NC0024252_Permit (Modification)_20150930

City
Conover
of
QD 1676.77
Public Works Department
September 28, 2015 RECEIVED/
DENR/D ViR
Ms.Teresa Rodriguez SEP
NC DENR 3 0 203
NPDES Permitting Unit NterQUali
1617 Mail Service Center Permitting cee�r
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Re: NPDES Permit Application Amendment(NPDES#NC0024252)
Northeast WWTP
Conover, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Rodriguez:
Enclosed please find for your review and processing an amendment to the NPDES permit application
previously submitted to NC DENR on October 27, 2014. This permit amendment provides for the phased
expansion of the plant from a capacity of 1.5 MGD to a capacity of 3.0 MGD. The application package
includes the following:
• Amended EPA Form 2A
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Engineering Alternative Analysis Report for the City of Conover
dated April 2015.
If any additional information is needed, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Michael Fox
Wastewater Treatment and Collection Supervisor
[Post Office Box 549 1 Conover, North Carolina 128613 1 voice/tdd(828) 464-4808 fax[phone]]

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast WWTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
FORM -------- ----- --------
2A I
NPD)ES FORM 2-A APPLICATION OVERVIEW
NPDES _ - - � - -�
APPLICATION OVERVIEW
Form 2A has been developed in a modular format and consists of a "Basic Application Information" packet r
and a "Supplemental Application Information" packet. The Basic Application Information packet is divided
into two parts. All applicants must complete Parts A and C. Applicants with a design flow greater than or
equal to 0.1 mgd must also complete Part B. Some applicants must also complete the Supplemental
Application Information packet. The following items explain which parts of Form 2A you must complete.
BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION:
A. Basic Application Information for all Applicants. All applicants must complete questions A 1 through A 8. A treatment works
that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States must also answer questions A 9 through A.12.
B. Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow>_0.1 mgd. All treatment works that have design flows
greater than or equal to 0.1 million gallons per day must complete questions B.1 through B 6.
C. Certification. All applicants must complete Part C(Certification).
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION:
D. Expanded Effluent Testing Data. A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States and meets
one or more of the following criteria must complete Part D(Expanded Effluent Testing Data)'
1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd,
2 Is required to have a pretreatment program(or has one in place), or
3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to provide the information
E. Toxicity Testing Data. A treatment works that meets one or more of the following criteria must complete Part E(Toxicity Testing
Data).
1 Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd,
2. Is required to have a pretreatment program(or has one in place), or
3 Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to submit results of toxicity testing
F. Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes. A treatment works that accepts process wastewater from any
significant industrial users(SIUs)or receives RCRA or CERCLA wastes must complete Part F(Industrial User Discharges
and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes) SIUs are defined as
1 All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 Code of Federal Regulations(CFR)403 6 and
40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N (see instructions), and
2 Any other industrial user that
a Discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the treatment works(with certain
exclusions), or
b. Contributes a process wastestream that makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic
capacity of the treatment plant;or
c Is designated as an SIU by the control authority
G. Combined Sewer Systems. A treatment works that has a combined sewer system must complete Part G(Combined Sewer
Systems)
^ �, AM RL.I'CtAtVTS MUST ROMPLE-1 E 4�ART-C (GERTIFICA�TIO:Ni) �!
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

�
`
..
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast WWTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
A.5. Indian Country.
a Is the treatment works located in Indian Country?
❑ Yes ® No
b Does the treatment works discharge to a receiving water that is either in Indian Country or that is upstream from(and eventually flows
through)Indian Country?
❑ Yes ® No
A.6. Flow. Indicate the design flow rate of the treatment plant(i e.,the wastewater flow rate that the plant was built to handle). Also provide the
average daily flow rate and maximum daily flow rate for each of the last three years Each year's data must be based on a 12-month time period
with the 12'h month of"this year"occurring no more than three months prior to this application submittal
a. Design flow rate 3.0(Phase 2),2.25(Phase 1) mgd
Two Years Ago Last Year This Year
b Annual average daily flow rate .673 .911
C. Maximum daily flow rate 2.93 3.488 2.793
A.7. Collection System. Indicate the type(s)of collection system(s)used by the treatment plant Check all that apply Also estimate the percent
contribution(by miles)of each.
® Separate sanitary sewer 100 %
❑ Combined storm and sanitary sewer %
A.8. Discharges and Other Disposal Methods.
a. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to waters of the U.S? ® Yes ❑ No
If yes,list how many of each of the following types of discharge points the treatment works uses
1. Discharges of treated effluent 1
ii Discharges of untreated or partially treated effluent
ui Combined sewer overflow points
IV. Constructed emergency overflows(prior to the headworks)
V Other
b Does the treatment works discharge effluent to basins,ponds,or other surface impoundments
that do not have outlets for discharge to waters of the U.S? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes,provide the following for each surface impoundment
Location:
Annual average daily volume discharge to surface impoundment(s) mgd
Is discharge ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
C. Does the treatment works land-apply treated wastewater? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes,provide the following for each land application site
Location.
Number of acres
Annual average daily volume applied to site. mgd
Is land application ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
d Does the treatment works discharge or transport treated or untreated wastewater to another
treatment works? ® Yes ❑ No
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast WWTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
If yes,describe the mean(s)by which the wastewater from the treatment works is discharged or transported to the other treatment works
(e.g.,tank truck,pipe)
Thickened biosolids are transported to regional compost facility
If transport is by a party other than the applicant,provide:
Transporter Name In house
Mailing Address
Contact Person
Title
Telephone Number ( )
For each treatment works that receives this discharge,provide the following
Name Regional Compost Facility Veolia
Mailing Address 3200 201h Avenue SE
Newton NC 28658
Contact Person Wayne Carroll
Title Proiect Manager
Telephone Number [phone]
If known,provide the NPDES permit number of the treatment works that receives this discharge WQ0004563
Provide the average daily flow rate from the treatment works into the receiving facility .004 mgd
e. Does the treatment works discharge or dispose of its wastewater in a manner not included
in A.8.through A 8 d above(e g,underground percolation,well injection) ❑ Yes ® No
If yes,provide the following for each disposal method,
Description of method(including location and size of site(s)if applicable)'
Annual daily volume disposed by this method
Is disposal through this method ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast VVVVTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
WASTEWATER DISCHARGES:
If you answered"Yes"to question A.8.a,complete questions A.9 through A.12 once for each outfall(including bypass points)through
which effluent is discharged. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows in this section. If you answered"No"to question
A.8.a,go to Part B,"Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow Greater than or Equal to 0.1 mgd."
A.9. Description of Outfall.
a Outfall number 001
b. Location City of Conover 28613
(City or town,if applicable) (Zip Code)
Catawba NC
(County) (State)
35 44 12 North 81 11 25 West
(Latitude) (Longitude)
c Distance from shore(if applicable) ft.
d Depth below surface(if applicable) ft.
e Average daily flow rate 0.810 mgd
f Does this outfall have either an intermittent or a periodic discharge? ® Yes ❑ No (go to A g.g.)
If yes,provide the following information-
Number f times per year discharge occurs, 8760
Average duration of each discharge- 15 minutes
Average flow per discharge 0 034 mgd
Months in which discharge occurs, all 12 months(Sequential Batch Reactor)
g. Is outfall equipped with a diffuser? ® Yes ❑ No
A.10. Description of Receiving Waters.
a Name of receiving water Lyle Creek
b Name of watershed(if known) South Fork Catawba River
United States Soil Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code(if known)-
C. Name of State Management/River Basin(if known)-Catawba
United States Geological Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit code(if known) 0305102
d Critical low flow of receiving stream(if applicable)
acute cfS chronic cfs
e Total hardness of receiving stream at critical low flow(if applicable) mg/I of CaCO3
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast WWTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
A.11. Description of Treatment
a What level of treatment are provided? Check all that apply.
❑ Primary ® Secondary
ID Advanced ❑ Other Describe:
b. Indicate the following removal rates(as applicable)
Design BOD5 removal or Design CBOD5 removal 95+ %
Design SS removal 95+ %
Design P removal %
Design N removal %
Other %
c What type of disinfection is used for the effluent from this outfall? If disinfection varies by season,please describe.
Liquid Sodium Hypochlorite
If disinfection is by chlorination is dechlorination used for this outfall? ® Yes ❑ No
Does the treatment plant have post aeration? ® Yes ❑ No
A.12. Effluent Testing Information. All Applicants that discharge to waters of the US must provide effluent testing data for the following
parameters. Provide the indicated effluent testing required by the permitting authority for each outfall through which effluent is
discharged. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows in this section. All information reported must be based on data
collected through analysis conducted using 40 CFR Part 136 methods. In addition,this data must comply with QA/QC requirements of
40 CFR Part 136 and other appropriate QA/QC requirements for standard methods for analytes not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a
minimum,effluent testing data must be based on at least three samples and must be no more than four and one-half years apart.
Outfall number. 001
MAXIMUM DAILY VALUEAVERAGE DAILY VALUE
PARAMETER - - ° - -
Value Units Value Units Number of Samples'
pH(Minimum) 6.3 s.0
pH(Maximum) 8.2 SM.
Flow Rate 3.49 MGD .741 MGD 1170
Temperature(Winter) 23.5 C 15.2 C 740
Temperature(Summer) 25.6 C 23.2 C 340
'For pH please report a minimum and a maximum daily value
MAXIMUM DAILY
AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE - e
DISCHARGE. : ANALYTICAL ••
POLLUTANT ML/MDL
Number of - METHOD
Conc. Units Conc. Units Samples.
CONVENTIONAL AND NON CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN BODS 35.3 m /I 1.49 m /I 702 SM205210B 2.0 m /I
DEMAND(Report one) CBOD5
FECAL COLIFORM 350 col/100 2.98 col/100 702 SM9222D 1/100ml
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS(TSS) 32 m /I 2.98 m /1 702 SM20250D 2.5 m /I
Y'$g�Tiy,+-- -- _ _- _-iia,2?� ,' - mac--y�� '" ✓�-,..-'W- :,-.^ _ _ .__ __ `4. - ';e,r_ NIN"I
'14
fir`, ,_ _fi `E __ � ZK
. _ 'P_ 3SEND Ot-
-TO>LTHEAPPLICATIONPV�RNEPARTS '
YOUAVIUSI'=C�O.MPLETEr: - - .<<
Y ass . 'm ,:°-' - E
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

|
,
` . .
NPDESFORM 2AAdditional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast VWVfP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
C. If the answer to B.5 b is"Yes,"briefly describe,including new maximum daily inflow rate(if applicable)
d Provide dates imposed by any compliance schedule or any actual dates of completion for the implementation steps listed below,as
applicable For improvements planned independently of local,State,or Federal agencies,indicate planned or actual completion dates,as
applicable Indicate dates as accurately as possible
Schedule Actual Completion
Implementation Stage MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYYY
Begin Construction 10/01/2017(Phase 1)
End Construction 10/01/2019(Phase 1)
Begin Discharge 12/01/2019(Phase 1)
Attain Operational Level 01/01/2020(Phase 1)
e Have appropriate permits/clearances concerning other Federal/State requirements been obtained? ❑ Yes ® No
Describe briefly
B.6. EFFLUENT TESTING DATA(GREATER THAN 0.1 MGD ONLY).
Applicants that discharge to waters of the US must provide effluent testing data for the following parameters. Provide the indicated
effluent testing required by the permitting authority for each outfall through which effluent is discharged. Do not include information
on combine sewer overflows in this section. All information reported must be based on data collected through analysis conducted
using 40 CFR Part 136 methods. In addition,this data must comply with QA/QC requirements of 40 CFR Part 136 and other appropriate
QA/QC requirements for standard methods for analytes not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a minimum effluent testing data must be
based on at least three pollutant scans and must be no more than four and on-half years old.
Outfall Number. 001
MAXIMUM DAILY'
:DISCHARGE AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE
r "'" ANALYTICAL
POLLUTANT ' r , �'' ML/MDL
Number of'- METHOD
Conic, • • Units Conc:� 'Units Samples
CONVENTIONAL AND NON CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS
AMMONIA(as N) 4.5 mg/I 0.63 mg/I 702 ASTMD1426-08A 0.2 mg/I
CHLORINE(TOTAL 27 ug/l 0.32 ug/I 702 SM45800CLG- 20 ug/I
RESIDUAL,TRC) 2000
DISSOLVED OXYGEN 10.50 mg/I 7.68 mg/I 702 SM4500-OG 1.0 mg/I
TOTAL KJELDAHL 2.52 mg/I 2.0 mg/I 3 SM204500-N-B 0.3 mg/I
NITROGEN(TKN)
NITRATE PLUS NITRITE 4.3 mg/I 3.3 mg/I 3 SM450ONO3-E 0.1 mg/I
NITROGEN
OIL and GREASE 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 3 EPA1664A 5.6 mg/I
PHOSPHORUS(Total) 4.86 mg/I 3.5 mg/I 3 SM20ED450OT-E 0.2 mg/I
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 242 mg/I 218.7 mg/I 3 SM2540D 1.0 mg/I
(TDS)
OTHER
rsND"OF'PART "
�REFER�TO'THE=AP'PLI,GA�TION°OVERI�IEW��PA`G'Ez1 �-TO_ =D.ETERMINE_WH_ICH�OTHER�Pi�RT>Sw��r-=
r _
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
City of Conover Northeast WWTP, NCO024252 Amendment Catawba
`-t 3�
'b-A§Id]�' Fi,'P'LIC- 10N',1NRdkMA!f6N _-4
PA
- -
FICATIOW C
All applicants must complete the Certification Section. Refer to instructions to determine who is an officer for the purposes of this
certification. All applicants must complete all applicable sections of Form 2A,as explained in the Application Overview. Indicate below which
parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting. By signing this certification statement,applicants confirm that they have reviewed
Form 2A and have completed all sections that apply to the facility for which this application is submitted.
Indicate which parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting:
SEE NPDES RENEWAL APPLICATION DATED 10/24/2014 FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
APPLICATION INFORMATION
0 Basic Application Information packet Supplemental Application Information packet,
Part D(Expanded Effluent Testing Data)
Part E(Toxicity Testing: Biomonitoring Data)
Part F(Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes)
❑ Part G(Combined Sewer Systems)
ALLAPPLICANTS-MUSf*COMPLETE'
'T-
-aT
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who
manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information is,to the best of my knowledge and belief,true,
accurate,and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,including the possibility of fine and imprisonment
for knowing violations
Name and official title Michael Fox,Wastewater Treatriftnt and Collection Supervisor
Signature Telephone number [phone]
Date signed —
Upon request of the permitting authority,you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment
works or identify appropriate permitting requirements.
SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO:
NCDENR/ DWQ
Attn: NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

