most economically feasible of the environmentally
practicable solutions.
Expansion of The Cape with continued discharge to the Cape Fear River will
accommodate flows from the existing Dolphin Bay system as well as those
currently allocated to the Ocean Forest service area. Upon construction of the
expanded facility and. connection of Dolphin Bay and Ocean Forest, their NPDES
permits will be rescinded. Expansion of The Cape with cessation of discharge at
Dolphin Bay and no construction at Ocean Forest will yield a decrease in the
permitted BOD5 loading to the Cape Fear River of nearly 70%. Such reduction in
permitted loading makes expansion a favorable alternative for providing
outstanding wastewater collection and treatment to the residents of southern
New Hanover County.
23 The Cape WWTP Regionalization
L-06
Stearns & Wheler, PLLC Engineering Alternatives Analysis
_� Emlmnm Mleeginemandsue,IiM

A16'
Q 4re
dpf
iL Aw";
em 1.
, If
M I F. Tire K 0 IM.
I?
LJ,mro-ir
a

�114
e
kind
1de Ut
tw'
I
't Its „ eavl8w
.. .1
7�
`^
+ �lmney
Gt� • �
Beau Rivage WWTP -� y akte
Dr
f' Cape B1vvd,,
+ " qILI.sk
lie
AThe.Cape Outfall
�+��"!�y"y�+ti� �� • � Sea Breeze
0
Available
Parcels
Federal Land
Dolphin Bay WWTP
o4Lewis ID(
A0 2006 Europa Technologles '
W Image 9 2006 Terra Metri
The Cape WWTP 02006 Navteq t '�✓ya
Image ® 2006 Digita'IOlobe
Pointer 34`04'44.75" N 77a53'51.20' W elevl 14 It 5r ► St°"�"'irri Ing1111111111i10096 Eye alt 25363 It

Figure 2
Southern New Hanover County Parcels
AQUA
�'`''rn``w"helcr North Carolina..
ilI'lt�_In I+�
fI Land I
0.5 0 0.5 1 2
Scale in Miles
The Cape WWTP Regionalization
Engineering Alternatives Analysis

I—
COLUMBUS
C>
s bb Haan°w,
.`
Arrbfs�I mciftnK Swan
.+�.
Satht Won
FM C mta qty Swow
WOft
Des
MOD'
At
Mna
US'D support RA"
vq
5_Fpa11nrai'ad
Nat .R.Vad
No cu"
P-mm Racy.
Carty Baleda7
M.a*elauty
Figure 1 — Use Support for Lower Cape Fear
BAsss' .... PENDEh' I,
Asse �► , 6Ase7
Northwest i6a6eO 1:
.� NEW
Sandy BB"7
1 HANOVER
Creek i ' b Leland
Navassa DA644 :.
r Belvine
Boiling Spring
Lakes
a
BRUNSWICK
B_e39 66112
1 `7
BAD
Long Beach 4 ._^
i
Caswell! Beach
09 Wilmington
OA713 88439'
OE
aaZ
ICU
SAT22 1
5 0 5 10 Muss I
Modified from the Cape Fear River Basin Plan, Division of Water Quality

M
Attachment D
Cost Curve Information
Substantial information is available for estimating capital and operation and maintenance
costs. Where recent contractor bids are available for similar AQUA North Carolina jobs
they have been used to estimate capital costs. In the absence of bid information, cost
curves- published in US EPA's Cost Summaries of Selected Environmental Control
Technologies (EPA-600/8-84-010)- and Costs of- Wastewater Treatment by Land
Application (EPA-430/9-75-503) have been used. Where cost information is published in
dollars other than 2006, the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Indices
(ENRCCI) have been used to express costs in -present-day dollars. The figure below is a
set of example cost curves for wastewater lift stations taken ' from the Handbook of
Wastewater Treatment Process, page 5. The ENR index for the publish year is 2475.
The June 2006 ENR index is 7699. Costs are brought forward to June 2006 dollars by
multiplying costs by the factor 7699/2475. The average kWh cost in today's market is
$0.10%kWh.
COSTS -Assumptions: ENR Index = 2475 -
1. Construction -cost includes fully enclosed wet well/dry well pit structure; pumping equipment capable of
meeting the peak flow with largest unit out of service; standby pumping facilities, piping and valves within
structure; bar screens - mechanically cleaned. TDH = 10 ft.
2. Power costs based on $0.02AWh.
0.11-
Q
i.l ID 10 100
Wastewater Flow, Mgal/d
Wastewater Flow, Mgal/d
Similar curves are published for all major treatment processes for both capital and
operation and maintenance costs.