NC0074900_Permit Issuance_20001011

..: ate of North Carolina
*Partment of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 113, 2000
Mr. Carroll Weber
Mid -South Utilities, Inc.
P.O. Box 127
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673
2C00 ,
102
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NCO074900
Highway 150 WWTP
Iredell County
Dear Mr. Weber:
The Division of Water Quality, (Division) after receiving and reviewing pertinent comments from the Public
Hearing held on June 29, 2000, and considering the additional information provided at the request of the Division,
has approved your application for renewal of the subject permit, submitted February 7, 2000. Accordingly, we are
forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. The Division of Water Quality issues this permit with the
following special conditions and modifications:
1. The monitoring frequency for fecal coliform has been increased to daily, including weekends and holidays, during
the summer months. This condition is required to ensure that the Class B designated use of Lake Norman
(including primary recreation) is protected and to ensure that the facility is visited daily during the summer when
the recreational uses of the lake are highest.
2. The permittee shall notify the Iredell, Lincoln, Catawba, and Mecklenburg County Public Health Directors in the
event of a spill that reaches waters of the State. In addition, the facility shall issue a press release after a spill or
bypass to surface waters of 1,000 gallons or more and shall issue a public notice and press release after a spill and
discharge to surface waters of 15,000 gallons or more.
3. Upon request for expansion above 0.10 MGD, the Director of the Division of Water Quality will determine if
expansion is warranted based on the updated flow justification and compliance review, submitted concurrently
with the Authorization to Construct Request.
The Division understands that Mid -South Utilities has entered into a contract to sell the Highway 150
Wastewater Treatment Plant to Consumers Water of North Carolina, a subsidiary of Philadelphia Suburban
Corporation. The Division has found Philadelphia Suburban Corporation to have a creditable reputation for
wastewater treatment and community involvement and is supportive of this transaction.
This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9,
1994 (or as subsequently amended).
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer Visir us ON THE INTERNET @ http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES

Permit NCO074900'�'
I ti.^
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable to
you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this
letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina
General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may require
modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain
other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land
Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be
required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Michael Myers at telephone number (919)
733-5083, extension 508.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
KERR T. STEVENS
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Central Files
Mooresville Regional Office/Water Quality Section
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit
Technical Assistance & Certification Unit
Donna Lisenby, Catawba River Keeper
Ron Byrant, Catawba River Foundation
Roosevelt Childress, EPA — Region IV

Permit NCO074900
L/
A
t
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and regulations
promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended,
Mid -South Utilities, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Highway 150 WWTP
off Quiet Cove Road
west of Mooresville
Iredell County
to receiving waters designated as Lake Norman (Catawba River) in the Catawba River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I,
II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective December 1, 2000.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on March 31, 2005.
Signed this day October 11, 2000.
ORIGINAL. SIGNED BY
KERR T. STEVENS
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0074900' `
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET Al,
f
Mid -South Utilities, Inc., is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue operation of a 0.10 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of the following treatment units:
• Equalization Tank
• Dual 50,000 gpd activated sludge package type WWTPs with diffused air and secondary clarification
• Aerated sludge holding tank
• Dual cell tertiary treatment (Sand filters)
• Chlorination
• Dechlorination
• Diffused Post Aeration
This treatment facility is located at the Highway 150 WW TP off Quiet Cove Road west of Mooresville in Iredell
County.
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality for each phase of expansion,
construct and operate wastewater treatment facilities with an ultimate capacity of 0.30 MGD (see Special
Condition A (3)).
3. Discharge, at the location specified on the attached map, from said treatment works into the Catawba River (Lake
Norman), classified as WS-IV B CA waters in the Catawba River Basin.

//,i�i '-) li l ✓ ,�J' f f°% �' t ii il✓ �07f 1 Af W­ �41t` a1
,V"'•-f.�I��+'`t' yJ✓ \`.I '�. �J7'�1`` \�li r�� ,E ,4 .t! N
JI
W.
VL
�('�,A7 e ��/ J" '.`,- t,� � �\u II\�( �I � `.^ �Gv �at (r ..��',f�"� rl ✓.,�y� ��i�
�r 1� [(11 j —� J�t� -J ��� St Ii ` sv� ♦ � ��,'�".+dr'�.
iug( r �\ Y � ����1\� ` �1 r. � (r � �\l1 / +•M,��� I ,<?.L� t � � �• 1 �� - ,
!%•" �.i// 3�.��."\.. rti'�\� ��C..= \ *��Ir 1�� r� il� ,I r � r I� ,i _�
l` M
;.�.,.,'�r'n�t � � �ii lei` S-}} • .1; . 1..�' �:. �\) ;:
Latitude: 35°36' (7••
N C 0 0 74 9 00
Longitude: 80'56.35••
Quad# E15SW
Mid -South Utilities
Stream Class: WS-IV&0CA
Highway 150 WWTP
Subbasin: 30832
Receiving Stream: Lake Norman (Catawba River)
l tf�
1 R yY-""r�-
{
Y
\
, , r
1_
J n � rti t
Facility
Location:
North SCALE 1 :24000

Permit NCO074900
. A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expansion beyond 0.1 MGD or
expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated domestic wastewater from outfall(s) 001. Such
discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
ffluerit Characteristics
:- Limits
- `,.I�ioitoring Recwirerrierits
Monthl Y
Average:: _
Weeki Y
Average
Dail Y
'Maximum
Measuremen#
_
_ Fr uenc
Sam !e
p. -
Ty - e
Sam ` to Location
P
Flow
0.10 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-Day, 200C
15.0 mg/L
22.5 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
4.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen'
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Summer2
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily3
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Winter2
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µg/L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Grease
30.0 mg/L
60.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
pH4
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature
Daily3
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
NO2 + NO3 + TKN
�%� a.
1
`
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
R
Quarterly
I Composite
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
2. Summer is defined as the period from April 1 through October 31, while Winter is defined as November 1 through
March 31.
3. Daily is defined as 7 days per week including Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays during the summer months and 5 days per
week during the winter months.
4. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0 on the standard units scale.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. See Special Condition A
(4.) Spill Notification.
There shall be no discharge of treated industrial wastewater without obtaining prior approval from the
Division of Water Quality.
Definitions:
MGD: Million gallons per day mg/L: Milligrams per liter µg/L: Micrograms per liter
ml: Milliliters BOD: Biochemical Oxygen Demand TKN: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
NO2: Nitrite Nitrogen NO3: Nitrate Nitrogen
Domestic Wastewater: water -carried human waste together with all other water -carried wastes normally present in wastewater
from non -industrial processes.
Industrial Wastewater: all wastewater other than sewage and includes:
(a) Wastewater resulting from any process of industry or manufacture, or from the development of any natural resource;
(b) Wastewater resulting from any process of trade or business, including wastewater from laundromats and
vehicle/equipment washes, but not wastewater from restaurants;
(c) Stormwater will not be considered to be an industrial wastewater unless it is contaminated with an industrial wastewater;
(d) Any combination of sewage and industrial wastewater;
(e) Municipal wastewater will be considered to be industrial wastewater unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of
the Division that the wastewater contains no industrial wastewater;
(f) Petroleum -contaminated groundwater extracted as part of an approved groundwater remediation system.

Permit NC0074900'
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning upon expansion beyond 0.10 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated domestic wastewater from outfall(s) 001. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Limits
Monitoring Requirements
Monthly
Average
Weekly-
Average
Daily
-Maximum
Measurement
:Fr-e uenc ,
Sam le TYpe
Samp[e_ Location1
Flow
0.30 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-Day, 20°C
15.0 mg/L
22.5 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Suspended Residue
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
4.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen'
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Summer2
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
DOy5
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Winter2
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µg/L
2/Week
Grab
Effluent
Oil and Grease
30.0 mg/L
60.0 mg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
pH4
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature
Daily5
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
CompositeT
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
2. Summer is defined as the period from April through October 31, while Winter is defined as November 1 through
March 31.
3. Daily is defined as 7 days per week including Saturday, Sunday, and Holidays during the summer months and 5 days per
week during the winter months.
4. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0 on the standard units scale.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. See Special Condition A
(4.) Spill Notification.
There shall be no discharge of treated industrial wastewater without obtaining prior approval from the
Division of Water Quality.
Definitions:
MGD: Million gallons per day mg/L: Milligrams per liter µg/L: Micrograms per liter
ml: Milliliters BOD: Biochemical Oxygen Demand TKN: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
NO2: Nitrite Nitrogen NO3: Nitrate Nitrogen
Domestic Wastewater: water -carried human waste together with all other water -carried wastes normally present in wastewater
from non -industrial processes.
Industrial Wastewater: all wastewater other than sewage and includes:
(a) Wastewater resulting from any process of industry or manufacture, or from the development of any natural resource;
(b) Wastewater resulting from any process of trade or business, including wastewater from laundromats and
vehicle/equipment washes, but not wastewater from restaurants;
(c) Stormwater will not be considered to be an industrial wastewater unless it is contaminated with an industrial wastewater;
(d) Any combination of sewage and industrial wastewater;
(e) Municipal wastewater will be considered to be industrial wastewater unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of
the Division that the wastewater contains no industrial wastewater;
(f) Petroleum -contaminated groundwater extracted as part of an approved groundwater remediation system.

Permit NCO074900
A. (3.) SPECIAL CONDITION — Flow Expansion Request
Concurrent with any application for an Authorization to Construct that results in an expansion of flow, the facility
shall submit an updated flow justification and permit compliance review.
a) An update on progress made toward elimination of the discharge, including connection to the Town of
Mooresville or other regional disposal systems.
b) The flow justification shall include at least the following:
1. Provide Basic Identification of the Project
■ Facility name
■ County
■ Facility address
■ Facility telephone number
■ Preparer's name
■ Preparer's mailing address and telephone number
2. Provide a detailed description of the project requiring an expansion of wastewater disposal. The wastewater
flows should be calculated according to 15A NCAC 2H .0219. Demonstrate and justify the need for flow
volumes, to include any flow reductions realized through flow -restricting devices. The use of flow -
restricting or low -flow devices should be investigated. Report findings should include flow reduction
projections. Updated plat maps, a time schedule for connection, and documentation of commitments shall
be required.
3. If existing facilities will be used as part of an expansion, discuss those existing units including present and
past performance, unit capacities, and inadequacies of each. Include a schematic with component sizes.
4. Indicate if the project will be constructed in phases. Provide the estimated wasteflow per phase. Indicate
current phase status for existing facilities and provide a schedule for constructing each additional phase.
c) The compliance review report shall summarize the performance of the treatment works or collection system and
state the extent to which any terms of its permit, federal laws, or any State laws, regulations or rules related to the
protection of water quality have been violated.
A. (4.) SPECIAL CONDITION — Spill Notification
(a) Contacting Public Health Directors
The facility must notify the Iredell, Lincoln, Catawba, and Mecklenburg County Public Health Directors
within 12 hours of first knowledge by the owner/operator of any discharge of untreated wastewater to waters of the
State or a discharge from the wastewater treatment plant that has not received adequate disinfection due to a
malfunctioning treatment unit.
The County Public Health Directors can be contacted using the following information:
Current Inc rmation for Iredell and Catawba Countv Health Directors
Catawba County Health Director Iredell County Health Director
3070 11 ch Avenue Drive S.E. 318 Turnersburg Highway
Hickory, NC 28602 Statesville, NC 28625
828-326-5801 704-878-5302
(continued on next page)

Permit NC0074900' „
s
A. (4.) SPECIAL CONDITION — Spill Notification (continued)
Lincoln County Health Director
151 Sigmon Road
Lincolnton, NC 28092-8643
704-736-8634
(b) Public Notification
Mecklenburg County Health Director
700 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
704-336-5567
The facility must notify the public of untreated wastewater spills. Wastewater facility owners or operators
must issue a press release after a discharge to surface waters of 1,000 gallons within 48 hours of first knowledge of the
spill by the owner/operator. The press release must be issued to "all electronic and print news media outlets that
provide general coverage in the counties (Iredell, Lincoln, Catawba, and Mecklenburg) where the discharge occurred."
A copy of the press release must be maintained for one year by the owner/operator. This press release is required in
addition to the permit requirement of contacting the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
If a discharge of 15,000 gallons or more reaches surface water, a public notice is required in addition to the
press release. The public notice must be placed in a newspaper having general circulation in the County in which the
discharge occurred and the county immediately downstream. At a minimum the notice should be published in the
newspaper of general circulation in Iredell, Lincoln, Catawba, and Mecklenburg Counties. If a discharge of 1,000,000
gallons of wastewater or more reaches surface waters, the DENR Mooresville Regional Office must be contacted to
determine in what additional counties, if any, a public notice must be published. A copy of these public notices and
proof of publication must be sent to the DWQ to the attention of "Non Discharge Compliance Enforcement Unit"
at the letterhead address within 30 days of publication. The minimum content of the notice is the location of the
discharge, estimated volume, water body affected and steps taken to prevent future discharges.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section — Environmental Sciences Branch
Intensive Survey Unit
Memorandum:
To: Tommy Stevens October 5, 2000
From: Jay Sauber fl`1,��,`n� ��%"`'�� 'b
Subject: Hearing Officer's Report
blid-South Utilities, Inc
NPDES NC00074900
Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant
At your request, I conducted a public hearing on the proposed National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Mid -South Utilities' Highway 150 Wastewater
Treatment Plant and effluent discharge. I have thoroughly reviewed the files to obtain relevant
current and historical information in support of making quality recommendations for your review.
I am untrained as a legal advisor and do not claim to have experience as a permit review engineer.
However, I believe that these recommendations are sound and offer positive options in the best
interest of the regulatory process.
The hearing was held on June 29, 2000 at the Mooresville Citizen's Center — Joe Knox
Auditorium. Approximately 120 individuals were in attendance in addition to approximately ten
members of the Water Quality Section Staff. After my introductory remarks, Mr. Michael Myers
(staff) initiated the hearing with a brief presentation of the draft permit conditions.
Approximately sixteen citizens made formal comments during this hearing opportunity, which
convened at 7:00 pm and continued for approximately one hour and forty-five minutes.
Numerous citizens constructed elaborate signs and posters that expressed their wishes to have this
proposed permit denied and the existing permit revoked. Those in attendance at the hearing were
very enthusiastic about their mission to have the permit denied and the auditorium was charged
with a great deal of energy and emotion. At the beginning of the hearing I requested the citizens
to display to me their posters, banners and other signs. After an ample amount of time for me to
actually read these signs, I requested that the posters not be waved during the course of the
meeting so as not to visually distract or interrupt anyone during individual comments. Because
the hearing record could not adequately capture the level of emotion and energy that was
frequently displayed at this hearing, I promised those in attendance that I would inform you of this
aspect of the meeting. Because of the controversial history of this permit, the large attendance, the
relatively few numbers of registered speakers, and the likelihood of some potential speakers to feel
intimidated by the lar.ge crowd and TV coverage, I elected to extend the hearing record and
comment period for approximately two weeks until July 13, 2000. (Ninety days from this date
equates to October 11, 2000). In response to the time extension, staff distributed slips of paper
with a mailing address for submitting written comments. Unfortunately, the mailing address was
incorrect. Therefore, I offered to accept comments at my correct address and also through my
Department e-mail address. Subsequently, a significant number of comments were received in
both written and electronic form. Mr. Myers has accumulated all hearing comments and e-mail
comments into a hearing summary file.

Hearing Officer's Report
NPDES NC0074900
Page 2 of 7
New information has been provided since the public hearing.
Both before and after the actual public hearing, I spent many hours working with staff from the
Division of Water Quality in the review of historical and speculative information. On, or about
July 25, 2000, I requested additional information in support of an appropriate flow necessity
analysis according to 15A NCAC 2H.0219(1). I also requested a copy of the local government
consistency document under 2H.0105(I) and G.S. 143-215.1(c)6. I received a final flow analysis
report with engineering alternatives on Friday September 29, 2000. The local government
consistency review was signed by Joel R. Mashburn, County Manager on September 29, 2000.
This additional information explains the timing of my hearing officer's summary and
recommendation report.
The flow justification and alternatives analysis with supporting maps and other attached
documents was developed by Mr. Charles Hughes, owner of Hughes Consulting. Mr. Hughes'
credentials include working as a member of the North Carolina Utility Commission, and many
other examples of working with and within water related Councils and Organizations. Mr.
Hughes also served in the General Assembly from 1980-1984. Mr. Hughes is not an engineer but a
more detailed list of his credentials can be found within the submitted report. The contents of this
report and supporting information were considered in my recommendations.
According to the Hughes report...
"Carroll Weber entered into negotiations with Consumers Waters of North Carolina for the sell of
the treatment plant. Recently Mid South Utilities, Inc. has entered into an Offer to Purchase
Contract with Consumers Water of North Carolina. The closing of the purchase and transfer of
assets shall take place upon final approval by the North Carolina Utility Commission. Consumers
Water of North Carolina is a subsidiary of Philadelphia Suburban Water Company —one of the
largest private utility companies in the country. "
Consumers Water of North Carolina has agreed to negotiate purchase of the Pier 16 WWTP from
Heater Utility. This would occur after the Utility Commission authorizes temporary operating
authority to Consumers with a filing of the application for transfer taking place immediately after
granting of a permanent franchise. Consumers has agreed to the costs of approximately $25,000
for a lift station, pump, piping, etc. and an estimated forty to fifty thousand dollars for the Pier 16
facility.
Consumers Water of North Carolina has filed provisions with the Utility Commission that will
include pre-treatment inspection. If the customer does not meet standards then service may be
terminated.
Summary of Comments From the Public Hearing Process
A legal representative of Mid -South indicated that the facility was constructed based on the need
for wastewater treatment. He indicated that the facility was constructed properly and that all the
Department's rules and regulations had been followed. Another individual, speaking in support of
the permit, was an investor with development supported by the WWTP. He indicated that his
preferred option "was to hook up to the City" but he indicated that at the time this was not an
option. He further indicated that the City has extended its lines "only within the past year". He
indicated that the proposed WWTP effluent is better than the alternatives.
A Regional Engineer for the NC Division. of Environmental Health —Public Water Supply
concurred with the issuance of the draft permit provided the facility is operated and maintained
properly, the stated effluent limits are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not
contravene the designated water quality standards.
Residents of the community and several members or associates of the Catawba River Foundation
and the Catawba Riverkeeper® strongly expressed their concerns for Mid -South's poor track

Hearing Officer's Report
NPDES NC0074900
Page 3 of 7
record with environmental compliance issues at this and other facilities. Citizens frequently
• expressed concerns over a decrease in property values, decrease in water quality, swimming
quality, and complaints of noxious odors from the facility.
Other concerns expressed during the hearing and in subsequent written comments and e-mail
comments included the following issues.
• Facility was constructed near a commercial corridor yet the facility was not designed to handle
commercial wastewater.
• The Water Quality Section evaluated the Highway 150 facility as a potential "regional facility" so
that the poorly functioning, nearby Pier 16 Wastewater Treatment Plant (previously owned by
Mid -South) could be taken off-line. Now that Mid -South Utilities has sold the Pier 16 facility the
Division has no authority to require the Highway 150 facility to accept the Pier 16 wastewater.
• Mid -South Utilities has demonstrated, over and over again, a poor history of administrative and
environmental compliance at other facilities.
• Wastewater should be reclaimed and reused not discharged into Lake Norman.
• The discharge will result in poor water quality creating algae and slime on rocks.
• Concerns for the safety of swimming as a result of package treatment plant sewage spills or the
discharge of poorly treated wastewater.
• Concerns that homeowners' wells ran dry after Mid -South installed a water tower and commercial
well system at the exact same site as the wastewater treatment facility.
• Several speakers were concerned about this facility being unmanned with limited automatic alarms
and sensors and no apparent emergency plan for responding to spills or discharge problems into
the heavily used recreational waters of Lake Norman.
• At lease two speakers indicated that Lake Norman at the discharge location sometimes flows
upstream due to the intake of cooling waters for Duke Power operations.
• Several speakers were obviously angry at the erroneous public notice on the previously issued
NPDES permit which indicated the facility was to be built and operated for the Knotts Landing
Development, SR 1197 (Oak Tree Road). This area is not in the same community as the Quiet
Cove Road location.
• This facility should be denied and required to connect to the Mooresville Waste Water Treatment
facility.
• The facility was constructed without the proper permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission as administered through Duke Power.
• The facility was built out of compliance with restrictive covenants of the neighborhood.
• The wasteload evaluation was done by Best Professional Judgement (BPJ) not good quality
science using models.
• Why was this facility built? We need to identify who the customers are. The residents of the
neighborhood are all on septic tanks and are not going to hook-up to this facility.
• A past member of the Lake Norman Marine Commission indicated that she was poorly informed
of this'project and ramifications and that she made a mistake in voting yes for the project to
proceed.
• Concerns that the discharge pipe is on the bottom of the lake not at the normal lake level.
Evaluating compliance at the end of the discharge pipe is impossible to do.
• The Division should recognize that wastewater management should go beyond the minimum
requirements of permits and look at this being a smart growth issue.
Summary of Proposed NPDES Permit
The proposed NPDES permit was transmitted as a draft to Mr. Carroll Weber, Mid South Water
Systems and dated June 2, 2000. The draft permit indicates that the facility is to be located at
Highway 150 WWTP Off of Quiet Cove Road West of Mooresville, Iredell County. Receiving
waters are designated as Lake Norman (Catawba River) WS-IV B CA. The draft permit is for the
continued operation of a 0.10 MGD facility and after receiving an Authorization to Construct to
operate an expanded facility with an ultimate capacity of 0.30 MGD. The permit is for treated
domestic wastewater and no discharge of treated industrial wastewater can be done without

Hearing Officer's Report
NPDES NCO074900
Page 4 of 7
obtaining prior approval from the Division of Water Quality. Monthly average effluent limits are
the same for both the 0.10 MOD facility and the expanded 0.30 MOD facility.
Proposed Average Monthly Limits
BOD, 5 day 15 mg/L Total Suspended Residue 30mg/L
NH3 as N 4 mg/L Fecal Coliform 200/100m1
Oil and Grease 30mg/L
Daily Maximum limits are also stipulated, but not detailed here with this memorandum.
Associated Regulatory Issues and Litigation or Pending Litigation
• The Catawba Riverkeeper® has filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a request for
dispute resolution for the ATC WQ0015856 and NPDES NC0074900. The basis of the filing is
that the permit was issued for a facility located off Oak Tree Road, Knotts Landing Development.
While the actual construction took place off Quiet Cove Road, in a different community on the
opposite side of the McCrary Creek Arm of Lake Norman.
• The Lake Norman Keepers have notified the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and Duke
Energy that they believe Duke Energy Corporation issued a lease to Mid -South for easement for
the project wastewater line without appropriate process (expired authorization) and through
violation of FERC no 2232 Article 39(d).
• On May 22, 2000, Richard Gaskins, for the Plaintiffs Mary Boyce, et al., filed a Verified Class
Action Complaint, Mecklenburg County # 00-CVS7735, against the permit holder. Issues raised
included violation of restrictive covenants, noxious odors, misleading submissions, denied
opportunity for public comments, design deficiencies of the facility, property values, etc
• A temporary restraining order was issued on May 23, 2000. This order prevented this Mid -South
Facility from accepting any wastewater in excess of 30,000 gallons per day or any new
construction. The Order was consented to by the permit holders. The order expired on July 5,
2000 and was not renewed, but the reviewing Judge warned the permit holder about future
compliance issues.
As of the date of this report, I am unaware of the exact current status of these pending litigation
issues. Mr. Ed Gavin, of the NC Attorney General's office, should be contacted for current
information.
My Recommendations as Hearing Officer
Because of the highly complex, controversial, and long historical and often changing history of
this permit and potential synergistic effects on other permits, I have chosen to offer my
recommendations to you as a series of options. Traditional wastewater assimilative capacity
issues do not appear to be a major issue. While there is no generally accepted 7Q10 flow estimate
for the Catawba River at the current discharge location, upstream historical gage information
suggests that the instream waste concentration for a waste flow of either 0.1MOD or 0.3 MGD
will be less than 1% of the 7Q10.
Each option has both merits and drawbacks that provide for water quality management and waste
disposal. The best scenario that I could imagine for this situation is for the Town of Mooresville
to accommodate the wastewater needs of the rapidly developing peninsula area along Highway
150 in Iredell County. Coupled with appropriate land use management strategies, a municipal
wastewater management system represents the most environmentally sound long-term solution to
the wastewater management needs of this area. Unfortunately, I know of no present way of
realizing this scenario since these decisions can only be made at the local government level.
Mooresville does not currently include this area in its growth management plans.
Option A
The Permit could be issued for the operation of a 0.1MGD facility, which has already been
constructed and is currently well below design capacity. The permit would NOT be issued
with an expansion option to a flow of 0.3 MGD.

