NC0088820_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20091009

Pender County Utilities Department /
Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
To
Evaluate Waste Disposal Alternatives
Prepared by
cm
5400 Glenwood Avenue
Suite 300
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
[phone]

MIN
e'021
Section 1
General Information
1.1 Project Identification
Pender County intends to develop, construct, and operate a new surface water
treatment plant (WTP) and related transmission mains. The proposed facility will be
located on property already owned by Pender County near the intersection of
Highway 421 and the New Hanover County line (property previously owned by
BASF). An NPDES permit is requested for the discharge of 900,000 gallons per day
(gpd) of process wastewater. The following information is provided as the Basic
Identification of the Project as requested in the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) NPDES Unit's Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance
Document (June 23, 2005):
■ Facility Name: Pender County Water Surface Treatment Plant
tok*�
■ County: Pender
rAN
■ Facility address: No street address at this time. Plant will be located near the
intersection of Highway 421 and the New Hanover County line (property
tmN
previously owned by BASF).
t=N
■ Facility telephone number: Facility has not been constructed. Pender County
MI,
contact information is as follows:
ok"N
Mr. Michael G. Mack, Director
Pender County Utilities Department
4K'�
605 E. Freemont Street
eXII-A
Burgaw NC 28425
ORN
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
t=N
■ EAA preparer's name: CDM (Bill Dowbiggin/Alex Travaglia)
�O,
■ EAA preparer's mailing address and telephone number: CDM contact information
MN
is as follows:
CDM
5400 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 300
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
Telephone [phone]
1.2 Detailed Description of Project
The recommended treatment process for the Pender County Surface WTP is based on
/aN conventional treatment of raw water from Cape Fear River. Construction of the new
/OtN WTP will be phased. Phase 1 will include a 2 mgd WTP with a 24-inch finished water
/ORa transmission main. The 2 mgd plant under Phase 1 will have the infrastructure
(concrete and building) in -place for rapid expansion by equipment addition to a 6.0
elm\ cm 1-1
1 �

Section 9
General Information
mgd capacity plant under Phase 2. Further permitting including an EA or EA
Amendment will be required to increase the capacity in the future to 6 mgd. The
treatment will require up to 10 percent water usage for filter backwashing,
sedimentation solids drainage and other uses.
A detailed description of the proposed WTP is provided in the NPDES Permit
Application - Short Form C - VIWTP (Appendix A).
1.2.1 Residuals Handling Approach
Two Residuals Basins will receive the sedimentation solids, washwater from the
sedimentation basins, filter backwash water, and filter -to -waste water. The residuals
basins will be used for storage and as equalization/ clarification basins. In normal
operation, backwash water and other high flows will be directed to one basin while
the other basin functions as a polishing basin. When one basin is down for cleaning,
the other basin will be decanted down prior to backwashing to capture the backwash
and then allow it to settle before decanting. Once a basin reaches 5 percent solids
concentration, bidding for contract removal will be needed.
Various alternative are evaluated in Section 2 for disposal of the decant from the
Residuals Basins.
1.2.2 Toxicity
The Residuals Basins contain water treatment plant process by-product wastewater
which is non -oxygen consuming. The only chemical that has potential toxicity related
to disinfection byproducts is chlorine (sodium hypochlorite), which is used for
primary disinfection and to provide a disinfectant residual. Dechlorination will be
used to remove chlorine.
1.3 Demand Projections
Water demand projections were prepared by CDM as summarized in a technical
memorandum (T vV on "Treatment Plant Capacity Demand Projections for Rocky
Point - Topsail Scott's Hill Water and Sewer Districts and the Township of Grady and
Long Creek" dated January 2009 and attached in Appendix B.
cm 1-2

Section 2
Disposal Alternatives
The NCDWQ NPDES Unit's Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) Guidance
Document (June 23, 2005) requires new NPDES permit applicants to evaluate
alternative disposal methods in addition to direct discharge. The following
alternatives must be considered:
■ Connecting to a an existing wastewater treatment system
■ Land application
■ Wastewater reuse
■ Direct discharge to surface waters
■ Combination of alternatives
According to the EAA Guidance Document, a wastewater disposal alternative can be
eliminated if it is determined that the alternative is technologically infeasible or it
would be cost prohibitive to implement relative to a direct discharge option.
2.1 Alternative A. Connection to an Existing Wastewater
Treatment System
2.1.1 Existing Sewerage System
Connecting to a nearby sewer collection system is typically a feasible alternative for
disposal of water treatment plant by-product wastewater. However, based on the list
of active individual permits prepared by the N.C. Division of Water Quality, no
municipal wastewater treatment plant exists within a 5-mile radius. The Town of
Burgaw Wastewater Treatment Facility is located within a radius of approximately 15
miles from the proposed Pender County WTP site and has a permitted capacity of
0.75 mgd.
2.1.2 Planned Sewerage System
A West Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) may be constructed in the
future near the Pender/ New Hanover County line along Highway 421. The
wastewater treatment facility will be constructed only when affordable and will not
happen in the near term.
It is anticipated that the new facility will adopt the existing NPDES permit of 4 mgd
that was owned by New Hanover County. An outfall has yet to be constructed. The
planned location for the outfall and the facility have not been determined yet.
Therefore, this option is not deemed feasible.
Cm 2-1

Section 2
Disposal Alternatives
'aN 2.2 Land Application
The property owned by Pender County outside the WTP site has been zoned for
commercial use and is not available for alternative uses. Therefore, a land disposal
system would need to be located elsewhere on property to be purchased by Pender
County specifically for this application.
/%Z\ In compliance with EAA guidelines, a high -rate land application alternative,
consisting of Rapid Infiltration Basins (RIBs), was evaluated to dispose of the decant
�, from the two proposed Residual Basins. A preliminary application rate of 1.0 gallon
per day per square foot of RIB bottom area, corresponding to 1.6 inches per day, was
elk\ estimated based on the results of geotechnical investigations performed on the WTP
site, and on the information provided by the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) National Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) soil survey (see Appendix
/WN C). Actual soil conditions may vary at other locations outside of Pender County
/M, property, impacting the application rate.
/Ot%t The preliminary design of the resulting high -rate infiltration system consists of 22
ejIN rectangular RIBs (400-feet long by 100-feet wide) with the following characteristics, in
^'N compliance with the provisions of 15 NCAC, Section .0700 - High Rate Infiltration
Systems:
r�
r� ■ Setbacks: 200 feet from property lines and 100 feet from wells
r ■ Residual storage sized to provide a 30 day retention time
egIN
A radial shaped groundwater mound will develop beneath each RIB. A distance of
500 feet was considered for this preliminary design in order to keep the RIBS
sufficiently apart from each other. If the RIBs are placed too close to each other, the
groundwater mounds will overlap and interfere with each other, thereby reducing the
infiltration capacity of each RIB. The groundwater mound should remain below the
rOWN
RIB bottom and land surface outside of the RIBs. The rectangular geometry allows for
ro,\
flow out the length of each RIB without interfering substantially with another RIB,
except for a very short portion of each RIB. The most efficient (hydraulic) section has
IMN
a high perimeter to area ratio which translates into a high length to width ratio,
/%ON
maximizing the perimeter for a given area. This in combination with the overall
,MIN
geometry will give the greatest capacity given everything else being equal (i.e.,
hydrogeology, available land area, etc).
r%L1\ The schematic layout of the RIBS shown in Figure 1 in Appendix C is approximate.
The location of the RIBS would need to be finalized such that there would be a cut and
fill balance at the actual site selected for the land application. The RIB shapes would
be contoured to match the topographic contours with a balanced cut and fill.
This sizing estimate is preliminary and intended to evaluating the feasibility of high -
rate land application at an alternative site located outside of Pender County property.
'R` Typically, during design a site -specific geotechnical/hydrogeologic exploration
.,ON program would need to be conducted in the immediate vicinity of the RIBs and a
/XN cm 2-2

MIN
/IM1
eMN Section 2
Disposal Alternatives
r=*N groundwater mounding analysis would have to be conducted in support of RIB
r� design. The number of RIBs and locations as well as RIB sizing may change
depending on the findings of these additional investigations and analysis, affecting
r� the estimated cost of this alternative.
/%L) The high -rate infiltration system would be equipped with two pump stations. One
pump station would convey wastewater from the Residuals Basins to either RBIs or
the 30-day Residual Storage Basin. A second pump station would be required to drain
the Residual Storage Basin to the RBIs. The 30-day Residual Storage Basin was sized
for an average flow of 0.4 mgd. The length of the force main from the WTP pump
station to the RIBs was estimated based on the distance between the WTP and the
` northern limit of the property owned by Pender County.
r�
As shown in Figure 1 in Appendix C, the high rate infiltration system would occupy
approximately 149 acres outside of property owned by Pender County. Based on
r� Pender County records of the sale price of real estate sold in the vicinity of the WTP
site between 2006 and 2008 (see Appendix C), it is estimated that the additional land
would be valued at approximately $29,000 per acre, for a total value of $4,330,000.
eal\ Clearing would only be up to 50 feet from the RIBs and the 30-day Storage Basin. No
r� seeding was included in the cost estimates. A present -worth cost analysis for the land
application alternative, including cost of land, equipment, and operation and
maintenance cost is included in Appendix C. The opinion of probable cost for the
present value for this option is $11,552,000.
OWN 2.3 Wastewater Reuse
eMN Conventional water treatment plants can be designed with the capability of recycling
process by-product wastewater back through the treatment system. The wastewater
eOl� is recycled back to the raw water impoundment at the beginning of the process cycle
r0t� and retreated.
r**\ In its Rules Governing Public Water Systems (15A NCAC 18C .0404), the North Carolina
r_tN Division of Environmental Health Public Water Supply Section allows the recycle of
,MN process wastewater subject to the following conditions:
r� (k) Waste Handling and Disposal.
r (1) Provisions must be made for disposal of water treatment plant wastes such as
clarification sludge, softening sludge, iron -manganese sludge, filter backwash
r� water and brines. Untreated waste shall not be returned to the head of the water
treatment plant.
r (2) Recycling of supernatant or filtrate from waste treatment facilities treating
filter wash water, sedimentation basin sludge or clarifier basin sludge to the head
of the water treatment plant may be allowed when the following conditions are
r�
met:
CM 2-3