RECEIVEDIDENRIDWR
{: SEP 3 0 2015
i Water Quality
" r Section
-
Permitting Per
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Engineering Alternative Analysis
Report for
City of Conover, N.C.
Fbial,Report—April 2015
Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
Project Number: 041000.09
PREPARED FOR:
City of Conover
Donald E. Duncan,Jr.City Manager
1011st Street East
Conover,NC 28613
PREPARED BY:
Davis&Floyd,Inc.
181 E.Evans Street,Suite 23
Florence,SC 28506 \`oCAR�o �G
[phone] ��� �� .Ot�. FESS
DAVIS & •: � •:
FLOYD, INC. _ - •'— No. 14773 '
�'a:6 No. F-0244 Sz i
��unn+rrmu�uaa���� , •. ,

RECEIVEDIDENRIDWR
SEP 30 2015
Table of Contents
Water duality
Permitting Section
Section Title Page
Section 1.0-Executive Summary . ............. ... .............................. 1
Section 2.0-Proposed Project Description.................................................. ... ........................ .3
Section 3.0-Current Situation.......................................................... .......... ................... ........ 5
3.1 Background Information .................. ...................... ...... .... ............................. ................5
3.2 Planning Area...................................... ..... . ..... . ...................... ........... ...............................5
3.3 Planning Period..... ................................................... ............ ................................................5
3.4 Existing Wastewater Collection Facilities . ..... .. ................................ . ..............................5
3.5 Existing Wastewater Treatment Facilities ..... ... ................................... .....................8
3.6 Wastewater Treatment Plant Assessment ... ......................... .. ...... ........................13
3.7 Wet Weather Flow Assessment...... . .......................... . ...... ...................... ..15
Section 4.0-Future Condition................... ........................................ ...................... .... . ..17
4.1 General ........................... ....................... ....... . ............................... ................................. ..17
4.2 Population Forecast........................... .............................. ....... . ................................ . ...17
4.3 Projected Wastewater Flow ...................... ...... . .......................... ..... ..........18
4.4 Projected Wastewater Characteristics ................ ........................................... .. ..........19
4.5 Speculative Effluent Limits ......................... . ...... . ..................................... ..................20
Section 5.0-Purpose and Need.............. ....................................................... .. . ............22
Section 6.0- Wastewater Treatment Alternatives....... .......................................... . ......23
6 1 Introduction................ ..................... .............................................. .......... . ...................23
6 2 Wastewater Treatment Alternative Description................................................. . ...................23
Section 7.0- Wastewater Treatment Alternative Evaluation ...............................................29
7 1 Introduction.... ................................. ....... ................................................. ..... ........ ....29
7.2 Present Worth Analysis.......... ...... .................................................... ......... . ......................29
7.3 Alternative Ranking & Selection...... ................................................................. .... ..30
7.4 Selected Plan Description ................. ....................................................................... ...... .32
7.5 Financial Analysis.............................. ............................................................................ .. .36
Wastewater Treatment EAA
City of Conover,NC Page I i

Tables Page
2.1 Estimated Capital Cost Summary...... ........................ ... ................... ..............................4
3.1 NE Wastewater Treatment Plant Design Criteria...... .. .............. ... I ...................12
3.2 Effluent Limitations for the NE Wastewater Treatment Plant................. .. .............. ... 13
3.3 Performance Summary for the NE Wastewater Treatment Plant .. .............. ...............14
3.4 Wet Weather Flow Assessment............... ........... ................. ... ...... .................... ...16
4.1 Population Projections, Catawba County, NC................ ................................ . ..... ...............17
4.2 Population Projections, City of Conover........................... ..................... ......... ................. 18
4.3 Wastewater Flow Projections.. .................. .... .. ..................... .......................... 19
44 Projected Raw Wastewater Characteristics. .... .................... ........ ....................... .20
4.5 Speculative Effluent Limits.................................................................................. . ..........21
71 Cost Summary and Present Worth Value ...... . ................................ ................... . ..30
7.2 Alternative Ranking . ................... ................................ ....................................................32
7.3 NE Wastewater Treatment Plant Proposed Design Criteria ....................... ... . ...............35
7.4 First Year Operational Cost ............. ........... . .............................................................. .. 36
F gures P cie
3.1 Study Area....................... ................. . . ........................................... .................................. 7
3.2 NE WWTP Process Schematic................. . . ... .................................. .....................11
6.1 Alternative A NE WWTP Process Schematic . . ....................................... .........................26
6.2 Alternative B NE WWTP Process Schematic....................... ..................................... . 27
6.3 Alternative C Potential Wastewater Land Application Site... ................................. ...........28
Appendices
WWTPFlow Data... ................................ . ..................................................... ..................... ...A
NC DENR Speculative Limit Letter............................. ...... ........................................ ........... B
Detail Alternative Cost Estimates................................................................................... ..... . ....C
Project First Year O&M Budget...... ....................................................................... ...... .... .. D
Wastewater Treatment EAA
City of Conover,NC Page I ii

Section 1.0 — Executive Summary
The City of Conover is ideally located for growth and development in that it is near major
urban centers and has ready access to major transportation systems. To respond to this growth
and development it will be essential that the City have adequate wastewater treatment
infrastructure available. The purpose of this Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA) is to
project future wastewater treatment needs and then identify and evaluate alternatives that are
available to the City that will enable this need to be met.
Wastewater treatment service is currently being provided by the City of Conover and also
by intergovernmental agreement with the City of Newton. The City Conover currently owns
and operates the Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant (NE WWTP) (NPDES Permit No. NC
0024252) having a capacity of 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD). In assessment of historical
and future residential, commercial, and industrial growth trends, it is recommended that the City
plan for the upgrade and expansion of the NE WWTP to treatment capacity of 3.0 MGD with the
ability for further expansion as required.
This EAA evaluated the design, physical condition, and performance of the NE WWTP.
From this evaluation various alternatives for upgrade and expansion were identified for
evaluation as described below:
• Alternative A provided for the upgrade and expansion of the NE WWTP utilizing
the current method of wastewater treatment utilizing sequential batch reactors
followed by tertiary filtration.
• Alternative B provided for the upgrade and expansion of the NE WWTP by
converting the current treatment system to a membrane biological reactor (MBR)
wastewater treatment process.
• Alternative C was the same as Alternative A with effluent disposal by standard
rate land application.
The North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural Resources (DENR) provided
Speculative Effluent Limits describing the allowable mass loading of biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD) and ammonia permissible for discharge to Lyle Creek by the City's NE WWTP.
These Speculative Effluent Limits were very restrictive. HydroAnalysis, Inc. was commissioned
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e l
City of Conover,NC

by the City of Conover in association with the City of Claremont to perform a water quality
study to determine if the mass loading for BOD and ammonia to Lyle Creek and McLin Creek
could be increased. This study demonstrated that Lyle Creek could receive additional mass
loading without violation of water quality standards. After review and approval of the study
DNER issued revised Speculative Limits that will enable the expansion of the NE Creek WWTP
to a capacity of 3.0 MGD.
Upon the evaluation of the alternatives, Alternative A was determined to be most cost-
effective and is recommended for final consideration by the City of Conover.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 12
City of Conover,NC

Section 2.0 — Proposed Project Description
The selected plan (Alternative A) would provide for the upgrade and expansion of the NE
Creek WWTP to a capacity of 3.0 MGD. The WWTP would continue to utilizing the sequential
batch reactor (SBR) treatment process followed by tertiary filtration. The expansion would be
performed in two phases with the first phase providing for 2.25 MGD of capacity. Treated
wastewater would continue to discharge to Lyle Creek; however, there may be opportunities for
effluent reuse in the future.
The upgrade and expansion of the NE Creek WWTP would consist of the following
major components as more fully described in Section 7:
• Course Influent Screening: The existing headworks would be modified to include
two manual bar screens.
• Influent Pump Station: The existing influent pump station would be upgraded
with the installation of new influent pumps, piping, and controls.
• Fine Screening: Rotary drum fine screen are proposed to be installed to provide
preliminary treatment to remove course solids and grit from the raw wastewater.
• SBR Process: The existing SBR treatment process will be expanded to provide
for an additional 1.5 MGD of treatment capacity.
• Tertiary Filtration: The existing shallow bed sand filters will be expanded to
provide for the additional treatment capacity.
• Disinfection: The existing chlorine disinfection system will be replaced with an
ultra-violet (UV) light disinfection system.
• Sludge Holding: Two new 300,000 gallons sludge holding tanks would be
constructed.
Presented in Table 2.1 is the estimated probable cost for the implementation of the
selected plan. Presented in Figure 6.2 is a schematic of the NE Creek WWTP illustrating the
scope of the proposed upgrade and expansion to a capacity of 3.0 MGD. Presented in Table 7.2
are the proposed design criteria for the plant upgrade and expansion.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 3
City of Conover,NC

Table 2.1
Estimated Capital Cost Summary
Item Esiimated C t
Phase I Construction , 2.25 MGD $8,272,000
Phase 2 Construction, 3.0 MGD $3,128,000
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $11,400,000
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 14
City of Conover,NC

Section 3.0— Current Situation
3.1 Background Information
The City of Conover needs additional wastewater treatment capacity in response to
anticipated growth and development of the City and adjoining areas. In 2011, a Preliminary
Engineering Report (2011 PER) was commissioned by Catawba County in conjunction with the
City of Hickory, City of Claremont, and the City of Conover to address the total wastewater
treatment needs for the McLin/Lyle Creek drainage basin. Hickory, Claremont, and Conover
each have existing wastewater treatment facilities serving customers within this drainage basin.
The 2011 PER considered various alternatives for providing wastewater treatment service to the
drainage basin including the alternative of consolidating all wastewater treatment in the drainage
basin at the new Catawba W WTP being constructed by the City of Hickory in conjunction with
Catawba County on Lyle Creek near the Town of Catawba. Upon evaluation this alternative was
found not to be viable on the basis of implementability and cost. Based upon this finding, the
City of Conover authorized this Engineering Alternative Analysis report to further evaluate
alternatives for the upgrade and expansion of the NE W WTP's to meet the City's future
wastewater treatment needs.
3.2 Planning Area
The planning area for this study is shown in Figure 3.1 and includes the current
wastewater service area of the Conover NE W WTP and potential future services areas in eastern
Catawba County.
3.3 Planning Period
The period considered reasonable for the planning of wastewater infrastructure is
typically 20 years. Projections of infrastructure needs beyond 20 years begin to become
unreliable. Therefore the planning year for this study will be 2035.
3.4 Existing Wastewater Collection Facilities
The City of Conover's sewer collection system composed of two major drainage basins
and includes over 120 miles of sewer lines, 7 pump stations, and over 3500 manholes. Collected
wastewater from one of these drainage basins is conveyed to the City of Newton for treatment.
Collected wastewater from the other basin, consisting of approximately 290,000 if of sewer
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 15
City of Conover,NC

interceptors and collection sewers, is conveyed to the City of Conover's Northeast Wastewater
Treatment Plant.
Two personnel are responsible for maintenance of the collection system. In the last few
years the City has installed electronic warning devices on their pumping stations and has just
recently began installing a telemetry system on select manholes that have had overflow problems
in the past. This will give staff advanced warning that a sewer manhole overflow is in the process
of occurring and will give staff time to take action before it happens. The collection crew work
out of the Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant site.
The City completed a significant sewer rehabilitation project in 2009 at a cost of
approximately $1,400,000 that has aided in the reduction of excessive infiltration and inflow into
the collection and treatment systems.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 16
City of Conover,NC

CD
jr
NM
CD
RDO(w"
CD
t"•.
PUMP SfAMNN-.. 1
:071
4
co Y,
dt�, N09rff_6r,-WASWTM
I.—TUENT-T
-Ell
eD
'14
k�
-.90
aL
'4 —ELI
FIGURE 3.1
CONOVER NORTHEAST WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DAVIS & FLOYD
0 4m. SINCE 1654
&SERVICE AREA PRUCT
NO-04100D.
(m
CD