Hearing Officer's Report
NPDES NC0074900
Page 5 of 7
Since the construction of the existing facility, the Town of Mooresville has extended its collection
lines to within one mile of the Mid -South facility to accommodate the construction of two new
schools. The Mooresville Urban Growth Boundary however, does not currently extend west of
the Doolie and Perth Church Road schools. While the Mooresville WWTP does have available
permit capacity, there apparently has been no formal request made to the Town Board for
consideration of extending the Urban Growth Boundary area. Nor does there appear to have been
any formal petition for providing water and sewer service or possible annexation to the Town
Board. The Director of Utilities for the Town of Mooresville has consistently denied extending
any utilities beyond the existing Urban Growth Boundary according to the Town's Utility
Extension Policy. By exercising this option to hold the permit to O.IMGD, expected new
development would be encouraged to seek remedy for wastewater management from the Town of
Mooresville. The 0.10 MGD design flow capacity is adequate to handle the existine wastewater
load including Pier 16.
It is my oninion that a transfer of ownership of this facility from Mid -South to Consumers Water
of North Carolina is desirable based on the non -exemplary history of other Mid -South operations
and other administrative requirements. Consumers Water of North Carolina is a subsidiary of
Philadelphia Suburban Water Company. Consumers Water is not currently operating any
W WTP's within our state. However, according to Mr. Joe Feola, Pennsylvania Division of
Environmental Protection, Southeast Regional Director, Philadelphia Suburban has an extremely
good compliance record on facilities within Pennsylvania. It is unclear exactly what effect
limiting the NPDES permit to O.l OMGD for Mid South will have on the potential purchase by
Consumers Water of North Carolina. Consumers could always apply for a permit flow expansion
since there appears to be ample assimilative capacity for highly treated effluent. However, the
Hughes report states: "Given the current development in the area the 0.3 MGD flow rate is more
than justified and needed to make this facility a viable facilityfor the purchase of the Highway I50
WWTP. Through the sale of this facility Mid South Utilities will no longer be in the wastewater
business. "
Option B
The Permit could be issued as drafted for the operation of a O.1MGD facility, which has
already been constructed with an expansion to 0.3 MGD. Special conditions could be added
to this permit to better protect for the successful operation of this facility and the user
community of Lake Norman.
The Hughes report has provided information for the flow justification of 0.3MGD at buildout of
the Highway 150 area and a local government consistency document has been signed. The flow
justification includes proposed future development, Pier 16, apartments, commercial development,
new residential development, shopping centers, and office buildings. Technically, this is all
considered domestic wastewater. The flow justification, in my opinion needs additional review,
since it includes the servicing of vacant residential lots where existing neighbors are currently
being served by septic tank systems. It is advantageous to support a regional facility rather than
multiple treatment facilities within the same geographic area. However, Mid South has a non -
exemplary history at other operations and there is an apparent offer to sell on the table. Yet, there
is no guarantee that Mid South will complete the sale and transfer of ownership to Consumer
Water of North Carolina. There is also no guarantee that the Pier 16 facility, which has a history
of issues, will be sold or transferred to this facility. Further, the 0.3 MGD flow allocation will not
be sufficient to accommodate development on land owned by Crescent Resources. Crescent
Resources currently has a permit for 0.45MGD called Pinnacle Shores WWTP that has not been
constructed and no ATC has been requested. Residential customers of Cresent Resources have
utilized septic tank systems for their wastewater mamweniont needs. Limits in the Pinnacle permit
are the same as the Mid -South facility.

Hearing Officer's Report
NPDES NCO074900
Page 6 of 7
Option C
The Permit could be issued for the operation of a 0.1MGD facility, which has already been
constructed, with an expansion to 0.2 MGD. Special conditions could be added to this
permit to better protect for the successful operation of this facility and the user community
of Lake Norman. The Hughes report has provided information for the flow justification of the
Highway 150 area and a local government consistency document has been signed. The flow
justification includes sufficient documentation for 0.2MGD for the near term. The applicant can
apply for additional flow with an additional flow justification in the future.
Special Conditions for your consideration
1. The permit could be conditioned to include language that requires the permit holder to
immediately notify the Catawba County Health Director and the Iredell County Health Director of
any discharge of wastewater to the waters of the state that has not been properly disinfected. This
reporting condition should be an enforceable component of the permit because of the unusually
high level of recreational use in the receiving waterbody.
Current Information for County Health Directors
Mr Barry Blick Mr Ronald Rabe
Catawba County Health Director Iredell County Health Director
3070 11i° Ave. Dr. S.E. 318 Tumersburg Highway
Hickory, NC 28602 Statesville, NC 28625
828/ 326-5801 704/ 878-5302
2. The Permit could be conditioned to require the owner to accept wastewater through a
reasonable offer from the nearby Pier 16 WWTP. This decision would be consistent with the
evaluation of this permit application and the historical operational issues at the Pier 16 facility
previously owned by Mid -South.. It is well documented that this Mid South facility was
evaluated by staff as an opportunity to take the Pier 16 facility off-line.
3. A thorough evaluation of discharge compliance, flow necessity analysis, and discharge
alternatives should be accomplished prior to any authorizations to construct (ATC) additional
wastewater treatment components.
4. Monitoring frequency should be established to collect sufficient samples to support with
confidence that this discharge is not altering swimming suitability. A preference should be
established for more frequent monitoring during summer or warmer weather which has a greater
recreational use. By locating the effluent outfall in this system, an increased level of public
concern for swimming- suitability has been created. This monitoring effort can greatly increase the
public's confidence in maintaining the designated uses of the Highway 150 area of Lake Norman.
A daily monitoring requirement (seven days per week) during the
April-Octobcr season will further help to ensure at least daily visits from the WWTP operators.
Other Considerations
The alternatives analysis submitted with the Hughes report did not include an assessment of
the costs associated with the infrastructure requirements of connecting wastewater utility
customers to the Town of Mooresville's WWTP. This is understandable since the Town did
not provided necessary information to the applicant as requested. While the Mid -South
facility is within one mile of the Mooresville collection system, it is currently outside of
Mooresville's urban growth area and no utility extensions are authorized outside this area
without formal petition to the Town Board. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no
formal petition to the Town Board seeking changes in this boundary area and municipal utility
services.
I am aware of several pending legal issues related to the historical siting, permitting, and
operation of permit number NC0074900. I am also aware that NPDES wastewater permits do

Hearing Officer's Report
A. NPDES NC0074900
Page 7 of 7
not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits that may be required for the
construction or operation of a wastewater treatment plant.
I believe that I have heard adequately from all parties in this matter and that the options outlined
here represent quality considerations for your decision. The available assimilative capacity of the
Catawba River (Lake Norman) at the proposed discharge location has not, in my professional
opinion, been a significant issue in the evaluation of this proposed permit. The process of
reviewing the history and permitting of this facility may provide a valuable learning opportunity to
staff on improving Public Notice and permit oversight reviews and stakeholder relations. I have
had the luxury of reviewing this draft permit with the benefit of hindsight and the assistance of the
Water Quality Section staff. I do not believe any processing issues related to this draft permit or
historical permits of the same NPDES number have been made maliciously or with deceitful
purposes. I would be pleased to discuss these recommendations with you and your staff or explore
additional options for resolving any pending issues related to this permit.
I would like to add, that I have gained a sincere appreciation for the staff that I have been working
with on this issue - particularly Mr. Michael Myers and Mr. Michael Parker. Through my insights
gained as Hearing Officer, I will have a few process suggestions that may be helpful to the
NPDES Unit and will communicate them directly to Mr. Bill Reid.
cc
Coleen Sullins
Bill Reid
David Goodrich
Rex Gleason
Michael Myers
Michael Parker

Summary of Comments Received at the
June 29, 2000 Public Hearing
Regarding the Renewal of the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit
For the Mid South WWTP
Hearing Officer:
Jay Sauber

Department of Environment and Natural Resources/ Division of Water Quality
Point Source Branch/ NPDES Unit
Introduction:
Mid South Utilities currently holds an NPDES permit to discharge a ultimate flow of 0.3 MGD in
the Catawba River Basin. The permit was originally issued in 1989, and has gone through several
permit modifications since that time. In 1996, Mid South Utilities requested modification of their
NPDES permit. The modification request included moving the discharge location for the WWTP
from McCrary Creek to Lake Norman(Catawba River) and increasing the permitted capacity of
the discharge to 300,000 gpd. In addition, to moving the discharge location Mid South moved the
proposed physical location of the treatment plant from Oak Tree Road to Quite Cove Road
(approximately 5 miles from Oak Tree Road).
During the public notice for the increase in permitted discharge and relocating of the discharge,
the Division of Water Quality incorrectly identified the physical location of treatment facility in
the permit and the public notice. The permit modification was granted and a NPDES permit was
issued in 1997 with the incorrect location of the treatment system. According to NCAC 2H .0100
and 40 CFR the required information was correctly identified in the public notice, however the
Division misrepresented the physical location of the treatment system.
The Highway 150 WWTP is currently permitted to discharge 100,000 gpd (0.1 MGD) of treated
domestic wastewater, with a build out permitted discharge of 300,000 gpd (0.3 MGD) into Lake
Norman (Catawba River) just south of the Highway 150 bridge.
During spring 2000 several concerned citizens submitted written request to DWQ asking for a
public hearing and on June 29, 2000, the NPDES Unit held a pubic meeting at the Mooresville
Citizens Center in Mooresville, North Carolina. The hearing was held to obtain relevant
comments regarding the re -issuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit for Mid South Utilities Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
The following is a summary of the comments received during the hearing and in the days
following the hearing until the close of record on July 13, 2000.
Hearing Summary:
Date: June 29, 2000 Cap 7:00 pm
Place: Mooresville Citizens Center, Mooresville, North Carolina
Attendance: 97 people
Commentors: 42 total comments (16 speakers at hearing + 26 additional written comments from
people who did not speak at hearing)
Speakers against the permitting of the Highway 150 WWTP NPDES permit: 37 people (88%
against)
Speakers for the permitting of the Highway 150 WWTP NPDES Permit: 4 people (9.5% For)
One commentor who was neither for nor against the plant. (2.4% undecided)
Page 2 of 4

Department of Environment and Natural Resources/ Division of Water Quality
t Point Source Branch/ NPDES Unit
1 4
Summary of Issued Raised during the Hearing and comments raised in comments submitted prior
to July 13, 2000:
1. Facility meets the requirements of NC DENR and should be re -issued. (issued raised by one
commentor)
2. There is no regulatory authority to require businesses and people to connect, therefore this
cannot be regional facility. (issue raised by one commentor)
3. The real time monitoring equipment is inadequate. (issued raised by 4 commentors)
4. Mid South has an extremely poor compliance history at other facilities. (issued raised by 20
commentors)
5. Location of the treatment system should be considered in permitting decisions. (issue raised
by one commentor)
6. Facility is not "state of the art". (issue raised by 4 commentors)
7. Engineering Alternatives Analysis should be required and 100 % reuse should be
implemented for this facility. (issue raised by one commentor)
8. Package plants function poorly and should not be permitted. (issue raised by one
commentors)
9. Plant is unmanned. (issue raised by 7 commentors)
10. Lake Norman is a Water Supply source for numerous citizens. (issued raised by 3
commentors)
11. A municipal collection system is less than one mile away. (issue raised by 5 commentors)
12. The treatment system has inadequate equalization at the front end of the plant. (issued raised
by 5 commentors)
13. No provisions for mitigation should environmental damage occur. (issue raised by one
commentor)
14. Cumulative affects of other discharges were not considered in permitting this facility. (issue
raised by 2 commentors)
15. Hydrodynamics of the lake were not considered in permitting this facility. This is the
narrowest part of the lake and a localized flow reversal occasionally occurs due the Marshall
Steam Station. (issue raised by 6 commentors)
16. The treatment system will be receiving flow several from commercial businesses, thus
receiving a mixed cocktail of toxic chemicals. These toxic chemicals may inhibit the
biological activity required for proper treatment and no alarms are present to notify the
operator of an upset to the plant. Additionally, since the facility is privately owned there are
no provisions for a pretreatment program to control the influent to the system. (issue raised
by 6 commentors)
17. There are several cooling water discharges into Lake Norman which raise the temperature
and lower DO in Lake Norman. (issue raised by one commentor)
18. Permit limits were based on Best Professional Judgement and not on scientific modeling.
(issued raised by 3 commentors)
19. Continuous flow design is wrong. Facility should only be allowed to discharge after
verifying that the effluent meets limits. (issue raised by 2 commentors)
20. There was no public hearing for the 1997 permit, therefore this permit should be denied.
(issue raised by 4 commentors)
21. Treatment plant not built to specifications. Specifically, the outfall was to be constructed at
an elevation of 760 ft. However, it was installed at the bottom of Lake Norman. (issue raised
by 3 commentors)
22. Facility has no Emergency Plan in case of failure. (issue raised by 2 commentors)
Page 3 of 4

Department of Environment and Natural Resources/ Division of Water Quality
t Point Source Branch/ NPDES Unit
23. Since the 1997 permit lists the site as being located on Oak Tree Road, but the facility is
actually located on Quite Cove Road, no legal permit exist for this facility. (issue raised by 4
commentors)
24. Public notification process needs to change. (issue raised by one commentor)
Summary:
The items outlined do not include issues raised with the 1997 permit, the class action case against
Mid South, the complaint filed against NC DENR over the 1997 NPDES permit, or the complaint
filed against Duke Energy. This outline provides no rebuttal to claims or misinformation, the
outline simply states the issues as they were raised during the public hearing process.
The three main issues raised as a part of this proceeding were Mid South's poor compliance
history with their other facilities, localized hydrodynamic affects of the Marshall Steam Station,
and the design deficiencies of the Mid South Facility.
Being apart of the hearing process there were issues raised that may not be reflected by simply
summarizing the permit related information from the record. The underlying concern of the
public who have commented in writing or verbally, is over how DENR and political officials are
planning to manage growth in the Lake Norman area. Lake Norman is surrounded by four
counties and is a blend of rural and urban cultures. The southern portion of the region is faced
with rapid growth and the citizens are very concerned that this growth be managed in a
sustainable manner. They are looking for guidance and information on how North Carolina will
manage the growth, while protecting it's resources.
Page 4 of 4

Mike's Speech for the Mid South Hearing
June 29, 2000 @ 19:00 hrs, Mooresville Citizens Center
Thanks for coming out tonight. I am going to talk a little about the history of this permit and why
the NPDES Unit believes that this is the best option available from a water quality and public
health stand point.
This permit was originally issued in 1989 with a discharge into McCrary Creek. Since that time
this permit has gone through several, what the Division calls "permit modifications" or simply
changes to the permit.
The modifications include facility siting locations, discharge locations, and increases in the
permitted flow.
In 1996, after a review of the options and justift�ations for the increase in flow, DWQ modified
Mid -South's NPDES permit for a build out permitted flow of 0.3 MGDowit
Regrettably, miscommunication within the Division resulted in the inaccurate depiction of the F;�,c v
[cation o t e treatment facility in the permit and the public notice. iAfter becoming
nd evaluating the situation the Division decided that renoticing of the permit was not
in part because the discharge location was correctly identified.
The 0.3 MGD represents an increase in the permitted flow from the previous permit and was
granted with the understanding that this facility would serve as a "regional" facility, serving the
rest ences and commercial businesses]on the peninsula. With the increase in permitted flow
Q required that the discharge location be removed from McCrary Creek to the main stem of
Lake Norman.
To date this facility has not become the regional facility the Division envisioned. However,
DWQ maintainsthatunde- that this is the best option available for
protection of public health and water quality.
Based on the characteristics of the wastewater-audthr watet_attality of the receiving stream this
permit limits the Mid South WWTP for oxygen consuming waste (or BOD, ST S and ammonia).
fecal coliform, dissolved oxygen, total residual chlorine, pH, temperature, and oil and grease.
Based on the Division's ed ` r.<
arts, these limits will protect for water quality in Lake Norman�afld—
�I, capa e . /4�' Cv ncf eN a 5;� k/.5. /
#W—'1 +7'-Nw+.�f� v��"TtiY'(.+:C 7-2ciL74,e- i aft-4&
The Mid South WWTP is permitted to discharge 100% treated domestic wastewater. If in the
future Mid South proposes to accept anything other than 100% domestic wastewater, they are y-i,v�¢ L
required to notify the Division prior to accepting this flow. The Division would then evaluate the
treatment system ensuring compatibility for treating the proposed waste stream and modify their
permit accordingly.
Lake Norman is classified as WS-IV B water, which means that Lake Norman is water protected
for water supply, primary recreation (including swimming on an organized basis), fishing, aquatic
life propagation and survival, and for wildlife. This permit was developed to protect these uses,
based on our understanding of the conditions. I am eager to hear your views and comments as the
stakeholders so that we can make informed decisions.