rm1
At\
Section 2
r�
Disposal Altematives
r�
(A) The water recycled shall be less than 10 percent by volume of the raw
water entering the water treatment plant.
(B) A permit has been issued by the appropriate regulatory authority for
discharge of wastes to sanitary sewer, stream, lagoon or spray irrigation.
`'k`
(C) T'he raw water does not contain excessive algae, finished water taste and
odor problems are not encountered and trihalomethane levels in the
distribution system do not exceed allowable levels in Rule .1517 in this
Subchapter.
�►
(Reference.15A NCAC 18C .0404)
'1`
Recycling the process wastewater can present some water quality concerns and can
rlO,
potentially impact treatment plant operations. Although the plant will be constructed
elt�
so that the process wastewater can be recycled, this option cannot be depended on
alone, in accordance with the Rules Governing Public Water Supplies, for disposal of
eMIN
the process effluent.
A present -worth cost analysis for the wastewater reuse alternative is included in
Appendix D. The opinion of probable cost for the present value for this option is
$11053,000.
OWN 2.4 Direct Discharge to Surface Waters
elfts Approximately 220 water treatment plants in North Carolina have an active NPDES
permit, of which 59 water treatment plants are in coastal areas, including one in
r� Wilmington, as shown in Appendix E. The Bladen Bluffs Regional WTP, the Hoffer
Mf', the Harnett County Regional WTP and the Sanford WTP have an NPDES
permit for discharge to Cape Fear River.
The following two options for discharge of water treatment plant process by-product
wastewater (non -oxygen consuming) directly into Cape Fear River were evaluated as
AWN part of the EAA analysis:
■ Direct Discharge Through Existing BASF Outfall Pipe
Pender County is in negotiation with BASF to acquire their property south of the
/Sit) proposed WTP and within Pender County limits. This property will be zoned for
commercial use.
ORN If a sale agreement is reached, a new outfall pipe would be constructed to discharge
eMIN from the WTP Residual Basins to Cape Fear River through the existing 10-inch
BASF outfall pipe, as shown in Figure 1, Appendix E.
A new pump station would be installed adjacent to the Residual Basins to
discharge through the outfall pipe to Cape Fear River.
■ Direct Discharge Through New Outfall Pipe
cm 2-4

eat
/JRN Section 2
Disposal Altematives
rMIN This alternative assumes that Pender County will not purchase additional land
rMN from BASF. A new pipe from the WTP Residuals Basins would discharge directly
to Cape Fear River, and would run parallel to the existing BASF outfall pipe, as
shown in Figure 2, Appendix E.
The proposed pipe would require the acquisition of easements between the WTP
site and Cape Fear River. The cost of these easements has been preliminarily
estimated at $29,000 per acre, assuming a width of 30 feet for the easements.
A new pump station would be installed in the vicinity of the Residuals Basins to
discharge through the outfall pipe to Cape Fear River.
/OLN The surface water classification of the river in this area is "C; SW" (i.e., primary
classification: C; secondary classification: swamp waters). Based on an inquiry with
Mr. Curtis Weaver, the USGS North Carolina Water Science Center currently does not
/SIN provide low -flow characteristics for streams recognized or suspected as being affected
rMN by tidal influences. The techniques used by the USGS for completing low -flow
analyses do not include a means of quantifying the effects of tides on low -flow
conditions. To estimate low -flow characteristics in a tidally -affected reach (when
est� unable to quantify the presence of the tides) runs the risk of possibly over -estimating
elw, the discharge values.
eaz\ A present -worth cost analysis for the two alternatives for direct discharge to surface
eMN waters is included in Appendix E. This evaluation will be impacted by the actual cost
ea*� of the easements and restoration work associated with the construction of the new
outfall pipe. The opinion of probable cost for the present value for this option is
/M., $1,811,500 for an entirely new pipe, and $1,331,000 for use of the existing BASF outfall
pipe.
It was assumed that no diffusers would be required for the new outfall pipe
alternative, and that the outfall discharge would consist of a simple headwall
structure.
2.5 Disposal Combinations
Direct discharge to surface waters and recycling a portion of the wastewater were
identified as feasible alternatives for disposal of treatment process by product
wastewater at the Pender County Surface WTP. Recycling, however, cannot be used
as the sole alternative as exclusive recycling is not allowed by the NCDENR Public
Water Supply Section.
These disposal alternatives can be combined and used interchangeably at the WTP.
The processes can be designed with the flexibility of allowing the plant operator to
select a disposal method based on testing and monitoring water quality parameters of
the discharge stream.
CM 2-s

Section 2
Disposal Alternatives
The alternative selected for disposal of the treatment by-product wastewater at the
Pender County Surface WTP is a combination of these two methods. Recycling of the
reclamation basin supernatant will be used in combination with a direct discharge
through an outfall pipe to Cape Fear River.
cm 2-6

Appendix A
NPDES Permit Application — Short Form C - WTP
(INCLUDED AS .SEPARATE SUBMITTAL)

Appendix B
Treatment Plant Capacity Demand Projections for Rocky Point
Topsail Scott's Hill Water and Sewer Districts and the
Township of Grady and Long Creek

Aft
.. Memorandum
To: Michael G. Mack, Director, Pender County Utilities
From: J. Brenan Buckley, P.E.
•. Date: January 21, 2009
..
Subject: Pender County, North Carolina
., Treatment Plant Capacity Demand Projections for Rocky Point -
Topsail and Scott's Hill Water and Sewer Districts and the Townships
•. of Grady and Long Creek
�►
This memorandum provides an estimate of the treatment capacity required at the proposed
„y
Pender County surface water treatment plant (WTP) to meet anticipated customer demand
over an appropriate planning horizon in the Rocky Point - Topsail and Scott's Hill water and
sewer districts and the Townships of Grady and Long Creek. The methodology used
incorporates historical water usage, population growth projections included in the 2006
Pender County Master Plan, and water supply and treatment design guidelines. The results
of this analysis may be used by Pender County to select the size of the initial phase of the
Pender County surface water treatment plant (WTP), which is planned for operation in 2012.
Ak
.. Background
Ak
Pender County currently purchases an 800,000 gallon per day (0.8 MGD) supply of potable
water from the Town of Wallace to serve the needs of customers in the Rocky Point Topsail
and Scott's Hill water and sewer districts. Demand projections developed in 2006 indicated
that before 2010, water demands from these service areas would outpace available supply,
requiring an additional source of water. Preliminary water supply studies prepared for the
County recommended that a water treatment plant with a 2 million gallon per day (MGD)
capacity be constructed in 2008 and an additional 2 MGD be constructed in 2010 to meet
anticipated demand.
While the current average day demand - based on actual usage from the Town of Wallace -
A"
peaked at approximately 0.74 MGD in August of 2008, Pender County Utilities estimate that
A%
by 2010 the demand will increase to approximately 3.20 MGD, primarily due to new
Aft
residential development (0.48 MGD), an expansion of the distribution system to existing areas
(1.19 MGD), and potential future demand (0.80 MGD).
Aft
Adk

Michael G. Mack
January 21, 2009
Page 2
In April 2008, Pender County contracted with CDM for the design of the proposed surface
water treatment plant. Based on a review of the preliminary design recommendations and
the conclusions of the Pender County Water Master Plan (Master Plan), CDM estimates that
the proposed surface water treatment plant, if constructed as a 2 MGD facility, would be at
capacity upon its completion, requiring an immediate expansion to meet anticipated demand.
Further, the demand projections included in the Master Plan do not appear to capture the
actual source water demand (or treatment capacity) required to meet expected customer
demand. Revised demand projections and recommendations for the capacity of the proposed
water treatment plant are presented below.
Water Demand Data
Two sets of data are available for the development of demand projections that can be used to
determine the treatment capacity of the proposed water treatment plant: demand projections
included in the Pender County Master Plan, and historical usage data collected by Pender
County Utilities. Each is discussed below.
Pender County Water Master Plan
The Pender County Water Master Plan (Master Plan), prepared by McKim and Creed
Engineers in July 2006, provides projections of total water demand for each water and sewer
district between 2010 and 2030. A summary of the total water demand by district is provided
in Table 1. Demand projections included in the Master Plan are based on moderate
Table 1
Summary of Total Water Demand by District and Township
From 2006 Water Master Plan
Total Water Demand (MGD)
DistrictlTownship 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Rocky Point - Topsail
Scott's Hill
2.09 3.19 4.59 5.61 6.38
0.11 0.16 0.24 0.28 0.30
Grady Township 0.13 0.27 0.63 1.0 1.35
Long Creek Township 0.12 0.14 0.23 0.43 0.54
Total Demand: 2.45 3.76 5.69 7.32 8.57
Notes: 1. Compiled from Tables 1.8 and 1.11 of Pender County Water Master Plan, July
2006.
2. Total Water Demand provided above does not include allowance for
unaccounted for /lost water, treatment process demands, or maximum to
average day factors.

�1
Michael G. Mack
January 21, 2009
Page 3
population projections and assumptions regarding locations, densities, and water usage for
residential, commercial, and industrial customers. For this analysis, CDM has assumed that
those projections and assumptions used are valid.
In the Master Plan, total water demand is reported as the sum of residential demand based on
an average daily demand of 200 gallons per day per residential unit, and commercial and
industrial demand based on land use. The reported total water demand does not include
allowances for unaccounted for/lost water, treatment plant process water demand, and ratios
of maximum to average day demand necessary to determine the required treatment capacity
of the proposed water treatment plant.
Historical Demand
Pender County Utilities (PCU) monitors actual water usage using residential and commercial
eaN
customer account data. This data is available for the Rocky Point Topsail water and sewer
/"IN
district on a monthly basis for the time period from December 2001 to present. Since the data
represents actual water usage as determined from meter readings, it does not include
allowances for unaccounted for/lost water, meter reading errors, or treatment plant process
(SIN
water demands. In addition, the data does not provide a good indication of the ratio of
rlmN
maximum to average day demand since the data is based on monthly readings.
el&'N As of December 2008, PCU reports 3,943 residential accounts and 218 commercial accounts in
the district. Typical average daily residential demand is approximately 166 gallons per
residential account per day and typical average daily commercial demand is approximately
2,666 gallons per day, both of which are generally consistent with demand projections
included in the Master Plan. A marked increase in demand observed in the first three
quarters of 2007 is related to the commissioning and flushing of a new distribution system,
according to PCU staff.
/"N The district's customer base, based on number of residential accounts, grew by 9.8% between
/Qt� July 2007 and April 2008. This growth rate does appear to be representative of the organic
(i.e., new) growth observed in the area. However, it does not account for the rapid and large
increases in customer accounts that occurred with the expansion of water service to
previously un-served portions of the district between December 2001 and February 2002,
rMN November 2006 and June 2007, and April and May 2008.
Water Demand Projection for Pender County VVTP Sizing
Treatment Capacity Components and Service Life
tft\ The required treatment capacity and the required service life before demand outpaces that
tl%tN capacity are key design considerations for the proposed water treatment plant. The required
ela� treatment capacity is typically based on average daily demand estimates provided from
el-LI-I master planning efforts, such as that undertaken by Pender County in 2006, and should
etIMN