3.S Existing Wastewater Treatment Facility
The City of Conover owns and operates the Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant. The
location of the plant and its current service area is
shown in Figure 3.1. The plant was constructed in
1991. This WWTP discharges its treated effluent
to Lyle Creek which is a tributary to the Catawba -
River system.
Influent wastewater first enters the NE ! f
WWTP's headworks which includes a catenary �'-
type mechanical bar screen followed by spiral
flow aerated grit chamber. Collected sand and grit
are removed using a chain and flight type conveyor. Screenings from the bar screen and the grit
chamber are conveyed to a dumpster for final disposal at the County landfill.
From the headworks the raw wastewater flows to a triplex submersible influent pump
station that conveys the wastewater to the plant's four biological treatment cells. The NE
WWTP utilizes, a variation of the sequential batch
.5Z
reactor (SBR) activated sludge treatment process
marketed as the Intermittent Cycle Extended
Aeration System (ICEAS) treatment process. The = "'�'°'�0�"'�
ICEAS process operates utilizing a time-based _r'
control system allowing continuous inflow of
wastewater through the system during the three
sequential phases of the treatment cycle. The
three phases of the ICEAS process treatment
cycles are 1) React, 2) Settle, and 3) Decant. The ICEAS process is able to achieve biological
oxidation, nitrification, denitrification, phosphorus removal and liquid/solids separation
continuously in a single treatment cell.
During the react phase, raw wastewater flows into the pre-react zone continuously to
react with the mixed liquor suspended solids within the ICEAS treatment cell. Depending on the
treatment objectives, the react phase will have periods of aeration, anoxic mixing, anaerobic
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 18
City of Conover,NC

conditions, or a combination thereof. As the basin17
E p :
continues to fill, biological oxidation/reduction ° �.
reactions take place simultaneously to treat the
wastewater.
During the settle phase, basin agitation
from the react phase aeration and/or mixing) is
stopped to allow the solids to settle to the bottom
of the basin. Raw wastewater continues to flow
into the pre-react zone as the main-react zone settles. As the solids settle, a clear layer of water
will remain on top of the basin. During the final decant phase, the decanter rotates downward to
draw off the clear, treated water for discharge to
the effluent line. Raw wastewater continues to
flow into the pre-react zone during the decant
phase. Excess sludge is typically removed or
= e wasted from the basin during this phase of the
sequential treatment cycle.
Effluent from the ICEAS basins is further
treated by shallow bed sand filters that remove
particulate solids from the wastewater. The plant
has five filter cells. Periodically these effluent filters are backwashed to removed accumulated
solids from the filter. The backwash is conveyed to the sludge holding tanks for further
treatment and disposal.
The final step in the wastewater treatment
process is disinfection of the wastewater with
hypochlorite followed by the addition of bisulfite -
to remove any residual chlorine from the
wastewater prior to final discharge into Lyle
Creek.
Biosolids are regularly removed from the , .� `
ICEAS treatment cells in order to maintain mixed
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 19
City of Conover,NC

liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentration within prescribed operational ranges. The
removed biosolids are pumped to holding tanks. Biosolids from the holding tanks are
periodically thickened using a gravity belt thickener and then hauled by truck to Catawba
County's regional composting facility for final
treatment and disposal.
The plant has a current design capacity of
1.5 million gallons per day with an average flow of
approximately 0.8 million gallons per day. A
schematic of the plant is presented in Figure 3.2.
The design criteria for the plant are presented in
Table 3.1.
RECEIVEDIDENROAT
SEP 3 0 2015
Water Quality
Permittinq Sectior
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e I 10
City of Conover,NC

n �
n �
O ^"
't
< LYLE CREEK
cc p
0'Q EFFlLENT OUTFALL
C7 CHLORINE CONTACT
ommm
OOq GRIT CKk%M
EIAR SCREE, KLU Puup —7f
SrATIDN
7 LAB
El BLOC
FXTER
0
� I
\� LEAS WASTENATER
\ TREATMENT SYSIEA
oialmI
em
SLUDGE
\ I
ri.owER
n I
--l1
LOADING TANK LOADING BLDG
SLUDGE SLUDGE
HOLDING TAN( THICKENER
BLDG
®DECOMMISSIONED TRFATMENT UMTS
0 100' 200'
FIGURE 3.2 DAVIS & FLOYD
EXISTING CONOVERNE WWTP PROCESS SCHEMATIC SINCE 1954 `t

Table 3.1
NE Wastewater Treatment Plant Design Criteria
1. Design Flow b. Air Supply per Basin 1400 scfm @ 7.5 psig
a. Average Day 1.5 MGD c. Blower Horsepower 75 ea.
b. Peak Hour 3.0 MGD d. Blower Type Positive Displacement
2. Influent Parameters e. Number 3 (one stand-by)
a. BOD 280 ppm 8. SBR Sludge Removal
b. TSS 250 ppm a. Type Submersible
c. Ammonia 20 ppm b. Pump Rate 100 gpm
d. Minimum Temperature 12°C c. Number One(per Basin)
e. Maximum Temperature 20°C 9. SBR Effluent Decant
3. Effluent Parameters(WWTP) a. Type Floating,Gravity
a. BOD 5 ppm b. Number One(per Basin)
b. TSS 5 ppm c. Decant Rate 2175 gpm
c. Ammonia 2 ppm d. Decant Time per Cycle 60 min.
4. Bar Screen 10. Filtration
a. Type Catenary a. Type High Rate, Shallow bed
b. Manufacturer S&L b. Number 5
c. Number of Units Two c. Filtration Rate 2.69 gpm/sf (w/one filter out
d. Type of Units One mechanically cleaned of service)
One manually cleaned d. Total Filtration Area 810 sf
e. Width 3.5 ft 11. Disinfection
f. Spacing of Opening 1/2 Inch a. Type Chlorine
5. Grit Chamber b. Retention Time @ Decant Rate 34.5 min
a. Type Catenary c. Number of Channels 2
b. Number of Units One 12. Sludge Holding
c. Aerated Yes a. Type Aerobic
d. Grit Removal Scrapper b. Number 1
e. Grit Classifier Type Gravity screen c. Volume 0.75 MG
6. Sequential Batch Reactor(SBR) d. Air Supply 50 scfim @ 8.0 psig
a. Type SBR 13. Sludge Thickener
b. Number Four a. Type Gravity Belt
c. Basin Volume 0.349 MG ea. b. Number 1
d. IN Ratio 0.075 c. Belt Width 2 meter
e. Max. Water Depth 16 ft 14. Sludge Processing
f. Low Water Depth 11.17 ft a. Type Composting
g. Cycles per day 6 per basin b. Location Regional Composting Facility
7. SBR Aeration
a. Type Coarse Bubble
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 12
City of Conover,NC

3.6 Wastewater Treatment Plant Assessment
Presented in Table 3.2 is the NPDES permit discharge limits for the plant. Presented in
Table 3.3 is a summary of the plant's recent performance. As can be observed the plant is
consistently achieving extremely good wastewater treatment. For this period the effluent BOD,
TSS and Ammonia have averaged 2.2 mg/1, 3.7 mg/1, and 0.6 mg/l respectively. Wastewater
flow the same period averaged approximately 0.85 MGD which is well within the plant's rated
capacity of 1.5 MGD. In July 2013 the monthly average flow reached 1.26 MGD or 84% of
plant capacity. The NPDES permit also requires quarterly testing for chronic effluent toxicity.
Review of testing data for the past five years indicates no toxicity has been observed in the
plant's effluent. This is again evidence of excellent treatment performance and also the absence
of industrial wastewaters being discharged to the collection system that could interfere with or
pass through the biological treatment process.
The NE WWTPP is about 25 years old and overall is in generally good structural and
mechanical condition. With customary maintenance, repair, and replacement, this plant should
be capable of providing many more years of service to the City of Conover.
Table 3.2
Effluent Limitations for the NE Wastewater Treatment Plant
(from NPDES Permit No. NC0024252)
sMg
Effluent.Himits
Mol
Parameters ;.5� � � : � :a"
MEM � _ f I-nthly Weekly llaily
�- A�er�age A-erage '"Average
Flow(mgd) 1.5
BOD, 5 day, 20°Ca(Apr 1 thru Oct 31) 8.0 mg/L 12.0 mg/L
BOD, 5 day, 20°Ca (Nov 1 thru Mar 16.0 mg/L 24.0 mg/L
31)
Total Suspended Solids(TSS) 30 mg/L 45 mg/L
NH3 as N (Apr I thru Oct 3l) 2.0 mg/L 6 mg/L
NH3 as N (Nov I thru Mar 31) 4.0 mg/L 12 mg/L
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean) 200/ 100 ml 400/ 100 ml
Total Residual Chlorine(TRC) 28 µg/L
Notes: a=Monthly average effluent concentrations for Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BODS) and TSS shall not exceed 15%of the respective influent values(i.e. 85%removal)
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 113
City of Conover,NC

Table 3.3
Performance Summary for the NE Wastewater Treatment Plant
;:, �� "� ' ; ���t,:" '.� Plant Intluent Plant E'ftluent
a_ tR. A%,,� ,O, d
1VIonth Y'ear4 t�� "' � MEN�F�lowa�° BOD �T,SS ammo in a �lem'a B®D(MGD) . ( (mg/�E) (m��)
January 2013 0.802 273 177 22.1 13.4 1.92 5.51 0.76 7.1
February 2013 0.805 273 219 23.9 12.2 4.23 6.98 1.37 7.2
March 2013 0.863 243 163 23.1 12.2 1.1 4.39 0.95 7.2
April 2013 0.955 255 164 22.9 15.3 1.27 2.10 0.69 7.0
May 2013 1.213 233 164 20.8 3.01 2.51 0.88
June 2013 0.845 289 203 21.1 3.2 4.38 0.95
July 2013 1.264 205 181 18.5 22.8 4.61 3.39 1.09 6.9
August 2013 0.908 204 145 20.0 23 2.79 5.26 0.47 7.1
September 2013 0.730 235 173 25.8 23 0.38 2.57 0.10 7.2
October 2013 0.75 221 170 26.4 20.9 0.6 1.05 0.08 7.1
November 2013 0.847 256 198 25.1 17.1 0.94 2.31 0.14 7.2
December 2013 0.949 241 140 20.8 13.9 0.75 2.36 0.03 7.0
January 2014 0.891 288 204 21.2 10.8 1.66 4.68 0.53 6.9
February 2014 0.782 294 142 23.7 11.4 0.51 1.09 0.64 6.8
March 2014 0.818 358 206 23.5 11.8 2.63 4.58 0.88 6.9
April 2014 0.737 440 155 23.1 14.4 1.47 3.76 0.99 7.0
May 2014 0.552 351 185 26.8 18.4 1.05 2.80 0.42 7.0
June 2014 0.519 307 215 26.1 21.7 3.78 4.18 0.51 6.9
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 114
City of Conover,NC -

3.7 Wet Weather Flow Assessment
The NE WWTP is subject to infiltration and inflow (I/I). Inflow into a collection system
is usually regarded as stormwater runoff that enters a system through manholes, cleanouts, or
other above ground openings in direct response to a rainfall event. Infiltration enters the system
as groundwater, through cracked pipes, poor connections, or deteriorating sections of the sanitary
sewer system. Infiltration can also be induced by a rainfall event(s). UI has a negative impact on
the sanitary sewer system as it utilizes the capacities of the plants, collection lines, and pump
stations that would otherwise be available to convey wastewater. It has also the potential to
cause sewer overflows during wet weather conditions. In the last few years the City has installed
electronic warning devices on their pumping stations and has just recently began installing a
telemetry system on select manholes that have had overflow problems in the past. This will give
staff advanced warning that of a potential sewer manhole overflow and will give staff time to
take action before it occurs. The City completed a significant sewer rehabilitation project in 2009
at a cost of approximately $1,400,000 and continues its efforts to reduce 1/I.
In reviewing 1/I contribution to the NE WWTP, an analysis was made of daily and
monthly flow records as summarized Table 3.10. From this analysis early June thru late July
2014 represents a dry weather period for the study area with little I/1 entering the collection
system. The average recorded wastewater flow for this period was 0.483 MGD and this is
considered to represent the Base Dry Weather Daily Average Flow received by the NE WWTP.
This base flow would include the minimum I//I entering the collection system plus the normal
residential, commercial, and industrial wastewater discharge from system customers.
During the following month (August 2014) a significant rainfall event occurred with over
six inches of rain over a three day period. Wastewater flow received by the NE WWTP resulting
from this rainfall event is considered to represent the Peak Day Rainfall Induced I/1 and totals
1.352 MGD. The I/I resulting from this significant rainfall event would be the difference
between the Peak Day Rainfall Induced Flow and the Base Dry Weather Daily Average Flow or
0.869 MGD.
Extreme wet weather and rain was experienced in the summer of 2013 that resulted in
abnormally high I/I contributions to the NE WWTP. For this reason this period was not utilized
in this wet weather flow assessment. Conditions in November and December of 2013 were
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 115
City of Conover,NC

considered to be more representative of normal wet weather months in that recorded rainfalls
were 5.01 inches and 6.78 inches respectively. The Maximum Monthly Average I/I was then
quantified to be the difference between the Maximum Monthly Average Flow received by the
NE WWTP recorded in December 2013 and the Base Dry Weather Daily Average Flow. As
shown in Table 3.4 the Maximum Monthly Average 1/1 expected during a wet month is
approximately 465,000 gallons per day.
Include in the Appendix A is supporting daily flow data for the period of analysis.
Table 3.4
Wet Weather Flow Assessment
NEI NE 1N1NTP Flow
Flow Condition (EMG`D)
Base Dry Weather Daily Average Flow (June-July 2014) 0.483
Peak Day Rainfall Induced Flow(August 2014) 1.352
Peak Day Rainfall Induced 1/1 0.869
Maximum Monthly Average Flow 0.948
Maximum Monthly Average 1/1 0.465
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 116
City of Conover,NC