- � 1z
c
(J v
Avsz�
dti1 � 0-7—�
a�l

Permit NC0074900
. A. (3.) SPECIAL CONDITION — Flow Expansion Request
Concurrent with any application for an Authorization to Construct that results in an expansion of flow, the facility
shall submit aL.n updated flow justific do and per it complianc review.
.ter O) A p1(1 yt� o'v�0� � V s� OFA� hj a �1 ✓1R�f/�a { QI�SL Vt�i
Q�
Al The flow justification shall include at least the following:
4D Co
rvl�
L Provide Basic Identification of the Project W vUt;tIA 0 r
■ Facility name
■ County
■ Facility address
■ Facility telephone number
■ Preparer's name
■ Preparer's mailing address and telephone number
2. Provide a detailed description of the project requiring an expansion of wastewater disposal. The wastewater
flows should be calculated according to 15A NCAC 2H .0219. Demonstrate and justify the need for flow
volumes, to include any flow reductions realized through flow -restricting devices. The use of flow -
restricting or low -flow devices should be investigated. Report findings should include flow reduction
projections. Updated plat maps, a time schedule for connection, and documentation of commitments shall
be required.
3. If existing facilities will be used as part of an expansion, discuss those existing units including present and
past performance, unit capacities, and inadequacies of each. Include a schematic with component sizes.
4. Indicate if the project will be constructed in phases. Provide the estimated wasteflow per phase. Indicate
current phase status for existing facilities and provide a schedule for constructing each additional phase.
The compliance review report shall summarize the performance of the treatment works or collection system and
state the extent to which any terms of its permit, federal laws, or any State laws, regulations or rules related to the
protection of water quality have been violated.
A. (4.) SPECIAL CONDITION — Spill Notification
(a) Contacting Public Health Directors
The facility must notify the Iredell, Lincoln, Catawba, and Mecklenburg County Public Health Directors
within 12 hours of first knowledge by the owner/operator of any discharge of untreated wastewater to waters of the
State or a discharge from the wastewater treatment plant that has not received adequate disinfection due to a
malfunctioning treatment unit.
The County Public Health Directors can be contacted using the following information:
urrent Information for _Iredell_and Catawba CountvHealth Directors
Catawba County Health Director Iredell County Health Director
3070 11,h Avenue Drive S.E. 318 Turnersburg Highway
Hickory, NC 28602 Statesville, NC 28625
828-326-5801 704-878-5302
(continued on next page)

1 /
pw� ,�_� �_� r'�_�<<.-,�.-�•_ - ,� s/4�.-<-%:fit_ 1 ,, ..� ,
3,0.
- •moo o �--•--
Aidre 9,/lam d - ,Zs,W�r - P� 5
Cl��,ksi J
I"silla�.� �LCS�L/T1S ^/ ,,,,.4 9, oCN`1 n-t-
�2.B�C.7'/�"� /�
w/v 4ze,,
r3(s-5_
Flo f«b/)c- Cam, ,,e-«r
� ��1Lc^i- �. J�'�0.11�0-�.�/�} �k••'Tf%'�.i�c:� ��Z��V"i-��' f"C'U-.�c�tiTLQ„�-. yM�^'S I
/'1

e"N
r1
�. •3�=-� c i . — Val, 2 t�-c,�- k'�_. — /�c�: its i .
7
`l• !/,c.ri v�,9st �2?113 a6�;
l '►�C : a C c'EJnV Eh'K,I 't- r 5.3 u20 . (/
P 1,,_
j --al S:1 � 0 @ F r 6-& 1 p/o� r C
/j
� cu-,.�•�wl�+�rriLti rr�yc�-t5' �/�T,/ ✓fees-c„��b h-v'. /'
�7 �,so� (�fJ-�� C. ITV` � j�-i"1 ��" � L�p,.,�l �i2ft+.J w�t[•il ✓� �i-..1 e�-
-�'

Q . �-vl� �'�-ae�Y.�.. ti'�' y✓`au..vnn.:.. J3� c� �� ���^G,L-r c� C�a "�t3

GO
/ Z . ^ ^' �Strti pe e/EP¢ ✓ . — OrL. c �,
-� fir, P/T
--,
T

n
"�' �-r�rn-Q., �.P,.�� a%�va.�,-Qec�i 2r�cr.�-�' cua� �2 �v-0-✓� /f_e�2c. .
/d , � 3�+-�^-i _ C:l„s,_. • c-c � �-... - ��co-w �.. � �� �-- j=-�-<•�c�.--w,. �� cr .Lw,— I
�' 4✓.+.L !�.¢.. ;.no--� lv�c�.!`,�.L �er�vtrU-'x-d--cam-- ��Z-v.<.-G<6L �,,ii�i-.... ��
� n,''3= rt'•-� r�2c� .,.,/ lcr�a - l` q �;«, _�/,.� c� 3cLc r�.e. -

l %. ikA ( Q IT � o
C&,.vfL
'�300 Qc� d /0
ca
i �,.�'�u-� •�: elf.-.�
�'1

09/24/2000 17:17 9103270918 HUGHES CONSULTING CO PAGE 01
OCT-02-2000 10;23 rREDEI-L CO MGR. 17048785355 P.0101
V JI LV/L'JVV ay. ar •. vvwir-�� ..�...-.� �. ...
Lanai Goverarnea! Reties Requirameaatil
for the Issusaiia of NOW Non-Modalyal Domestic Waatm"ftr Diwharie 8ssmitil
1e.✓d /ra. /l/ r�0 io/z/oo
Gera 1 ye
• . s Oak
North Carolina General Ststute 143.215.1 (e)(6) in the isvtence o(NPAES Panda (ornow-
mu rcipal domestic wastintater treatment fatalrnes. sped6eslly, the l;ranvenmeneJ Msaagement Commission (11MQ rosy not act at
an appbcahen toes new nen•municipsl domestic wauaiester discharge facility until it his received a weinen a sinst ent from suh dry
and county Sm crruacnt having lwisdiebon over any psti of the lands on which the ptopossd frulity Odin epparteomces ace to be
locatedThe emato statement shall document whether the city tR county two a avnia'g or 8411rdiviaiO4 ordinsnra en effort and (3f
Ruch m ordinance is in eff.i) wh.&a the proposed facility is mwistant with the ordutsnee, The E..4C )hall nor approve a pmwt
application for my hybty which a city or cowry h i detsvmihed to be meonsistent with coning or subdivision ordinances unless Our
approval of such appieaeon is dcacmdned to have staseVidr agnehwnec seal is in the best ietesesc of the Stem
I • roedona to the w^ Bearer
Prior to submitting sn application Poe a NPDES permit foe a propoerd facility, the tepptio■ae chap request that 4021%sila
Ot zd.LpnK rnx= "` •t eomplety this form.
The apitbeaat mtou
e Submit a copy of the permit spplioatioo (with . wiliest, request for this form to ba completed) to the clerk of the city
sad the canary oy "rafted asset. trNm receipt reyuea4d,
• lreitb•r (orboth) local gewrmant(r) rail(o) to maul the completed form, is evidenced by the pisimmaek on the
cer0ad mail card(*), within 1S days after reaming and sighing for this eettir(ed wail, the applicant may submit the
application to that NPDES Unit.
e As evidence to the Commission that nmc local geectnmcnt(s) galled m respond wtchln IS days, dic applicant *bap
submit a copy of the estnifitd mail Bard along with, a hotarn rd letter araring that the local govetament(e) failed to
trspo.rd wizbin the Wdsy peziad.
iCIhl7JLa.1O.r.L.' '1 Gn9er-.-°
The nearby city, and/or county goveramvai which may have or has ]urisditaiop over any put of the land on which the
prgated lacitity tic its apparteeaaaes art: to be located is requited to complete and return this foma m der applicant within
1S days or receipt. be form must be signed and novestesd•
Y�oaeaewwl.m t��al^aelwa//
Name of local govammetnt „1rAVeft l t `Stru)�V
(City/County)
Door the cih/A&WW have jurisdacdon over any pats of the land oo which the proposed facility and its appurtenances are
to be located? Yet [)d No( ) Tf no, pleast ugn this form, have a aatariaed, and rtmm it to the applicant.
Dora the dtflcounty havo in effaa a toning or subdivision ordinance? Yes Xi No [ ]
Tf there it a zoning or subdivision ordinance in effect, is the plan for the proposed fa6hry, conaistmt with the ealinsnrai
Yes tjj No( )
Date ` - "-120
Signature ,
(City Managsa/Coewty Magog)
State of. he,, ,County of
On this ,�„�,_,,,p day of ^, �,t porteoa•1)y appeuad bafole me, the said
name NIDA i _ IC . OL"k %ta A „ to me known and known to me to be the person
doscribed in and who executed the foregoing document and he (or she) acknowledged that he (ot she)
exeeuud the *Am% and being duty a —urn by me, made oats diet she *saremeri s m tile-ibregoiAg document ary
true. J -
My Commission expire s1 d I In / (gyglpeurt of Notary Public) a✓
1Nv 66c (Offioal Stod)
_r
TOTAL P.0!

10/ 01 / 2000 22: 39 7046627039
MOORESVILLE PLANNING
PAGE 01
Send To:
From;
o f lAOO�e
oaAT �� d► ,eeo• •e
a t •�'
Yt L�F'
PiaA A.ag � Eg�i�ee�ring
Fax Transmission
Cover Sheet
P.O. Box 878
Mooresville, NC 2$1.15 .
[phone] [phone] (Fax)
Carson Fisher
Date: Total Pages:
(Including Cover Sheen.
Coy arms:
do
a
a
r

aac� i`
jr may.,.
T.. ■..
f.. r ri :ram E XOM
N
N
W
ID
O
m
H
rrFn
z
G)
D
m
m

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
August 8, 2000
Mr. Carroll Webber
Mid South Water Systems
P.O. Box 127
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673
NCDENR
Subject: Request for Additional Information
NPDES NCO074900
Highway 150 WWTP
Iredell County
Dear Mr. Webber:
As I am sure you are aware, a public hearing was held regarding the issuance of NPDES Permit NC0074900, to Mid
South Utilities, for the wastewater treatment plant located on Quite Cove Road in Sherrills Ford, North Carolina. The
hearing officer has reviewed the historical files for this facility and requires additional information before making his
final recommendations. Specifically, the hearing officer requires that an Engineering Alternatives Analysis be conducted.
This analysis shall include the following information:
❑ Flow justification for the 100,000 gpd flow and the 300,000 gpd flow according to T15A NCAC 211.0219(I) for the
referenced facility.
❑ The feasibility and infrastructure requirements needed to connect the Heater Utilities, Pier 16 WWTP to the Mid
South WWTP.
❑ The hydraulic capacity of the City of Mooresville collection system that extends closest to the businesses that the
WWTP serves. Additionally, include the degree to which this capacity has been allocated (i.e. what is the capacity
after subtracting the flows that have already been allocated to the collection system).
❑ Local Government Signoff, pursuant to T15A .0105(I) and G.S. 143-215.1(c)(6).
The EAA shall be developed according to the enclosed Engineering Alternatives Analysis Guidance Document and
submitted to the Division of Water Quality, NPDES Unit at the address listed below no later than September 25, 2000.
If you have any questions about this additional information request, please contact Mike Myers, at [phone],
extension 508.
Sincerely,
��L— 977('01�
David Goodrich
NPDES Unit Supervisor
cc: Mooresville Regional Office, Water Quality
Central Files
NPDES Unit Files
Charlie Hughes — 111 Oak Lane
Sneads Ferry, North Carolina 28460
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer Internet: http://h2o.evir.state.nc.us/

Notes for Highway 150 Mid -South Wastewater Treatment
Plant
Site History
Mid South Utilities, Inc. has applied for renewal of the NPDES permit for Highway
150 Wastewater Treatment Plant. This facility is located in subbasin 03-08-32 of
the Catawba River Basin. The Highway 150 facility discharges into Lake Norman
(Catawba River) near the highway 150 bridge. The receiving waters are class WS-IV
B CA waters and have been rated as meeting its designated uses, which include:
water supply, primary recreation (including swimming on an organized or frequent
basis), fishing, aquatic life, and wildlife. Lake Norman (Catawba River) is not listed
on the state's 303(d).
Prior to 1997, the facility possessed an NPDES permit to discharge 0.041 MGD
(41)000 gpd) at secondary treatment limits for oxygen consuming waste. On May 7,
19961 Mid South applied for a modification of the NPDES permit, including an
expansion in flow to 0.3 MGD (300,000 gpd).
On October 18, 1996, the State of North Carolina's Division of Water Quality
notified the public, through a classified ad in the newspaper of general circulation in
Iredell County, that the permittee had requested an expansion in permitted flow and
relocation of the discharge location.
The ad and subsequent permit incorrectly identified the facility as being located at
Knotts Landings subdivision. The Division concluded that renoticing of the NPDES
permit was not warranted as a result of lack of public comment and according to
T15A: 02H .0109, which stipulates that the Notice should contain:
❑ Name, address, and phone number of the agency issuing the permit.
❑ Name and address of the applicant.
❑ Brief description of the applicants' activities or operations, which result in the
discharge, described in the NPDES application.
❑ Name of waterway to which the discharge is made and short description of the
location of the discharge on the waterway.
❑ Statement of the Division's intention to issue or deny.
❑ Brief description of the procedures used in the determination, including a 30
public comment period.
❑ Agency contact information for additional information request.
According to the requirements stipulated by the Environmental Management
Commission, the public noticed fulfilled the requirements of this rule.
Permit Writer: MJM
Permit #: NCO074900
Permit File Review
The subject permit was last issued December 9, 1996, and will expire June 30, 2000.
Subsequent to the issuance of the NPDES permit the facility applied for and
received an Authorization to Construct a 0.1 MGD wastewater treatment plant,

consisting of an equalization chamber, dual 50,000 gpd trains each consisting of an
aeration basin and rectangular clarifier, aerated sludge holding, dual cell tertiary
filter, post aeration, chlorination, and dechlorination.
Wasteload Allocation Review
A wasteload was conducted on August 8, 1996, for flows of 0.041 , 0.1, and 0.3 MGD.
The wasteload allocation recommended limits of 15 mg/L BOD5, 4 mg/L NH3-N, 5.0
mg/L DO, 30 mg/L TSS, 200/ 100ml fecal coliform, 28 µg/L TRC, and 30 mg/L oil and
grease. The limits for BODY NH3-Nand D.O. are based on the recommended oxygen
consuming waste management strategy detailed in the February 1995 Catawba
River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
Correspondence Review
❑ April 6, 2000 - According to correspondence from concerned citizens the
construction of the facility may not have been conducted per approved plans.
April 6, 2000 an engineering certification from Dale Stewart, P.E., was received
by the Division of Water Quality, stating that the treatment facility was
constructed according to the approved Plans and Specifications.
❑ April 3, 2000 — Division received communication from Stephen and Jennifer Ford
of Mooresville, North Carolina. The Ford's state that in their opinion no valid
NPDES permit exist for the discharge occurring on Quiet Cove road at Highway
150. Their argument is that the facility location was incorrectly referenced in
the public notice and as such authorization was granted for the construction of a
facility at another location.
There was also some concern over permit WQ0015856, and the discharge
elevation stipulated in the permit. The Ford's requested a public hearing be
held. {This request will be granted.}
❑ March 24, 2000 — Letter to the Office of Administrative Hearings. Donna
Lisenby requested a public hearing be held on the issuance of the Highway 150
permit. (This request will be granted)
❑ March 24, 2000 — Letter to DENR (Dave Goodrich) — Donna Lisenby requested
copies of the draft permit, copies of the renewal application, and several other
documents. {This request will be granted}
❑ March 30, 2000 — The Division received a letter from Lynn Teeter requesting a
public hearing on the Mid -South Highway 150 WWTP. {This request will be
granted}
❑ March 28, 2000 — The Division received a letter from Nancy and Michael Lindsey
requesting a public hearing on the Mid -South Highway 150 WWTP. (This
request will be granted)

DMR Review
There is only limited data available from discharge monitoring reports, since the
facility has only recently begun discharging.
Basinplan Review
Subbasin 03-08-32 is located in the upper piedmont ecoregion. The subbasin has a
total land area of 706 square miles of which 54% is forest/wetland, 31%
pasture/managed herbaceous, 9% surface water, 3% urban, and 3% cultivated crops.
There are two other dischargers within one mile, both of which discharge treated
domestic wastewater.
Lake Norman is one of four lakes monitored in the subbasin and is North Carolina's
Largest man made reservoir. Lake Norman was most recently sampled in the
summer of 1997, by Duke Energy and found to be oligotrophic. The lake was
sampled by DWQ in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1986 and 1992 and rated as oligotrophic in
198% 1986, and 1992.
General Comments
The facility was originally constructed (1989) to serve the Knotts Landing
Subdivision in Iredell County. The subdivision never developed. The facility now
serves residences and commercial property in the surrounding area. There are two
dischargers in the immediate surrounding area, both of which have had compliance
problems. This would appear to be a good candidate for regionalization.
The facility has a treatment capacity of 0.1 MGD with a ultimate permitted flow of
0.3 MGD. The design of this facility can be retrofited rather easily for biological
nutrient removal in the event of future nutrient limits.
The correct facility location is off of Quit Cove Road.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality
020f VIAL
9QG
h �
o ,c
Water Quality Section — Environmental Sciences Branch
Intensive Survey Unit
Memorandum: July 25, 2000
To: David Goodrich
From: Jay Saubbe�
Subject: Hearing Officer's Review and Request For Information
Mid -South Utilities, Inc
NPDES NC00074900
Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant
As you are aware, I conducted a public hearing on the proposed National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit for Mid -South Utilities' Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant and effluent
discharge. I have reviewed the files to obtain relevant current and historical information in support of
making quality recommendations for the director's review. However, I am in need of additional
information prior to making my recommendations.
Please provide a copy of an appropriate flow necessity analysis according to 15A NCAC 211.0219(1) for
this facility and a copy of the local government consistency document under 2H.0105(i) and G.S. 143-
215. 1 (c)(6). Thank you in advance for your quick response. These documents are necessary to assist in the
completion of my recommendations.
JUL 2 7 200U
DEtiR - WATER OU.1L!TY
POINT SOURCE DRM04

-1WY 15Q•WWTP = NPDES Permit Issuance
' Subject: HWY 150 WWTP - NPDES Permit Issuance
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:10:27 -0400
From: Britt Setzer <Britt. Setzer @ ncmail.net>
• Organization: NC DENR - Mooresville Regional Office
To: [e-mail]
Michael,
To speed up the comments on this particular project, I thought I would
respond by e-mail. We concur with the issuance of this permit provided
the facility is operated and maintained properly, the stated effluent
limits are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not contravene
the designated water quality standards.
If you have any questions, please call me at 704 663-1699.
Britt Setzer - [e-mail]
Regional Engineer
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
Dept. of Environmental Health - Public Water Supply
919 N. Main St.
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Britt Setzer <[e-mail]>
Regional Engineer
NC DENR - Mooresville
Dept. of Environmental Health - Public Water Supply
1 of 1 6/26/00 11:12 AM

I
DENR/DWQ
• FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO074900
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility
Name:
Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 127
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673
Facility Address:
Off of Quiet Cove Road, Iredell County
Permitted Flow
0.1 MGD and 0.3 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic
Facility/Permit Status:
Renewal
County:
Iredell
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Lake Norman
Catawba River
Regional Office:
Mooresville
Stream Classification:
WS IV, B, CA
USGS Topo Quad:
E15 SW- Lake Norman
North
303(d) Listed?:
No
Permit Writer:
Michael Myers
Subbasin:
03-08-32
Date:
May 13, 2000
Drainage Area (mi2):
Lake Discharge
Summer 7910 (cfs)
Lake Discharge
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Lake Discharge
Average Flow (cfs):
Lake Discharge
IWC (%):
Lake Discharge
Primary SIC Code:
Lake Discharge
SUMMARY
Mid South Utilities, Inc. has applied for renewal of the NPDES pemut for Highway 150 Wastewater
Treatment Plant. The W WTP was built to treat wastewater generated from commercial and
residential properties in the Knotts Landing and surrounding area. The upgraded facility has
the ability to provide better than secondary treatment. This facility is located in subbasin 03-08-32
of the Catawba River Basin. The Highway 150 facility discharges into Lake Norman (Catawba River) near
the highway 150 bridge. The receiving waters are class WS-IV B CA waters and have been rated as
meeting its designated uses, which include: water supply, primary recreation (including swimming on an
organized or frequent basis), fishing, aquatic life, and wildlife. Lake Norman (Catawba River) is not
listed on the state's impaired waters 303(d) list.
Prior to 1997, the facility possessed an NPDES permit to discharge 0.041 MGD (41,000 gpd) at secondary
treatment limits for oxygen consuming waste. On May 7,1996, Mid South applied for a modification of
the NPDES permit, including an expansion in flow to 0.3 MGD (300,000 gpd).
On October 18,1996, the State of North Carolina's Division of Water Quality notified the public, through
a classified ad in the newspaper of general circulation in Iredell County, that the permittee had requested
an expansion in permitted flow and relocation of the discharge location.
The public notice and NPDES permit identified the facility as being located at Knotts Landing
Subdivision with a discharge into Lake Norman near Highway 150. Though the discharge location was
correctly identified the physical location of the wastewater treatment plant was incorrect. The actual
physical location of the wastewater treatment plant is off of Quiet Cove Road, which is a few miles away
from the location identified in the permit and public notice. The Division concluded that renoticing of the
NPDES permit was not warranted as a result of lack of public comment and because the requirements
stipulated by the Environmental Management Commission had been fulfilled. According to T15A: 02H
.0109, the Notice should contain:
Fie( Sheet
NPDES Renewal
pane I

❑ Name, address, and phone number of the agency issuing the permit.
❑ Name and address of the applicant.
❑ Brief description of the applicants' activities or operations, which result in the discharge, described in
the NPDES application.
❑ Name of waterway to which the discharge is made and short description of the location of the
discharge on the waterway.
❑ Statement of the Division's intention to issue or deny.
❑ Brief description of the procedures used in the determination, including a 30 public comment period.
❑ Agency contact information for additional information request.
The Division contends that each of these requirements was fulfilled in the public notice. Though incorrect,
the physical location of the facility is not a requirement of the public notice, therefore the issuance of the
NPDES permit was not re -noticed.
TOXICITY TESTING:
Current Requirement: None
Recommended Requirement: None
FACILITY COMPLIANCE SUMMARY:
There is no compliance history with this facility since discharging only began appro2dmately a
month ago.
INSTREAM MONITORING:
None
PROPOSED CHANGES:
The facility location has been modified to reflect the correct location of the treatment plant.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
Draft Permit to Public Notice: May 24, 2000
Permit Scheduled to Issue: Pending public hearing resolution.
STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Michael Myers at [phone] ext. 508.
NPDES SUPERVISOR:
d.
fart Shed
NI'DE[S Renewal
1'a,-c 2

Apr. 6, 2000 11:05AM LAND DESIGN ENG. No.8641 P. 1/3
A
• •- LanbDesi njnc. FAX COVER SHEET
ENGINEERING DIVISION
1700 East Boulevard
Charlotte, NO 28203
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Land Planning
Urban Design
Civil Engineering
Landscape Architecture
DATE: 11, 6 _ p o FAX #:
TO: - •° PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT NO.: `0C?-7 '
FROM: Dale C. Stewart, P.E. # OF PAGES (including cover):
RE:
COMMENTS:
r w
(fC R a 6
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The documents accompanying this FA)( transmissfon contain confidential Information Intended only for the uee of the Individual of the entity named above. If you are not Me hitended reclplent, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying: distribution or the taking of any action in reliant: on the Contents of this facsimite information is striotfy prohibited. If you have mcrived this FAX in error. please
Immediately notify us by telephone et 70M78.7777 to arrange for dlaposhton or return of the documents to us.
KVcrrrWCff MFAXower.doc REV V1SROMREV 811"9