,Sq� Michael G. Mack
January 21, 2009
Page 4
include allowances for customer demands, unaccounted for/lost water in the distribution
system and water meters, water lost to the treatment process, and appropriate ratios to
determine the maximum daily demand.
The North Carolina Public Water Supply Design Criteria (NCAC T15A.18C .0400) provide
ram, some guidance in determining the maximum daily demand. Systems that do not have local
water supply plans are either limited to daily flow requirements that include factors for
maximum daily demand or, in cases where usage data is limited, flow requirements that are
determined by multiplying average daily use by 2.0 to 2.5 to determine maximum daily
ARN demand. System with local water supply plans are assumed to have included appropriate
factors in their demand estimates to account for maximum daily demand and, therefore, the
required treatment capacity.
This maximum to average day demand factor is system -specific and obviously can have a
sizeable impact on the size and cost of the proposed water treatment plant. It is our
understanding that PCU does not have available the daily demand data necessary to make a
system -specific determination of the appropriate maximum to average day factor. CDM has
rSON
obtained data for similar water systems in Lenoir County that demonstrate the maximum to
?=N
average day demand for these systems ranged from 1.45 to 2.59, with an average of 1.64.
Given that Pender County has completed a water system master plan and actual average
daily demand data for the customer base is somewhat consistent with the demand
e%XN
assumptions in the master plan, CDM has used a maximum to average day factor of 1.5 for
,!w\
the proposed water treatment plant.
e=�
Unaccounted for/lost water from the distribution system typically ranges from less than 10
percent to more than 30 percent in extreme cases, depending on the age and condition of the
distribution system and meters. It is a demand that must be accounted for in the
determination of the appropriate treatment capacity, since these losses occur in the treated
water distribution system. Given the relative young service life of the Rocky Point Topsail
a
system, CDM has assumed a factor of 10 percent for unaccounted for/lost water for the
proposed water treatment plant.
Water lost to the treatment process must also be considered in determining the appropriate
101�
capacity of the treatment plant. These process needs, including filter backwash and the
tob%
distribution of chemicals, are performed using treated water. CDM has assumed a factor of
10 percent for water lost to the treatment process for the proposed water treatment plant.
The final factor affecting treatment plant capacity is the required service life of the facility.
For the purposes of this memorandum, service life is defined as the time at which treated
water demand outpaces available capacity at the water treatment plant. It does not reflect the
elm\
actual useful life of the asset, which is typically 40 to 50 years with routine maintenance. The
,�
expected service life for the 2 MGD water treatment plant originally proposed in the Master

In
eWN
elt'N
�1
Michael G. Mack
January 21, 2009
Page 5
exkk
Plan was less than two years, even excluding considerations for the various factors discussed
above. Industry standards generally recommend that projects such as a multi -phase water
treatment plant expected to grow with demand be designed and constructed in phases that
r�
provide a service life of 10 to 15 years per phase before an additional upgrade or expansion is
required to provide maximum efficiencies in design and construction costs. As with the
maximum to average day demand factor, the service life has an impact on the size and
associated cost of the project and is therefore dependent on the financial capacity of the
owner.
Treatment Plant Capacity Projections
CDM has developed revised demand projections that combine demand projections provided
in the Master Plan, historical use data from December 2001 to present, and treatment plant
capacity factors that were not included in previous estimates to provide a basis for
elm`
determining the appropriate treatment plant capacity for the proposed Pender County water
/:a\
treatment plant. These treatment plant capacity projections are presented on Figure 1,
,oft�
attached. Key assumptions used to develop these projections are provided below:
'%:`
■ The water treatment plant's service area was assumed to be the Rocky Point Topsail and
Oft�
Scott's Hill water and sewer districts and the Townships of Grady and Long Creek, based
,�
on discussions with PCU staff. Surf City and Topsail Beach are not included.
rx�
■ Total water demand projections included in the Master Plan assuming moderate growth
were adjusted to include allowances for unaccounted for/lost water demand (10% of
average daily demand), water treatment plant process water demand (10%), and a
maximum to average day demand factor of 1.5.
■ Historical usage from December 2001 to present were factored to include the allowances
noted above and future demand was projected to 2030 from the last data point using the
/ALN
historical linear growth rate as defined by the trendline of this historical usage.
■ Maximum short-term demand projections were based on*PCU estimates of actual customer
commitments (existing demand plus allocated demand) totaling 1.2 MGD, planned county
distribution system expansions totaling 1.19 MGD, 0.5 MGD for the Moore's Landing
development, and 0.3 MGD in anticipated short-term customer growth, factored to include
r�
the allowances noted above. The timing of these allocations is unknown and is therefore
shown in the projections as a horizontal line (demand at an undefined future time) for
comparison.
Conclusions
A new water treatment facility will be operational in 2012 to meet the anticipated increase in
water demand for the Rocky Point Topsail and Scott's Hill water and sewer districts and the

Michael G. Mack
January 21, 2009
Page 6
Townships of Grady and Long Creek in Pender County. Estimates of water demand have
been projected up to year 2030 to provide a planning horizon for the proposed water
treatment plant intended to serve these areas. The proposed 2 MGD water treatment plant is
inadequate to meet reasonably anticipated demands as determined from the Master Plan or
historical water usage and including factors for demands related to unaccounted for/
water, treatment processes, and maximum to average day ratios. Further, the proposed 2
MGD water treatment plant would be inadequate to meet the allocations currently held by
current and prospective customers that total 5.8 MGD with the factors noted above. The
required treatment plant capacity to meet the maximum day demand will likely exceed 4
MGD by 2012 and 10 MGD by 2020 if demand projections developed in the Master Plan are
accurate.

) ) ) ) )) ) ) ) )) ) )) ) ) ) ) )) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),) )
16
15
14
13
T
12
0 11
10
-0 9
E �
v aE 8
�o
v�
3 X 6
v � 5
0 4
� 3
2
1
0
Figure 1
Service Area
Water Demand Projections
MEN, ��D� C��C��C�CC�CC■
■■Z_._J■■■■■■■■■■■■■_■�■E■�■C■■
rl ry M M le N tD n 00 m O r N M a N b r W M O
O O O O O O O O O rl 'i rl • r rl rl rl 'i rl N N N N N N N N N N M
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
15.01
Date
Max Day (Short -Term Projection) — Max Day (Master Plan) Max Day (2001-2008 Estimate) — Linear Trendline
Notes:
1. All Max Day Demand projections estimated as 150°% of Average Day Total Demand. Average Day Total Demand estimated as sum of Average Day Demand, System Losses
and Backwash requirements.
2. 2001-2008 Max Day Demand based on historical data for Average Day Demand during this period. -
3. Max Day Demand based on Average Day Demand projections referenced in the Water Master Plan prepared by McKim&Creed Engineers, which are based on a population
moderate growth model.
4. Max Day Demand accounts for demand from Rocky Pt/Topsail District, Scott's Hill District, Long Creek Township and Grady Township. Surf City and Topsail Beach were
excluded from these projections.
�5. Max Day Demand based on customer allocations, future distribution system expansions, and short-term development needs provided by Pander County Utilities.
cm

Appendix C
Land Application Alternative

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Land Application
Assumptions:
High Rate Infiltration System
Application rate: 1.0 gal/day/sq.ft
1.6 in/day
Recharge Infiltration Basins (RIBs):
Length: 400 ft
Width: 100 ft
Area: 40,000 sq.ft.
Maximum discharge rate: 900,000 gpd
Calculations:
Number of recharge basins required for land application:
(900,000 gpd)/(1.0 gpd/sq.ft * 40,000 sq.ft./RIB) = 22.5
Land required beyond area dedicated to WTP site: 149 ac
(includes residual basins, 30-day residual storage basin and setbacks)
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA):
Evaluation period, n: 20 Years
Discount rate, r: 5.625%
Capital cost: $10,499,000
Annual O&M cost: $89,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $10,499,000
P/A = ((1 +r)"-1)/(r(1 +r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost * P/A $1,053,000
Present value: $11,552,000
.. .
Page 1 of 3
N:1Pender County - 674761permittinglNPDES1EAAlEAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsLand Based Disposal
Page 2 of 3
N:1Pender County - 674761permitting\NPDES1EAAlEAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsLand Based Disposal

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Land Application
Capital Cost
1. Land
149 acres @ $29,000 /ace
$4,330,000
2. Transfer pump stations
Pump Station #1 (from Residuals Basins to RIBs)
$200,000
Pump station #2 (from 30-day Residual Storage Basin to RIBs)
$200,000
3. 6" PVC Piping, fittings and splash pads at Land Application Site
12,500 LF @ $50 /LF
$625,000
4.6" PVC Piping and fittings from Pump Station at WTP to Land Application Site
3,700 LF @ $105 /LF (Direct Drilling Across Wetlands)
$388,500
Assumed Min distance to Land Application Site (Outside Pender County Property)
5.5' Deep excavation and disposal
163,000 cu.yd @ $7.5 /cu.yd.
$1,222,500
6. 6' Chain -link fence
$11,700 LF @ $26.5 /LF
$310,050
7.30-day residual storage basin (sized for avg. flow of 0.40 mgd)
Basin
Residual capacity 12 Mgal
Freeboard 2 ft
Max water depth 6 ft
Surface area 267,380 sq. ft.
Length 517 ft
Width 517 ft
79,224 cu.yd. @ $7.5 /cu.yd.
$595,000
Liner on sides
40,000 sq.ft. @ $1.3 /sq.ft.
$52,000
8. Clearing (Limited to 50' around perimeter of RIBs and 30-day Storage Tank; no seeding)
105 ac @ $4,500 lac
$475,000
Subtotal
$8,399,000
Contingency (25%)
$2,100,000
Total Capital Cost
$10,499,000
2 Based on 2006 land price near Hwy 421 (Source: Pender County GIS)
Page 2 of 3
cap N:1Pender County - 674761permittinglNPDESIEAAIEAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsLand Based Disposal

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Land Application
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump stations
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time)
3. Repair parts and maintenance of RIBs
Repairs and maintenance
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing
5. Annual Permit Renewal Fee
Permit fee
$15,000
$25,000
$25,000
$5,000
$860
Subtotal $71,000
Contingency (25%) $18,000
Total O&M Cost $89,000
Page 3 of 3
N:IPender County - 674761permittinglNPDES1EAAlEAA Costs-10.9.09.xisLand Based Disposal

���n�w;E'�°i
�_
(((f (((t (�(i ((f ((((( ( ( ( ( ( 1 ( t ( ( ( ( ( f ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (t

USDA
United States
Department of
Agriculture
o
FRCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
,yYY
Vt'=
r
sr t
14
�7.
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Pender County,
North Carolina
Pender County Surface Water
Treatment Plant
I
0W.
Ponder
r
i
l —
September 17, 2009

I►
^
Preface
^
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They
highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about
^
the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many
different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners,
community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also,
^
conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal,
and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance
'k
the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
^
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties
that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information
'"`
is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on
Aft
various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying
with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
^
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.
^
Examples include soil quality assessments (http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/) and certain
conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact
^
your local USDA Service Center (http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?
agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://soils.usda.gov/contact/
state offices/).
^
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey orwet soils are poorly suited to use as septic
tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or
^
underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department
of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural
^
Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil
Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
i►
through the NRCS Soil Data Mart Web site or the NRCS Web Soil Survey. The Soil
Data Mart is the data storage site for the official soil survey information.
^
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
.�.
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an
'�
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
^
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means
^
^
2
^
^

for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call [phone]
(voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and
employer.
3

Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
SoilMap..................................................................................................................7
SoilMap................................................................................................................8
Legend..................................................................................................................9
MapUnit Legend................................................................................................10
MapUnit Descriptions........................................................................................10
Pender County, North Carolina.......................................................................12
AnB—Alpin fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes...............................................12
Do—Dorovan muck, frequently flooded......................................................13
Mu—Murville muck......................................................................................13
References............................................................................................................15
4