Section 4.0 — Future Condition
4.1. General
This section will present an assessment of future condition in the planning area that will
establish the need for future wastewater treatment facilities.
4.2 Population Forecast
Presented in Table 4.1 is population data for Catawba County according to the U.S.
Census.
Table 4.1
Population Projections
Catawba County, NC
Year Population Ann al(%)
Incr>.ease
1990 118,412
2000 141,685 1.81
2010 154,358 0.86
2014 155,477 0.2
1990-2014 1.11
2035(Projected) 195,997 1.11
As can be observed, Catawba County has experienced varying rates of population growth
over the past three decades. Growth in more recent years has been influenced by economic
recession. The average annual percent population growth between 1990 and 2014 averaged 1.11
percent. For purposes of this study, it will be projected that for the next 20 years the population
growth of the County will be at this average annual growth rate. It will also be projected that the
population of the City of Conover will increase at the same rate as Catawba County. Presented
in Table 4.2 is the projected population for the City of Conover for the next 20 years.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 117
City of Conover,NC

Table 4.2
Population Projections
City of Conover, NC
Year � opulation
r
2013 8,255
2025 9,424
2035 10,524
4.3 Projected Wastewater Flow
Wastewater flow for the 20 year planning period has been projected and presented in
Table 4.3 based upon anticipated residential, commercial, and industrial growth. Current base
flow is projected to increase in proportion to the overall population growth rate presented in the
previous section. In addition, historical growth patterns for the County have indicated that the
percentage of population provided sewer service has increased approximately 0.3% per year.
Over a 20 year planning period this would represent an overall increase of approximately 6.0%
in the population served.
Future commercial/industrial flow was calculated based on the land area that has been
zoned for industrial and/or commercial development within the service area. Wastewater flow
was estimated using a projected development flow of 880 gallons per acre per day as prescribed
by NCDENR standards for non-residential developments where types of use and occupancy are
not known. It is recognized that industrial flow projections are subject to wide variation and
could substantially exceed this projection. The City of Conover and Catawaba County are
actively, seeking industrial and commercial development within the service area and to
accommodate that development adequate wastewater treatment service will be critical.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 118
City of Conover,NC

Table 4.3
Wastewater Flow Projections
Item VVV�'TsP
Service Area
Current Base Flow,MGD 0.483
Annual Population Growth Rate 1.11%
Annual Service Extension Rate 0.3%
Projected Base Flow,MGD 0.088
Ind./Commercial Site Area, ac. 200
Flow/Acre, GPD 880
Projected Ind./Commercial Flow, MGD 0.176
Peak Monthly Avg. 1/I Flow, MGD 0.465
Total Projected Flow,MGD 1.342
The City of Conover is ideally located for growth and development in that it is near major
urban centers and has ready access to major transportation systems. Residential, commercial,
and industrial growth opportunities as well as service area extension could rapidly create the
need for capacity beyond that projected in Table 4.3. To insure adequate wastewater treatment
capacity is available to accommodate growth and development opportunities, it is recommended
that the City provide for the phased expansion of the NE W WTP to a treatment capacity of 3.0
MGD with provisions for further expansion as the need arises.
4.4 Projected Wastewater Characteristics
The primary customer base for the City of Conover is not expected to change materially
during the planning period. From evaluation of historical wastewater characteristics for the NE
Creek WWTP's the projected raw wastewater specification is as presented in Table 4.4. This
specification will be used in the planning for WWTP upgrade and expansions. The City's Sewer
Use Ordinance will need to be utilized to require industries to provide appropriate pretreatment
of their wastewater if their wastewater contains excessive non-domestic type pollutant loading.
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 119
City of Conover,NC

Table 4.4
Projected Raw Wastewater Characteristics
Parameter 1VlonthhvAvera�e
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), mg/1 280
Total Suspended Solids(TSS), mg/l 250
Ammonia, mg/1 28
pH 7
Max. Temperature, C 20
Min. Temperature, C 12
4.5 Speculative Effluent Limits
In anticipation of the capacity expansion of the NE W WTP to meet the future needs of
the City of Conover, the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR) was requested to provide Speculative Effluent Limits. These limits describe the
required pollutant characteristics of the plant's effluent for discharge to Lyle Creek at the future
rate of discharge flow. Presented in Table 4.5 is a summary of the Speculative Effluent Limits
for the most critical parameters. A copy of the NCDENR Speculative Limits letter for Lyle
Creek is included in Appendix B.
The rational for the Speculative Effluent for McLin Creek WWTP was supported by the
water quality study of Lyle Creek and McLin Creek performed by HydroAnalysis, Inc.
commissioned by the City of Conover and the City of Conover in conjunction with NCDENR.
The indicated effluent limits for the NE W WTP are obtainable with current treatment
technology as evidenced by the current performance of these treatment plants. Enforcement of
the City's Sewer Use Ordinance will continue to be critical to guard against plant up-sets caused
by discharge of non-compliant industrial waste.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 120
City of Conover,NC

Table 4.5
Speculative Effluent Limits for Conover NE WWTP
I�� '' I � Parameter l' � Eftluen�t imitations
Mwonthl: Avera e .eekl Avera a !ail'. laieimnm
Flow, MGD 3.0
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), 8.0 12.0
(April l —October 31), mg/l
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), 16.0 24.0
(November 1 —March 3 1),mg/l
Ammonia, (April 1 —October 31), 1.8 5.4
mg/l
Ammonia, (November 1 —March 31), 4.0 12.0
mg/l
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/l 5.0
Total Suspended Solids, mg/l 30.0 45.0
Total Residual Chlorine, ug/l 28.0
Fecal coliform,/100 ml 200 400
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 121
City of Conover,NC

Section 5.0— Purpose and Need
The City of Conover is ideally located for growth and development in that it is near major
urban centers and has ready access to major transportation systems. To accommodate growth
and development opportunities it will be essential the City have adequate wastewater treatment
infrastructure. Wastewater flow projections indicate a total wastewater treatment capacity need
for the service area of the City's NE WWTP of approximately 1.34 MGD for the 20 year
planning period. However, residential, commercial, and industrial growth opportunities as well
as service area extension could rapidly create the need for capacity beyond that projected.
Planning for a total wastewater treatment capacity of 3.0 MGD is proposed with provisions for
further expansion as the need arises. Accordingly, the City of Conover authorized this
Engineering Alternative Analysis report to evaluate alternatives for the upgrade and expansion of
the existing NE WWTP's to meet the future wastewater treatment needs of its service area.
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 122
City of Conover,NC

Section 6.0 —Wastewater Treatment Alternatives
6.1 Introduction
In previous sections of this report the need for additional wastewater treatment capacity
was identified. This section will present alternatives available to the City of Conover.
6.2 Wastewater Treatment Alternative Description
There are several alternatives which are not considered viable as described below:
Do-Nothing Alternative: As addressed previously in this report the City of Conover's
existing NE WWTP's does not have adequate treatment capacity to meet the projected future
needs of the its current and future service area. For this principal reasons this alternative in not
viable.
Regional Alternative: The alternative of connection to the City of Hickory's Catawba
WWTP was considered; however, as previously discussed this alternative was found not to be
viable. The City of Conover and the City on Newton currently have a regional agreement for
that provides wastewater treatment service for one of City of Conover's two drainage basins.
Provided below is a description of each of the available wastewater treatment alternatives
evaluated by this study.
Alternative A
The NE WWTP would be upgraded and expanded to a capacity of 3.0 MGD utilizing its
current ICEAS Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR) treatment process and continue to discharge
treated effluent to Lyle Creek. Four additional SBR treatment cells would be required as well as
expansion of the existing effluent filters. Alternative A is considered a viable alternative and
will receive further evaluation. Presented in Figure 6.1 is a schematic of the proposed upgrade
and expansion of the NE WWTP utilizing the ICEAS SBR treatment process.
Alternative B
With this alternative the existing NE WWTP would be upgraded and expanded to a
capacity of 3.0 MGD by converting the existing ICEAS SBR treatment cells to membrane
biological reactors (MBR). No additional treatment tankage would be needed and the existing
tertiary filters would no longer be required. Effluent from the MBR would continue to be
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 123
City of Conover,NC

discharge to Lyle Creek. The MBR process would produce a superior quality effluent giving the
City additional assurance of meeting NPDES permit limits and also provide an effluent quality
suitable for reuse. Alternative B is considered a viable alternative and will receive further
evaluation. Presented in Figure 6.2 is a schematic of the proposed upgrade and expansion of the
NE WWTP utilizing the MBR treatment process.
Alternative C
With this alternative the NE WWTP would be upgraded and expanded as described in
Alternative A to a capacity of 3.0 MGD utilizing its current SBR treatment process. Two
effluent discharge options would be available. The first would be to discharge up to 1.5 MGD to
Lyle Creek as currently authorized by the plant's NPDES permit. The second discharge options
would enable up to 1.5 MGD of treated effluent to be land applied. Three alternative methods of
land application are available:
• Rapid Infiltration — The use of rapid infiltration system requires the presence of
highly permeable soils. Most soils within Catawba County do not have high
enough infiltration rates to support rapid infiltration. Thus, rapid infiltration was
eliminated as a feasible land application alternative.
• Overland Flow — Overland flow systems are generally comprised of slopes
between 2% and 8%, and require large tracts of land. The slopes of land
surrounding the existing WWTP are excessive . Thus, the overland flow process
is also eliminated.
• Slow Rate Land Application — The slow rate process is normally referred to as
irrigation. Based on the site characteristics criteria for slow rate systems, the
Rock Barn golf course is located in close vicinity of the existing NE WWTP and
appears to be suitable for this type of land application. Thus this land application
alternative will be further evaluated.
At a typical application rate of 2 inches per week, approximately 220 acres will be
required for land application. Presented in Figure 6.3 is a map showing the location of the Rock
Barn golf course. The Rock Barn golf course has an irrigation system in place that would be
continue to be utilized for land application of treated wastewater. The acreage currently under
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 124
City of Conover,NC

irrigation exceeds that required for this alternative. For purposes of this preliminary analysis it
was assumed that this site would be suitable and available for use by the City. A significant
advantage the golf course offers is that no land application site would have to be purchased by
the City. Use of the golf course would be by agreement. It is further assumed that the golf
course would continue to be responsible for operation of the irrigation system. Treated effluent
from the NE WWTP would be pumped from the plant to the onsite golf course irrigation pond.
An additional 14 day storage pond would be constructed adjacent to the NE WWTP to store
effluent during those periods when land application was not permissible due to inclement
weather or golf course operational reasons.
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 125
City of Conover,NC

n �
T
O tp
n y
O ^'
^, fD
LYLE GREEK
� O
Up PROPOSED 24'
Z EFFLUENT OUTFALL
n �
-t
� �`1 PROPOSED W
Q GRIT CKA� 7NFECIION
PROPOSED NEW PROPOSED / /+ SAND
BAR SCREEN INRDREPI�AL�LQ FILTER
f PROPOSED
SAND FILTER
LAB _
n. BLDG \� PROPOSED FENM2_
i
PROPOSED ICFJS
\l.Y I�TUETER
NT SYSTEM
•�`sr CHEMICAL
�\ STORAGE BLDG PROPOSED PROPOSED FINE
BLOM BLDG t XREF,R CRR
\ EXTvem i i ROOM
mom PROPOSED
BLDG ASPHALT ROAD
I
Rim PROPOSED SLUDGELOADING TANK SLUICE HOLDING TANK NO.2
LOADING BLDG SLUDM PROPOSED SLUDGE
SLUDGE THICKENER HDLDING TANK NO. 1
HOLDING TANK BIDG
®DECOMWWONED TREAT w UNITS
0 100' 200'
FIGURE 6.1
CONOVERNE WWTP PROCESS SCHEMATIC- DAVIS & FLOYD
ALTERNATIVE I'A'A SINCE 1954
'0PROJECT 041000.09
eD
N

n �
ny
LYLE CNDEL
3 A PROPOSED 24•
Z p' EFFWENT OUTFALL
CD
r`- I-rNFECTION
POSED tN
70:7 GOT Ci4M
BAR SCREEN PROPOSED •
a WLUENT PUMP
a REPIACEYEINf & SAND
/ FlLTOL
❑ ��/ LA -� PROPOSED FENCE
In.waDc BPROWS hmR
LOWER&
O o Kw BLDG i
`® PROPOSED MEUWAE
BIOLO61f1�L REACTOR
\'er0011CAL PROPOSED FINE
STORAGE BLOC I I SCREEN&GW
\ ROOM
\ I PROPOSED SLUDGE
HOLDING TANK NO.2
SUMER
BLDG
n PROPOSED SLUDGE
Sim-// i (
MID=TANK NO 1
LOADING TANK SLUDGE
LOADING BLDG SIIE
SLUDGE THICKENER
HOLDING TANK BLDG
®DECdW6SIONtD rOTM NT UNITS
O tar 2OW
FIGURE 6.2
CONOVER NE WWTP PROCESS SCHEMATIC- DAVIS & FLOYD
ALTERNATIVE'LB" SINCE 1834
'0PROW NO.:041UPd
Q.
t9
N
J

p•r�� :•g��,` �J•t-`• G�':! rr{',ice .:•: `��"�•• -'� `� '
`� t, �• , rt' Jul
'7! 1 ,tea^' x /i7 + / • •. ��.V�iw�-�' •, - �. t • , ry4r
^v '� , r iT? .•v� •r,Cty
�,_ r 10.4Y
��'..1� err.•.� r ,° � ^t` `.'ij„ 4� ..., lifts
,y•• ,i � •
UA
Y JrJ/
+. _ ,i. '{ {'i'�My. 1r -1.Y. 4r'"i +nl��'f���•�.c„ "'"__i rr._._...��F;�
� gig. _•.!.�S— _ Vit;, r _ .
r