Apr- 6, 2000 11:05AM LAND DESIGN ENG. No.8641 P. 2/3
LaXODe57 n Ine.,
Land Planning Urban Design Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture
April 6, 2000
Mr. David A. Goodrich, Supervisor
NCDENR - NPDES Discharge Section
1617 MSC (27699-1617)
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh NC 27601
RE: Wastewater Treatment Facility Final Certification
NC 150 - f redell County
NPDES Permit NCO074900
Q.N. 1087036
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
On February 17, 2000,1 provided to the Mooresville Regional Office a Partial Certification of the Mid
South NC 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant in support of an application for a temporary pump and haul
permit. The purpose of that certification was to allow utilization of the flow equalization tank as a
holding tank for the purposes of the pump and haul operation. Even though the plant was essentially
complete at the time of the Partial Certification, I withheld Final Certification pending resolution of the
FERC permit for the effluent discharge line to the Catawba River.
The FERC issued that permit on March 28, 2000 (copy attached).
Although I am in receipt of a letter from Ms. Donna Lisenby, The Catawba RiverKeeper0, requesting an
administrative hearing regarding the NPDES Permit (NC0074900) for this facility, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, the facilities have been constructed in accordance with the Authorization To
Construct (ATC), dated November 24, 1997 (copy attached). Our responsibility for this project related to
design and construction observation of the proposed plant and effluent line, as described in the ,ATC. In
our opinion the responsibility related to addressing the issues raised in Ms. Lisenby's letter regarding the
NPDES permit rest with the North Carolina Department Environment and Natural Resources, as we were
not involved with the application process related to that permit, Whatever the outcome of that process
and merits of the complaint filed by Ms. Lisenby, we have documented the construction of the plant and
facilities, and the decision to allow full operation and discharge now rests with the Division of Water
Quality.
DCSrj
Enc2asuro(3)
Cc: Mr rw Glcaaon
btr. Carroll WSW
d:187o361dacslaoo�.GxlQ14t01o0
please advise. A set of final as -bunts is also enclosed.
1700 East Blvd, Charlotte, NC 28203 / Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
Other Offices: Alexandria, VA Southern Pines, NC Franklin, TN High Point, NC Asheville, NC

Apr. 6. 2000 11:05AM LAND DESIGN ENG. No,8641 P. 3/3
4 f �
.f
1087036
I, Dale C. Stewart, a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina, have
personally or through authorized inspectors under my employ, periodically observed the construction
of a 0.10 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility consisting of a flow equalization chamber, dual
50,000 gpd trains each consisting of an aeration basin and rectangular clarifier, aerated sludge
holding, a dual cell tertiary filter, post aeration, chlorination and dechlorination with final discharge
of treated wastewater into the Catawba Rivet, all located in lredell County, North Carolina. This
certification is in accordance with the requirements of the Authorization To Construct, dated
November 24, 1997.
l state, in my professional judgment that the construction of the Wastewater Treatment Facilities
were observed to be constructed within substantial compliance and intent ofthe approved plans and
specifications as reflected on the attached as -built plans.
This statement is a declaration of professional judgment as to the construction of these facilities. It
does not constitute a warranty, or guarantee, expressed or implied, nor does it relieve the Owner or
any other party of his responsibility to abide by contract documents, applicable codes, standards,
regulations, ordinances, or other permits or procedures applicable to this facility.
North Caz6lina Professional Engineer Number 6988
y
Date: April 5, 2000
a
GA97036WocArxMftcWoM"V.doc LANMOSM. INC

- - NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 29, 2000
Mr. Lon R. Crow, Chief
JAMES B. HUNT JR. Environmental Compliance Branch
GOVERNOR Office of Hydropower Licensing
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street N.E.
BILL HOLMAN Mail Stop HL-11.2
SECRETARY Washington, DC 20426
KERR T. STEVENS
Subject: Project No. 2232-402 & 403 DIRECTOR - Cabawba-Wateree Project
Duke Energy Corporation
Easement for Mid -South Water Systems
Dear Mr. Crow,
The purpose of this letter is to provide clarification regarding
i environmental permitting activities associated with construction of a wastewater
treatment plant by Mid -South Water Systems (Mid -South).
In North Carolina, to construct and operate a wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP) that discharges to surface waters, the facility owner must obtain a
NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Permit and an
Authorization to Construct Permit. On December 9, 1996 this agency issued
NPDES Permit No. NCO074900 to Mid -South for operation of a WWTP with a
discharge to Lake Norman on the Catawba River. This plant is known as the
Highway 150 or Knotts Landing WWTP. The permit contains effluent limitations
that specify the quality of the treated wastewater that can be discharged to the
lake. On November 24, 1997 this agency issued the Authorization to Construct
Permit for construction of the Highway 150 WWTP. Prior to issuance of the
Authorization to Construct Permit, this agency reviewed the design basis and the
detailed design plans and specifications for the proposed WWTP to ensure that
the proposed treatment works could meet the effluent limitations required by the
NPDES Permit. Mid -South has obtained all of the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources' permits necessary for construction and
operation of this WWTP.
The construction of the 100,000 gallon per day plant (Phase I) has been
completed. The Authorization to Construct Permit requires that prior to the start
of operation, a certification must be provided by a professional engineer certifying
that the facility has been installed in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications. As of this date, the certification has not been obtained for the
WWTP. However, it is our understanding that the design engineer will provide
the certification, once the easement for the discharge line has been approved by
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-161
website: h2o.ennstate.nc.us PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50%n RECYCLE./tO% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Once this certification has been
received, we will have no objection to Mid -South beginning operation of the
WWTP.
The Iredell County Building Inspections Department has issued occupancy
permits for a completed apartment complex that is tributary to the Highway 150
WWTP. Because of the pending Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
approval, Mid -South requested and obtained a pump and haul permit from our
agency to avoid operating the WWTP and discharging treated wastewater from
the plant to the lake. The existing wastewater flow is collected from the
equalization basin at the wastewater treatment plant site (Note: this basin has been
certified by the design engineer) and is being transported to the City of Newton
wastewater treatment plant for final treatment and disposal. The pump and haul
permit is only a temporary measure to avoid operating the WWTP and we are
anxious for this activity to cease as soon as possible.
In a letter dated December 6, 1999 Duke Energy Corporation notified the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of their intent to convey an easement to
Mid -South for the installation of a discharge line originating from this WWTP
and extending into the main channel of Lake Norman. It is our understanding that
the easement can not be conveyed without Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission approval. When the discharge of treated wastewater into a lake is
proposed, our agency routinely recommends that the discharge line be extended
into the lake for water quality reasons (i.e., so that a greater degree of mixing will
be provided). For this reason, we recommend approval of Duke Energy
Corporation's conveyance of the easement. It should also be noted that once the
Highway 150 WWTP is operational an existing discharge into the lake from a
WWTP known as Pier 16 Marina should be eliminated. The Pier 16 Marina plant
has a history of operational and compliance problems. The Highway 150 plant
will provide a higher degree of treatment with greater reliability than the old Pier
16 Marina WWTP.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Bill
Reid of my staff at [phone], Ext. 519.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Bill Holman
Rex Gleason
Dave Goodrich
Coleen Sullins

NOTES FROM COLEEN'S STAFF MEETING — 2/1/2000
• The Department's travel policies have been revised. Copies of the final version of the
"Travel Policies & Regulations" document will be provided to staff.
The agenda for the Water Quality Committee meeting (12:00 Noon — 2/9/2000) and
EMC meeting (2/10/2000) have been finalized. The proposed Neuse River
wastewater treatment plant discharge rule changes (i.e., a request to adopt the
modifications as a temporary rule and to initiate the permanent rulemaking process
for the proposed changes) will be presented at both meetings. An update on
stormwater program development will be provided at the Water Quality Committee
meeting. [Supervisors and presenters have been provided copies of the agenda
Coleen would like to meet with staff members providing presentations on
Monday (2n) at 12:30.
• The next BIMS meeting is Wednesday, February 9 at 9:30
Coleen and Boyd will meet with Land Quality representatives on Friday, February 11,
to make plans for the next joint Water Quality/Land Quality meeting scheduled for
April 4, 2000. [Shannon/Bradley — please put this on your calendar. Note, there are
some permitting and compliance issues we need to address prior to the 4/4 meeting -
jwr]
• Most of the regional offices reported weather related (power) problems with sewer
pump stations and/or plant bypasses. By far most of the problems were in the
Fayetteville region (Anson, Moore, Montgomery and Richmond Counties).
Rex reported that Mid -South Utilities' new plant on Lake Norman (the Highway 150
plant) has been completed. This plant will eliminate the old Mid -South (now Heater
Utilities) Pier 16 plant which has a history of compliance problems. However, due to
objections raised by local environmentalist, Donna Lizenbe, the FERC has not
granted approval for the discharge line out into the lake. FERC has told Mid -South
that they cannot discharge until the local concerns are addressed.
2/1/2000 Jwr

Nov 29 ' 00 15 : 55
!DES P.ER1VIITAPPLICATION
T;SHORT•FORM:D
n1y.y .dischargers ld ° To b��•ft�'ed�o of U /o domesfic wastewater..(4�i MGD flaw) .
N. C Department of environment and; Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality I NPDES Unit
1617 Mail SeMO Center, Raleigh, NC 2769994617
North Carolina NPDES Permit 14uttiber . 74900
(if ]mown)
Please pint br type
1. Maffing address of applicant
Facility Name
Owner Name
Street• Address•
City
ZIPCode
Telephone Number
Fax Number
e`-maU A►Oesq
NC .1.50. -.] n=4,Landi4g WWTI'
'Midsouth
•3502 Moutnt Pleasant load
ShenUs Ford
NC
28673 -- - -- -
[phone]
(828) 478: 434o
2. Location of facility producing discharge:
Name (If different from above]
P. 01/02
Facility Contact Person Mr. Carroll Reber
Street Address or State Road (Same ai above) '
City / dip Code_
County
Telephone Nuinber ( ) -
3. Reason for application:
Expansion / Modification * Existing Unpermitted Discharge
Renewal X New Facility '
* Please pro vide :a description of the ekpansion/moMcation:
N/A - Renewal • ' .
4- Deseaription:of•the .exlstin treatment Faciiiaes Mist all installed components with capacities):,
0.I0 MGD Dual train •W'W'IP with flow �ualizatiM extended aeration, rectan ar elarifters;
acrab-A slud=liaWng, dual.c,OA tertiary filter, post.aeration Oblori.nation, deehlorimlion
see attached Authorization To Construct
Page I of 2 Version9lw

Nov 29 '00 15:55 P.02/02
v
bES MRMT APPLICATION - SHORT FORM
. o be plod only bty.VW'hargers of 100% domestic wastewater (<I MGD flow)
5. Description of wastewater -(check all that apply):
Tyne of Facility Canerating Wastewater
Industrial Number of Employees
Commercial x Number of Employees
Residential x Number of Homes
School Number of Students/Staff
Other
Describe the sontrce(s) * of wastewater (example: subdivision, mobile home park, etc.)
Slagle and residential and commercial bushmss
6. Number of separate wastewater discharge pipes (wastewater outfalls):
Odc
rrT ■
7. If the facility has raultipld discharge ootfalls, record the source(s) of wastewater for each outfall:
NIA
8. Name of receiving- water(s) (Provide a map showing the exact location of each outfall):
Catawba River
I certify that I am. familiar with the information contained in the application and '
that to the. best. of my knowledge acid belief such information is true, complete, and
accurate.
I
1& Carroll weber
Printed Name -of Person
Prosidant Y;' ►tee tit
Title
Signature of Applicant Date bignea.
North Carolina General -Statute 14215.60)(2) provides that. Any person who Imowingly makes. any
false statement representation, or certification m any application, reoord, report, plan, -or other
document fli es or required to be maintained under Article 21 or regulations of the Environmental
Management Commission implementing that Article, or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly
renders inaccurate any recording or moaitorsts9 doviee or method required to be operated or maintained
under Article 21 or regulations of the Enviroiunental Mmtagement Commission itmplcmenting that
Article, shall be guilty of a fnisdeineanor punishable by a fine not to. exceed S 10,000, or by imprisonment
not to exceed six months, or by both (19 IKS.C. Section tool provides a punishment by a fine of not more
than $10,000 or imprisonment not more than 5 years, or both for a shrmlar ofi'ense.)
Page 2 of 2
Version 9/99
I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
A IT
00
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
PERMIT NAME/OWNERSHIP CHANGE FORM
CURRENT PERMIT INFORMATION:
Permit Number: NC00 7 / 4 / 9 / 0 / D
1. Permit holder's name: CONSUMERS NORTH CAROLINA WATER COMPANY, INC.
2. Permit's signing official's name and title: RICHARD D HUGUS
(Verson legally responsible or perm)
CHAIRMAN
3. Mailing address: PORT rlliFICE BOX 35047 it : GRT7Al SBotito
State: N C Zip Code: 27425
E-mail address:
NEW OWNERMAME INFORMATION:
1. This request for a name change is a result of:
__I_a. Change in ownership of property/company
b. Name change only
c. Other (please explain):
2. New owner's name (name to be put on permit):
HYDRAULICS, LTD.
Phone:( 336 ) 665-0817
3. New owner's or signing official's name and title:
erson ega y responsible for permit)
PRESIDENT
4. Mailing address: POST OFFTCF. ROx 35047 City: r.REENSRORO
State: N C Zip Code: 27425 Phone: ( 336 ) 665-0817
E-mail address:. manuelper-kinsliltriad
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

.to
PERMIT NAME 1 OWNERSHIP CHANGE FORM
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
UNLESS ALL OF THE APPLICABLE ITEMS LISTED BELOW ARE INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL.
REQUIRED ITEMS:
1. This completed application form
2. Legal documentation of the transfer of ownership (such as a contract, deed, articles of
incorporation)
For changes of ownershi , this form must be completed and signed -by both the current permit
hol er and the new owner of the faci itt y
For name chan a only, the current permit holder must complete and sign the Applicant's
Certi ica ion.
Current Permittee's Certification:
I, RICHARD n HUGUS , attest that this application for
name/ownership change has been reviewed an is accurate and complete to the best of my
knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this application are not completed and that
if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application
package will be gturned as incomplete.
Signature:z4rtDate: o I o D
Applicant's Certification:
I, MANUEL L PERKINS , attest that this application for a
name/ownership change has been reviewed and is accurate and complete to the best of my
knowledge. 1 understand that if all required parts of this application are not completed and that
if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application
package will be returned as incom lete.
Signature- Date:
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING
INFORMATION & MATERIALS, SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDDRESS:
NC DENR / DWQ
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Version 9-99

e
-
Excise Tax/Reveaue Stamps $ Q '-4
Tax Lot No.
Verifiedby
by
Parcel Identifier No.
BOOK 1276
PAGES 705 - 708
I'redell County, NC
Recorded 07/30/2001 08:46:08am
No 9999-00017155 1 of 4 pages
Brenda D. Bell, Register of Deeds
County on the day of 1120
Mail after recording to SANFORD HOLSHOUSER LAW FIRM, PLLC
219 FAYETTEVILLE ST. MALL, STE. 1000
Raleigh, NC 27602
This instrument was prepared by Robert B. Markworth, Esq.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION FOR THE INDEX
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this the day of
GRANTOR
CONSUMERS NORTH CAROLINA WATER
COMPANY, INC., a North Carolina corporation
ZUU 1 by and between
GRANTEE
HYDRAULICS, LTD., a North Carolina
corporation
Post Office Box 35047
Greensboro, North Carolina 27425
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors and a.all
include singular, plural, masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH, that Grantor, for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, has and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple, all that
certain lot or parcel of land situated in Iredell County, North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
79514.1
SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO
1
Ij
0
z
-40
�a
Kn

The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument recorded in Book 1230, Page 666, Book
1230, Page 668, and Book 1230, Page 671, Iredell County Registry, North Carolina.
A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat/Map Book , Page ,
County Registry, North Carolina.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land an all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging
to the Grantee in fee simple.
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee, that the Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple, has the
right to convey the same in fee simple, that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances, and that
Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever except for the
exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property is subject to the following exceptions:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, or if corporate, has caused this instrument
to be signed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by authority of
its Board of Directors, the day and year first above written.
�o`°N L s�
K�c9 �#' �r��
a0siy9r
CONSUMERS NORTH CAROLINA WATER COMPANY INC. 4
SEAL Q
BY: Lt/.1- orate Seal) p Z
a'b
ATTESZ .h ( a r .� �� e���,�.�� �� a.40
:TH CAROLINA, ,
c�
that a
and acknowledged the execu
or seal, this the �` of
COUNTY
Not b ' f-the County and State aforesaid, certify
a'' , personally appeared before me this day
egoing instrument. Witness my hand and official stamp
My Commission Expires: T' Notary
STATE OF'NORTH CAROLINA, COUNTY
•i jr 1,
yrAfl _ :, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
, a <r,4 7 Y;.,'O� t.�, : certify -that r; S C.�1�•, ,,, g personally came before me
��• �`� ,; " `�
Y, ,this day and acknowledged that the is the Secretary of Consumers North Carolina Water
t 11 j a • r �g_tj;j S K�yy w i.
:. f r t'� (s ,.�k•u., tr 4!S t,ai w'I�.uCom an
rs f P y, a North Carolina corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of the
3c.+' w: ,;;corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its�,Pitisidetit, sealed with
its corporate seal and attested by 1 Secretary. �``�
�� '• . . r . 3 � h ' ' Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this tj a _�Y�f
Notary Public
_ MY -Commission Expires: _T�'
r I' 03
genet l varra n& deed jorm
Graf "Ole 0i 0%am* of Wd
Rip limb 'I'll, and of ©odmeatie
on�q� � �aad in the 800kand Pam
79514.1 2 06
of adeft

e
EXHIBIT A
Tract One:
BEGINNING at an iron pipe situated on the property line of Lot Twenty -Six (26) of
Section II of SPRING ACRES SUBDIVISION (see Plat Book 19 at page 89), said iron pipe
being the southeast corner of the Martha L. Shelton property (see Book 970 at Page 944); thence
with the property line of Lot 26 and continuing with the property lines of Lots 27 and 28 in
Section H of SPRING ACRES SUBDIVISION South 03 deg. 04 min. 36 sec. West 378.70 feet to
an iron pin situated on the property line of Lot 28, said iron pin being the northeast comer of the
Thomas S. Wilson property (See Book 886 at Page 113); thence with the Thomas S. Wilson
property line North 86 deg. 55 min. 24 sec. West 315.85 feet- to an iron pipe, being the northwest
corner of the Thomas W. Wilson property and the northeast comer of the Piedmont Diving and
Rescue Association, Inc. property (see Book 815 at Page 890); thence with the Piedmont Diving
and Rescue Association, Inc. property line North 51 deg. 55 min. 09 sec. West 257.23 feet to a
rebar, being the common comer of the Piedmont Diving and Rescue Association, Inc. property
and the Crescent Resources, Inc. property (see Book 481 at Page 91); thence with the Crescent
Resources, Inc. property line North 50 deg. 06 min. 34 sec. East 317.02 feet to an iron pipe,
being the common corner of the Crescent Resources, Inc. property and the Martha L. Shelton
property (see Book 970 at Page 944); thence with the Martha L. Shelton property line South 89
deg. 51 min. 00 sec. East 294.96 feet to the point of beginning, and being a tract containing 3.51
acres, more or less, as set forth on a physical survey map entitled "Boundary Survey of a portion
of the Thomas S. Wilson Property" prepared by Joel H. Patterson, III, Registered Surveyor and
dated May 28, 1995.
For back title, see Book 886 at Page 113, and Book 1089 at Page 1514, Iredell County Registry.
Tract Two:
BEING all of Lot 26 of Spring Acres, Section II, as the same is platted, planned and
recorded in Plat Book 19, Page 89 and 89A, in the Office of the Register of Deeds of Iredell
County, North Carolina.

w
EXHIBIT A
Tract Three:
BEGINNING at an iron pin set in the eastern right of way of McCrary Road (SR 1168) at
the intersection of River Parkway; running thence South 80 deg. 50 min. 25 sec. East 65.21 feet
to a point in the northern right of way of River Parkway; thence in a curve to the left having a
radius of 305.00 feet the length of 78.15 feet, a chord bearing of South 88 deg. 10 min. 51 sec.
East and a chord distance of 77.94 feet to a point in the northern right of way of River Parkway;
thence North 84 deg. 28 min. 44 sec. East 35.14 feet to an iron pin set; thence along a new line
South 02 deg. 00 min. 00 sec. West 246.87 feet to an iron pin set; thence North 88 deg. 00 min.
00 sec. West 220.00 feet to an iron pin set in the western right of way of McCrary Road (SR
1168); thence along and with SR 1168, North 12 deg. 40 min. 20 sec. East 90.79 feet; thence in a
curve to the left having a radius of 2539.50 feet a length of 103.61 feet, a chord bearing of North
11 deg. 30 min. 12 sec. East and a chord distance of 103.60 feet to a point; thence North 10 deg.
20 min. 05 sec. East 5 9.3 8 feet to an iron pin set, the point and place of BEGINNING, and being
the property shown on a plat prepared by Patterson, Brewer & Associates, P.A., Registered
Surveyors, identified as proposed Lot #1 of proposed Riverpark Subdivision, a copy of said map
being attached to the deed recorded in Book 1142 at Page 936., Iredell County Registry, and being
1.11 acres, more or less.
THERE IS ALSO CONVEYED HEREWITH AN EASEMENT DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Lying and being in Davidson Township, Iredell County, North Carolina, and beginning at
a point, said point being located South 88 deg. 00 min. 00 sec. East 46.49 feet from an iron pin
set in the western margin of McCrary Road (SR 1168) and said iron pin being located North 12
deg. 40 min. 20 sec. East 101.76 feet from a #4 rebar located at the Southwestern corner of the
Riverpark Subdivision from the beginning point in a curve having a length of 247.03 feet a radius
of 100.00 feet, a bearing of North 68 deg. 45 min. 18 sec. East and a chord distance of 188.84
feet; thence in a curve having a length of 381.29 feet, a radius of 100.00 feet, a bearing of South
68 deg. 45 min. 18 sec. West and a chord distance of 188.84 feet and being the property
identified as 0.36 acres, "Inside Well Area" on a survey prepared by Patterson, Brewer &
Associates, P.A., Registered Surveyors, dated March 15, 1999, a copy of which is attached to the
deed recorded in Book 1142 at Page 936, Iredell County Registry.