OWN
61
►1
`
How Soil Surveys Are Made
ORIN
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas
in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and
their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations
affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of
the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and
the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is
the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the
surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the
surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other
living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas
(MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share
common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources,
soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically
consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is
related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area.
Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of
landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous
areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the
landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus,
during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable
degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the
`
landscape.
rWN
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
n
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by
an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify
predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to
identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of
soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
�
5

/M1
r2a�
Custom Soil Resource Report
0M)
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have
similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique
combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of
the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes
the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and
landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of
resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is
needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
�+
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and
experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -
landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific
locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of
measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These
measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to
r�
bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of
sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from
one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
ALIN
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret
the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics
and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different
uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils
in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are
modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet
local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information,
r�
production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop
yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from
AMN
field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such
variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long
periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil
scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have
a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a
high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
-
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
/9411
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields,
roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil
map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
I!r

e'� t
1
i a Vrt 1T`irJ$� ,♦r4 #4
IL

Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND
MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Very Stony Spot
Map Scale: 1:6,810 if printed on A size (8.5" * 11") sheet.
O
Area of Interest (AOI)
Wet Spot
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.
Soils
� Other
Soil Map Units
Spacial Line Features
Please rely on the bar scale on each ma sheet for accurate ma
Y P P
Special
Point Features
Gully
measurements.
(V
Blowout
.. Short Steep Slope
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
®
Borrow Pit
... Other
Web Soil Survey URL: htt //websoilsume nres.usda. ov
Y P� Y� 9
X
Clay Spot
Coordinate System: UTM Zone 17N NAD83
Political Features
Closed Depression
Cities
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of
X
Gravel Pit
Water Features
the version date(s) listed below.
..
Gravelly Spot
oceans
Soil Survey Area: Pander County, North Carolina
®
Landfill
Streams and Canals
Survey Area Data: Version 11, Jun 5, 2009
Lava Flow
Transportation
.rw. Rails
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Data not available.
46
Marsh or swamp
R
Mine or Quarry
ti' Interstate Highways
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
Oo
Miscellaneous Water
US Routes
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting
O.
Perennial Water
Major Roads
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Rock Outcrop
}
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
C
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
a
Spoil Area
a
Stony Spot

/IR1
fAN
/Qh Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Ponder County, North Carolina (NC141)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
AnB Alpin fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes
121.8
98.0%
Do j Dorovan muck, frequently flooded
0.5
0.4%
Mu Murville muck
2.1
1.7%
Totals for Area of interest
124.3
100.0%
t141
/-X1
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils
or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the
maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
At's
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape,
however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability
of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend
beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic
class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic
classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas
r
for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes
other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
`
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally
are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified
by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the
contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with
some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially
Aw\
where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations
to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness
or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic
classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments
on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If
�
10

Custom Soil Resource Report
intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to
define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each
/M\ description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties
and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons
that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity,
degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such
r� differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the
detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly
indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0
to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
/,AN
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The
AWN
pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all
areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or
anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical
or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and
relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -
Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that
could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of
the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be
made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up
of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material
and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
11
At\

Custom Soil Resource Report
Pender County, North Carolina
AnB—Alpin fine sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period. 200 to 280 days
Map Unit Composition
Alpin and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 4 percent
Description of Alpin
Setting
Landform: Ridges on marine terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Eolian sands and/or sandy fluviomarine deposits
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding. None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity. Nonsaline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water capacity: Low (about 3.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 4s
Typical profile
0 to 4 inches: Fine sand
4 to 48 inches: Fine sand
48 to 80 inches: Fine sand
Minor Components
Leon
Percent of map unit. 2 percent
Landform: Flats on marine terraces
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Muckalee, undrained
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
12

Custom Soil Resource Report
Do—Dorovan muck, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period. 200 to 280 days
Map Unit Composition
Donovan and similar soils: 80 percent
Description of Dorovan
Setting
Landfonn: Flood plains
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Woody organic material
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class. Very poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: Frequent
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Very high (about 13.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonimigated): 7w
Typical profile
0 to 5 inches: Muck
5 to 85 inches: Muck
85 to 95 inches: Loamy sand
Mu—Murville muck
Map Unit Setting
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost -free period. 200 to 280 days
13

Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Composition
Murville, undrained, and similar soils: 80 percent
Description of Murville, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Depressions on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Sandy fluviomarine deposits and/or eolian sands
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Very poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: Frequent
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability (nonirrigated): 5w
Typical profile
0 to 10 inches: Mucky fine sand
10 to 36 inches: Sand
36 to 80 inches: Sand
14

References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.
Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and
.�
testing. 24th edition.
.,
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
"'A
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
A,
FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils
in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
e►
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S.
r�
Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making
and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook436. http://soils.usda.gov/
Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://soils.usda.gov/
Aft
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Aft
Section.
Ak
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://soils.usda.gov/
�►
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.glti.nres.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://soils.usda.gov/
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
,^
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the
Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
http://soils.usda.gov/
h
15

Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210.
16

.,
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow—Pender Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
County, North Carolina
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and
'O Overland Flow
.�
Soil properties are important considerations in areas where soils are used as sites
for the treatment and disposal of organic waste and wastewater. Selection of soils
with properties that favor waste management can help to prevent environmental
.�
damage.
Aft
This table shows the degree and kind of soil limitations affecting the treatment of
wastewater, including municipal and food -processing wastewater and effluent from
""
lagoons or storage ponds. Municipal wastewater is the waste stream from a
,Nk
municipality. It contains domestic waste and may contain industrial waste. It may
have received primary or secondary treatment. It is rarely untreated sewage. Food -
Aft
processing wastewater results from the preparation of fruits, vegetables, milk,
Aft
cheese, and meats for public consumption. In places it is high in content of sodium
and chloride. In the context of this table, the effluent in lagoons and storage ponds
A►
is from facilities used to treat or store food -processing wastewater or domestic or
Aft
animal waste. Domestic and food -processing wastewater is very dilute, and the
effluent from the facilities that treat or store it commonly is very low in content of
ANk
carbonaceous and nitrogenous material; the content of nitrogen commonly ranges
from 10 to 30 milligrams per liter. The wastewater from animal waste treatment
Aak
lagoons or storage ponds, however, has much higher concentrations of these
Aft
materials, mainly because the manure has not been diluted as much as the
domestic waste. The content of nitrogen in this wastewater generally ranges from
50 to 2,000 milligrams per liter. When wastewater is applied, checks should be
.�
made to ensure that nitrogen, heavy metals, and salts are not added in excessive
amounts.
The ratings in the table are for waste management systems that not only dispose
"`
of and treat wastewater but also are beneficial to crops. The ratings are both verbal
.,
and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are limited
by all of the soil features that affect agricultural waste management. Not limited
'"
indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use.
,^
Good performance and very low maintenance can be expected. Somewhat
limited indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for the
A►
specified use. The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning,
Aft
design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be
expected. Very limited indicates that the soil has one or more features that are
.f
unfavorable for the specified use. The limitations generally cannot be overcome
without majorsoil reclamation, special design, orexpensive installation procedures.
�.
Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected.
Aft
Numerical ratings in the tables indicate the severity of individual limitations. The
Ak
ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate
gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative
",
impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation
k
(0.00).
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/17/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3

Aft
Alk
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow—Pender
'^ County, North Carolina
Pander County Surface Water Treatment Plant
Disposal of wastewaterby irrigation not only disposes of municipal wastewater and
wastewater from food -processing plants, lagoons, and storage ponds but also can
improve crop production by increasing the amount of water available to crops. The
ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect the design,
construction, management, and performance of the irrigation system. The
properties that affect design and management include the sodium adsorption ratio,
depth to a water table, ponding, available water capacity, Ksat, slope, and flooding.
The properties that affect construction include stones, cobbles, depth to bedrock
or a cemented pan, depth to a water table, and ponding. The properties that affect
performance include depth to bedrock or a cemented pan, bulk density, the sodium
adsorption ratio, salinity, reaction, and the cation -exchange capacity, which is used
to estimate the capacity of a soil to adsorb heavy metals. Permanently frozen soils
are not suitable for disposal of wastewater by irrigation.
^
Overland flow of wastewater is a process in which wastewater is applied to the
upper reaches of sloped land and allowed to flow across vegetated surfaces,
sometimes called terraces, to runoff -collection ditches. The length of the run
^
generally is 150 to 300 feet. The application rate ranges from 2.5 to 16.0 inches per
week. It commonly exceeds the rate needed for irrigation of cropland. The
wastewater leaves solids and nutrients on the vegetated surfaces as it flows
downslope in a thin film. Most of the water reaches the collection ditch, some is lost
^
through evapotranspiration, and a small amount may percolate to the ground water.
The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect absorption, plant
^ growth, microbial activity, and the design and construction of the system. Reaction
and the cation -exchange capacity affect absorption. Reaction, salinity, and the
sodium adsorption ratio affect plant growth and microbial activity. Slope, saturated
^ hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), depth to a water table, ponding, flooding, depth to
bedrock or a cemented pan, stones, and cobbles affect design and construction.
Permanently frozen soils are unsuitable for waste treatment.
Report —Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and
Overland Flow
.� [Onsite investigation may be needed to validate the interpretations in this table and
to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site. The numbers in the value columns
range from 0.01 to 1.00. The larger the value, the greater the potential limitation.
^ The table shows only the top five limitations for any given soil. The soil may have
additional limitations]
^
^
� Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
9117/2009
Page 2 of 3

Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow-Pender
County, North Carolina
Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Irrigation and Overland Flow- Pender County, North Carolina
Map symbol and soil name
Pct. of
map unit
Disposal of wastewater by irrigation
Overland flow of wastewater
Rating class and limiting
features
Value
Rating class and limiting
features
Value
AnB-Alpin fine sand, 1 to 6
percent slopes
Alpin
85
Somewhat limited
Very limited
Filtering capacity
0.99
Seepage 1.00
Too acid
0.77
Too acid
0.77
Droughty
0.04
Leon
2
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Seepage
1.00
Filtering capacity
0.99
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Too acid
0.99
Too add
0.99
Muckalee, undra€ned
2
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Too acid
0.07
Seepage
1.00
Do-Dorovan muck, frequently
flooded
Too acid
0.07
Dorovan 80
Very limited
Very limited
Ponding
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Ponding
1.00
Too acid
1.00
Depth to saturated zone j
1.00
l
Flooding
1.00
Too acid
1.00
Seepage
1.00
Mu-Murville muck
Murville, undra€ned
80
Very limited
Very limited I
_
Ponding 1.00
Seepage
1.00
Depth to saturated zone 1.00
Ponding
1.00
Too acid 1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
----�--__
_
Filtering capacity 0.99
_
Too acid
1.00
Flooding �
0.40
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Pender County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 11, Jun 5, 2009
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/17/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid Infiltration and Slow Rate
Ak Treatment—Pender County, North Carolina
Pander County Surface Water Treatment Plant
AOAgricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid Infiltration
and Slow Rate Treatment
Soil properties are important considerations in areas where soils are used as sites
for the treatment and disposal of organic waste and wastewater. Selection of soils
with properties that favor waste management can help to prevent environmental
.� damage.
^,
This table shows the degree and kind of soil limitations affecting the treatment of
wastewater, including municipal and food -processing wastewater and effluent from
lagoons or storage ponds. Municipal wastewater is the waste stream from a
.,
municipality. It contains domestic waste and may contain industrial waste. It may
have received primary or secondary treatment. It is rarely untreated sewage. Food -
processing wastewater results from the preparation of fruits, vegetables, milk,
Ak
cheese, and meats for public consumption. In places it is high in content of sodium
and chloride. In the context of this table, the effluent in lagoons and storage ponds
A+
is from facilities used to treat or store food -processing wastewater or domestic or
Ak
animal waste. Domestic and food -processing wastewater is very dilute, and the
effluent from the facilities that treat or store it commonly is very low in content of
A►
carbonaceous and nitrogenous material; the content of nitrogen commonly ranges
AM^
from 10 to 30 milligrams per liter. The wastewater from animal waste treatment
lagoons or storage ponds, however, has much higher concentrations of these
..,
materials, mainly because the manure has not been diluted as much as the
domestic waste. The content of nitrogen in this wastewater generally ranges from
Alk
50 to 2,000 milligrams per liter. When wastewater is applied, checks should be
,ry
made to ensure that nitrogen, heavy metals, and salts are not added in excessive
amounts.
The ratings in the table are for waste management systems that not only dispose
of and treat wastewater but also are beneficial to crops. The ratings are both verbal
and numerical. Rating class terms indicate the extent to which the soils are limited
by all of the soil features that affect agricultural waste management. Not limited
indicates that the soil has features that are very favorable for the specified use.
Good performance and very low maintenance can be expected. Somewhat
limited indicates that the soil has features that are moderately favorable for the
specified use. The limitations can be overcome or minimized by special planning,
design, or installation. Fair performance and moderate maintenance can be
expected. Very limited indicates that the soil has one or more features that are
unfavorable for the specified use. The limitations generally cannot be overcome
without major soil reclamation, special design, or expensive installation procedures.
Poor performance and high maintenance can be expected.
Numerical ratings in the tables indicate the severity of individual limitations. The
ratings are shown as decimal fractions ranging from 0.01 to 1.00. They indicate
gradations between the point at which a soil feature has the greatest negative
A%
impact on the use (1.00) and the point at which the soil feature is not a limitation
Aft
(0.00).
Ak
Aft
A►
Aft
Ak USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
Aft 2" Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
9/17/2009
Page 1 of 3
r.

Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid Infiltration and Slow Rate Pander County Surface Water Treatment Plant
"ak Treatment—Pender County, North Carolina
AMA
Ink
Rapid infiltration of wastewater is a process in which wastewater applied in a level
basin at a rate of 4 to 120 inches per week percolates through the soil. The
Ak
wastewater may eventually reach the ground water. The application rate commonly
nr►
exceeds the rate needed for irrigation of cropland. Vegetation is not a necessary
part of the treatment; hence, the basins may or may not be vegetated. The thickness
Oft
of the soil material needed for proper treatment of the wastewater is more than 72
inches. As a result, geologic and hydrologic investigation is needed to ensure
proper design and performance and to determine the risk of ground -water pollution.
The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect the risk of
pollution and the design, construction, and performance of the system. Depth to a
water table, ponding, flooding, and depth to bedrock or a cemented pan affect the
risk of pollution and the design and construction of the system. Slope, stones, and
cobbles also affect design and construction. Ksat and reaction affect performance.
Permanently frozen soils are unsuitable for waste treatment.
Slow rate treatment of wastewater is a process in which wastewater is applied to
land at a rate normally between 0.5 inch and 4.0 inches per week. The application
rate commonly exceeds the rate needed for irrigation of cropland. The applied
wastewater is treated as it moves through the soil. Much of the treated water may
percolate to the ground water, and some enters the atmosphere through
evapotranspiration. The applied water generally is not allowed to run off the surface.
Waterlogging is prevented either through control of the application rate or through
the use of tile drains, or both.
Aft
The ratings in the table are based on the soil properties that affect absorption, plant
1^
growth, microbial activity, erodibility, and the application of waste. The properties
that affect absorption include the sodium adsorption ratio, depth to a water table,
ponding, available water capacity, Ksat, depth to bedrock or a cemented pan,
reaction, the cation -exchange capacity, and slope. Reaction, the sodium adsorption
ratio, salinity, and bulk density affect plant growth and microbial activity. The wind
"rt
erodibility group, the soil erosion factor K, and slope are considered in estimating
,.s
the likelihood of wind erosion or water erosion. Stones, cobbles, a water table,
ponding, and flooding can hinder the application of waste. Permanently frozen soils
are unsuitable for waste treatment.
..
Report —Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid
Infiltration and Slow Rate Treatment
[Onsite investigation may be needed to validate the interpretations in this table and
to confirm the identity of the soil on a given site. The numbers in the value columns
�+
range from 0.01 to 1.00. The larger the value, the greater the potential limitation.
The table shows only the top five limitations for any given soil. The soil may have
additional limitations]
Auk
'^ USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9N09 7/20
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3

Aft Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid Infiltration and Slow Rate
Treatment—Pender County, North Carolina
Ak
Ae►
Ak
AMk
Pander County Surface Water Treatment Plant
Agricultural Disposal of Wastewater by Rapid Infiltration and Slow Rate Treatment— Ponder County, North Carolina
Map symbol and soil name
PcL of
map unit
Rapid infiltration of wastewater
Slow rate treatment of wastewater
Rating class and limiting
features
Value
Rating class and limiting Value
features
AnB—Alpin fine sand, 1 to 6
percent slopes
Alpin
85
Somewhat limited
Somewhat limited
Slow water movement
0.32
Filtering capacity
0.99
Too acid 0.77
Leon
Muckalea, undrained
2
Very limited
Very limited
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Slow water movement
1.00
Filtering capacity
0.99
2
Very limited
Too acid
Very limited
0.99
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Slow water movement
1.00
Too acid
0.07
Do—Dorovan muck, frequently
flooded
Dorovan
80
Very limited
Very limited
Ponding
1.00
Ponding
1,00
Flooding
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Too acid
1.00
Slow water movement
1.00
Flooding
1.00
Too acid
0.85
Mu—Murville muck
Murville, undrained
80
Very limited
Very limited
Ponding
1.00
Ponding
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Depth to saturated zone
1.00
Slow water movement
0. 12
Too acid
1.00
Too acid
0.21
Filtering capacity
0.99
Data Source Information
Soil Survey Area: Pander County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 11, Jun 5, 2009
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 9/17/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Pender County Water Treatment Plant
Geot+echnical Data Summary
Location
Reclamation Basin Area
Water Treatment Plant Area
Raw Water Intake Pipe Area
Access Road Area
Boring Number
R-1 through R-6
B-1 through B-9
RW-1 through RW-3
A-1 through A-3
Groundwater Depth, ft-bgs
83 to 14.1
12 to 22
6
17
Composition of Aquifer
very loose to dense SAND
very loose to dense SAND
very loose to dense SAND
very loose to medium dense SAND
Fast Confining
Depth, ft-bgs
22 to 37
27 to 37
Not Encountered
Not Encountered
unit
Composition
I
Very soft to stiff CLAY and medium
dense SAND
Soh to firm CLAY and medium
dense SAND
n a
n a
Permeability Data
No permeability tests performed; Sieve analyses data is available
Notes:
1. Data was from the Geotechnical Report prepared by S&ME.
2. ft-bgs: ft below ground surface.
3. Groundwater depth listed was estimated on the drilling date. For seasonal high water table data, please see attached report.
4. The confining unit was not encountered in every boring and may not be a continuous layer.
5. See attachments for boring locations plan, boring logs, lab testing data and seasonal high water table evaluations.

Page l of 1
http://gis.pender-county.com/output/Pender_gis0373607908355jpg. 6/12/2009

ConnectGIS
Page I of I
Parcels
Name:
PENDER CNTY
PIN:
Deed
Deed:
3044/319
Date:
Address:
807 S. WALKER STREET
City:
Land
Zip:
28425
Value:
Total
Deferred Value:
0
Value:
Tax
Neighborhood:
00
Codes:
Property Address:
421 HWY
Acres:
Property
358.62AC PB 42/113 421 HWY PB 19/79 99
Description:
INTERIUM IMPROVEMENTS
1:1662 feet
2291-76-4724-
Sale Price:
4000000
0000
9/7/2006
Plat:
BURGAW
State:
NC
Building
359853
0
Value:
359853
Subdivision:
G01 F25 R40
Zone:
12
358.62
Township:
GRADY
o�NrYa Pender County GIS
Tnl: mao BPnm,j br mU mw I, ,mmW of.
tavn dd jnlijufc]'.. a b13:. d
.a
emmm as 0 re.. nna ftm o, ml.d M T.
r]en. 6:engmD.W.OM nereYrn M. mit me
��, ilmeremarei Quart inmirr immmewn waves
* :ncam.
ntrmnlnm cmihmhon mis nisi. Penner Ciunb
noiemm,Mmd anr'm..P. ttilmafbn
V [pnbme0 On C$ mei�
http://gis.pender-county.comIConnectGIS W eb/(S(hf33ni454zwb4v45rc3zpsi2))IMapIPrint... 6/ 12/2009

COnnectGlS
Page 1 of 1
Name: FUFU GROUP LLC
Deed:
3552/153
Address:
3127 BOUGAINVILLEA WAY
Zip:
28409
Deferred Value:
0
Neighborhood:
00
Property Address:
34 PENDER LAKE RD
Property
L 4 PB 5/10 E/S 421 1 PRESTIGE
Description:
WOODS MHP
1:948 feet
Parcels
2293-41-2927-
PIN:
Sale Price:
300000
OOOL
Deed
12/5/2008
Plat:
00050010
Date:
City:
WILMINGTON
State:
NC
Land
Building
88598
41570
Value:
Value:
Total
130168
Subdivision:
Value:
Tax
G01 F25 R40
Zone:
SEEMAP
Codes:
Acres:
15.3
Township:
GRADY
VN7Y
Pender County GIS
I\\ 1.
Tnls mao bo«nn«c b' We mvenmry a« a1 vR ev
»utl0 �INm mi.Iu05][tlon, MY 1S 111p dfnm
1=eddC .P.M..n. MC F.tll:,x ena
deb. UIMs MMs — x here,IMIIe Mn-.le
snmmemnnv vuvrc tlnmvymMrmmm� wrusez
sntlultl De ctlnsulb] Hrtls'.nnloWn mine
n!Mmetlx cmblm] on mn msv. N_ntiv Cvunly
nsfum[i nC lepol Rf GcnsbN' nx Me Ii1fOTAlbn
cGnnlnetl Cn RIS mep.
http://gis.pender-county.comIConDectGIS Webl(S(hf33ni454zwb4v45re3zpsi2))/Map/Print... 6/12/2009