Section 7.0 —Wastewater Treatment Alternative Evaluation
7.1 Introduction
The various alternatives which have been indentified will now be evaluated with respect
to monetary factors (present worth value) and non-monetary factors such as environmental
effects, implementation capability, treatment reliability, energy consumption, and operational
complexity. The most cost effective alternative is determined by consideration of both the
monetary and non-monetary factors.
7.2 Present Worth Analysis
Present worth value (PWV) is the primary tool for comparing the monetary value of
alternatives. PWV is determined by converting the initial capital costs, annual operation and
maintenance (O&M) expenses, and future salvage value of an alternative to present day dollars.
Capital cost estimates include costs of contractor mobilization, structures, mechanical
equipment, piping, buildings, electrical work, instrumentation & controls, sitework, and
allowances for construction contingencies and technical services. Capital costs presented in this
report are preliminary, and are based upon information currently available. The cost estimates
were developed from a variety of sources including equipment manufacturers, contractors, and
in-house calculations. Actual construction costs will be influenced by final site conditions,
regulatory requirements, detailed engineering design, market conditions at the time of bidding
for construction services, inflation, time constraints, and other factors outside the scope of this
analysis.
Annual operation and maintenance expenses include both fixed and variable expense
items including labor, power, chemicals, supplies, and minor repairs to equipment. Labor
expense estimates are based upon that currently experienced by the City of Conover and other
similar sized WWTP's. Power and chemical usage are variable expense items and have been
estimated considering process requirements. The costs used to estimate power and chernical
costs are based on the current market.
The service life of all proposed equipment included in the various alternatives is assumed
to be 20 years. Therefore, equipment replacement costs are not a part of the cost present worth
calculation. The useful life of concrete structures and piping was estimated at 40 years. Future
salvage values were calculated based upon straight-line depreciation of the initial costs over the
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 129
City of Conover,NC

useful life span of the plant component. The value of land was assumed to have a constant value
throughout the life of the project.
Detail estimates of capital costs, O&M costs, and salvage value were developed for each
wastewater treatment alternative. Construction of each alternative was considered to be
implemented in two phases. The first phase would be implemented immediately and provide for
a treatment capacity of 2.25 MGD. The second phase would be implemented in 10 years and
would provide for the upgrade and expansion to a treatment capacity of 3.0 MGD. Presented in
Table 7.1 is a summary of those estimates along with the calculated present worth value of each
alternative. The detail estimates are included in the Appendix C to this report.
Table 7.1
Cost Summary and Present Worth Value
!�I ernwa-fMme A Alternative B Al'ternatiue C
Phase 1 Capital Cost $8,272,031 $11,083,810 $9,724,371
Phase 2 Capital Cost $3,128,404 $3,084,629 $3,775,468
Total Capital Cost $11,400,434 $14,168,439 $13,499,839
Average Annual O&M $1,062,599 $1,118,755 $1,083,015
Expense
Salvage Value $2,375,315 $1,827,412 $2,800,771
Present Worth Value $25,093,489 $29,011,513 $27,095,476
7.3 Alternative Ranking&Selection
To determine the most cost effective alternative a composite ranking of each alternative
was determined based upon monetary factors represented by PWV and non-monetary factors
represented by environmental effects, implementation capability, treatment reliability, energy
consumption, and operational complexity. Presented in Table 7.2 is the composite rankings
assigned to each evaluated alternative. In performing the ranking, possible values ranged from 1
to 3 with 3 representing the most desirable rank. When alternatives appear to have similar
characteristics, the ranking given would be equal.
• Environmental Effects — Construction of Alternatives B would be within the
current plant site which would be an advantage. Construction of Alternative A
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 130
City of Conover,NC

and C would develope additional property adjacent to the NE WWTP that is
currently owned by the City. Alternative B would provide superior quality
effluent for discharge to Lyle Creek or reuse by industry and others. Alternative
C would not increase the plant's discharge to Lyle Creek. Secondary
environmental impacts of each alternative are" considered equal. An
Environmental Assessment will be prepared that will evaluate the environmental
impact in more detail.
• Implementation Capability'— Implementation of Alternative B would have the
advantage over the other alternatives since the treatment plant could be expanded
by retrofitting the existing treatment basin with MBR equipment. Implementation
of Alternative C may be hindered by the negotiations with the Rock Barn golf
course over terms and conditions of use of the golf course for land application.
• Treatment Reliability — The MBR treatment process operates at a much higher
biomass concentration that makes the process less susceptible to biological upset.
Also the membrane filtration process eliminates the biomass settability issues
often experienced by SBR and activated sludge treatment processes that can result
in poor treatment performance.
• Energy Consumption — Energy requirements were estimated for each alternative.
Alternative A had the least 20 year energy cost followed by Alternative C and
then Alternative B.
• Operational Complexity — Alternative B utilizing the MBR treatment process
would be less complex to operate due to the elimination of biomass settability as
an operating parameter. In addition tertiary filtration would no longer be
required. Alternative C would have the lowest rank due to the need to coordinate
with golf course spray field operation in addition to the operation of the W WTP.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 131
City of Conover,NC
i

Table 7.2
Alternative Ranking
M
onat�e A Alternative B Alternative C Weight SBR MBR SBR wN
R_ an?k Value Ra-nkk � Value Rank Value
PWV 25 3 75 1 25 2 50
Environmental 20 2 40 3 60 2 40
Effects
Implementation 10 2 20 3 30 1 10
Capability
Treatment 20 2 40 3 60 2 40
Reliability
Energy 10 3 30 l 10 2 20
Consumption
Operational 15 2 30 3 45 1 15
Complexity
Total Value 100 235 230 175
Alternative received the highest ranking and is therefore deemed the most cost
effective alternative considering both monetary and non-monetary cost.
7.4 Selected Plan Description
Presented in Figure 6.1 is a schematic of the NE W WTP illustrating the scope of the
proposed upgrade and expansion to a capacity of 3.0 MGD. Presented in Table 7.3 are the
proposed design criteria for the plant upgrade and expansion. The upgrade and expansion of the
NE W WTP would consist of the following major components:
• Headworks: The existing mechanical bar screen would be removed and replaced
with a new mechanical bar screen to provide course influent screening to protect
the downstream influent pump station. During design, consideration may be
given to the installation of a macerator instead of the bar screen. The existing grit
chamber equipment would be removed and a new parshall flume would be
installed for influent flow measurement.
• Influent Pump Station: The existing influent pump station would be upgraded
with the installation of new higher capacity influent pumps, piping, and controls.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 132
City of Conover,NC

i
• Fine Screening: Three rotary drum fine screens are proposed to be installed. The
drum screens will have two levels of screening and will remove particles in the
wastewater down to 1.6 mm in size. More efficient influent screening should
improve the performance of the downstream treatment processes.
• ICEAS SBR Process: The current SBR process consists of four treatment cells
each having a volume of 349,000 gallons. These cells will be reconfigured to
form two treatment cells each having a volume of 698,000 gallons. To provide
for plant expansion, two additional treatment cells will be constructed each having
a volume of 698,000 gallons. Each new cell will be equipped with diffused
aeration system, sludge waste pumps, effuent decanters, associated piping, and
process instrumentation and controls. The existing blower building will be
extended and additional blowers installed to provide aeration for the two new
SBR treatment cells.
• Tertiary Filtration: As the plant capacity is being doubled, the existing high rate
shallow bed filters will be duplicated. Existing filter backwash, mudwell sludge,
and backwash recycle pumps will be adequate to support the additional filters.
• Disinfection: The existing chlorine disinfection system will be replaced with an
ultra-violet (UV) light disinfection system installed within the existing chlorine
contact chamber.
• Sludge Holding: Two new 300,000 gallons sludge holding tanks will be provided
to store, thicken, and stabilize excess sludge generated by the SBR treatment
process.
• Sludge Thickening: The existing gravity belt sludge thickener is sufficient to
accommodate the additional sludge production from the expanded plant. Hours of
operation will increase.
• Effluent Outfall: The existing outfall is not sufficient to accommodate the
additional flow. A new outfall will be constructed.
The upgrade and expansion would be accomplished in two phases. The initial phase
would provide for a capacity of 2.25 MGD. The second phase would increase the capacity to 3.0
MGD. A scope of the first phase would include all those plant components presented in Table
7.3 with the following adjustments:
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 133
City of Conover,NC

• Fine Screening: During the Phase 1 expansion, two of the three proposed fine
screens would be installed. During Phase 2, the third fine screen would be
installed.
• ICEAS SBR Process: One new SBR treatment cells with associated equipment
will be constructed during each expansion phase.
• Tertiary Filtration: Five new filter bays will be required. Three will be provided
in Phase 1 and two will added in Phase 2.
• Sludge Holdings Two 300,000 sludge holding tanks are proposed. One tank will
be constructed in each phase.
Wastewater Engineering EAA P a g e 134
City of Conover,NC

Table 7.3
Northeast Wastewater Treatment Plant Proposed Design Criteria
1. Design Flow b. Air Supply per Basin 970 scfm @ 7.4 psig
a. Average Day 3.0 MGD c. Blower Horsepower 65 ea.
b. Peak Hour 8.3 MGD d. Blower Type Positive Displacement
2. Influent Parameters e. Number 4(one stand-by)
a. BOD 280 ppm 8. SBR Sludge Removal
b. TSS 250 ppm a. Type Submersible
c. TKN 28 ppm b. Pump Rate 100 gpm
d. Minimum Temperature 12°C c. Number One(per Basin)
e. Maximum Temperature 20°C 9. SBR Effluent Decant
3. Effluent Parameters(WWTP) a. Type Floating,Gravity
a. BOD(Summer) 8 ppm b. Number One(per Basin)
b. TSS 8 ppm c. Decant Rate 2402 gpm
c. Ammonia(Summer) 1.8 ppm d. Decant Time per Cycle 60 min.
d. Dissolved Oxygen 5.0 ppm 10. Filtration
4. Bar Screen a. Type High Rate,Shallow bed
a. Type Step b. Number 10
b. Number of Units One c. Filtration Rate 2.69 gpm/sf (w/one filter out
c. Type of Units One mechanically cleaned of service)
One manually cleaned d. Total Filtration Area 1620 sf
d. Width 23.5 inches 11. Disinfection
e. Spacing of Opening I Inch a. Type Ultraviolet Lignt
5. Fine Screen b. UV Transmittance 65%
a. Type 2 Stage Drum c. Number of Banks/Lmps 2/144
b. Number of Units Three 12. Sludge Holding
c. Mesh Size 1.6 mm a. Type Aerobic
6. Sequential Batch Reactor(SBR) b. Number 2
a. Type ICEAS c. Volume 0.30 MG
b. Number Four d. Blower Horsepower 60 ea
c. Basin Volume 0.698 MG ea. 13. Sludge Thickener(existing)
d. F/M Ratio 0.089 a. Type Gravity Belt
e. Max.Water Depth 16 ft b. Number 1
f. Low Water Depth 11.8 ft c. Belt Width 2 meter
g. Cycles per day 6 per basin 14. Sludge Processing
7. SBR Aeration a. Type Composting
a. Type Fine Bubble b. Location Regional Composting Facility
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 135
City of Conover,NC

7.5 Financial Analysis
Presented in Appendix D and summarized in Table 7.4 is the estimated operational
expense for the first year of operation upon implementation of the Phase 1 expansion of the
NEW W WTP. Annual debt service as presented in this table is based upon capital financing at
two percent for a period of 20 years. Debt service may be less than that indicated depending
upon the amount of any construction grants received by the City or reserve fund contributions
made by the City to help finance construction cost. This estimate is based upon the City's
current operational budget for the Sewer Department and anticipated O&M expense associated
with the expansion of the treatment facility.
Table 7.4
First Year Operational Cost
ItemWAM Al"te natiuetA
Annual Debt Service $505,890
Initial Annual O&M Expense $855,058
Total Annual Expense $1,360,949
Wastewater Engineering EAA Page 136
City of Conover,NC

APPENDIX A

Month of Dece-ober 2013
North East VWVTP,Conover, NC
Day Flow(MGD) Rain Inches
1 0.904 0.00 Month of December Flow
2 0.877 0.00
3 0.874 0.10 3.000
4 0.874 0.10
5 0.896 0.17 2.500 e UO
6 0.769 0.39
7 0.739 0.03 p 2.000
8 0.702 0.32 0
9 0.972 0.43 1.500
10 0.969 0.18
11 0.810 0.00 G 1.000
12 0.758 0.00 u-
13 0.723 0.00 0.500
14 1.130 0.96
15 0.916 0.00 0.000
16 0.830 0.01 1 2 3 ' 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22232425262728293031
17 0.792 0.00
18 0.746 0.00 Day
19 0.713 0.00
20 0.689 0.00
21 0.694 0.00
22 1.596 2.70 Month of December Rainfall
23 2.381 0.33
24 1.305 0.00 8.00
25 0.956 0.00
26 0.884 0.00 7.00
27 0.827 0.00 6.00
28 0.784 0.48 =
29 1.463 0.58 = 5.00
30 0.981 0.00 = 4.00
31 0.844 0.00
Total 29.398 6.783.00
Min. 0.689 0.00 2.00
Max 2.381 2.70
,Average 0.948 0.22 1.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29, 30 31
Day