Outline for the Mid South Wastewater Treatment Plant
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
Contents:
1.0 Introduction and Summary of Present Conditions
1.1 General Information
1.2 Site Description and History
1.2.1 Existing Site Acreage (including buffer requirements)
1.3 Flow Justification
1.3.1.1 Mid South's Five Year Plan for the Area to be Served
1.3.1.2 Feasibility of Eliminating the Pier 16
1.3.1.3 Feasibility of Providing Sewage to Existing Residences
1.3.1.4 Existing Customers
1.3.1.5 Planned Future Customers
2.0 Evaluate Disposal "Alternatives
2.1 Connection to a Publicly Owned Treatment Works(POTW)
2.1.1 Existing Sewerage System
2.1.1.1 Name
2.1.1.2 Location of Nearest Collection System
2.1.1.3 POTW Permitted Flow (Ultimate and Current)
2.1.1.4 POTW Actual Current Flow
2.1.1.5 Hydraulic Capacity of Collection System
2.1.1.6 Percent of Hydraulic Capacity Allocated
2.1.1.7 Indication of Flow Acceptance
2.1.1.8 Municipalities Five Year Plan for the Area to be Served
2.1.1.9 Economic Analysis
2.1.1.9.1 Capital Cost
2.1.1.9.2 Recurring Cost
2.2 Land -Based Disposal Alternatives
2.2.1 Feasibility of Individual Subsurface Systems
2.2.1.1 Economic Analysis
2.2.2 Feasibility of a Community Subsurface System
2.2.3 Reuse (both 100% reuse and conjunctive reuse)
2.2.4 Surface Water Discharge through NPDES Program
2.2.4.1 Economic Analysis
2.2.4.2 Recurring Cost
2.2.5 Drip Irrigation (Subsurface and Surface)
2.2.6 Spray Irrigation
2.2.7 Other Possible Combinations
3.0 Conclusion — Comparison of Alternatives

ENGINEERING ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant
Renewal of NPDES NCO074900
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Hughes Consulting herein submits the following information on behalf of Mid
South Utilities, and at the request of the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), in response to the Engineer
Alternatives Analysis requested by NCDENR for the renewal of NPDES
NC0074900, NC Highway 150 Treatment Plant. Hughes Consulting provides
consulting services to both public and private utilities.
1.1 GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility Name: NC Highway 150 Wastewater Treatment Plant
County: Iredell
Facility Address: NC Highway 150 and Quiet Cove Road
Owner of Treatment Plant: Mid South Utilities, Inc. Telephone # [phone]
EAA preparer's name and background information:
Hughes Consulting, 111 Oak Lane, Sneads Ferry, North Carolina 28460
Telephone # [phone]
Charles Hughes, owner of Hughes Consulting, served on the North Carolina
Utility Commission from 1989 to 1997. Hughes was elected Chairman of the
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Water Committee;
Served as NARUC's Representative to Public Advisory Forum to the Officers and
Directors of the American Water Works Association; Member, Public Council on
Water Supply Research of the American Water Works Association Research
Foundation; NARUC's Representative to Federal Advisory Committee on
Drinking Water Disinfection By -Products Rulemaking of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; Served as a Faculty Advisor, National Judicial College at the
University of Nevada (Administrative Law); NARUC Committee, 1996 Safe
Drinking Act. Hughes served in the North Carolina General Assembly (District
52) from 1980-1984, has operated and owned a commercial and industrial
general contracting company, holding a North Carolina's General Contractor's
License, and is past Executive Vice President and City Manager for the Bank of
North Carolina.

1.2 HISTORY AND SITE DESCRIPTION
V.
Mid South Utilities, Inc. has applied for renewal of the NPDES permit for Highway
150 Wastewater Treatment Plant. The WWTP was built to treat wastewater
generated from commercial and residential properties in the Knotts Landing and
surrounding area. The facility has the ability to provide advanced secondary
treatment. This facility is located in subbasin 03-08-32 of the Catawba River
Basin. The Highway 150 facility discharges into Lake Norman (Catawba River)
near the highway 150 bridge. The receiving waters are class WS-IV B CA waters
and have been rated as meeting its designated uses, which include: water
supply, primary recreation (including swimming on an organized or frequent
basis), fishing, aquatic life, and wildlife. Lake Norman (Catawba River) is not
listed on the state's impaired waters 303(d) list.
Prior to 1997, the facility possessed an NPDES permit to discharge 0.041 MGD
(41,000 gpd) of treated domestic wastewater. On May 7, 1996, Mid South
applied for a modification of the NPDES permit, including an expansion in flow to
0.3 MGD (300,000 gpd).
On October 18, 1996, the State of North Carolina's Division of Water Quality
notified the public, through a classified ad in the newspaper of general circulation
in Iredell County, that the permittee had requested an expansion in permitted
flow and relocation of the discharge location.
On December 9, 1996, NCDEHNR issued a discharge permit NCO074900 to Mid
South Water Systems, Inc., for a proposed new treatment facility to be located off
NC150, at Quiet Cove Road, in Iredell County. The plant is to serve a large area
of the Lake Norman/NC150 corridor.
On November 24, 1997, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) issued an
Authorization to Construct to Mid South Utilities approving the engineering plans
and specifications for the 0.1 MGD Highway 150 WWTP. On April 6, 2000, after
construction and prior to discharge, Dale Stewart (Land Design) submitted the
engineering certification to NC DWQ, certifying that the facility was constructed
according to the approved engineering plans and specifications.
After submitting the engineering certification and conducting the required on -site
inspection the Highway 150 WWTP began discharging treated domestic
wastewater through outfall 001 into Lake Norman (Catawba River) as permitted
under NC0074900.
June 2, 2000, DWQ provided Mid South Utilities with a draft copy for the
proposed renewal of the NPDES permit NCO074900 and notified Mid South that
a public hearing had been scheduled for June 29, 2000. After conducting the

public hearing Mid South Utilities was notified that additional information was
required prior to the hearing officer making his final recommendations.
Several developments have occurred since the hearing. Due to the extreme
controversy surrounding the Highway 150 WWTP, Carroll Weber entered into
negotiations with Consumers Waters of North Carolina for the sell the treatment
plant. Recently, Mid South Utilities, Inc. has entered into an Offer to Purchase
Contract with Consumers Water of North Carolina. The closing of the purchase
and transfer of assets shall take place upon final approval by the North Carolina
Utility Commission. Consumers Water of North Carolina is a subsidiary of
Philadelphia Suburban Water Company. Philadelphia Suburban Water
Company is one of the largest private utility companies in the country.
As noted during the public hearing several citizens in the area expressed
concern over the lack of an enforceable pretreatment program. In submitting
their plans to the utility commission Consumers Waters of North Carolina has
included the following provision:
The tariff provisions, which are filed with the Utility Commission, will
require pre-treatment inspection. If the customer does not meet standards
then service may be terminated.
At the time of submittal Hughes Consulting was still addressing the issue of local
government signoff. However, as part of this document copies of the $100,000
bond payment to Iredell County is submitted. It is suggested that by accepting
the bond payment that Iredell County was stating that the facility was consistent
with the zoning in the area.
Upon the finalization of the sale of the Highway 150 WWTP to Consumers Water
of North Carolina the $100,000 bond money will be transferred. ( Exhibit T)
The existing treatment facility consists of a wastewater treatment system and
distribution system to serve the existing customers. The details of the existing
system are outlined below:
Wastewater Treatment Plant:
The Mid South wastewater treatment project, Highway 150/RiverPark, is
designed to provide water and sewer service to the NC Highway 150 corridor
from Perth Church Road to the Catawba River. It includes some 205 +
apartments, a proposed office park and a shopping center. The treatment plant,
when at capacity, has a maximum discharge limit of 0.30 MGD.
Currently, the treatment plant is a 0.10 MGD Dual train WWTP with dual 50,000
gpd trains each consisting of an aeration basin, rectangular clarifier, aerated
sludge holding, dual cell tertiary filter, post aeration, chlorination and

i
dechlorination with final discharge of treated wastewater into the Catawba River,
Iredell County, North Carolina. In addition, the treatment system is equipped with
an equalization tank, with a capacity equal to 25% of the design capacity of the
treatment plant.
The plant is capable of having the existing Pier 16 Treatment Plant, which is
located nearby, tied into the system thus eliminating an outfall on Lake Norman.
There are two existing waterfront subdivisions developed by Crescent
Resources, Inc. in the immediate area of the discharge line along the Highway
150 Corridor (e.g. Pinnacle Shores and Pinnacle Shore South). Homeowners in
these two developments currently utilize individual septic systems for waste
disposal. These subdivisions could be tied into the plant along with existing and
new development both commercial and residential along the Highway 150
Corridor.
Distribution System:
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statues
of North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and
Regulations, permission was granted and permit issued on the eleventh day of
January, 1999 to Mid South Water Systems, Inc., Iredell County for the
construction and operation of approximately 34,898 linear feet of 8-inch gravity
sewer, a 250 GPM pump station with duplex pumps, on -site audible and visual
high water alarms, telemetry, portable generator and approximately 6,025 linear
feet of 6-inch force main to serve Riverpark subdivision, and the discharge of
98,150 GPD of collected domestic wastewaer into the Mid South Water Systems,
Inc.'s existing sewerage system, pursuant to the application received September
14, 1998 and in conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other
supporting data subsequently filed and approved by the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and considered a part of this permit.
As documented in the following discussion the Highway 150 WWTP conforms
with all applicable building codes and has secured the appropriate permits for the
construction and discharge of 0.1 MGD of treated domestic wastewater.
Below are excerpts from a letter to Mr. William Allison, Planning Supervisor,
Iredell County Planning Department, from Dale Stewart, P.E. Land Design, Inc.
responding to a request for confirmation to Iredell County building Codes.
"The plant has been designed in accordance with the requirements of
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDEQ) and has been
constructed under the authority of the Authorization To Construct issued
by this agency."

G
t
"Standby generators have been provided both at the River Park pump
station and at the treatment plant. The approved plans also require
audible and visual alarms at both locations, and a telephone dialer to alert
the operators of alarm conditions at either location."
"Properly maintained, the main treatment plant components should have a
minimum 20 year life expectancy, though replacement of some
mechanical components (pumps, blowers, etc.) will be required as part of
normal operation and maintenance. The plant manufacturer has provided
both shop drawings for plant manufacture and an operation and
maintenance manual, which includes a list of recommended spare parts
and O & M instructions."
"There are no components of the NC 150 system within a 100 year flood
plain area nor located on unsuitable soils. Land was not available within
the River Park Subdivision, thus the plant is located on a separate parcel
owned by Mid South, located off NC150 and Quiet Cove Road."
"The size of the parcel provided sufficient area to locate the treatment
plant, a new water well and elevated water storage tank, and provide the
minimum buffers required by the NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources maximum extent practicable and additional plantings
provided."
"The plant site, though accessible from a State maintained roadway, is
not visible from the roadway, and is fenced and locked to provide security,
and prevent access by the general public."
"The plant site location is unique in that it is situated at a prominent
elevation in the area, which accommodates the elevated tank, but requires
both pumping to the plant and effluent pumping to the point of discharge."
( Exhibit B, February 21, 2000 letter from Dale Stewart, P.E.
LandDesign, Inc. to Mr. William Allison, Planning Supervisor,
Iredell County)
The following agencies reviewed the application and either issued permits or
provided comments regarding the discharge permit:
1. NCDENR — Div. Of Water Quality issued NPDES permit #
NCO074900
2. Iredell County Health Department required monthly monitoring and
compliance with Chapter 14 Wastewater of Iredell County Code
3. NC Dept. of Cultural Resources -Div. Of Archives and History
reviewed the project and were aware of no properties of

architectural, historic, or archeological significance which would be
affected.
4. NCDENR-Natural Heritage Program review found no potential
impacts to sites under the program nor federal or state listed
species
5. NCWRC- no objection provided US Army COE are contracted to
determine if Sec. 404 permit is required
6. NCDENR- Div. Envir. Health -Public Water Supply Section no
objection provided facility is operated properly.
7. Lake Norman Marine Commission minutes state that a motion to
approve was made and seconded, and the entire Commission
approved.
8. USFWS commented that the project may impact fish and wildlife
but elected not to conduct a field inspection, response should not
be considered a "no objection" report
9. US Army COE approved project under Nationwide Permit No. 12.
10.Iredell County Department of Planning and Enforcement issued
building permit #76297.
11. NCDOT entered into a Right -of Way Encroachment Agreement for
NC 150-SR 1168.
(Exhibit C, February 1, 2000, Letter from George A. Galleher, P.E.,
Manager, Lake Management, Duke Power to The Honorable David P.
Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)
Certification:
The Highway 150 Treatment Plant was certified by Dale C. Stewart, North
Carolina Professional Engineer Number 6988, on April 5, 2000. The certification
was for the 0.10 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility consisting of a flow
equalization chamber, dual 50,000 gpd trans each consisting of an aeration basin
and rectangular clarifier, aerated sludge holding, a dual cell tertiary filter, post
aeration, chlorination and dechlorination with final discharge of treated
wastewater into the Catawba River, all located in Iredell County, North Carolina.
This certification is in accordance with the requirements of the Authorization to
Construct, dated November 24, 1997. (Exhibit D)
1.2.1 EXISTING ACREAGE
The Highway 150 Treatment Plant is located on approximately 3.5 acres, along
the NC 150 Corridor in Iredell County.
1.3 FLOW JUSTIFICATIONS
Existing subdivision vacant lots equal 215 lots.

A detailed discussion on the development of 215 is discussed in section civ;)� `
Assuming that each lot will be developed for residential purposed (conservative
assumption) and that each home will be a three bedroom home (also a
conservative assumption) then according to 2H .0219(1) a flow of 360 gpd per lot
(3 x 120 gpd) can be used. This yields a flow of 77,400 as demonstrated below:
215 x 360 = 77y40 g dpdp
Vacant land marked in yellow with future lots (Exhibit A and Exhibit J).
Vacant land was conservatively divided into future lots as demonstrated in
Exhibit J. This vacant land is included in the service area as submitted to the
A1� Utility Commission. According to the details of the plan as submitted to the Utility
`v commission Consumers Waters of North Carolina is obligated to provide utility
/SLY service to any resident requesting service within the service area. Totaling the
V� lots associated with the vacant land 226 lots were delineated. Again assuming
all lots will be residential and that the homes will be three bedroom homes (both
(conservative assumptions) 360 gpd per lot was calculated.
t�4v1`� 226 lots x 360 = 81,360 gp
David Drye Apartments
The David Drye Apartments include 205 units each with two bedrooms,
according to 21-1.0219 (1) a flow rate of 240 gpd per unit was used.
205 units x 240 = 49,200 gpd Z
iF(L►�� Pier 16 according to the existing NPDES permit 18,500 gpd
Business Park/Shopping Center O 90,844 gpd
(See detailed explanation below)
roperty L p l t� (A? .Q
L
Assumes 20 lots and a single three "bedroom home per lot. According to 2H
.0219 (1) the flowrate would then be:
I20 lots x 360gpd per lot = 7800 gpd
18 plus acres for proposed hotel/motel
Assuming a 60-room hotel the flow rate would be
60 rooms x 175 gpd per room=10,500 gpd

18 plus acres for proposed apartment complex with a total of 175 apartments:
175 apartments x 240 gpd per apartment = 42,000 gpd -qI-X o r`
_ z �
Summing the above flows gives a total flow of :W/ 604 gpd
- Pr, Yoe
(Please refer to
dlp fi.J. �Eu%�
Dividing the business park into lots and using the allowable flowrates according
to 2H .0219 (1) the estimated flow required to serve the development is as
follows:
Lot 23:
Anchor business —
70,000 ft2 Grocery Store [(70,000 ft2*(120 gpd/1000 ft2]
Deli food service [40 gallon per seat' 48 seats]
Meat market — [3 employees * 25 gallons per employee]
Meat market — [500 ft2 * 50 gpd/100ft2]
Additional 60,000 ft2 for retail shops [60,000 ft2 * (120 gpd/1000ft2)]
Food service/restaurants:
Mexican Restaurant [320 seats * 40 gallons per seat]
Sub/Sandwich Restaurant [100 seats* 40 gallons per seat]
Pizza Restaurant [240 seats * 40 gallons per seat]
Chinese Restaurant [300 seats * 40 gallons per seat]
Subtotal (includes only Lot 23):
Lots 2 through 15:
8,400 gpd CAS
1,920 gpd �u�qG
75 gpd
250 gp
7,200 gpd
12,800 gpd
4,000 gpd
9,600 gpd
12,000 qpd
56,245 gpd 00�
Lots 2 through 15 includes 14.8 acres or 644,688 ft2. Of this area, 289,480 ft2 is
buildable (see Exhibit K). Assume that 43% of the buildable land area is available
for construction of office units. Then lots 2 through 15 will contain 116, 950 ft2 of
office units. Each office unit will be 1,500 ft2, therefore if four employees per
office unit is assumed, the estimated wastewater flowrate is 7,800 gpd.
[(116,950 ft2/1,500 ft2 per office unit)*4 employees per office unit * 25 gpd per ✓ O
employee]
Lot 81t A

Total land area is 4.03 acres or 175,547 ft2. Of the total area 82,764 is buildable
assuming that 43% of the buildable land area for the construction of office space,
then lot 18A will contain 35,000 ft2 of office space. Assuming an average of
2000 ft2 per office and an average of 6 employees per office the total projected
flow is 35,000 ft2/2000 ft2 per office * 6 employees per office * 25 gpd per
employee = 29625 gpd.
Lot 17B
Total land area = 63,597 ft2
Buildable land area = 26,279 ft2
43% of buildable land area to be used for warehouse space=11,300 ft2
10 employees for warehouse @ 25 gpd per employee = 250 gpd
Lot 21 C
Total land area = 50,530 ft2
le land area = 25'000ft2
A4r30of buildable land area for office space=10,750ft2
me 2000 ft2 per office and 6 employees per office
25 gpd per employee
Projected flow rate = 750 gpd
Lot 19D
A gas station with car wash is projected to be built on lot 19D, Assuming the gas
station will have two public restrooms and one employee restroom. The projected
flowrate is 3 bathrooms @ 250 = 750 gpd
Lot 20E and F
Total land area = 1181483ft2
Buildable land area = 599000 ft2
43% of buildable land area for retail shops = 25,370 ft2
Projected flow rate:
25370 ft2 * (120 gpd / 1000ft2) = 31044 gpd
Lot 22G
Total Land area = 53,579 ft2
Buildable land area = 50,000 ft2
43% of buildable land area for retail shops = 21,500 ft2
Projected flow rate:
21,500 ft2 * (120 gpd / 1,000 ft2) = 2,580 gpd

Lot 23H
Total Land area = 471755 ft2
Buildable land area = 327,153 ft2
43% of buildable land area for retail shops = 140,000 ft2
Projected flow rate:
140,000 ft2 * (120 gpd / 1,000 ft2) = 16,800 gpd
Y
Total Requirement for RiverPark Office/Shopping Center = 90,844 gpd J
I would like to call attention to the area map (Exhibit A). Please note that eight (8)
of the parcels marked in yellow on Highway 150 have not been included in the
p Y g Y
flow calculations. There are also 21 parcels, which could request sewer that are
not included in the flow calculations. Additionally, there are many existing
residences and future residences which possibly will request service, i.e., Red
Brook Lane (15 houses). I have also estimated lot sizes larger than existing lots.
The exclusion of properties and the reduction of lot sizes are intentional to
ensure that calculations are not inflated but reflect conservative estimates.
(Note: See Exhibit K for background data. Also included are flow calculations
from Dale Stewart dated July 29, 1999 (Exhibit R).
1.3.1.1 FIVE YEAR PLAN FOR THE AREA TO BE SERVED
Over the next five years, the projected need for sewer service is as follows:
• The Tom Wilson RiverPark Office/Shopping Center — currently under
construction
• The addition of Pier 16 — This is to include Pinnacle Lane growth
• Highway 150 business corridor- expansion is currently developing
• Doolie Road: Requests have been made for service ( Exhibit L)
• McCrary Road area: (See yellow on Map- Exhibit A)
• Robinson Road area: (See yellow on Map — Exhibit A)
• Other areas requesting service or areas of need are to be worked into the
growth pattern.
1.3.1.2 FEASIBILITY OF ELIMINATING PIER 16
The cost of removing Pier 16 and tying to the Highway 150 Treatment Plant will
be approximately $25,000 for a lift station, pump, piping, etc. The cost for the
purchase of Pier 16 from Heater Utility is estimated at forty to fifty thousand
dollars. Consumers of North Carolina has agreed to the above cost and
negotiations will begin after the North Carolina Utility Commission authorizes

temporary operating authority to Consumers with an application for transfer filing
taking place immediately after granting of permanent franchise.
1.3.1.3 FEASIBILITY OF PROVIDING SEWAGE TO EXISTING
RESIDENCES
Because the most current tax map information available for Iredell County is
1997 data, the attached map (Exhibit A) developed by Hughes Consulting is the
result of actual visits to the properties in the proposed service area. To ensure
the most current and accurate reporting, the property surveys were conducted in
July and August of 2000. For clarification purposes, the properties colored with
blue dots identify development since 1997. The red dots identify all vacant lots
for future development.
(Exhibit Q A letter from John Gregorian, property owner on Doolie Road,
requesting service from the city of Mooresville and the city's decline. The areas
colored in pink identify Mr. Grigorian's service request (Purple Finch Lane).
There are nine (9) existing residences and twelve (12) future residences. There
is also a request for future service for the property marked in yellow, which
includes Spruce and Pine Streets and a portion of Doolie Road. The projected
development will require service for approximately 18-20 homes.
Because of these two service requests, as is demonstrated by the Map,
Whippoorwill Road with 18 vacant lots will become feasible to serve. This would
yield a total available of 65 connections on Whippoorwill Road.
Projected growth on Robinson Road and vacant lots make be feasible to serve
the existing residences. The total number of existing residences and vacant lots
yields 69 service connections. Rustic Way Lane off Robinson Road has possible
13 serviceable connections.
A small subdivision across from Rustic Way Lane will produce 16 connections.
In the area of Pinnacle Lane, the service to existing customers is feasible and
requests have been made. This area will produce 12 residential connections.
The total service connections for existing feasible area which includes future
connections is estimated to be 215 connections.
Total feasible existing customers per above calculations:
215 x 360 = 77,400 gpd (not included in flow justification)
1.3.1.4 Existing Customers
At the present time the following customers are on line:

• David Drye Apartments- 205 units
• Vehicle repair shop — Corner of Highway 150 and Quiet Cove Road
• Pontoon/boat Dealership- Highway 150 across from Big Daddy's Restaurant
• Business connection requested (which may be completed after writing of this
document.)
• Business next to body repair shop at corner of Highway 150 and Quiet Cove
Road
1.3.1.5 Planned Future Customers
Please refer to 1.3.1 through 1.3.1.3
2.0 EVALUATE DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
2.1 Connection to Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
The only public system available is the City of Mooresville. Information
has been requested from the City to include in this analysis, but to date
City has not provided information (Exhibit M). However, we can answer
the following:
2.1.1 Existing Sewerage System
2.1.1. 1 Name: The City of Mooresville
2.1.1.2 Location of Nearest Collection System:
The City of Mooresville has a force main at Perth Church Road.
2.1.1.3 POTW Permitted Flow (Ultimate and Current)
Have not received requested information from Mooresville (Exhibit M)
2.1.1.4 POTW Actual Current Flow:
Have not received requested information from Mooresville (Exhibit M)
2.1.1.5 Hydraulic Capacity of Collection System:
Have not received requested information from Mooresville (Exhibit M)
2.1.1.6 Percent of Hydraulic Capacity Allocated:
Have not received requested information from Mooresville (Exhibit M)
2.1.1.7 Indication of Flow Acceptance:
Have not received requested information from Mooresville (Exhibit M).