ConnectGIS
Page I of 1
Parcels
Name:
PENDER PROPERTIES LLC
PIN:
2283-81-4928-0000
Sale Price:
14607000
Deed:
2867/252
Deed Date:
1/19/2006
Plat:
NOPLAT
Address:
PO BOX 1139
City:
WALLACE
State:
NC
Zip:
28466-1139
Land Value:
105642
Building Value:
0
Deferred Value:
0
Total Value:
105642
Subdivision:
Neighborhood:
00
Tax Codes:
G01 F25 R40
Zone:
RA
Property Address:
421 HWY OFF
Acres:
273.67
Township:
GRADY
Property Description:
ACL R/R OFF W/S 421 D5
1:5374 feet
Pender County
GIS
)�
Tnls mo Is meame[exmelnvenbrrvrtm oRw_�ry
es,"C elmm Mbluwctlon. ana Is lr'e. a fn]m
lemyus.aftheMap fibf CIVM_'d M.T,
]ele.WttfCga mepdrteel' ..Qe0 m£Se
OYEIG OIIm`✓yllllprl11014J11 Ai1RC]
# *
`
shculd cans
.f .Ume[a, Leal an bn. .PPee�MleunV
mmmes nc legal meeenablll} W me IMvm'.]Ibn
...Used cn eB maa.
http://gis.pender-county.comIConnectGIS Web/(S(rciltc55fanxnp45btl52cic))IMapIPrintWi... 5/29/2009

Appendix!)
Wastewater Reuse Alternative

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA)
Evaluation period, n:
20 Years
Discount rate, r:
5.625%
Capital cost:
$307,000
Annual O&M cost:
$63,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $307,000
PIA = ((1 +r)" - 1)/(r(1 +r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost * P/A $746,000
Present value: $1,053,000
Capital Cost
1. Transfer Pump Station
Pump station $200,000
2. Force Main
900 LF @ $50 IF $45,000
Subtotal $245,000
Contingency (25%) $62,000
Total Capital Cost $307,000
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump station (estimated) $10,000
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time) $25,000
3. Repair parts and maintenance of pumping equipment
Repairs and maintenance $10,000
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing $5,000
Subtotal $50,000
Contingency (25%) $13,000
Total O&M Cost $63,000
Page 1 of 1
CAN N:1Pender County - 674761permitting\NPDESIEAAIEAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsRecycle

n
Appendix E
Direct Discharge to Surface Waters.

Point of Connection to
ExistingBASF Oulfall Pipe
Usdnar{ Pont
- Existing BASF OtAINI Ff
P ,,.ed WWI Ppe
(ties Into Existing BASF
Wul Pipe)
— Rop.d WTP
Uwng Well
ROW
' jPent:w Cmirty Property
100 Year Fboti Plain
BASF Pm ely
FIGURE 1
N EAA Outfall Option 1
w' I:
Tie-in to Existing BASF Discharge
S PENDER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NOTE:
PROPOSED OUTFALL PIPE
ALIGNMENT MAY VARY
cm

Am
Ak
..
-
Ok
-
A%
-
FIGURE 2
EAA Outfall Option 2
w is
New Outfall Pipe if BASF Outfall Cannot Be Used
S' PENDER COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
NOTE:
PROPOSED OUTFALL PIPE
ALIGNMENT MAY VARY
cm

7
Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA)
Evaluation period, n: 20 Years
Discount rate, r: 5.625%
Capital cost: $1,058,500
Annual O&M cost: $63,660
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $1,058,500
PIA = ((1+r)n - 1)/(r(1+r)n) 11.83
B = O&M Cost " P/A $753,000
Present value: $198119500
Capital Cost
1. 10" PVC Piping (from Residuals Basins to Cape Fear River)
Open -cut installation at WTP site
1100 LF @ $50 /LF
$55,000
Direct drilling (across wetlands)
4500 LF @ $105 /LF
$472,500
2. Valves
1, 8" plug valve
$4,000
1, 8" flap valve at outlet
$4,000
3. Headwall
1 Structure
$5,000
4. Rip -rap at outlet
30 ton @ $100 /ton
$3,000
5. Parshall Flume
1 Unit
$10,000
6. Sampler
1 Unit
$3,000
7. Transfer Pump Station
Pump station (from Residuals Basins to Cape Fear River)
$200,000
8. Easements
Width 30 ft
Total length 4500 If
Area 3.1 ac
3.1 ac @ $29,000 lac
$90,000
Subtotal $846,500
Contingency (25%) $212,000
Total Capital Cost $1,058,500

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump station
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time)
3. Repair parts and maintenance
Repairs and maintenance
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing
5. Annual Permit Renewal Fee
Permit fee
$10,000
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$860
Subtotal $50,860
Contingency (25%) $12,800
Total O&M Cost $63,660

Pender County Surface Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Application for Discharge Associated with Water Treatment Plants
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA)
Evaluation period, n:
20 Years
Discount rate, r:
5.625%
Capital cost:
$574,000
Annual O&M cost:
$64,000
Present value of costs, PV = A + B
A = Capital Cost $574,000
PIA = ((1+r)" - 1)/(r(1+r)") 11.83
B = O&M Cost' P/A $757,000
Present value: $1,3319000
Capital Cost
1. 10" PVC Piping (from Residuals Basins to Existing BASF Outfall Pipe)
Open -cut installation at WTP site
1100 LF @ $50 IF
$55,000
Direct drilling (across wetlands)
1700 LF @ $105 /LF
$178,500
2. Pipe Tie-in
Connection between existing and new pipe
$4,000
3. Valves
1, 8" plug valve
$4,000
1, 8" flap valve at outlet
$4,000
4. Parshall Flume
1 Unit
$10,000
5. Sampler
1 Unit
$3,000
6. Transfer Pump Station
Pump station (from Residuals Basins to Cape Fear River)
$200,000
Subtotal $459,000
Contingency (25%) $115,000
Total Capital Cost $574,000
Page 1 of 2
CM ' N:1Pender County - 674761permitting\NPDES1EAA\EAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsOutfall Direct Discharge Exist

Operation and Maintenance fOW Cost
1. Energy
Transfer pump station
2. Personnel (Salaries and Benefits)
Mechanic (part-time)
3. Repair parts and maintenance
Repairs and maintenance
4. Laboratory Cost
Laboratory supplies and testing
5. Annual Permit Renewal Fee
Permit fee
$10,000
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$860
Subtotal $51,000
Contingency (25%) $13,000
Total O&M Cost $64,000
Page 2 of 2
CM N:IPender County - 674761permitting\NPDES1EAA\EAA Costs-10.9.09.xlsOutfall Direct Discharge Exist

j D ) j ) j j ) ) j ) ) ) j j ) ) ) j j ) ) ) j ) ) j ) ) ) ) j j ) ) j j j j ) ) ) j
Permit
Owner
Facility
County
Region
Assigned
Type
Flow
Receiving Stream
NCO081191
City of Washington
Washington WTP
Beaufort
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
420000
PAMLICO RIVER
NCO083224
Town of Chocowinity
Edgewood Drive WTP
Beaufort
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Maple Branch
NCO084808
Beaufort County Water System Richland WTP
Beaufort
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
South Creek
NCO086584
Town of Belhaven
Belhaven WTP
Beaufort
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
220000
Pantego Creek
NCO087041
Town of Chocowinity
Hill Road WTP
Beaufort
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Chocowinity Bay
NCO087491
Beaufort County Water District V Chocowinity/Richland Township WTP
Beaufort
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
PAMLICO RIVER
NC0007978
South Mills Water Association, IrSouth Mills Water Association WTP
Camden
Washington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
45000
Dismal Swamp Canal
NCO086681
Camden County
Camden County Reverse Osmosis WTP
Camden
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
432000
Pasquotank River
NC0007552
Town of Edenton
Freemason WTP
Chowan
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
10000
Pembroke Creek
NCO032719
Chowan County
Valhalla WTP
Chowan
Washington
teresa.rodriguez
Water Treatment Plant
60000
Rockyhock Creek (Bennett Millpond)
NCO086291
Town of Edenton
Beaver Hill WTP
Chowan
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
10000
Pembroke Creek
NCO088650
Currituck County
Mainland WTP
Currituck
Washington
teresa.rodriguez
Water Treatment Plant
1670000
North River
NCO087670
Currituck County
Southern Outer Banks Water System WTP
Currituck
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
600000
Atlantic Ocean
NCO035670
Dare County
Skyco Regional WTP
Dare
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
192000
Croatan Sound
NCO070157
Dare County
Dare County North Reverse Osmosis WTP
Dare
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
1420000
Atlantic Ocean
NCO083909
Dare County Water Department Rodanthe/Waves/Salvo Reverse Osmosis I
Dare
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
300000
Blackmer Gut
NCO085707
Dare County Water Department Cape Hatteras Reverse Osmosis WTP
Dan:
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
1800000
Pamlico Sound
NCO086932
Dare County
Stumpy Point Reverse Osmosis WTP
Dare
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
43200
Stumpy Point Bay
NCO088391
Stumpy Point Water & Sewer Di; Stumpy Point WWTP
Dare
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
50000
Stumpy Point Bay
NCO068233
Hyde County Water System
Fairfield WTP
Hyde
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
100000
Lake Mattamuskeet
NCO077992
Hyde County Water System
Ponzer WTP
Hyde
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
108000
Pungo Lake Canal
NCO088668
Hyde County
Englehard WTP
Hyde
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
110000
Far Creek
NCO041530
Ocracoke Sanitary District
Ocracoke Reverse Osmosis WTP
Hyde
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
450000
Pamlico Sound
NCO088323
Pamlico County
Grantsboro WTP
Pamlico
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Beard Creek
NCO088331
Pamlico County
Kershaw WTP
Pamlico
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Tartdln Creek
NCO088340
Pamlico County
Millpond WTP
Pamlico
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
North Prong Bay River
NCO088358
Pamlico County
Vandemere WTP
Pamlico
Washington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Smith Creek
NCO088447
Town of Oriental
Oriental WTP
Pamlico
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
10300
Whittaker Creek
NCO088480
Pasquotank County
Pasquotank County Reverse Osmosis WTF
Pasquotank
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
665000
Albemarle Sound
NCO036447
City of Elizabeth City
Elizabeth City WTP
Pasquotank
Washington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Knobbs Creek
NCO043583
Pasquotank County
Pasquotank County WTP
Pasquotank
Washington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
New Begun Creek
NCO068861
Perquimans County
Bethel WTP
Perquimans
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Bethel Creek
NCO051373
Perquimans County
Winfall WTP
Perquimans
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
35000
Mill Creek
NCO081850
Town of Winfall
W1*11 WTP
Perquimans
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
15000
Mill Creek
NCO088251
Tyrrell County
Tyrrell County Prison RO WTP
Tyrrell
Washington
teresa.rodNuez
Water Treatment Plant
216000
Albemarle Sound
NC0007510
Town of Columbia
Columbia WTP
Tyrrell
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
20000
Scuppemong River
NCO086924
Tyrrell County
Reverse Osmosis WTP
Tyrrell
Washington
teresa.rodriguez
Water Treatment Plant
216000
Bull Bay
NCO087092
Tyrrell County
Creeks WTP
Tyrrell
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
53000
Riders Creek (First Creek) and connecting canals
NCO027600
Town of Creswell
Creswell WTP
Washington
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
11000
Scuppernong River
NCO031925
Town of Roper
Roper WTP
Washington
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
9000
Main Canal
NCO087009
Washington County
Washington County WTP
Washington
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
15000
ALBEMARLE SOUND
NCO040061
Brunswick County
Beaverdam Creek WTP
Brunswick
Wilmington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Beaverdam Creek
NCO057533
Brunswick County
Hood Creek (Northwest) WTP
Brunswick
Wilmington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Hood Creek
NCO085553
Village of Bald Head Island
Village of Bald Head Island Utilities Dept %4
Brunswick
Wilmington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Bald Head Island Marina Basin
NCO044806
Town of Atlantic Beach
Atlantic Beach WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Bogue Sound (Including Intracoastal Waterway to Beaufort Inlet)