Month of tuine 2014
(North East VW. P, Conover, IVC
0.911 Flow(MGD) Rain (Inches)
1 0.468 0.00 Month of June Flow
2 0.509 0.00
3 0.529 0.00
4 0.525 0.00 0.70
5 0.550 0.00 0.60
6 0.559 0.00
7 0.517 0.00 ^. 0.50
8 0.608 2.04 0
9 0.571 0.01 0.40
10 0.549 0.00 0.30
11 0.555 0.00
12 0.557 0.00 M 0.20
13 0.514 0.16
14 0.528 0.00 0.10
15 0.503 0.00 0.00
16 0.517 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
17 0.498 0.00
18 0.499 0.00 Day
19 0.520 0.18
20 0.505 0.29
21 0.517 0.04
22 0.482 0.02 Month of June Rainfall
23 0.519 0.00
24 0.502 0.08
25 0.497 0.00 2.50
26 0.508 0.00
27 0.512 0.00 N 2.00
28 0.493 0.00
t
29 0.485 0.00 1.50
30 0.456 0.00
Total 15.552 2.82 1.00
Min. 0.456 0.00 'ca
Max 0.608 2.04 W 0.50
Average 0.518 0.09
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Day

Month o" July 2014
North East Vn,.P, Conover, NC
Day Flow(MGD) Rain (Inches)
1 0.459 0.00 Month of July Flow
2 0.462 0.00
3 0.516 1.23 0.54
4 0.437 0.00
5 0.444 0.00 0.52
6 0.445 0.00 0.50
7 0.468 0.00
8 0.466 0.00 0.48
9 0.462 0.21 0.46
10 0.492 0.18
11 0.461 0.00 p 0.44
12 0.476 0.00 r' 0.42
13 0.444 0.04
14 0.463 0.01 0.40
15 0.468 0.35 0.38
16 0.460 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
17 0.450 0.00
18 0.468 0.15 Day
19 0.473 0.11
20 0.469 0.01
21 0.461 0.09
22 0.489 0.00 Month of July Rainfall
23 0.493 0.05
24 0.501 0.10 6.00
25 0.467 0.00 5.50
26 0.457 0.00 N 5.00
27 0.438 0.28 m 4.50
28 0.467 0.00 v 4.00
29 0.460 0.00 = 3.50
30 0.464 0.00 - 3.00
31 0.469 2.98 „a 2.50
Total 14.449 5.79 = 2.00
Min. 0.437 0.00 1.50
Max 0.516 2.98 1.00
Average 0.466 0.19 0.50
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Day

Month of "�•igust 2014
North East VVUe-rP, Conover, NC
Day Flow(MGD) Rain (Inches)
1 0.823 1.67 Month of August Flow
2 0.486 0.00
3 0.464 0.00 1.60
4 0.498 0.00
5 0.716 0.69 1.40 I
6 0.546 0.01 1.20 0' We 0,4 e C>LV
7 0.479 0.00 0
8 0.467 0.14 1.00
9 0.464 0.01 0.80
10 0.822 3.83
11 1.153 0.35 p 0.60
12 1.352 2.13 M 0.40
13 0.897 0.02
14 0.641 0.00 0.20
15 0.561 0.00 0.00
16 0.523 0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
17 0.497 0.00
18 0.493 0.00 Day
19 0.482 0.00
20 0.466 0.00
21 0.464 0.00
22 0.464 0.33 Month of August Rainfall
23 0.527 0.86
24 0.550 0.10 6.00
25 0.512 0.00 5.50
26 0.485 0.00 N 5.00 -
27 0.491 0.00 m 4.50
28 0.500 0.00 v 4.00
29 0.502 0.00 = 3.50 -
30 0.471 0.17 - 3.00
31 0.463 0.00 2.50
Total 18.259 10.31 = 2.00
Min. 0.463 0.00 10 1.50
Max 1.352 3.83 1.00
Average 0.589 0.33 0.50
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12131415161718192021 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Day

APPENDIX B

Wx
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder John E,Skvaria, III
Governor Director Secretary
February 12,2014
Mr. Guy Slagle,P.E.,Project Director
Davis&Floyd
107313th Street NE
Hickory,NC 28602
Subject: Speculative Effluent Limits
City of Conover
Southeast WWTP
Pernit No. NCO024252
Catawba Cotulty
Catawba River Basin
Dear Mr. Slagle:
This letter provides speculative effluent linnits for 3.0 MGD at the Conover SE WWTP. The
Division received the speculative limits request in a letter dated January 31, 2014. Please
recognize that speculative lirnnits may change based on future water duality initiatives,and it is
highly reconnmended that the applicant verify the speculative limits with the D'ivision's NPDES
Unit prior to any engineering design work.
Receiviing Stream. Lyle Creek is located within the Catawba River Basin, Lyle Creek has a
stream classification of C, and waters with this classification have a best usage for aquatic
life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity, wildlife, secondary recreation and
agriculture. Lyle Creek has a sununer 7Q10 flow of 5 cfs,a whiter 7Q10 flow of 8 cfs, and an
annual average flow of 23 cfs.
Lyle Creek is not currently listed as an unpaired waterbody on the 2012 North Carolina
303(4)Impaired Waters List for biological integrity.
Based upon a review of information available from the North Carolua Natural IIeritage
Program Online Map Viewer, there are clot any Federally Listed threatened or endangered
aquatic species identified within a 5 nile radius of the proposed discharge location. If there
are any identified threatened/endangered species, it is recorrunended that the applicant
1617 Mall Service Center,Ralof h,North Carolina 27699.1617
Location:612 N.Salisbury St,Raleigh,North Carolina 27604
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone]
Internet:vNNIalcv+aternuality.ora �TOlie r
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Acton Employer 1�!o1�ffi Cawlina
N09hlll"111

Mr. Guy Slagle
February 12,2014
Page 2 of 4
discuss the proposed project with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to determine Whether the
proposed discharge location imiglnt impact such species.
Speculative Effluent Limits. Based on Division review of receiving stream conditions and
the Upper Lyle and McLiL Creek Water Quality Modeling Analysis prepared by
HydroAnalysis, speculative limits for the proposed expansion to 3.0 MGD are presented it
Table 1. A complete evaluation of these limits and monitoring requirements for metals and
other toxicants, as well as potential instream monitoring requirements, will be addressed
upon receipt of a formal NPDBS permit application. Soine features of the speculative limit
development include the following:
o BOD/DO/NH3N Limits. The limits for BOD, DO and NH3N (winter) are based on
the results of the modeling analysis, The Qual2K model predicted DO concentrations
above the water quality standard maintaining the current concentration limits for
BOD and amnunonia.
• NH3N (Summer). The sumuner limits for ammonia were calculated to protect for
chronic toxicity based on the expanded flow and stream dilution. 'These limits are
more stringent than the limits used for the model to maintain dissolved oxygen
above the water quality standard.
o Upsh•eann/Downstream Monitoring, h stream monitoring for dissolved oxygen and
temperature is recommended to evaluate the increased discharge impact on the
watershed. Monitoring locations will be determined when the pern Lit is modified to
1 include the expansion.
TABLE 1, Speculative Limits for Conover SE WWTP
Efl -e tliuut Homs
ftt � . a
Bfflieiil.Charcte�'is.bic:
,'Nlai tial ;Average. ;Weeklj�';Ave"r'age: ..Daily MaxiMItm'
Flow 3.0 MGD
BOD5 (April 1-October 31) 8.0 m /L 12,0 mg/l,
BOD5(November 1-March 16.0 nig/L 24.0 mng/L
31)
NH3 as N(April 1 -October 1.8 mg/l, 5.41mg/L
31)
NH3 as N(November 1- 4.0 ing/L 12.0 mig/L
_March 31)
Dissolved Oxygen 5,0 mg/L
11iiniunun-1
TSS 30 in /L 45 mg/L
TRC 28 u /I

Ivlr. Guy Slagle
February 12,2014
Page 3 of 4
Fecal coliform(geometric 200/100 n11 400/100 nil
mean)
Total Phosphorus 1\4otiitor
Total Nitrogen Monitor
Dissolved Oxygen Upstream./Downstream monitoring
Tens eratureU stream/Downstneant trtonitorin
Chronic Toxicity Pass/Fail
Quarterly test 48%
Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA). Please note that the Division cannot guarantee
that an NPDES peanut for a new or expanding discharge will be issued with these
speculative limits. Final decisions can only be irtade after the Division receives and
evaluates a formal permit application for the new/expanded discharge. In accordance with
North Carolina Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H.0105( c), the most environmentally
sound alternative should be selected from all reasonably cost effective options, Therefore,
as a component of all NPDES permit applications for new or expanding flow, a detailed
engineering alternatives analysis (EAA)insist be prepared. The EAA must justify requested
flows and provide an analysis of potential wastewater treatment alternatives, A copy of the
Division guidance for preparing EAA documents is attached.
State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) EA/EIS Requirements. A SEPA EA/EIS document
must be prepared for all projects that: 1)need a permit;2)use public money or affect public
lands; and 3) night have a potential to significantly impact the environment, For new or
expanding discharges,significantiinpact is defined as>500,000 gpd additional flow. Since
the City of Conover is proposing an increase in flow>500,000 gpd, the City must prepare
a SEPA document that evaluates the potential for impacting the duality of the
envirorunent. The NPDF.S Unit ivill not accept an NPDES permit application for the
expanded discharge until the Division has approved the SEPA document and sent a Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) to the State Clearinghouse for review and comment. A
SEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) should contain a clear justification for the proposed
project. If the SEPA EA demonstrates that the project may result in a significant adverse
effect on the quality of the environment,you must then prepare a SEPA EIS (Environmental
Impact Statement). For projects that are subject to SEPA, the EAA requirements discussed
above will need to be folded into the SEPA document. The SEPA process will be delayed if
all EAA requirements are not adequately addressed. If you.have any questions regarding
SEPA EA/EIS requirements, please contact Jackie Roddy with DWR Planning at (919) 807-
6442,
Should you have any questions about these speculative limits or NPDES pernnitth-Ig
requirements,please feel free to contact Teresa Rodriguez at(919)807-6387 or Tom Behnick
at(919)807-6390.

Mr. Guy Slagle
Febromy 12,2014
I ) Page 4 of 4
Respectfully,
(�oj
Behlick
Supervisor,NPDES Complex Permitting Unit
Attachment: BAA Guidance Document
Hardcopy:
Central Piles
NPDES Permit Rile
Electronic Copy:
US Fish and Wildlife Service,Sara—[e-mail]
DWR/Mooresville Regional Office
D4VR/SEPA,Jackie Roddy
DWR/Modeling,Kathy Stecker
DWR/Basuiwide Pluming,Jeff Max-ming
NPDES Server>Specs
I

APPENDIX C

LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Item Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
Capital Cost: Phase 1 $8,272,031 $11,083,810 $9,724,371
Captial Cost: Phase 2 $3,128,404 $3,084,629 $3,775,468
Total Capital Cost $11,400,434 $14,168,439 $13,499,839
Average Annual O&M Expense $1,062,599 $1,118,755 $1,083,015
Salvage Value (20 Year) $2,375,315 $1,827,412 $2,800,771
Present Worth Value $25,093,4891 $29,011,513 $27,095,476
FIRST YEAR OPERATIONAL EXPENSE
Item Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
Annual Dept Service WWTP $505,890 $677,849 $594,711
Initial Annual O&M Expense $855,058 $849,093 $862,444
Total Annual Expense $1,360,949 $1,526,943 $1,457,155

INFLATION
Inflation Rate= /
Term
Term= 20 years
(1+i)^n= 1 80611
SINGLE PAYMENT SERIES EQUAL PAYMENT SERIES
Compound Amt Fact 1.80611 Cap Recovery Facto 0 06722
Present Worth Fact 055368 Compound Amt Fac 26 87037
Present Worth Fact 1487747
PHASE 1 PHASE 2: Construction in Year 10
WWTP ECONOMIC ANALYSIS WWTP ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Interest Rate= 3% Interest Rate= 3%
Term= 20 years Terni= 10 years
(1+,)^n= 1 80611 (1+t)^n= 1 34392
SINGLE PAYMENT SERIES EQUAL PAYMENT SERIES SINGLE PAYMENT SERIES EQUAL PAYMENT SERIES
Compound Amt Fact 180611 Cap Recovery Facto 0 06722 Compound Amt Faci 1 34392 Cap Recovery Facto 0 11723
Present Worth Fact 055368 Compound Amt Fac 2687037 Present Worth Fact 074409 Compound Amt Fac I 1 46388
Present Worth Fact 14 87747 Present Worth Fact 853020
Alternative CAPITAL ANNUAL SALVAGE PRESENT Alternative CAPITAL PRESENT
INVESTMENT O&M VALUE WORTH VALUE INVESTMENT WORTH VALUE
A $8,272,031 $1,062,599 $2,375315 $22,765,663 A $3,128,404 $2,327,826
B $11,083,810 $1,118,755 $1,827,412 $26,716,259 B $3,084,629 $2,295_54
C $9,724,371 $1,083,015 $2,800,771 $24,286,173 C $3,775,468 $2,809,302
WWTP CONSTRUCTION FINANCING WWTP CONSTRUCTION FINANCING
Interest Rate= 2% Interest Rate= 2%
Term= 20 years Term= 20 years
(I+i)^n= 1 48595 (1+�)^n= 148595
SINGLE PAYMENT SERIES EQUAL PAYMENT SERIES SINGLE PAYMENT SERIES EQUAL PAYMENT SERIES
Compound Amt Fact 148595 Cap Recovery Facto 0.06116 Compound Amt Fac 148595 Cap Recovery Facto 0.06116
Present Worth Fact 0 67297 Compound Ain Fac 24 29737 Present Worth Fact 0 67297 Compound Anit Fac 24 29737
Present Worth Fact 16 35143 Present Worth Fact 1635143
Alternative CAPITAL ANNUAL Alternative CAPITAL ANNUAL
INVESTMENT DEBT SERVICE INVESTMENT DEBT SERVICE
A $8,272,031 $505,890 A $3,128,404 $191,323
B $11,083,810 $677,849 B $3,084,629 $188,646
C $9,724,371 $594,711 C $3,775,468 $230,895