J
Though the information requested from the Town of Mooresville has not
been received the issue surrounding the need for the requested
information can be answered. As noted above, the Town of Mooresville
has extended a force main to serve the schools on Perth Church Road.
As indicated Town of Mooresville has no plans to provide sewer beyond
Perth Church Road. In addition, the Town of Mooresville has refused
service request for customers within the area bordered by Perth Church
Road. This along with the projected service area supplied by the town of
Mooresville clearly shows that there are no plans to provide sewer to
anything other than the schools that are already being served.
Though the Town of Mooresville did not supply the information on the
hydraulic capacity of the force mains, good engineering design would
dictate that the system should be sized to handle only the wastewater
flows associated with the schools. Since it is apparent that the Town of
Mooresville's plans for area only include providing sewer to the schools on
Perth Church Road, designing the force mains for flows beyond those
expected by the schools would be a waste of resources.
Therefore, it can be concluded that in order for the Town of Mooresville to
serve the peninsula the following would have to occur. First, the Town of
Mooresville would have to be willing to accept the additional flow from
peninsula and second new infrastructure would need to be constructed to
accommodate the increased flow generated from the development of the
area.
Addressing the first statement. It is clear from the letters submitted, 5 year
plan submitted and the signed statements from individuals who have
requested service that the Town of Mooresville within the next 5 year
permitting cycle has no intentions of providing service to anyone other
than the schools in the area.
Additionally, the Town of Mooresville is unable to serve the residences of
the peninsula without major infrastructure changes. As state the existing
sewer line extended to the schools is a force main. It is not feasible to tap
into an force main. Additionally, because a force main operates under
pressure (as opposed to gravity flow) the lines are sized according to the
service requirements. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the
sewer lines have been sized according to the expected flows generated
from the schools alone and are unable to accept the increased flows from
the future development.
2.1.1.8 Municipalities Five Year Plan for the Area to be Served:
Attached (Exhibit E) is City of Mooresville's five-year growth plan. It
is our understanding that the City has no plans to go beyond the

l
urban growth boundaries. (Also see attached letters to Exhibit E
and letters in Exhibit L.)
2.1.1.9 Economic Analysis
Since this alternative is not feasible an economic analysis was not
completed.
2.2 LAND -BASED DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
2.2.1 Feasibility of Individual Subsurface Systems
It is historically important to note the 1989 septic system failure of Big Daddy's
Restaurant, an establishment seating 315 people. The remedy for the failed
septic system was tying the restaurant to the existing Pier 16 Treatment Plant.
(Exhibit N). The location of Big Daddy's Restaurant is adjacent to the RiverPark
Development, apartment complex, business park, and shopping center. Given
the past failure of Big Daddy's, a high capacity user in the area, it is not feasible
to gamble on repeated failure. Given the current development along the Highway
150 Corridor, from Doolie Road to the Catawba River Bridge, a septic system is
not feasible.
While we do need to consider the economics of septic systems, it is imperative to
consider the environmental impact of failing septic tanks. It is my understanding
that currently there is no formal inspection of septic tanks in Iredell
County.(Iredell County Planning Department). I further understand that the
county does not have the necessary manpower to carry out such inspections.
On the other hand, the State of North Carolina does and will continue to closely
inspect and monitor wastewater treatment facilities.
Attached is a letter dated June 6, 1994 to David A. Goodrich (Exhibit F), as well
as a letter dated May 20, 1994 from Soil Science Services, Inc. (Exhibit G). As
per your request, we were able to obtain an Iredell County soil survey of which
pertinent pages are attached. (Exhibit H).
2.2.1.1 Economic Analysis
Even though evidence indicates that septic systems are not the most
environmentally sound alternative for this area an economic analysis was
performed. In 1996, Triangle Environmental conducted an economic analysis of
the cost associated with septic tanks. The unit cost for the capital equipment will
be used. The only exception will be the unit cost for the price of land in the area.
In 1996, Triangle Environmental indicated that the cost of land was 15, 000 per
acre. As documented in Exhibit O, the average cost of land in this area is now
80, 000 per acre.
Additionally, the assumption has been made that all the lots in the area are
suitable for septic tanks. Though it is clear that this is not the case an approach

a
was taken that assumes that this is the only alternative. As indicated in Section
1.3 the projected flows for this facility include 441 lots, 0.090844 MGD flow for
business park, and 60,300 gpd for retail and office space.
For residential areas assume one 1,000 gallon septic tanks.
For commercial land a 30000 gallon septic tank for each 30000 gpd is assumed.
Therefore, the cost associated with this alternative would be as follows:
Residential:
441 units at a cost of $2,200 per unit for tank, field = $970,200
Land Assuming .07 acre per system — 0.07 * 441 * $85,000 = 21623,950
Commercial:
151,144 gpd / 30,000 = 5.04
Pump stations to adsorption fields - 4 pumps * $21,000 per pump = $84,000
30,000 gallon tank, dosing system distribution lines = 4 @ $60,000 = $240,000
Land assuming 1.5 acres for each 30,000 gpd — 5.04 * 1.5 * $85,000 = $642,362
Total cost $4,560,000.
Be advised that this cost is very conservative. This cost does not include and
contingency cost or opportunity cost. However, it is believe that the outlined cost
are sufficient to show that this alternative is economically unfeasible.
2.2.2 Feasibility of a Community Subsurface System
There are several problems associated with a community subsurface system that
make this alternative unfeasible. The land necessary to implement this
alternative on its own would drive the cost of this alternative into the tens of
millions of dollars. Additionally, there is the environmental risk associated with a
0.3 MGD community subsurface system: These system are typically used for
much smaller systems. Given the proximity to Lake Norman and the eventual
failure of this system of this size, economics aside this is not the most
environmentally sound alternative.
As indicated above the cost of acreage is rapidly increasing with the average
cost per acre in this service area averaging $80,000. For example, a 52-acre
tract at the corner of Highway 150 and Perth Church Road recently sold for
$80,000 per acre. A 1 1/2 acre tract on Highway 150 sold recently for
$240,000.(Source: Lake Shore Realty, Brawley School Road, Mooresville, NC
,Exhibit 0). This high dollar market makes the purchase of land prohibitive.
2.2.3 Reuse (both 100% reuse and conjunctive reuse)

Currently, there are no sources for reuse.
2.2.4 Surface Water Discharge through NPDES Program
The Highway 150 Treatment Plant is currently discharging with NPDES
#NC0074900. Given the fact that the facility is already constructed and
discharging as the economic analysis will show this is the most economically
feasible alternative. There are no water quality problems in the receiving waters
(Lake Norman) that would prohibit this discharge alternative. Additionally, as
documented earlier numerous regulatory agencies have previously reviewed the
project with no objections. Pending the renewal of a 300,000 gpd NPDES
discharge permit the Highway 150 WWTP will be sold to Consumers Water of
North Carolina a subsidiary of Suburban Philadelphia, one of the largest water
and wastewater private utilities in the country. Negotiations have begun and a
price has been negotiated for the sell of the nearby Pier 16 WWTP to Consumers
Water of North Carolina that will remove the non -compliant Pier 16 discharge
from Lake Norman. We highlight this just to make DWQ aware that the renewal
of this permit at the 0.3 MGD permitted flow limit will set in motion activities to
make this a regional system for the peninsula.
As documented the 300,000 gpd system has been adequately justified and is
needed to make the viability of regional system economically beneficial. As this
is the preferred option by the permittee the economic analysis for the
construction of the additional 0.2 MGD and the recurring cost associate with
alternative are detailed below.
2.2.4.1 Economic Analysis
Present Value of Wastewater Treatment Plant w C
PV=C+C[ 1 +r —1]
R(1+r) C
Values
C = 111,253
�
C = 111,253
R = .095
N = 20
Recurring Cost
1,100,.000----
;
Capital Cost
Present Value
$294009000
Capital Cost
Exhibit S

I
t
JR
r
o l�o� .
z ?z?'fg
3 g�/732
j3
174 d
3944
3-1/10
3 ZZ �
zG o ll2

Equipment and Plant Cost-Prowater
434,265.00
Survey Cost:
2,783.00
Design Cost
47,566.00
Plumbing Cost
2,112.00
Claremont Warehouse
17,357.00
Pete Duty Installation
61,088.00
Electrical
12,362.00
Gravel
8,364.00
Labor (site,wellhouse,etc.)
55,794.00
Fence
10,120.00
Total Capital Cost
$6439447.00
2.2.4.2 Recurring Cost
Recurring Cost — Hwy 150/RiverPark Wastewater Treatment Plant
Salary Plant Operator
31,200.00
Average Admin. Cost per Customer
(used only 50% of actual cost) 64.25 x 209=
6,714.00
Average Maint. & Repairs 11.87 x 209=
2,480.00
Purchase Power 1,200.00 mo. x 12
142400.00
Chemical Expense 12 mo.
7,938.00
Testing
6,734.00
Vehicle fuel 8.30 x 209
1,735.00
Average other expense 11.01 x 209=
2,301.00
Average Property Tax 93.00
93.00
Average Payroll Tax, etc. 9.83 x 209
2,055.00
Truck Lease
12,000.00
Sludge Removal
5,400.00
939050.00
Allowable Return 10.90%
10,142.00
103,192.00
4% Franchise Tax
4,128.00
107, 320.00
State Tax on Return
735.00
Federal Tax on Return
3,198.00
111,253.00
State Taxable Income 10,142.00
X 7.25%
735.00 state tax
10,142.00
Less 735.00
Federal Tax. Income 9,407.00
X34%
3,198.00 Federal Tax

2.2.5 Drip Irrigation (Subsurface and Surface)
There is insufficient land mass available for the required 86 acres (land for drip
system, storage pond and infrastructure). In addition the average cost per acre
of $80k is not a feasible alternative. An interesting observation is the
astronomical increase in land costs since 1996 (Exhibit P- Triangle
Environmental Report). Land cost per acre at that reporting time was $101000.
On today's market in the Highway 150 area, using the cost per acre as $80,000,
the estimated cost in today's dollars $6,880,000.00. It is apparent that land cost
make drip irrigation unfeasible.
2.2.6 Spray Irrigation
Land mass is not available at a reasonable cost. Since spray irrigation requires
approximately the same requirement in acreage as drip irrigation, the same logic
can be applied as described in section 2.2.5 regarding today's high cost market
( Exhibit O).
2.2.7 Other Possible Combinations
There are no combinations which meet requirements.
3.0 Conclusion — Comparison of Alternatives
With the cost of land increasing along the Highway 150 corridor, the
inflation of land costs also inflates property tax. This translates into
additional taxation for those properties annexed to the City of
Mooresville's utility extension policy. It is important to remember that
City services, such as water and sewer, are receipt supported, but they
also are tax base supported. These are hidden costs, nevertheless, they
are real costs. Knowing these facts, if residents from Doolie Road to
the Catawba River were given the opportunity to annex to the City in
order to receive water and sewer services ---- my best guess would be
that the "opportunity" would be met with opposition.
Additionally, there are two schools currently under construction within a
1-mile radius of the permitted area. Prices of land have increased, but
development has not decreased. The addition of the schools will bring
residential development that is a part of the overall growth explosion in
the area. Due to the continueing escalating price of land in the area, the
only economically feasible alternative is a surface water discharge

z
system. Given the current development in the area the 0.3 MGD flow
rate is more than justified and needed to make this facility a viable
facility for the purchaser of the Highway 150 WWTP. Through the sale
of the facility Mid South Utilities will no longer be in wastewater
business.
There are no reuse opportunities in the area and due the variability of
the soils and the topographic relief subsurface disposal is not feasible.
Additionally, the cost of land in this area makes this alternative
unfeasible.
More importantly, we cannot overlook the need to protect our
groundwater and surface waters from leaking septic systems. It is
noteworthy to remember that individual septic system are not inspected
on a regular basis.
After evaluating all the alternatives, the projected flows, and
environmental impacts of the different alternatives the renewal of the
NPDES permit at 300,000 gpd is the most feasible alternative.

• � 1
11
r �•v
Les
Land Planning, Urban Design, Civil Engineering, Landscape Architecture
February 21, 2000
Mr. William Allison, Planning Supervisor
Iredell County Planning Department
227 South Center Street
Statesville NC 28677
Dear William:
EXHIBIT B
RE: NC 150 Treatment Plant
NPDES NCO074900
Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
P.N. 1087036
In response to your request for confirmation as to the conformance of our design of the NC 150
Treatment Plant for Mid South Water Systems, Inc., I am providing this Ietter of explanation, which
responds in corresponding order to the paragraphs in Section 14-29 of the Iredell County Code.
a.
(I)
There are no components of the NC 150 system within a 100 year flood plain area nor
located on unsuitable soils. Land was not available within the River Park
Subdivision, thus the plant is located on a separate parcel owned by Mid South,
located off NC 150 and Quiet Cove Road.
(2)
The size of the parcel provided sufficient area to locate the treatment plant, a new
water well and elevated water storage tank, and provide the minimum buffers
required by the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR).
The existing vegetation on the site was preserved around the perimeter to the
maximum extent practicable and additional plantings provided.
(3)
As the plant is located on a separate parcel, not within the River Park Subdivision, it
is my understanding that this paragraph does not apply.
(4)
The plant site, though accessible from a State maintained roadway, is not visible from
the roadway, and is fenced and locked to provide security, and prevent access by the
general public.
5)
The plant site location is unique in that it is situated at a prominent elevation in the
.area, which accommodates the elevated tank, but requires both pumping to the plant
and effluent pumping to the point of discharge. River Park Subdivision, the only
development currently permitted for service by the plant, is connected via a pump
station in the subdivision and force main to the plant. This circumstance would
therefore permit a connection to a public system, if available, via the pump station
through retrofit of the pumps and new force main to the point of connection. Any
future area or development served by this plant would likewise require a pumping
system, and could also be designed to allow future connection to a public system.
G:%57038ido =WMson.doGUi1?I j=
1700 East Boulevard 1208 Eastchester Dr, Suite 200 38 Garfield Street, Suite C 135 Second Avenue N, Suite 201
Charlotte, NC 28203-5824 High Point, NC 27265-3165 Asheville, NC 28803-2327 Franklin, TN 37064-2511
704.376.7777
704.376.8235 FAX
336.885.5785 828281.1447 615.591.7164
336.885.5784 FAX [phone] FAX [phone] FAX

Mr. William Allison 1087036
'• . February 2I, 2000
Page Two
M
31
(6) The plant is designed with a final treated effluent pump tank, which serves as a
convenient location for sampling prior to pumping to the point of discharge.
Sampling could also be accomplished at the outlet of the disinfection tank.
(1) Standby generators have been provided both at the River Park pump station and at the
treatment plant. The approved plans also require audible and visual alarms at both
locations, and a telephone dialer to alert the operators of alarm conditions at either
Iocation.
(2) Properly maintained, the main treatment plant components should have a minimum
20 year life expectancy, though replacement of some mechanical components
(pumps, blowers, etc.) will be required as part of normal operation and maintenance.
The plant manufacturer has provided both shop drawings for plant manufacture and
an operation and maintenance manual, which includes a list of recommended spare
parts and O & M instructions. We have requested a list of likely major repairs, and
will forward it to you as soon as received.
(3) The plant has been designed in accordance with the requirements of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) and has been constructed under the
authority of the Authorization To Construct issued by this agency (copy enclosed).
AIthough the plant construction is essentially complete, due to the issue of the FERC permit, we are
withholding our final certification of completion for the entire plant. However, we have certified the
River Park pump station and force main, and the use of the flow equalization tank and associated
aeration equipment at the plant in support of an Application for a Pump and Haul permit to allow
service to the River Park Apartments, until the FERC issue is resolved. A copy of correspondence to
Rex Gleason is enclosed in regard to this application. A copy of my certification is also enclosed.
Please note that based upon the capacity of the flow equalization tank (25,000 gallons) the pump and
haul permit requests approval of a volume of 21,600 gpd equivalent to 60 apartment units at 360 gpd
per unit (Form: PHDS 4/91, Page 2 of 6).
I trust this information adequately responds to your request. If you have questions or if you find that
additional., nformation is required, please let me know.
Very 4ufy
C. to .
LAMDESI , INC.
DCSfj
Enclosure
Cc: Carroll Weber, Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
Rex Gleason, NCDWQ, Mooresville
G:1870361docslallison.doc1fj102121100

Op
ower.
j A nvk E—V G-r-y
uuKe ruwec
526 South Church Scrcct
P.O. Box 1006
Charlottc, NC 28201-1006
February 1, 2000
The Honorable David P. Boergers
Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20246
EXHIBIT C
Re: Response To Letter On Application For Discharge (Mid South Water
Systems, Inc.) On Lake Norman, Catawba-Wateree Project No. 2232-
402&403
Dear Secretary Boergers:
This letter is in response to the letter of January 14, 2000 from the Chief, Environmental
Compliance Branch, notifying Duke Power the letter it filed with the Commission on December
6, 1999, wherein Duke Power notified the Commission of its proposal to authorize Mid South
"Mid South" to operate a wastewater discharge line into Lake Norman, had been accepted as an
application for the intended discharge. The Commission initially received two letters regarding
the application and therefore has requested Duke Power to respond to allegations and issues
presented in those letters, one filed by the Lake Norman Keepers Chair of the NPDES permit
review committee and the other by Francis and Paula Martin. The Commission, in its January 14"'
letter, also requested a current Sec. 404 Clean Water Act Permit or documentation from the Corps
of Engineers (COE) that the permit in the Mid South application remains valid. In addition the
Commission identified two specific concerns raised in these letters: 1) The potential cumulative
effects on the Catawba-Wateree Project's environmental resources resulting from the proposed
discharge combined with other such discharges in the immediate vicinity and; 2) the allegedly
poor environmental compliance record of Mid South in operating its other wastewater plants at
the project. The Commission has since received letters in support of the Lake Norman Keeper's
initial letter and an addendum to the Lake Norman Keeper's initial letter dated January 10, 2000.
BACKGROUND
Mid South filed an application with Duke Power for a proposed treated wastewater effluent
discharge Iine (discharge line) on Lake Norman on September 5, 1997. Mid South continued to
amend the application until Duke Power accepted a final application on January 14, 1999.
Amendments to the initial application included a letter of authorization from the Corps of
Engineers (08/06/97); an Iredell County Inspection Building Department Permit (08/24/98); a
N.C. Department of Transportation Right -of -Way Encroachment Agreement and letter
(12/15/98); a letter from Mid South to the Iredell County Health Department (01/12/99); and a
letter from Mid South to Duke Power responding to a previous information request and a request
for reactivation of the application review (1/14/99).
Unfortunately, due to an'oversight on the part of Duke Power, it did not notify the Commission so
as to begin the 45-day notice on the Mid South proposal until after Mid South contacted Duke
Power, in October of 1999 regarding installation and use of the discharge line. Construction of
VaIVA419ALUP ConveyaneeNormtn%MidSouthKeepResp.doe