Permit
Owner
Facility
County
Region
Assigned
Type
Flow
Receiving Stream
NC0072699
Town of Beaufort
Pine Street WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Town Creek
NCO072702
Town of Beaufort
Glenda Drive WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Turner Creek
NCO077143
West Carteret Water Corporator West Carteret WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
frances.candelaria
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
East Prong Sanders Cr.
NCO082520
Town of Pine Knoll Shores
Pine Knoll Shores WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
frances.candelaria
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Bogue Sound (Including Intracoastal Waterway to Beaufort Inlet)
NCO083089
Bogue Banks Water Corporation Bogue Banks Water Corporation
Carteret
Wilmington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
106000
Bogue Sound (Including Intracoastal Waterway)
NC0086975
Carteret County
Laurel Road WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Felton Creek
NC0077600
NC Department of Transportatioi Ferry Division WTP
Carteret
Wilmington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
10000
Cedar Island Bay
NC0002879
City of Wilmington
Sweeney WTP
New Hanover
Wilmington
toya.fields
Water Treatment Plant
4400000
Northeast Cape Fear River
NC0088307
New Hanover County Water & S, New Hanover County WTP and Well Field! New Hanover
Wilmington
teresa.rodtuez
Water Treatment Plant
2000000
Intracoastal Waterway
NC0OM21
County of Onslow
Hubert WTP
Onslow
Wilmington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
518000
Queen Creek
NC0083551
County of Onslow
Dixon WTP
Onslow
Wilmington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Stones Creek
NC0088455
City of Jacksonville
Jacksonville Nanofitration WTP
Onslow
Wilmington
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
2700000
New River
NCO032221
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of h Belvedere Well #1 & Well #2 WTP
Pander
Wilmington
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Intracoastal Waterway
NC0085154
Town of Weaverville
Ivy River WTP
Buncombe
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Ivy Creek (River)
NCO035807
City of Asheville
Northfork WTP
Buncombe
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Swannanoa River
NC0056961
City of Asheville
DeBruhl WTP
Buncombe
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Beetree Creek
NC0083178
Woodfin Sanitary W&S
Sugarcamp Fork WTP
Buncombe
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Reams Creek
NCO060194
City of Morganton
Catawba River WTP
Burke
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Hickory below elevation 935)
NC0082546
Town of Granite Falls
Granite Falls WTP
Caldwell
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Rhodhiss Lake below elevation 995)
NC0044164
City of Lenoir
Lake Rhodhiss WTP
Caldwell
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Norman below elevation 760)
NC0069892
Town of Andrews
Andrews WTP
Cherokee
Asheville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Dan Holland Creek
NCO083071
Town of Robbinsville
Robbinsville WTP
Graham
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Rods Creek
NC0086843
Junaluska Highlands Homeowne Junaluska Highlands WTP
Haywood
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Richland Creek
NCO049409
Town of Waynesville
Waynesville WTP
Haywood
Asheville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Allen Creek
NC0085511
Asheville -Buncombe -Henderson Mills River Regional WTP
Henderson
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
FRENCH BROAD RIVER
NCO042277
City of Hendersonville
Hendersonville WTP
Henderson
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
180000
Brandy Branch
NC0074624
Westem Carolina University
Western Carolina University WTP
Jackson
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
500
Tudkasegee River
NC0032778
Town of Highlands
4th Street WTP
Macon
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Big Creek
NC0083712
Town of Mars Hill
Mars Hill WTP
Madison
Asheville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Big Laurel Creek
NC0055221
City of Marion
Marion WTP
McDowell
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Nix Creek (Nicks Creek)
NC0082767
Town of Spruce Pine
Spruce Pine WTP
Mitchell
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Beaver Creek
NC0086525
Town of Tryon
Tryon WTP
Polk
Asheville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
250000
North Pacolet River
NC0074306
Town of Forest City
Forest City WTP
Rutherford
Asheville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
90000
Second Broad River
NC0044784
City of Brevard
Cathey's Creek WTP
Transylvania
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Catheys Creek
NC0075965
Town of Burnsville
Burnsville WTP
Yancey
Asheville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Little Crabtree Creek
NCO074390
Anson County
Anson County WTP
Anson
Fayetteville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
750000
McCoy Creek
NC0088781
Lower Cape Fear Water & Sewe Bladen Bluffs Regional WTP
Bladen
Fayetteville
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
900000
CAPE FEAR RIVER
NC0076783
PWCIFayetteville
Hoffer WTP
Cumberland
Fayetteville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CAPE FEAR RIVER
NC0007684
Harnett County Public Utilities
Harnett County Regional WTP
Hamett
Fayetteville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CAPE FEAR RIVER
NC0078955
City of Dunn
A.B. Uzzle WTP
Hamett
Fayetteville
agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
2000000
Juniper Creek
NC0086037
Hoke County
Arabia WTP
Hoke
Fayetteville
maureen.scerdina
Water Treatment Plant
55000
Little Marsh Swamp
NCO086045
Hoke County
Antioch WTP
Hoke
Fayetteville
maureen.scardina
Water Treatment Plant
55000
RaftSwamp
NCO080322
Montgomery County
Montgomery County WTP
Montgomery
Fayetteville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
470000
Clarks Creek
NC0077101
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of
h Whispering Pines WTP
Moore
Fayetteville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Whispering Pines Lake

Permit
Owner FacillityPermit Owner Facility
County
Assigned
T�e
Type
Flow
Flow
Receiving StreamAssigned
Receiving Stream
NCO049778
Town of Southern Pines Southern Pines WTP
Moore
Fayetteville
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
480000
Aberdeen Creek
NCO081281
Richmond County Richmond County WTP
Richmond
Fayetteville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
500000
PEE DEE RIVER
NCO048577
Robeson County Water Departm Maxton WTP
Robeson
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
200000
LUMBER RIVER
NCO084204
Robeson County Water Departm Kenric Road WTP
Robeson
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
100000
LUMBER RIVER
NCO085685
Robeson County Water Departm Lumber Bridge WTP
Robeson
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
100000
Big Marsh Swamp (Marsh Swamp) (Lake McNeill, Odom Pond)
NCO086991
Robeson County Water Departm Sanchez Drive WTP
Robeson
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
100000
Little Jacob Branch
NCO086894
Robeson County Water Departm Raemon Well WTP
Robeson
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
100000
First Swamp
NCO086649
City of Clinton Parson -Anders WTP
Sampson
Fayetteville
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Rowans Branch (Chestnut Pond)
NCO036773
City of Laurinburg Laurinburg WTP
Scotland
Fayetteville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
150000
Big Branch
NCO044717
Water and Sewer Authority of Ce Mount Pleasant WTP
Cabarrus
Mooresville
julie.grzyb
Water Treatment Plant
30000
Dutch Buffalo Creek
NCO077364
Carolina Water Service, Inc of h Cabarrus Woods Well 6 Water Treatment F
Cabarrus
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
30000
Crozier Branch
NCO083119
City of Concord Coddle Creek WTP
Cabarrus
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
600000
Coddle Creek
NCO044121
City of Hickory Hickory WTP
Catawba
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Hickory below elevation 935)
NCO079740
City of Kings Mountain Ellison WTP
Cleveland
Mooresville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Buffalo Creek
NCO027197
City of Shelby Shelby WTP
Cleveland
Mooresville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
200000
First Broad River
NC0051918
Cleveland County Water Cleveland County WTP
Cleveland
Mooresville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
485000
First Broad River
NCO040070
City of Gastonia Gastonia WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
120000D
Long Creek
NCO066141
Town of Spencer Mountain Spencer Mountain WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
10000
South Fork Catawba River
NCO084689
City of Mount Holly Mount Holly WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
100000
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Wylie below elevation 570)
NCO077763
City of Belmont Belmont WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
South Fork Catawba River
NCO080195
Forest Hills Mobile Home Estate Forest Hills Mobile Home Estate WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Hoyle Creek
NCO082694
Town of Dallas Dallas WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
kamn.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
South Fork Catawba River
NCO069035
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Southgate WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Catawba Creek
NCO072061
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Fox Run WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Crowders Creek
NCO084468
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Kettic Meadows WTP #2
Gaston
Mooresville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Catawba Creek
NCO086142
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Oakley Park WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
1000
McGill Branch
NCO086193
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Maplecrest WTP
Gaston
Mooresville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Catawba Creek
NCO088M
Daniel Jonathan Stowe Conserv, Daniel Stowe Botanical Garden
Gaston
Mooresville
agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
3800
Catawba Creek
NCO084565
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of h The Harbour - Wells 1 & 2 WTP
Iredell
Mooresville
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Norman below elevation 760)
NCO086592
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of h The Point I Well I WTP
Iredell
Mooresville
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Norman below elevation 760)
NCO086606
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of h The Harbour - Well #4 WTP
Iredell
Mooresville
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Norman below elevation 760)
NCO084573
Lincoln County Lincoln County WTP
Lincoln
Mooresville
maureen.scardina
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CATAWBA RIVER (Lake Norman below elevation 760)
NCO085588
City of Uncolnton Uncolnton WTP
Lincoln
Mooresville
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
South Fork Catawba River
NCO084387
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility De Lee S. Dukes WTP
Mecklenburg
Mooresville
julie.grzyb
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
McDowell Creek
NCO084549
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility De Franklin WTP
Mecklenburg
Mooresville
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Stewart Creek
NC0006220
City of Kennapolis Kannapolis WTP
Rowan
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
367000
Irish Buffalo Creek
NCO027502
Town of Landis Landis WTP
- Rowan
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
200000
Grants Creek
NCO075701
City of Albemarle Tuckertown WTP
Stanly
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
20000
YADKIN RIVER (including lower portion of High Rock Lake, Tuckertown Lai
NCO088676
Town of Norwood Norwood WTP
Stanly
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
32000
Lake Tillery
NCO044024
City of Albemarle Highway 52 WTP
Stanly
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
114000
Little Long Creek
NCO080381
City of Monroe John Glenn WTP
Union
Mooresville
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
898000
Stewarts Creek
NCO080896
Town of Pittsboro Pittsboro WTP
Chatham
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
HAW RIVER
NCO084093
County of Chatham Jordan Lake WTP
Chatham
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Unnamed Tributary at Camp New Hope (Camp New Hope lake)
NCO081795
Goklston-Gulf Sanitary District Goldston-Gulf WTP
Chatham
Raleigh
agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
6000
DEEP RIVER
NCO085111
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of h Heather Glen WTP
Durham
Raleigh
maureen.scardina
Water Treatment Plant
3000
Sevenmile Creek