CLIENT ff��
ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE VMTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Nw
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 1
,All D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION :] MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits 1 Is $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 Is $127,700 $127,700
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 20 mo $6,000 $120,000
Cleanup and Move Out 1 Is $25,000 $25,000 $297,700
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp(Replacement) I Is $164,160 $164,160
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 1 S. $15,200 $15,200
Installation-Total I Is $38,000 $38,000
Influent Flow Meter 1 Is $37,800 $37,800
Contractor Equipment Markup I Is $3,500 $3,500
Installation-Total 1 I.s $8,750 $8,750
Demo 1 Is $15,000 $15,000 $282,410
Influent Pump Station
Replacement 30 Inch DIP Gravity Sewer 200 if $90 $18,000
Pumps/Rails/Etc 1 ea $318,600 $318,600
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I S. $29,500 $29,500
Installation 1 Is $73,750 $73,750
Parrellel 12 Inch Force Main 800 if $48 $38,400
Demo 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 $483,250
Fine Screen vv/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor I I.S. $378,000 $378,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I.S. $35,000 $35,000
Installation I Is $87,500 $87,500
Screw Conveyors 2 ea $21,600 $43,200
Contractor Equipment Markup I I S. $4,000 $4,000
Installation 1 Is $10,000 $10,000
Concrete 499 c y $600 $29,940
Excavation 49 c y $15 $735
Porous Fill 25 c y. $38 $950
Stairs 1 Is $10,000 $10,000
Handrail 96 1 f. $34 $3,264
Grating 0 s f. $50 $0 $602,589
ICEAS Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 Is $567,000 $567,000

CLIENT COSI.ESTIMATE DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WVVTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 1
,All I D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNITUNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Contractor Equipment Markup I Is $52,500 $52,500
Installation I Is $131,250 $131,250
Concrete 682 c y $600 $409,200
Excavation 5,282 c y $15 $79,230
Porous Fill 251 c Y. $38 $9,538
Blower Building Expansion 840 Is $120 $100,800
Air Piping&Valves 1 I S. $50,000 $50,000 $1,399,518
Filtration
Additional Filtration Cells I Is $781,920 $781,920
Contractor Equipment Markup I Is $72,400 $72,400
Installation 1 I.S. $181,000 $181,000
Concrete 296 c.y. $600 $177,600
Excavation 995 c.y $15 $14,925
Porous Fill 84 Cy $38 $3,192
Demo I Ls $10,000 $10,000
Hand Rail 240 If $37 $8,880
Grating 29 s f $50 $1,450 $1,251,367
UV Disinfection &Outfall
UV Equipment 1 Is $384,480 $384,480
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $35,600 $35,600
Installation 1 Is $89,000 $89,000
Disinfection Chamber Modifications I Is $35,000 $35,000
24 Inch DIP Effluent Outfall 130 Lf $90 $11,700 $555,780
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment 1 l.s. $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c y. $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 c Y. $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 c Y. $38 $2,774
Stairs 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 $307,869
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 1 Is $420,278 $420,278 $420,278
Site Work
Site Work I 1 S. $322,026 $322,026
Miscellaneous I Is $10,000 $10.000 $332,026

CLIENT CTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE DATEPREPARED
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE VAVTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Notc
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT 9 41000 09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION :]=MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 Is $390,623 $390,623
Site Lighting 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Standby Power(Generators) 2 ea $85,000 $170,000 $580,623
Estimated Construction Costs $6,513,410
Contingencies $977,012
Fees&Services $781,609
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $8,272,031

CLIENT COST ESTIMATE DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT# 41000 09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION :]EMANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL:::�[ SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits I Is $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 Is $47,600 $47,600
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 12 mo. $6,000 $72,000
Cleanup and Move Out I Is $15,000 $15,000 $159,600
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp 0 1 S. $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 I.S $0 $0
Installation-Total 0 Is $0 $0
Demo 0 1 S. $0 $0 $0
Influent Pump Station
Pumps/Rails/Etc. 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation 0 I.s $0 $0
Demo 0 Is $0 $0 $0
Fine Screen w/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 l.s $15,000 $15,000
Installation 1 I'S. $37,500 $37,500
Screw Conveyors 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation 0 l.S $0 $0
Concrete 0 c.y $0 $0
Excavation 0 c y $0 $0
Porous Fill 0 c.y $0 $0
Stairs 0 Is $0 $0
Handrail 0 if $0 $0
Grating 0 s f $0 $0 $214,500

CLIENT COST ESTIMATE DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WMFP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
ICEAS Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 I S. $324,000 $324,000
Contractor Equipment Markup l I.S $30,000 $30,000
Installation I Is $75,000 $75,000
Concrete 682 c Y. $600 $409,200
Excavation 5,282 cy. $15 $79,230
Porous Fill 251 c y $38 $9,538
Air Piping&Valves 1 I S. $30,000 $30,000 $956,968
Filtration
Additional Filtration Cells 1 Is $260,280 $260,280
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $24,100 $24,100
Installation 1 Is $60,250 $60,250
Concrete 0 c y $0 $0
Excavation 0 c Y. $0 $0
Porous Fill 0 c y $0 $0
Demo 0 Is $0 $0
Hand Rail 0 if $0 $0
Grating 0 S f. $0 $0 $344,630
UV Disinfection&Outfall
UV Equipment 0 1 S. $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation 0 1 S. $0 $0
Disinfection Chamber Modifications 0 Is $0 $0
24 Inch Effluent Outfall 0 if $0 $0 $0
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c y $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 c.y $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 C.Y. $38 $2,774
Stairs 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 0 1 S. $0 $0 $302,869

LIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
CCOST ESTIMATE onover
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Nolc
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative A:ICEAS Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT# 41000.09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION __::] MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 1 l.S $181,897 $181,897 $181,897
Site Work
Site Work I Is $109,138 $109,138
Miscellaneous 1 Is $10,000 $10,000 $119,138
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 I.S $145,517 $145,517
Site Lighting 0 Is $0 $0
Standby Power(Generators) 0 ea $0 $0 $145,517
Estimated Construction Costs $2,425,119
Contingencies $363,768
Fees&Services $339,517
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $3,128,404

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
COST ESTIMATE
Conover
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative B:MBR Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits 1 I.s $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 I S $171,100 $171,100
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 18 mo $6,000 $108,000
Cleanup and Move Out 1 I s $15,000 $15,000 5319,100
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp(Replacement) 1 I s $164,160 $164,160
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I S. $15,200 $15,200
Installation-Total 1 I.S. $38,000 $38,000
Influent Flow Meter l 1 s $37,800 $37,800
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 1 S $3,500 $3,500
Installation-Total 1 I S $8,750 $8,750
Demo 1 I s $15,000 $15,000 $282,410
Influent Pump Station
Replacement 30 Inch DIP Gravity Sewer 200 1.f. $90 $18,000
Pumps/Rails/Etc I ea. $318,600 $318,600
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I s $29,500 $29,500
Installation 1 1 S. $73,750 $73,750
Parrellel 12 Inch Force Main 800 1 f $48 $38,400
Demo 1 1 s $5,000 $5,000 $483,250
Fine Screen w/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor I I S $378,000 $378,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I S $35,000 $35,000
Installation 1 I S $87,500 $87,500
Screw Conveyors 2 ea $21,600 $43,200
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I.s $4,000 $4,000
Installation 1 1 S. $10,000 $10,000
Concrete 499 c.y $600 $29,940
Excavation 49 c.y $15 $735
Porous Fill 25 c y $38 $950
Stairs l I s $10,000 $10,000
Handrail 96 Lf $34 $3,264
Grating 0 S.f. $50 $0 $602,589

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover [COST
ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative B:MBR Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATEIL
ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION M__I[:::: ANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
MBR Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 Is $3,564,000 $3,564,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $330,000 $330,000
Installation 1 Is $660,000 $660,000
Concrete(Anoxic Basin wall) 75 c.y $600 $45,000
Concrete Repair(old Basin) 353 Sy $35 $12,355
Membrane Blower&Pump Building 2,240 S f $120 $268,800
Air&Process Piping 1 I.S $30,000 $30,000 $4,910,155
UV Disinfection
UV Equipment 1 Is $384,480 $384,480
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Ls $35,600 $35,600
Installation 1 Is $89,000 $89,000
Disinfection Chamber Modifications I Is $35,000 $35,000
24 Inch DIP Effluent Outfall 130 if $90 $11,700 $555,780
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c Y. $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 c.y $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 c.y $38 $2,774
Stairs 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 $307,869
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 1 Is $360,523 $360,523 $360,523

L"
onover NT DATE PREPARED [ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
C
COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE VVffrP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative B:MBR Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT a 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Site Work
Site Work 1 Is $205,789 $205,789
Miscellaneous 1 Is $10,000 $10,000 $215,789
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 Is $499,944 $499,944
Site Lighting 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Standby Power(Generators) 2 ea $85,000 $170,000 $689,944
Estimated Construction Costs $8,727,409
Contingencies $1,309,111
Fees&Services $1,047,289
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $11,083,810

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Notc
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative B:MBR Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT k 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION IMANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL____�[ SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits I Is $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 I.S $46,900 $46,900
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 10 mo. $6,000 $60,000
Cleanup and Move Out 1 I S. $15,000 $15,000 $146,900
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp 0 Is $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 I.S. $0 $0
Installation-Total 0 Is $0 $0
Demo 0 Is $0 $0 $0
Influent Pump Station
Pumps/Rads/Etc 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 I.S. $0 $0
Installation 0 Is $0 $0
Demo 0 I S. $0 $0 $0
Fine Screen w/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $15,000 $15,000
Installation 1 Is $37,500 $37,500
Screw Conveyors 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 I.S $0 $0
Installation 0 Is $0 $0
Concrete 0 c y $0 $0
Excavation 0 c.y $0 $0
Porous Fill 0 c y $0 $0
Stairs 0 Is $0 $0
Handrail 0 Lf. $0 $0
Grating 0 S.f $0 $0 $214,500
MBR Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 Is $1,188,000 $1,188,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I S. $110,000 $110,000
Installation 1 Is $220,000 $220,000

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Nom
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative B:MBR Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT H 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATEITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL _j SUBTOTAL
Concrete(Anoxic Basin wall) 0 C.y $0 $0
Concrete Repair(old Basin) 0 S y $0 $0
Membrane Blower&Pump Building 0 S f $0 $0
Air&Process Piping 1 1 s $10,000 $10,000 $1,528,000
UV Disinfection
UV Equipment 0 1 s $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 1 s $0 $0
Installation 0 1 s $0 $0
Disinfection Chamber Modifications 0 1 s - $0 $0
24 Inch Effluent Outfall 0 1 f $0 $0 $0
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment i 1 s $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c Y. $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 ey. $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 C.Y. $38 $2,774
Stairs I I s $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 0 1 s $0 $0 $302,869
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 0 1 s. $0 $0 $0
Site Work
Site Work 1 I s $30,287 $30,287
Miscellaneous 1 I S $5,000 $5,000 $35,287
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 I s $163,630 $163,630
Site Lighting 0 1 S. $0 $0
Standby Power(Generators) 0 ea $0 $0 5163,630
Estimated Construction Costs $2,391,185
Contingencies $358,678
Fees&Services $334,766
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $3,084,629

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Notc
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT# 41000.09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits I I.S. $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 Is $150,100 $150,100
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 20 mo $6,000 $120,000
Cleanup and Move Out I Is $25,000 $25,000 $320,100
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp(Replacement) 1 Is $164,160 $164,160
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $15,200 $15,200
Installation-Total 1 I S. $38,000 $38,000
Influent Flow Meter 1 Is $37,800 $37,800
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $3,500 $3,500
Installation-Total 1 l S. $8,750 $8,750
Demo 1 Is $15,000 $15,000 $282,410
Influent Pump Station
Replacement 30 Inch DIP Gravity Sewer 200 if $90 $18,000
Pumps/Rails/Etc 1 ea. $318,600 $318,600
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $29,500 $29,500
Installation 1 1 S $73,750 $73,750
Parrellel 12 Inch Force Main 800 if $48 $38,400
Demo I I S. $5,000 $5,000 $483,250
Fine Screen w/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor 1 I S. $378,000 $378,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $35,000 $35,000
Installation 1 Is $87,500 $87,500
Screw Conveyors 2 ea $21,600 $43,200
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $4,000 $4,000
Installation 1 Is $10,000 $10,000
Concrete 499 c.y. $600 $29,940
Excavation 49 cy. $15 $735
Porous Fill 25 c y $38 $950
Stairs 1 Is $10,000 $10,000
Handrail 96 if $34 $3,264
Grating 0 s f $50 $0 $602,589

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover [COST
ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWfP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase I
All D&F PROJECT# 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL L SUBTOTAL
ICEAS Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 Is $567,000 $567,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $52,500 $52,500
Installation 1 is $131,250 $131,250
Concrete 682 c.y $600 $409,200
Excavation 5,282 c.y $15 $79,230
Porous Fill 251 c y $38 $9,538
Blower Building Expansion 840 1 S. $120 $100,800
Air Piping&Valves 1 Is $50,000 $50,000 $1,399,518
Filtration
Additional Filtration Cells 1 Is $781,920 $781,920
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $72,400 $72,400
Installation 1 I's $181,000 $181,000
Concrete 296 C.Y. $600 $177,600
Excavation 995 Cy $15 $14,925
Porous Fill 84 c y $38 $3,192
Demo I Is $10,000 $10,000
Hand Rail 240 if $37 $8,880
Grating 29 s f $50 $1,450 $1,251,367
UV Disinfection&Outfall
UV Equipment 1 l S. $384,480 $384,480
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $35,600 $35,600
Installation 1 Is $89,000 $89,000
Disinfection Chamber Modifications 1 Is $35,000 $35,000
24 Inch DIP Effluent Outfall 0 Lf $90 $0 $544,080
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c Y. $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 c y $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 c Y. $38 $2,774
Stairs 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 1 Is $5,000 $5,000 $307,869