The following agencies reviewed the application and either issued permits or provided
comments regarding the proposal:
1. NCDENR-Div. of Water Quality issued NPDES permit # NCO074900
2. Iredell County Health Dept. required monthly monitoring and compliance
with Chapter 14 Wastewater of Iredell County Code
3. NC Dept. of Cultural Resources -Div. of Archives and History reviewed the
project and were aware of no properties of architectural, historic, or
archeological significance which would be affected
4. NCDENR-Natural Heritage Program review found no potential impacts to
sites under the program nor federal or state listed species
5. NCWRC no objection provided US Army COE are contacted to determine if
Sec. 404 permit is required
6. NCDENR-Div. Envir. Health- Public Water Supply Section no objection
provided facility is operated properly
7. Lake Norman Marine Commission minutes state that a motion to approve
was made and seconded, and the entire Commission approved
8. USFWS commented that the project may impact fish and wildlife but elected
not to conduct a field inspection, response should not be considered a "no
objection" report
9. US Army COE approved project under Nationwide Permit No. 12
10. Iredell County Department of Planning and Enforcement issued building
permit # 76297
11. NCDOT entered into a Right -of -Way Encroachment Agreement for NC 150-
SR 1168
Mid South provided letters dated July 17, 1997 and January 14, 1999 to Duke Power'as part of
the application agreeing to comply with all recommendations, requirements and/or conditions,
and providing additional information, respectively.
The conveyance between Duke Power and Mid South will ensure that Mid South shall comply
with all applicable Federal, State and Local laws, as well as all rules, regulations and sanctions of
any regulatory body or agency having jurisdiction in the premises. Additionally, Mid South shall
take all necessary precautions during operation and maintenance of the effluent discharge line to
protect and enhance the scenic, recreational and environmental values of the affected Project
lands and waters. The conveyance will also include terms and conditions that assure the effluent
discharge line is maintained in good repair, and is removed and the area restored upon
discontinuation of use.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Duke Power is concerned with comments made by the Lake Norman Keeper as to Duke Power
and Crescent Resources, Inc. Unfortunately, the Lake Norman Keepers would like the
Commission and others to believe that Duke Power and Crescent Resources, Inc. are the only
ones responsible or have any control over the amount of development that takes place not only
within the project boundary but also within the region. The whole piedmont region is
experiencing continued growth and this certainly includes many of the Catawba-Wateree lakes
gpa1ljsh41911LUP CanvcysnccNOnn&n\MidSouthKeepResp.doe

If Commission Staff have any questions, please contact me at [phone]. Your prompt
attention to this matter is of utmost importance and is most appreciated.
Sincerely,
George A. Galleher, P.E.
Manager, Lake Management
Environmental Engineering
Duke Power, Group Environment, Health and Safety
Enclosures
cc w/attach: Victoria Taylor,
Donna Lisenby,
Mark Lancaster,
Chris i J. Juvier, Esq.,
--,Carroll Weber,
Charlie Hughes,
Brian Romanek,
cc w/out attach: Michael Jones,
Charles R. St. Clair,
Paula G. Martin,
Celeste I. Renaldo,
M. Jean Lyons,
Jane and Homer Townsend,
Linda C. Stuart,
Linda Hickle,
Michael G. Lind,
Lois D. Buenau,
Jay and Selah Bunzey,
Lake Norman Keeper
Riverkeeper
Lake Norman Marine Commission
Duke Power
Mid South Utilities, Inc.
Hughes Consulting
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Lake Norman Keeper
Lake Norman Keeper
Lake Norman Keeper
Lake Norman Keepers
Lake Norman Keeper
Lake Norman Keeper
Mike Lind Building Contractors, Inc.
Lake Norman Keeper
Lake Norman Keepers
gpz1\jsh4191%LUP ConveyusceNormsalMidSoathKarR sp.doe
8

hi✓ 1 ' :: CAM LA,i:D [ t� i ail tPi'a .
EXHIBIT D
109 036
I. Dale C, Stev -art, a duly .r4stered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina, have
personally or tl: rougb authorized inspectors under my employ, periodically observed the construction
of a 0.10 MGM - Wastewater TreaMment Facility consisting of a flow equalization charnber, dual
507000 gpd tra ns each consiv ing of an aeration basin and rectangular claxifier, aerated sludge
holding, a dual ;ell tertiary filter, post aeration, chlorination and dechlorination with final discliarge
of treated wart► water into the Catawba River, all located in hredell County, North Carolina. This
certification, is in accordance with the requirements of the Authorization To Consbud, dated
November 24, 997.
I state, in my p -ofessionaI judgment that the construction of the Wastewater Treatment Facilities
were observed - a be constructed within substantial compliance and intent ofthe approved plans and
specifications E 3 reflected on the attached as -built plans.
This statenient s a declaration ofprofessional judgment as to the construction of these facilities. It
does not consti- ute a lxanzattty, or guarantee, expressed or implied, nor does it relieve the Owner or
any other party of his responsibility to abide by contract documents, applicable codes, standards,
rcgulafions, orc inances, or other permits or procedures applicable to this facility.
r
Dale
North Ca . ina Professional Engineer Number 6988
Date: April S, 2 NO
G`�'.hlisW�sttlu'Cf�.�xt+oe� �.Qoc
LAteel "ON. WC

LanbDesi
April 6.2000
Inge
Land PfaronAg Urban Design Civil Engineering Landscape Amhltecture
,Mr. David A. C, odrich, Supervisor
NCDENR - NPI ,ES Discharge Section
1617 MSC (276• 19-.1617)
512 North Salisl ury Street
Raleigh NC 276 ! 1
RE: Wastewater Treatment Facility Final Certification
NC 150- lredell Countti
NPDES Permit NCO074900
P.N. 108?036
Dear Mr. Goodr -h:
On Febatary 17 '2000, 1 provided to the Mooresville Regional Oft -ice a Partral Certification of the Mid
South NC 150 N rastewater Treatment Plant in support of an application for a temporary pump and haul
PerMit. The pL Tose of that certification was to allow utiliZation of the #fox equalization tank as a
holding tank zo, the purposes of the pump and haul operation. Even though the plant was essentially
complete xt the ittta of the Partial Certification. I withheld Final Certification pending resolution of the
fERC permit fog the effluent discharge line to the Catawba River.
The FERC issue 1 that perrnit on March 285 2000 (copy attached).
.A,ldhougb I am iI receipt of'a letter from Ms. Donna Lisenby, The Catawba River eeperl), requesting an
administrative h raring regarding the NPDES Permit (NC0074900) for this facility, to the best of my
knowledge and ielizf, the facilities have been constructed in accordance with the Authorization To
Construct (ATq , dated November 2,d, 1997 (copy attached). Our responsibilitY for this project related to
design and consi -action observation of the proposed plant and effluent )ine, as described in the ATC. In
our opinion the I esFonsibility related to addressing the issues raised in .Ms.
NPDES permit r -st with the North Carolina Department Environment and Natural Resoetter regarding the
urces, as we were
not involved wii 1 the application process related to that permit. Whatever the outcome of that process
and inearits of th, complaint filed by Ms. Lisenby, we have documented the constructiott of the merit aztd .
facilities, and tb : decision to allow full operation and discharge now rests with the Division of Water
Quality.
e'er
ale C.
L:0DD
DC3)
Feclw�sdi)
Cc:
i ave anv u tions, please advise. A set of final as-builts is also enclosed. — - - -
J N, Z: iC. - -
Art. Clonal Wo •t
45i40ii'darsspo�dtfCheat►i1iR 30
1700 East Blvd, Charlotte, NC 282031 Phone: [phone]; Fax: 704.378.a23$
Othe ofrlces: Alexandria, VA Southern Pines. NC Franklin, TN High Point, NC Asher.,111e, NC

w
� a'�' I UUIIiISENGI11tEERS I TOWN OF MOORESVIU.E I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 1998

FU
TCWM OF
MOORESVILLE
PUNNING &
ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT
Mr. Charles H. Hughes, Utility Consultant
111 Oak Lane
Sneads Ferry, North Carolina 28460
Re: MidSouth Wastewater Service
Town of Mooresville Urban Growth Boundary
Dear Mr. Hughes:
H. Carson Fisher. P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Mooresville
413 N. Main Street
P. 0. Box 878
Mooresville, NC 28115
Telephone No. 704/662-
8472
Fax No. 704-662-7039
September 15, 2000
As we have discussed, the Mooresville Town Board approved the attached Urban
Growth Boundary in December, 1998. This boundary defines the area the Board has said
that they are interested in serving with water and sewer. That area extends just to the west
of Doolie and Perth Roads. Without a formal request to provide service outside that area
and the Town Board revising the Urban Growth Boundary, i do not feel that the Board is
interested in serving any area beyond this western boundary line at this time.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 704/662-8472.
Sincerely,
H. Carson Fisher, PE
Town Engineer
Cc: Mr. Richard Q McLean, Town Manager
Mr. Erskine Smith, Planning Director

I
•" �c i 4J t'1 I D SOUTH P . 03
- - • ` r UK'IV Ur
PAGE 02
Ta
ooresilly EPNONC
�70a' 683.3e00
n Of Y
NORTH C A R O L I N A PC)ST OCCICE BOX 978
MOORESV;LLC. NORTH CAAOWNA 2g i 19
,
July 120 1996
NO Soutb Water Systen2s, Inc.
P•. Box 127
Sherrilis Ford, North Carolina 28673
Mtn: Mr. Kim Colson, P.E.
Re: Sewn Availability
NC 150 west Area
Dr,Ar Mr. Colson:
In reJpoasn to your letter dated Jay 2, 1996 co We.'t area, it is MY opinion that the Town ncerning Sewer availability in the NC I So
of Mooresville has no immediate -or mid-term plans
p�rovido sower service to the area indl
Fequest that would be mutually beneficial
up on your rna" •
Y I p' Obwous�', if the Town receiveto
Up to the Town Board to decldo if that to the Town ajnd•the Interested $
riot now have An lens service is sornothsn th P� then it would be
Y P to st,,, NC 1 SO West w 8 eY Wanted to pursue. But, we do
future, wYth sewer service any time in the immediate
Should you have any questions, do not hesitate
to s'.ontarrt me At 704/562_84720
cc: Mr. Rick McLean, Town Manager
Mr. Joe DeBruhI, P.E.a WUlis Engineers
Mr. Glenn Shuler, Utilities Direct
Sincerely,
1 .
H. Carson Fisher, RE,
Town Engineer

T UE 1 3= -4.3 f7 I U SOUTH
IREDELL COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ENFORCEMENT
PO BOX 788 227 SOUTH CENTER ST.
STATESViLLE, NC 28687
LYNN S. NIBLOCK, DIRECTOR
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Y.. duly .i3,1996
Mr. Kira ff. Colson, P.E.
Mid South Water Systems Inc.
PO Box 127
Sberrills Ford, NC 28673
Re: Response to your letter dated 7-2-96 to Mr. Joel Mashburn, County Manager
concerning the availability if a sewer along Hwy.150 West.
'Dear Mr. Colson:
Ism writing you at Mr. Mashburns request in response to your letter. Iredell County does
Taut have any sewer system in any part of the County, including the area in question on
Hwy. ISO W from the Doolie Community to the Catawba River Bridge. Prior to our office
issuing a building permit we must have verification that there is either an approved sewer
system or that the lot is suitable for a septic tank system. I hope this addresses your
question. Please let me know if I can be of Additional assistance.
Sincerely;
Ilynn S.,
Niblock
Vire'ctor of.Planning & Enforcement
cr: Mr. Joel Mashburn

IREDELL COUNTY
Office of the County Manager
200 South Center Street • P.O. Box 788
Stalesville, NC 28687 9 [phone]
Fax: [phone]
June 11 1994
Mr. B.K. Barringer, Jr., P.E.
B.K. Barringer & Associates, P.A.
104 Westfield Center
Mooresville, NC 28115
RE: NPDES Discharge Permit No. NCO074900
McCrary Creek Area of Lake Norman Near SR 1221
Dear Mr. Barringer:
The purpose of this letter is to advise that Iredell County does
not have plans to provide sewer service in the area of SR 1197 (Oak
Tree Road) off Brawley School Road. In addition, we do not
anticipate any future plans for sewer from the County in this area.
Shculd additional information be desired, please advise.
Sincerely,
IREDELL COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE
Joel Mashburn
County Manager
MS 0345

�:. � 1 a i:LL.d•�
Y
r To�n o 7Hoores*lle
NORTH CAROLINA
1
lunc 2, 1994
DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES
TELEPHONE [phone]
—tY---
POST OFFICE SOX 878
MOORESVILLE. NORTH CAROLINA 2e 1 15 ,
B. K. Barringer & Associates, P.A.
104 Westfield Center
Mooresville, NC 28115-8812
RE: Utilities to McCrary Creek Area of Lake Norman
Dear Mr. Barringer:
The Town ofMooresville does not have plans of extending any utilities to the McCrary Creek
area oi` Lake Norman near SR 1197 (Oak Tree Road) off Braw(ey School Road in Iredeil County.
This area is not included in the 25 year projection plan for the Town. Should you have an further questions or concerns, please contact me at 664-3705. Y
Sincerely,
op
Glenn A. Shuler
nir of Utilities
cc: Rick McLean
J
MS 0343

UTILITY EXTENSION POLICY
TOWN OF MOORESVILLE
4
i
�. INTRODUCTION.
1.01. PURPOSE.
The Utility Extension Policy is intended to define how extensions of the Town utility
systems will be made. The Policy establishes procedures for installing new services and the
financial obligations thereto.
1.02. OBJECTIVES.
The Town's primary objective is to provide reliable and affordable utility service to its
existing customers. New customers to the system are therefore expected to share in a
majority of the expense for their new services. The specific objectives of this Policy are to:
1. Define how requests for new service shall be submitted to the Town.
2.. Define the facilities necessary to provide new services.
3. Define the construction responsibilities for these new facilities.
4. Define the financial responsibilities for these new facilities.
5. Establish funding mechanisms for private contributions to publicly funded
utility extensions.
1.03. DEFINITIONS.
Urban Growth Areas — the areas around Mooresville considered by the Town
to be viable candidates for incorporation into the Town. The areas are
bounded by the Urban Growth Boundary, as established by the Town
Board, and are reflected in the Town's various Capital Improvement
Plans.
Major Facilities — facilities defined by the Town of Mooresville Water and
Wastewater Plan. Major water facilities generally consist of the treatment
works, storage facilities, pumping facilities and water transmission lines
12 inches in diameter and larger. Major wastewater facilities generally
consist of the treatment works, pumping facilities with capacity in excess
of 700 gallons per minute and sewers 12 inches in diameter and larger.
Minor Facilities — facilities to provide local service, which are not defined by
the Town of Mooresville Water and Wastewater Plan.
Town of Mooresville 1 Utility Extension Policy

z
Service Connection -- lines and appurtenances connecting a new customer to
r
the Town system at the point of sale.
Tap Fee — a fee paid by all new customers to defray, in part, the cost of the
service connection and meter.
Availability Fee -- a fee paid by all new customers to defray, in part, the cost
of the existing major facilities through which service will be provided.
System Development Charge, -- a fee paid by all new customers outside the
Town limits to defray, in part, the cost of extending the major facilities to
new service areas.
2. APPLICATION.
2.01. PETITION.
Any interested party may request water and/or sewer service from the Town. If the
service is to be provided within the corporate limits and adequate public water and sewer
mains are available adjacent to the property, service will be provided upon payment of the
applicable fees. If the service is to be provided outside the corporate limits or requires
extension of a service main, a formal petition for service shall be submitted to the Town
Board for consideration.
All petitioners requesting water service shall, at the request of the Town, file a petition for
annexation to the Town. The Town will generally consider annexation and extension of
utilities to areas within the Urban Growth Boundary. Failure to file a petition for voluntary
annexation or satellite annexation on notice from the Town shall result in immediate
termination of water service.
2.02. TOWN RESPONSE.
Upon receipt of a petition to extend a water and/or sewer main, the Town Board has
the following five options for response:
1. Install the extension at the Town's expense.
2. Approve and allow the petitioner to install the extension at his expense.
3. Install the extension at the petitioner's expense.
4. Install and jointly finance the extension in cooperation with the petitioner.
5. Jointly finance and install the extension in cooperation with the County in
accordance with the intergovernmental agreement.
6. Deny the request.
Town of Mooresville 2 Utility Extension Policy

The criteria under which an option will be chosen are generally defined herein;
• however, the Town Board may act according to any aforementioned option, which it feels is
in the best interest of the Town.
The Town Board may also extend water and/or sanitary sewer mains on their own
volition without receipt of a petition and assess the cost or collect utility fees as described
herein, from those who connect to the main.
3. CONSTRUCTION
3.01. SERVICE CONNECTIONS
New service connections to existing mains will generally be installed by the Town
and paid for by the new customer. Where new service connections are to be installed in
conjunction with extension of water and sewer lines, the customer may, at the Town's
discretion, install service connections.
No new service shall be commissioned until construction and testing are completed,
all applicable fees have been paid and the Town has commissioned the facilities for public
use.
3.02. MINOR FACILITIES
All extensions to Town utilities shall be made in accordance with Town standards
and applicable State and Federal regulations.
Where extension of utilities is funded entirely or partly by the Town, the Town shall
design and construct the facilities. Extensions funded entirely by the petitioner may, at the
Town's discretion, be designed and constructed by the petitioner in accordance with Town
standards.
Extensions utilizing Town funds shall generally be Town projects. The petitioner
shall make a non-refundable deposit of twenty percent of the estimated project cost prior to
the Town undertaking design. Prior to construction the petitioner shall pay the balance of
the project cost or the petitioners share of the cost.
Privately funded extension projects constructed by the petitioner shall be reviewed
and approved by the Town prior to the petitioner submitting the plans to any other review
agency. Upon approval of the plans the Town will issue written notification to the petitioner
who shall then secure all addition approvals and construct the facilities. The petitioner shall
commence construction within 18 months of the approval and complete the installation and
make service connections within 36 months. Failure. to comply with the approved plan or
time schedule will automatically terminate the approval for service.
Town of Mooresville 3 Utility Extension Policy

3.03. MAJOR FACILITIES
Major facilities shall be funded, designed and constructed by the Town. These
facilities, as established by the Water and Wastewater Plan, shall be constructed in order of
priority as adopted in the Town's Capital Improvement Plans. Projects will only be
undertaken as adequate capital improvement funds are available. Projects to improve
existing services will generally be funded by Availability Fees and sales revenues. Projects
to extend the major facilities will generally be funded by System Development Charges and
private contributions.
Petitioners wishing to expedite a major utility extension project may be asked by the
Town Board to prepay System Development Charges, make a contribution to the project
cost or both such that accelerating the project does not adversely impact existing customers
or the orderly expansion of the utility system.
4. FEES AND CHARGES.
4.02. TAP FEES.
Tap Fees will be collected from each new customer prior to initiating service. The
Fees are established by the Town to reflect the average cost to the Town for installation of
taps and meters. Where new service connections are installed as part of a new
development, the fee reflects the cost of meter installation only. The schedule of required
fees, attached as Schedule A, shall be periodically revised to reflect changes in the Town's
actual cost.
Payment of the Tap Fees shall be made prior to installation of any meter or
commissioning any new service connection.
4.02. AVAILABILITY FEES.
Availability Fees will be collected from each new customer prior to initiating service.
The Fees are established to defray, in part, the cost of the existing major facilities. These
facilities include the treatment works and major facilities to which new service extensions
would connect. The Availability Fee may also include funds for capital. reserves for the
expansion or replacement of these facilities. The schedule of required fees, attached as .
Schedule B, shall be periodically revised to reflect changes in facility needs and associated
costs.
Where the Town Board has extended the Town Limits pursuant to statutory
involuntary annexation and water and/or sewer lines are extended to or through the newly
annexed area to comply with statutory requirements relating to the annexation; property
owners may be required to pay a special assessment, tap fees, and utility availability fee.
However, the utility availability fee is subject to a credit in the amount of the. special
Town of Mooresville
4 Utility Extension Policy

assessment, up to the amount of the utility availability fee.
Payment of the Availability Fees shall be made prior to installation of any meter or
commissioning any new service connection.
4.03. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE.
System Development Charges will be collected from each new customer outside the
Town Limits as of the adoption of this Policy. System Development Charges will be
collected prior to initiating service. The Fees are established to defray, in part, the cost of
extending the Major Facilities to serve new areas within the Urban Growth Boundary. These
facilities include the major facilities as described by the Water and Wastewater Plan and the
Capital Improvement Plans.
The System Development Charge is based on each customer's pro -rats share of the
cost of major facilities needed to extend service throughout the Urban Growth Area. The
schedule of charges is included in the attached Schedule B and shall be periodically revised
to reflect changes in facility needs and associated costs.
5. ADOPTION
Adopted by the Board of Commissioners on the 71h day of December, 1998. .
Town of Mooresville
5 Utility Extension Policy

Town of Mooresville Tap Fees
c
Meter Meter Equivalent Town Installed Customer Installed
Size Capacity Residential
(inches) (Qom) Units Water Wastewater Total Water MAtAr r)niv
5/8 x 3/4
20
1.0
$400
$400
$800
$75
3/4
30
1.5
450
400
850
100
1
50
2.5
500
400
900
125
For water meter sizes larger than 1 inch and sewer laterals larger than 4 inches,
the Tap Fee shall be based on the actual cost of installation by the Town.
Effective Dec 7, 1998 Schedule A

Town of Mooresville
Meter
Size
Inches
Meter Equivalent Availability Fee
Capacity Residential
m Units Water Wastewater Total
5/8 x 3/4
20
1.0
3/4
30
1.5
1
50
2.5
1-1/2
100
5.0
2
160
8.0
3
320
16.0
4
500
25.0
. 6
11000
50.0
8
1,600
80.0
10
2,300
115.0
12
3,100
155.0
For meter sizes larger than
12 inches, tr
Safe Maximum Operating Capacity frorr
by 20 gallons
per minute.
$631
$677
$1,308
947
1,016
1,962
1,578
1,693
3,270
3,155
3,385
6,540
5,048
5,416
10,464
10,096
10,832
20,928
15,775
16,925 -
32,700
31,550
331850
65,400
50,480
54,160
104,640
72,565
77,855
150,420
97,805
104,935
202,740
A � N b� �C� �
A ��
ie charge shall be based on the ratio of t
i AWWA Standards for that meter size di
L1
Availability Fees and
System Development Charges
J/
System Development Charge Total
Combined
Water Wastewater Total Fees
$1,216
$1,706
1,824
2,559
3,040
4,265
6,080
8,530
9,728
13,648
19,456
27,296
30,400
42,650
60,800
85,300
97,280
136,480
139.840
-196,190
188.480
264,430
he
vided
$2,922
4,383
7,305
14,610
23,376
46,752
73,050
146,100
233,760
336,030
452,910
$4,230
6,345
10,575
21,150
33,840
67,680
105,750
211.500
338,400
486,450
655,650
Effective Dec 7, 1998 Prhorli ilo R

r
' `B. K. BARRINGER & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Professional Engineer
` 104 Westfield Center NC 150 and US 21 Designer/Planner
MOORESVILLE: NORTH CAROLINA 28115-8812
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
EXHIBIT F
June 6, 1994
Mr. David A. Goodrich
N.C.D.E.H. & N.R., DEM
Permit & Engineering Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
RE: Knotts Landing Subdivision
NPDES Permit No. NC 0074900
Iredell County, NC -
Return # 634
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
I have spoken with Charles Alvarez concerning the Owner's desire to renew and keep this
discharge permit in force. Mr. Alvarez advised this package should be returned to you for
permit renewal. It is the Owner's intent that this permit will be used in the near future.
Attached is Short Form D along with a check in the amount of $200 permit renewal fee.
Engineering Evaluation Narrative: An extended aeration WWTP with sand filter tertiary
treatment, chlorination and dechlorination are proposed to treat the waste for this system.
After exploration of other alternatives for waste disposal, this system is considered the most
feasible, most economical and best suited to address required needs due to other conditions
beyond the control of the Owners. This system is to serve a proposed 100-lot residential
subdivision.
Individual septic systems. Attached is a map marked by soil scientist_ Dennis Osborne
along with a narrative stating his opinion that individual septic systems will not work on
this property.
Community drip irrigation, community spray irrigation or community septic systems have
been considered, however, due to limited available area and provisionally suitable soils,
these systems will not adequately address the demands.
A citizens group (POSSE) recently opposed a Crescent Resources plan for spray irrigation
on property which is contiguous to this property. We, therefore, believe the political
climate -is such that spray irrigation is not a consideration. _
The availability of public utilities has been explored. Attached is a letter from the
County Manager indicating that Iredell County has no plans to provide sewer to the area.
Also attached is a letter from the Town of Mooresville, Director of Utilities, stating that
the Town has no plan to provide utilities to this area.
To be in compliance with Section 29.GS.143-215.1, all sources of discharge within the system
will include water conservation fixtures. Owner shall be made aware of conservative water
usage habits.