Permit
Owner Facility
County
Region
Assigned
Type
Flow
Receiving Stream
NC0002852
Town of FrankGnton Franklinton WTP
Franklin
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
85000
Taylors Creek
NC0007625
City of Creedmoor Creedmoor WTP
Granville
Raleigh
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
12000
Ledge Creek
NC0058416
South Granville Water & Sewer) SGWASA WTP
Granville
Raleigh
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
200000
Knap of Reeds Creek
NC0084034
Town of Enfield Enfield WTP
Halifax
Raleigh
maureen.scardina
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Fishing Creek
NCO084735
Johnston County Department of Johnston County WTP
Johnston
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
4000000
NEUSE RIVER
NC0083348
Town of Smithfield Smithfield WTP
Johnston
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
300000
Buffalo Creek
NCO002861
City of Sanford Sanford WTP
Lee
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
CAPE FEAR RIVER
NC0083852
Pilgrims Pride Corporation Sanford WTP
Lee
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
DEEP RIVER
NCO072125
City of Rocky Mount Tar River WTP
Nash
Raleigh
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
TAR RIVER
NC0072133
City of Rocky Mount Sunset Avenue WTP
Nash
Raleigh
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
TAR RIVER
NC0086061
Town of Bailey Bailey Well #1 WTP
Nash
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
500
Camp Branch (Bailey Branch)
NC0086541
Town of Bailey Bailey Well #2 WTP
Nash
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
500
Camp Branch (Bailey Branch)
NC0087840
Town of Middlesex Well #4 WTP
Nash
Raleigh
agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
3400
Turkey Creek
NC0082210
Orange Water And Sewer Autho Jones Ferry Road WTP
Orange
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Morgan Creek
NC0082759
Orange Alamance Water Systerr Orange-Alamance Water System WTP
Orange
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
30000O
Eno River
NC0088048
Crabtree Bane, LLC Stonegate Mobile Home Park WTP
Orange
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
400D
Rhodes Creek
NCOOD3042
City of Roxboro Roxboro WTP
Person
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Marlowe Creek
NC0083101
City of Henderson Kerr Lake Regional WTP
Vance
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Anderson Swamp Creek (Including Anderson Swamp Creek Arm of John H
NC0081591
Town of Cary Cary & Apex WTP
Wake
Raleigh
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
White Oak Creek
NC0088790
Montclair LLC Rosemoor Well site
Wake
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
4000
Black Creek
NC0085853
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Waterfall Plantation WTP
Wake
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
5000
Horse Creek
NC0007528
City of Raleigh G.G. Hill WTP
Wake
Raleigh
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
70000
Smith Creek
NCO082376
City of Raleigh E.M. Johnson WTP
Wake
Raleigh
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
880D000
NEUSE RIVER
NC0088285
City of Raleigh Dempsey E. Benton WTP
Wake
Raleigh
sergei.chemikov
Water Treatment Plant
4000000
Lake Benson
NCO088412
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Stonehenge Subdivision WTP
Wake
Raleigh
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
1750
Hare Snipe Creek
NC0055701
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Nottingham WTP
Wake
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
1100
Swift Creek
NC0073679
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Oak Hollow WTP
Wake
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
2500
Middle Creek
NC0082996
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Hollybrook WTP
Wake
Raleigh
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
34DO
Middle Creek
NC0083747
Dutchman Creek, Inc. Twin Lake WTP
Wake
Raleigh
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
600
Basal Creek [(Bass Lake, (Mills Pond)]
NCO086266
Carolina Water Service, Inc. of A Woodtrace WTP
Wake
Raleigh
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
3000
Little River
NC0086690
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Stansted Well #2 (WTP)
Wake
Raleigh
mn.berry
Water Treatment Plant
2500
Basal Creek [(Bass Lake, (Mills Pond)]
NCO087998
Aqua North Carolina, Inc. Rand Meadows Phase II
Wake
Raleigh
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
2350
Juniper Creek
NC0088714
IOM Community Developers, Inc Lassiter Farm Subdivision WTP
Wake
Raleigh
jim.mckay
Water Treatment Plant
2000
Ditch Branch
NC0007536
Town of Stantonsburg Stantonsburg WTP
Wilson
Raleigh
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Contentnea Creek
NC0080071
Town of Vanceboro Vanceboro WTP
Craven
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
16000
Mauts Swamp
NC0086797
Town of River Bend River Bend WTP 1 & 2
Craven
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
270DO
Trent River
NC0060321
First Craven Sanitary District First Craven Sanitary District
Craven
Washington
maureen.scardina
Water Treatment Plant
120000
Duck Creek
NC0078131
City of Havelock Brown Blvd WTP
Craven
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
360000
Hancock Creek
NCO088111
Neuse Regional Water & Sewer Neuse Regional WTP
Lenoir
Washington
toya.fields
Water Treatment Plant
2000000
Neuse River
NC0082139
Greenville Utilities Commission Greenville WTP
Pitt
Washington
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
TAR RIVER
NC0086941
Southeastern Wayne Sanitary Di Southeastern Wayne S D WTP
Wayne
Washington
frances.candetaria
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Horsepen Branch
NC0003051
Town of Mount Olive Mount Olive WTP #3
Wayne
Washington
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Northeast Cape Fear giver
NCO086801
Town of Mount Olive Gordon Street WTP
Wayne
Washington
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Northeast Cape Fear River
NC0086918
Eastern Wayne Sanitary District Rockford Church Road WTP
Wayne
Washington
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
NEUSE RIVER
NC0086959
Northwestern ! Belfast-Patetown Memorial Church Road WTP #2
Wayne
Washington
vanessa.manuel
Water Treatment Plant
30000
Great Swamp

Permit
Owner
Facility
County
Region
Assigned
Type
Flow
Receiving Stream
INC0087726
Fork Township Sanitary District Fork Township WTP
Wayne
Washington
joe.corporon
Water Treatment Plant
33000
Beaverdam Creek
NC0002933
Town of Calypso
Calypso WTP
Dupfin
Wilmington
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Dicks Branch
NC0063711
Duplin County/Albertson Water
A Duplin County/Albertson W&S District WTP
Duplin
Wilmington
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Great Branch (Hussey Pond)
NC0045292
City of Graham
Graham ! Mebane WTP
Alamance
Winston-Salem
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Bads Creek
NC0059625
South Saxapahaw Home Owner South Saxapahaw WTP
Alamance
Winston-Salem
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
HAW RIVER
NC0083828
City of Burlington
J.D. Mackintosh, Jr. WTP
Alamance
Winston-Salem
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Big Alamance Creek (Alamance Creek)
NC0083470
Town of Jefferson
Jefferson WTP
Ashe
Winston-Salem
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Naked Creek
NC0086983
Caswell County Schools
South Elementary WTP
Caswell
Winston-Salem
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Hyco Creek (North Hyco Creek)
NC0007323
Town of Yanceyville
Yanceyville WTP
Caswell
Winston-Salem
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
15000
Fullers Creek
NC0082949
Town of Denton
Denton WTP
Davidson
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
YADKIN RIVER (including lower portion of High Rock Lake, Tuckertown Lal
NC0084425
Davidson Water, Inc.
Davidson Water WTP
Davidson
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
YADKIN RIVER
NC0028037
City of Lexington
Lexington WTP #1 & 2
Davidson
Winston-Salem
julle.grzyb
Water Treatment Plant
467000
Abbotts Creek
NC0088200
City of Thomasville
City of Thomasville WTP
Davidson
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
200000
Rich Fork Creek
NC0084212
Davie County
Sparks Road WTP
Davie
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
YADKIN RIVER
NC0086762
City of Winston-Salem
Northwest WTP
Forsyth
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
35000000
Bashavia Creek
NC0088501
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Stonington Subdivision - Well #1
Forsyth
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
2100
Abbots Creek
NC0079821
City of Winston-Salem
RA Thomas WTP
Forsyth
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
25000000
Salem Creek (Middle Fork Muddy Creek)
NC0086011
City of Winston-Salem
Neilson WTP
Forsyth
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
48000000
Muddy Creek
NC0081426
City of Greensboro
N.L. Mitchell WTP
Guilford
Winston-Salem
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
North Buffalo Creek
NC0081671
City of Greensboro
Lake Townsend WTP
Guilford
Winston-Salem
chades.weaver
Water Treatment Plant
1500000
Reedy Fork
NC0081256
City of High Point
Frank L. Ward WTP
Guilford
Winston-Salem
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
10000000
Richland Creek
NC0087866
Piedmont Triad Regional Water Randleman Lake WTP
Randolph
Winston-Salem agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
1500000
DEEP RIVER (Randleman Lake)
NC0074454
Town of Ramseur
Ramseur WTP
Randolph
Winston-Salem agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Sandy Creek
NC0046345
City of Reidsville
Reidsville WTP
Rockingham
Winston-Salem
carolyn.bryant
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Troublesome Creek (Lake Reidsville)
NC0046302
Town of Mayodan
Mayodan WTP
Rockingham
Winston-Salem
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Mayo River
NC0085626
Town of Madison
Madison WTP
Rockingham
Winston-Salem
ron.berry
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Big Beaver Island Creek
NC0043290
Town of Danbury
Danbury WTP
Stokes
Winston-Salem
karen.rust
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Scott Creek (Steadmans Creek)
NC0068365
Town of Pilot Mountain
Pilot Mountain WTP
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Toms Creek
NC0088498
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Mitchell Bluff - Well #1
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
1700
Mitchell River
NC0088609
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.'
Windgate Subdivision
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
1680
Fisher River
NC0088528
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Hillcresl Subdivision - Well #3
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
2000
Champ Creek
NC0088536
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Bannertown Hills Subdivision - Well #2
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
1600
Faulkner Creek
NC0088552
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Colonial Woods Subdivision - Wells 1 and'.
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
4000
Bull Creek
NC0088617
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Snow Hill subdivision
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
2520
Cody Creek
NC0088625
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
The Hollows subdivision
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
2000
Stewarts Creek
NC0088633
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Reeves Woods Subdivision Well #2
Surry
Winston-Salem
bob.guerra
Water Treatment Plant
2000
Rutledge Creek
NC0088854
Aqua North Carolina, Inc.
Pine Lakes Subdivision - Well #2
Surry
Winston-Salem
sargei.chemikov
Water Treatment Plant
2000
Stewarts Creek
NC0044423
Appalachian State University
Appalachian State WTP
Watauga
Winston-Salem
fiances.candelada
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Norris Branch
NC008BD99
Town of Beech Mountain
Buckeye Lake WTP
Watauga
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
Buckeye Creek
NC0083291
Reddies River Water Works
Reddies River WTP
Wilkes
Winston-Salem agyeman.adu-poku
Water Treatment Plant
63000
Reddies River
NC0079260
Town of Yadkinville
Yadkinville WTP
Yadkin
Winston-Salem
bob.sledge
Water Treatment Plant
not limited
South Deep Creek