CLIENT COST ESTIMATE DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover 1 11
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WV%1TP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase 1
All D&F PROJECT N 41000.09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION :] MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 1 I.s $419,108 $419,108 $419,108
Site Work
Site Work I I.S. $321,207 $321,207
Miscellaneous I I S. $10,000 $10,000 $331,207
Land Application System
Effluent Storage Basin I Is $345,800 $345,800
Effluent Distribution Pumping 1 Is $409,000 $409,000
Effluent Distribution Piping 6600 If $55 $363,000
Spray Irrigation System 0 ac $0 $0
Land Application Site 0 ac $0 $0
Monitoring Wells 6 ea $3,000 $18,000 $1,135,800
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 Ls $389,687 $389,687
Site Lighting 1 Ls $20,000 $20,000
Standby Power(Generators) 2 ea $85,000 $170,000 $579,687
Estimated Construction Costs $7,656,985
Contingencies 51,148,548
Fees&Services $918,838
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $9,724,371

CLIENT DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover
COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT# 41000.09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
IF ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL SUBTOTAL
_j
Miscellaneous Contractor Expenses
Move In,Licenses&Permits 1 Is $25,000 $25,000
Bonds and Insurance 1 Is $57,400 $57,400
Supervision,temp facilities,equipment,living expenses 12 mo $6,000 $72,000
Cleanup and Move Out I I S. $15,000 $15,000 5169,400
Headworks Structure
Automatic Bar Screen/Wash/Comp 0 I.S $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation-Total 0 I.S. $0 $0
Demo 0 is $0 $0 50
Influent Pump Station
Pumps/Rails/Etc 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 I.S $0 $0
Installation 0 1 S. $0 $0
Demo 0 1 S. $0 $0 50
Fine Screen w/Grit Removal
Fine Screen w/Classifier&Compactor 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I.S $15,000 $15,000
Installation 1 Is $37,500 $37,500
Screw Conveyors 0 ea $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation 0 I.S $0 $0
Concrete 0 c y $0 $0
Excavation 0 c.y $0 $0
Porous Fill 0 c y. $0 $0
Stairs 0 Is $0 $0
Handrail 0 I.f. $0 $0
Grating 0 S f. $0 $0 $214,500

CLIENT DATE PREPARED CTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE VvWTP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _10D% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT# 41000 09
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST I TOTAL SUBTOTAL
ICEAS Process System
Equipment,Shop Dwgs,O&M Manuals,Start-up,Freight 1 Ls $324,000 $324,000
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 I.S. $30,000 $30,000
Installation 1 Is $75,000 $75,000
Concrete 682 c.y $600 $409,200
Excavation 5,282 c.y $15 $79,230
Porous Fill 251 c y $38 $9,538
Air Piping&Valves 1 I S. $30,000 $30,000 5956,968
Filtration
Additional Filtration Cells 1 Is $260,280 $260,280
Contractor Equipment Markup 1 Is $24,100 $24,100
Installation 1 Is $60,250 $60,250
Concrete 0 c y $0 $0
Excavation 0 C.Y. $0 $0
Porous Fill 0 c y $0 $0
Demo 0 1 S. $0 $0
Hand Rail 0 IT $0 $0
Grating 0 S f $0 $0 $344,630
UV Disinfection&Outfall
UV Equipment 0 Is $0 $0
Contractor Equipment Markup 0 Is $0 $0
Installation 0 1 s $0 $0
Disinfection Chamber Modifications 0 Is $0 $0
24 Inch Effluent Outfall 0 if $0 $0 $0
Sludge Holding Tank
Aeration/Mixing Equipment 1 Is $162,000 $162,000
Concrete 190 c.y $600 $114,000
Excavation 273 C.Y. $15 $4,095
Porous Fill 73 c Y. $38 $2,774
Stairs 1 Is $20,000 $20,000
Concrete Pads 0 I.S. $0 $0 $302,869

CLIENT COST ESTIMATE DATE PREPARED ACTIVITY AND LOCATION
Conover 11
PROJECT TITLE ESTIMATED BY CATEGORY CODE NUMBER
Engr.Alternative Analysis for NE WWfP D&F
STATUS OF DESIGN Note
DISCIPLINE X PER _PDS% _100% _FINAL _OTHER(Specify) Alternative C:Phase 2
All D&F PROJECT N 4100009
QUANTITY ENGINEERING ESTIMATE ITEM
ITEM DESCRIPTION :]=MANUFACTURER NUMBER UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL:=�[ SUBTOTAL
Piping
Yard Pipe,Valves and Fittings 1 Is $181,897 $181,897 $181,897
Site Work
Site Work I I S. $109,138 $109,138
Miscellaneous I LS $10,000 $10,000 $119,138
Land Application System
Effluent Storage Basin 1 1 S. $345,800 $345,800
Effluent Distribution Pumping 1 Is $146,000 $146,000
Effluent Distribution Piping 0 if $0 $0
Spray Irrigation System 0 ac $0 $0
Land Application Site 0 ac $0 $0
Monitoring Wells 0 ea. $0 $0 $491,800
Electrical
Electrical Installation 1 Is $145,517 $145,517
Site Lighting 0 LS $0 $0
Standby Power(Generators) 0 ea $0 $0 $145,517
Estimated Construction Costs $2,926,719
Contingencies $439,008
Fees&Services $409,741
TOTAL CAPITAL COST $3,775,468

Alternative A
Operation& Maintenance Expense
ICEAS SBR
Fixed Operational Expenses
Initial Year of Final Year of
Item Operation Operation
Salaries&Benefits $413,000 $413,000
Repair&Maintenance $114,620 $114,620
Contract Services $46,130 $46,130
Miscellanous $110,914 $110,914
Annual Ex ense $684,664 $684,664
Variable Operational Expenses
Inputs
Initial Wastewater Flow,MGD 053
Design Year Wastewater Flow,MGD 240
Design Flow,MGD 3 00
Sludge Production,DT/d/MGD 0.70
BHp/Nameplate lip 0.80
Chemical Cost $1 15
Power Cost,$/kw-h $0 10
Electrical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Equipment Item Installed hp Design Run Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d
Time/d hr
Bar Screen 2 4 0.71 084 3 20 3.82
Washing Press 4 4 0.71 1 69 3 20 764
Influent Pump Station 280 87 1.54 25674 6.96 116258
Fine Screen 3 24 2400 4295 24.00 4295
Grit Pumps 9 4 0.71 3 79 3.20 17.18
ICEAS Basin Blowers,each 75 12 12.00 1073 81 1200 214762
Sludge Pumps 96 1.5 027 1.52 1.20 687
Filter Backwash Pumps 20 10 1.77 21 08 8.00 9545
Filter Other 17 5 10 1.77 1844 800 83.52
UV Disinfection 242 24 24.00 346.48 24.00 34648
Sludge Holding Tank 120 18 3.18 227.65 1440 103086
Miscellanous 20 24 2400 28635 2400 28635
Total kW-h/d 228134 5231.31
Annual Electrical Costs $83,269 $190,943
Chemical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Design Sludge Design Usage, Operating Operating
Item Production,DT/d lbs/DT Annual Use(lbs) Costs/Yr Annual Use(lbs) Costs/Yr
Polymer 21 16 2166.641 S2,4921 98112 $11,283
Sludge Disposal Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Item Design Sludge Disposal Cost, Annual Operating Annual Use(lbs) Operating
Production,WT/d $/ton ]'reduction,WT's Costs/Yr Costs/Yr
Regional Sludge Disposal 26.25 1 $5000 L 16931 $84,634 7665 $383,250
Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Total Annual O&M Costs $855,058 $1,270,139 ��

Alternative B
Operation&Maintenance Expense
MBR
Fixed Operational Expenses
Initial Year of Final Year of
Item Operation Operation
Salaries&Benefits $413,000 $413,000
Repair&Maintenance $77,370 $77,370
Contract Services $46,130 $46,130
Miscellanous $96,700 $96,700
Annual Expensell $633,200 $633,200
Variable Operational Expenses
Inputs
Initial Wastewater Flow,MGD 0.53
Design Year Wastewater Flow,MGD 240
Design Flow,MGD 3 00
Sludge Production,DT/d/MGD 070
BHp/Nameplate Hp 080
Chemical Cost $1.15
Power Cost,$/kw-h $0 10
Electrical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Equipment Item Installed lip Design Run Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d
Tune/d(hr)
Bar Screen 2 4 0.71 0.84 3 20 3 82
Washing Press 4 4 071 1.69 3 20 7.64
Influent Pump Station 280 8.7 1.54 25674 6.96 1162 58
Fine Screen 3 24 24.00 4295 2400 42.95
Grit Pumps 9 4 0.71 3 79 3 20 17.18
MBR Anoxic Cells,each 421 21 3 71 1864 1680 16877
MBR Preaeration Cells,each 75 22 3.89 173 90 17.60 157492
MBR Internal Reccle,each 25 24 2400 715.87 2400 1431 74
MBR Permeate Pump,each 10 21 3.71 4426 1680 40089
MBR Blower,each 75 22 3 89 34779 1760 314984
UV Disinfection 24.2 24 2400 34648 2400 34648
Sludge Holding Tank 120 18 18 00 1288.57 1800 1288.57
Miscellanous 20 24 24.00 286 35 2400 28635
Total kW-h/d 3527 88 9881.72
Annual Electrical Costs $128,767,1 $360,683
Chemical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Item 11 Design Sludge Design Usage, Annual Use(Ibs) Operating Annual Use(Ibs) Operating
Production,DT/d I lbs./DT Costs/Yr I Costs/Yr
Polymer 21 16 2166.641 $2,4921 98112 $11,283
Sludge Disposal Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Item Design Sludge Disposal Cost, Annual Operating Annual Use(lbs) Operating
Production,WT/d $/ton Production,WT's I Costs/Yr Costs/Yr
Regional Sludge Disposal 26.25 1 $5000 16931 $84,634 7665 $383,250
Initial Year of Operation 11 Design Year of Operation
Total Annual O&M Costs $849,093 11 $1,388,416
ei

Alternative C
Operation& Maintenance Expense
ICEAS SBR w/Land Application
Fixed Operational Expenses
Item Initial Year of Final Year of
Operation Operation
Salaries&Benefits $413,000 $413,000
Repair&Maintenance $114,620 $114,620
Contract Services $46,130 $46,130
Miscellanous $110,914 $110,914
Annual Expense $684,66411 $684,664
Variable Operational Expenses
Inputs
Initial Wastewater Flow,MGD 053
Design Year Wastewater Flow,MGD 240
Design Flow,MGD 3 00
Sludge Production,DT/d/MGD 0.70
BI-Ip/Nameplate Hp 0.80
Chemical Cost $1.15
Power Cost,$/kw-h $0.10
Electrical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Equipment Item Installed hp Design Run Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d Run Time/d(hr) kW-h/d
Time/d(lir)
Bar Screen 2 4 0.71 084 3.20 3 82
Washing Press 4 4 071 1 69 3.20 764
Influent Pump Station 280 8 7 1 54 256.74 696 1162 58
Fine Screen 3 24 2400 42.95 24 00 42.95
Grit Pumps 9 4 071 3 79 320 17 18
ICEAS Basin Blowers,each 75 12 1200 1073 81 1200 214762
Sludge Pumps 9 6 1 5 027 1 52 1.20 6.87
Filter Backwash Pumps 20 10 1 77 21.08 8.00 95.45
Filter Other 17.5 10 1 77 1844 8.00 83 52
UV Disinfection 24.2 24 2400 34648 24 00 346.48
Sludge Holding Tank 120 18 3 18 227.65 1440 103086
Effluent Distribution Pumping 120 16 2 83 202.35 1280 91632
Miscellanous 20 24 2400 28635 24 00 28635
Total kW-h/d 2483 69 614762
Annual Electrical Costsi. $90,6551 $224,388
Chemical Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Item Design Sludge Design Usage, Annual Use(Ibs) Operating Annual Use(Ibs) Operate
Production,DT/d lbs/DT Costs/Yr Costs/Yr
Polymer 2 1 16 2166641 $2,49211 9811 2 $11,283
Sludge Disposal Costs Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Design Sludge Disposal Cost, Annual Operating Operating
Item Production,WT/d Mon Production,WT's Costs/Yr Annual Use(Ibs) Costs/Yr
Regional Sludge Disposal 1 2625 $50.00 1693 $84,634 7665 $383,250
Initial Year of Operation Design Year of Operation
Total Annual O&M Costs $862,444 $1,303,585 ��

APPENDIX D
1

PROJECTED FIRST YEAR O&M BUDGET
NE Wastewater Treatment Plant
)✓x erase tem �_ount
Salaries $284,000
Employee Benefits $129,000
Professional Services $7,000
Repairs & Maintenance $28,300
UV Lamp Replacement $16,320
ICEAS Repairs & Replacement $70,000
Utilities $83,269
Office Expense $7,700
Contractual Services (Lab & Engr) $39,130
Supplies $7,000
Chemicals $2,492
Vehiciles $42,000
Miscellaneous $40,020
Sludge Disposal $98,828
'T�©tal $'8+55,058