It is requested that this discharge permit be renewed. If you have any questions, please advise.
Yours truly,
B. K. BARRINGER & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
. K. Barringer, Jr., P.E.
N. C. Registration No. 3370
BKB/ceb
cc Rex Gleason - N.C.D.E.H. & N.R. - Mooresville, NC
Tom Scott - B. V. Belk Investments
Carroll Weber - Mid -South Utilities, Inc.
Attachments:
Short Form D
$200 Permit Renewal Fee
Letter from Town of Mooresville
Letter from Iredell County
USGS Map showing discharge point & location of subdivision
Soils Map of subdivision
Soil Scientist Report

EXHIBIT G
SOIL SCIENCE SERVICES, INC.
P. O. BOX 5064
RALEIGH, NC 27650
[phone]
May 20, 1994
Mr. Tom Scott
B. B. Belk Investments
4400 Park Road, Suite 300
Charlotte, NC 28209
Mr. Dick Brolin
B. K. Barringer & Associates, P.A.
104 Westfield Center
Mooresville, NC 28115
Reference: Soil Evaluation, Morrison Farm Property, Iredell County
Gentlemen:
The purpose of this letter is to serve as a Summary Report of the Soil Survey and site
evaluation conducted on the above -referenced tract May 15 and 16, 1994. The purpose of
the work was to establish a general framework for estimating lot yield as a function of
amount of DHS-permittable individual on -site waste water treatment and disposal systems.
Methods
In advance of the work, marked copies of the relevant portions of the USDA-SCS
"Soil Survey of Iredell County, N.C., " a USGS topographic map, and a proposed lot layout
on a topographic base were furnished by Mr. Brolin. These documents showed the site (of
about 75 acres) intended for review. These documents were used as a beginning for library
research of the area and for research into local set backs, zoning rules, and DHS custom.
Andrea Leman of the local Health Department was contacted and asked to meet at the
site during the work. Developers furnished a backhoe and operator. These last two were
used to dig pits for soil evaluations at locations specified by us or by Mrs. Leman.
Backhoe pits were excavated on each landform on the site: ridgecrest, sideslope,
toeslope, noseslope, headslope and drainageway. These were dug in traverse to obtain both
east and west aspect evaluations. All pits and hand auger borings were evaluated according
to Section .1900, 15A NCAC ("The Laws and Rules for Sewage Treatment and Disposal
Systems"). Hand auger borings were advanced on the mornings of May 15, in advance of
backhoe work, and on May 16, after backhoe work, to help classify soils to Series Level in

Soil Evaluation
Iredell County
Page 3
May 20, 1994
Recommendations
However,
The work done on this site was not proposed to be on a lot -by -lot basis. Howlevel of
el equipment and time allowed an evaluation that moved more closely to that a of
personnel,
than originally proposed. Because of the,(1) value of the project and (2) imperative study b DHS view in advance of permitting. DHS approval, much effort was spent determining emphasizing the low probability of reversal
this case DHS views coincided closely with ours, emp g
of that opinion.
It is al
ways s possible that consultants can argue over individual lots and perform such
studies that permits can be obtained on several lots, but the directions for our work were to
try to see if the proposal, or close to that proposal, would work.
The conclusion is, it won't. Therefore, it is recommended:
() renegotiation otiation occur with the objective in mind of not buying the eastern third
thus eliminating road or bad soil penalties; shown as proposed lots 55-63 and
(2) consider pumping effluent to the areas now sho p P
53, to service lakefront lots 5-17; and
(3) develop lots 25-48 largely as shown.
It is obvious that much careful thought has gone into the proposed ply Lots 25-28
to lot
generall "work," roads are in excellent locations, and the ratio of road front footageextent of
b Y
square footage is low. However, the published Soil Survey does not indicate the ext d his
q
problem soils, particularly the wet soils. Therefore, on future projects, rt is suggested
extent of wet soil be evaluated early on.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist in this matter. Please call if you have
questions .
Dennis J. Os
CPSS 329
DJO:bfd
Enclosures
, Ph.D.

>r:: v
�jtdJ
�' s,.ik .Y wss��" w;:A,'�'�' ���"c'�Y�U �x�+,�� r'4y.� �✓�J ` ,:_ • �,
1
f r t •t
1 r ? +tx 1n
}
Sixtr. �' t`Y
is
ec ,
oily���1tT
f�yw P�jiJJ.�'••,'.vyRl�fL°�.r�o- � _M
-
f7
. Jk 'lt 'ys`fV� ki4i a s J f+Sf f 2 f 91� 5 r" `
. �r
r `
4 don
)xv
>r t 1i

Or,

m

A. (I). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL
During the period beginning upon the effective date of the Permit No. NCOd74900
Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number pi and lasting until EXPANSION ABOVE 0.100 MGD or expiration, specified below: . Such discharges shall be limited and monitored b the mte the -
Y p rm�ttee as
Flow
BOD, 5-Day, 200C
Total Suspended Residue
NH3 as N
Dissolved Oxygen"
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Oil and Grease
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
0.100
MGD
15.0
mg/I
30.0
mg/I
4.0
mg/l
200 /100 ml
30.0 m g/l
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent.
22.5 m g/I
Continuous
Weekly
Recording
I or E
45.0 mg/I
Weekly
Composite
Composite
E
Weekly
Composite
E
E
400 /100 ml
Weekly
W�sekly
Grab �
Grab
E
28.0 µg/I
2/week
Grab
E
E
60.0 mg/I
Weekly
Grab
E
Weekly
Grab
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not
be less than 5.0 mg/1.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 sta
ndard units and shall be monitored weekly at the effluent b r
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.Y g ab sample.
EXHIBIT I

A. (2). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL
Permit No. NC0074900 _
During the period beginning upon EXPANSION ABOVE 0.100 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Flow
BOD, 5-Day, 200C
Total Suspended Residue
NH3 as N
Dissolved Oxygen"
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Oil and Grease
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
10MIT.-TUT-Im11 Irl i1
Monthly. Avg. Weekly Avg., Dally Max.
0.300 MGD
15.0 mg/l 22.5 mg/I
30.0 mg/l 45.0 mg/I
4.0 mg/I
200 /100 ml 400 /100 ml
28.0 µg/I
30.0 mg/I 60.0 mg/l
i
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent.
Monitoring
Measurement
Requirements
Frequency__
Tyl2e Location*
Sample
Continuous
Recording
I or E
Weekly
Composite
E
Weekly
Composite
E
Weekly
Composite
E
Weekly
Grab
E
Weekly
Grab
E
2/week
Grab
E
Weekly
Grab
E
Weekly
Grab
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
Quarterly
Composite
E
** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/l.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored weekly at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

ft
va
2 zilwomi
_ ,�♦fir' � � \ =� � �� �
min
opt
LN
�1
M

•- � Q � ,o pv O
• C3 o
o -
' D
3 ..
oft
e
o
>! n 40 i
u
IA H
„ JI
167
D
N
N
f M
JI �
In
w it i
J + �
AM
UJ am Sh
am M
r rr M ra
1 r n j
N _L
In
♦ - _16
'
Af V * l r
98
r
" atCF ST.
r w
An v r AM 0
T� m .► >, N e
goo
432
dow
. .. .,
a� =
T
s�o s
i3J. • J
r1N, r T/
12t1 • O
so
m „n rs• O • �
M
+ r .m
a a� oi n
fl P�
LAKE
Jw sas

dr0

EXHIBIT K
River Park
I-77 Exit 36
2.5 miles west on Hwy 150
Approx. Buildable
Lot Zoned Price Acres Square Feet MLS #
1
GB
Reserved for Well
1.11
2
GB
under contract
1.23
3
GB
under contract
1.07
4
GB
$92,430
0.93
5
GB
$132,500
1.07
6
GB
$168,900
1.50
7
GB
$110,900
1.10
8
GB
580,136
0.93
9
GB
S87,250
1.07
10
GB
$75,960
1.23
11
GB
$66,150
0.93
12
GB
$92,291
1.13
13
GB
5100,900
0.95
14
GB
$92,430
0.84
15
GB
under contract
0.94
2l Out Parcels
27,000 923696 1 t, to t o ST-
19, 000
cd,17 O $F
18.000
923722
r71'7 ka S7-
26,500
923724
SF
38,000
923979
1b 34o SL
22,500
923880
cj to'( 5 S�
16,000
923881
L*SSc) 5F
18,644
923992
128oiV c,,G
14,336
923883
tpl(oLk 5F
11,000
923984
vr13�s�
22,000
923885
9ybo sr
21,000
923886
qu Ro 5�= g7
18,000
923987
-194i se -
17,500�
Cpa,F rl�� cy
18 (A)
RO
$595,000
4.03
82,764
923889 ,'35,5w 5'
17 (B)
RO
S250,000
1.46
26,279
923M
21 (C)
RO
$250,000
1.16
25,000
923891 0 1��so SF3�
19 (D)
SC
under contract
2.28
58,750
" 25 �tv3 S��tJ
2C tr- &F)
SC
S495,000
2.72
59,000
923894= a5„3717 S�g`o
22 (G)
SC
5350,MJ
1.23
50,000
923897=
- 23 (H)
SC
51,500,000
10.83
327,153
923898 = ��}u oe• 5� Ow se
Prices are subject to change
Lot size approximate
Revised 5/9/2000

r
EXHIBIT L
Lakeshore Developerit
9 Williamson Road
Mooresville NC 28117
0
September 14, 2000
Mr. Charles Hughes
Hughes Consulting
111 Oak Lane
Snead Ferry, NC 28460
RE: Whippoorwill Woods 11 Subdivision Water & Sewer
Mooresville NC 28117
Dear Mr. Hughes:
Please be advised that I am the developer of the above referenced property.
I currently oven 2- single family and 3 duplexes on this property and they ar6.-Sefvlced oy community
water (well) and septic systerns.
I have approached the Town of Mooresville about providing city water and sewer to my loca►ion.
They have declined at this time to even consider this.
Please let me know what plans you have for providing me this service.
n rely,
.,on Tian, GRI
!Broker

y y,
- ... ter,.-...r..........- ._........... - -w' �ti�y5r��xOM��■N � rs
�1 q r•1 } My r 1� i
y �INOO��r'Y�•N• J A
1 j 33ss
Z 4$�. P
�30 ev
O �
s
4` D�� _ - rORA�.unEN �.. -- - F�E/2
"J -D _ l 1
J �Jtp v�
SJ� CD 13 r1 to •`
O eall-
IS
1- 10 r ss s • `b3 ��3/s
Z.!15.32 Sby �� ) AV 76 Ai
8p-9 � �s
�g/" �� lJ• y �2 p :a. 71 �� o SZ ID
� ,�r � / � f �• �_ r ``-�_''`-. (_ � o tit
,� � •.Pl r�w�+ .s+ le i
Cb
7
3o.oc3 S F s r by 1 30• 5 r Sao Norm, (► AO 03)
,f
(^ ft 0 'L; 5�q~,6 fSo.Gs &R ir.� BY 7�o r+•
1
a 257.37_ c Q \ _._--
`� _-` f3 .ox •y rt �. � /J. !•4Q_4SE. 6e°"e�sy1?.tS. D^fl�
►/ 33 2JE, yp Aj C. 3 '?rE. a> i trot ¢I f49Z of
N _ o
w � h 90
u `~ w W a O i� to \ tQ'� SAyNppyt�a
G�o m �. l
Ica
a N ct)
IjP
04 - A 30,0r7::.f
in�.
O � `tin � � yCi,OCO 5 ! `'� y,� Jv. d •).f. o A °tv
j+44ff7
Pe n
_ _ 3s' aLa� 18�•ao F
` %
ILfJ•4C a E'• ^ ?z sv t� ' a97L', 73.46 z�.ze^ 99 - G4`ii _iS.uo oc�•_'1-oc��_.— ----�_
------- Il y.�� 30 1/ •1.9o•o�C. tl f 3d� 14.1 •03•,7 £- _ o -.. --- _ _� /"--'L n
1 _� _ ---
- -- --- _----ooL_ }„
WHIPPOORWILL WOODS" 11
U • M .

FRI r1 A.; tJi. 7�at'3 r?a 1: pep. 14 2000 39: F1
Mr. Greg $� ra-780 Lancaster
8811vtlle Michigan
septenftr 14, 2000
Mr. Charles Huohes
Hughes GonsuRing
111 Oak Lane
Sneads Ferry, NC 28W
Re: 11 Ac m Dodlie Road at eid of Mooresville NC 28117
Dear Mr. Hughes.
?lease be advised that i am the owner of the above mfemnced parcel' of land.
I am 0 the pmcwss a'f buDding on the Property. t have aporoac hed the Town of moo,.vsv 111e to obtaln
Ay water and sewer and they have dedined at this time.
r an Interad in what can be done to provide me with water and sewer to my trad of Idnd.
Sincsrely,
Grey
I
Sincemly,

U5:10 F&I
(, I (I I) 2 '.M. ,
4285 Paint Korman Drive
9herrills Ford NC 2M73
September' 15. 200Q
Mt. Charles Hughes
Hughes tomAng
111 Oelc Lazne
Sneads Ferry, NO 2""
Re: .97 ACm River Highway
Dear Mr. Hughes,
Plea= be adrimd that 1 aM the o*rw of the above tsfwm:*d pWCGI at tend-
! am lrn the M=w of bulldhV on the ptppetty. 1 trove approadmd tM Tows of Mooresville 10 oWn
city wetef and se%W AM"trove dOdned at dw' dms.
,vt can be done 10 Pwlw rm WOUI VMM, 8ttd ref mY of tend.
I

EXHIBIT M
TOVWN OF
MOORESVILLE
PLANNING &
ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT
Olt 000j?
ar'r
� r
R89100.
Mr. Charles H. Hughes, Utility Consultant
111 Oak Lane
Sneads Ferry, North Carolina 28460
Re: MidSouth Wastewater Alternatives Analysis
Request for Information
H. Carson Fisher, N.tz.
Town Engineer
Town of Mooresville
413 N. Main Street
P. 0. Box 876
Mooresville, NC 28115
Telephone No. 704/662-
8472
Fax No. 704-662.7039
September 15, 2000
Dear Mr. Hughes:
I have not been able to gather the information that you requested for the above -
referenced analysis and I am not sure when I can supply it. I simply don't have the time at
this point to put that info together.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at 7041662-8472.
Sincerely,
1 1
i
H. Carson Fisher, PE
Town Engineer

:.. N•
Owner:
EXHIBIT N
REPAIR OF
GROUND ABSORPTION SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM
FOR BIG DADDY'S OF LAKE NORMAN
NORTH SIDE OF N.C. HWY 150 WEST
IREDELL COUNTY, N.C.
JANUARY 25, 1966
REVISED MAY 81 1989
REVISED MAY 26, 1989
Bryant F. Lancaster
Rt. e, Box 582
Mooresville, N.C. 28115
Prepared By:
B. K. Barringer, Jr., P.E.
N. C. Registration No. 3370
104 Westfield Center
Mooresville, N. C.. 28115
[phone]
V1
ales
�' ••• IASI ••,� '•�
i SEAL
56?0
lop
40
as

• EXHIBIT 0
1,AESHOR
E R EALI'Y, IN U.
September 15, 2000
Hughcs Consulting
111 Oak Lane
Sneads Ferry NC 23460
Re: 1-tighway 150 Corridor Land Values
To Whom It May Concern:
I; is my professional opinion as a real estate broker that large tract land values in Iredell County
removed from I-77 along Hwy 150 near the Peninsula are $80,000 per acre.
Please feel flee to give me a call if I can be of any further assistance.
Jon oriai , G
Owner.113rol, z

' TRIAIIIGLE
ENVIRONMENTAL
INC.
EXHIBIT P
P.O. Box 41087
Raleigh, NC 27629
919-876-51 l5
800-849-5115
FAX [phone]
September 13, 1996
Mr. David A. Goodrich, Supervisor
NPDES Permits Group
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Reference: A�Lltlel,
Response to DEM Review Letter of August 12, 1996
NPDES Permit Application for SGP b S (�
Mid South Water Systems, Inc.; Knotts Landing c7q ° /\J •
Triangle Project No. 628-0119
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
Mid South Water Systems, Inc. is a utility company regulated
P Y g d by the North Carolina
Utility Commission. As such a utility, Mid South's principle business is ser
ving
residents and developers needing water and/or sewer services. Mid -South is f g '
operations of discharging wastewater treatment plants in that the have fiv amiliar with
operators and own/operate 17 permitted dischar in wastewater y e certified
discharging water treatment systems.
On behalf of Mid South Water Systems, Inc., Triangle Environmental Inc.
is
responding to comments received from you dated August 12 1996. W (Triangle)
issues raised by that letter to be: a understand the
1 • The soils evaluation performed in 1994 is not sufficient' '
flow sought to be permitted. in Light of the increase in
2. The flow is considered "new" and thus examination of disposal alternatives must
be satisfied and non -discharge alternatives must be considered
flow before the permit will be modified. for the 0.30 MGD
3. Costs for discharge and non -discharge alternatives must be considered utilizing
appropriate land costs, construction costs, and land irrigation rates. zing
Triangle has considered reasonable scenarios for three non -discharge and dischar e
options and prepared cost estimates for each. To provide data to evaluate coats for the
alternatives, we obtained the soils report for Iredell County, spoke to the sanitarian
gathered information from contractors and suppliers on wastewater treatment plants
(WWTPs), and sought listings from agents for land for sale in the area. In *addition, we
reviewed a report prepared in May 1995 for a tract of land to support a wastewater land
M1DSOU71ASECOND.RSP

Drip Irrigation System
Cost Estimate
Item
Unit Cost
sagmated Cost
Pump station to Drip system
job
$509000
Standby Power for Pump station
job
19,000
Force main to Drip system *1
7,000
LF
6.00
/LF
42,000
Land for Drip system, storage pond & infrastructure
86.0
Ac
10,000 /Ac *2
860,000
On site pump station
job
18,000
Drip system lines *3
3109000
LF
0.30
/ LF
93,000
Ground water monitoring wells
4
ea
2,200
/ea
90000
ra,
wwTP consisting of dual extended air basins, clarifiers, and filters,
300,00o
gal
1.90
gal
capacity
57%000
di9infcction
4169000
Contingency 25 %
Total for Drip Irrigation System $ 2.077,000
' 1 Assumed site is 7000 ft away tract 13, tax map M 2P. This
assumption in no way infers that this tract is suitable or available,
only that is a tract of suitable size & potentially of suitable soils.
- 2 Lots of 20,000 sq ft range up to $12,000 and more. Commercial
Land is selling for over $60,000 per acre. Thus a figure of $10,000
tier acre of raw band is reasonable or conservative.
03 Using 4000 LF per acre similar to the Morrison report

Land Use
1. Drip Irrigation field needed
2. Wet weather detention pond
Irrigation Acreage Sizing
Knotts Landing WWT Mid South Utilities
Assumed calculation Acreage
Needed
Conditions
at 1 inch per acre
per week * 0.3 '.3 MOD X I Ac-wk 7 days X / .02715 MO per acre
MGD
fluctuating depth of
4 to 8 feet for 30 days X 0.3 MOD / 1.3 MO per acre
storage,
gravel, lb ft width,
3. Access roadway and facilities 500 lineal feet
Assume land yield
4. Additional land needed for loss usable acreage) is
due to poor soils, wetlands, buffers 75 % of sum of
etc. items 1,2, & 3
• * 1 Inch onto one acre
27,150 gallons
auow I acre
-( 77.3 + 13.8 + 1.0) / 0.75 -
77.3
1.0
86

Septic Tank Costs
Item
Pump stations to Absorption fields
Residential 1000 gal ST & Field &
land
3000 gal ST & Field
land, assume 3000 sq. ft. ( .07 ac.) for
each 3000 gpd system
30,000 gal Tank, Dosing systems, distribution
lines and pump station
land, assume 1.J ac. for each JU,000
gpd system, plus equal replacement
Contingency 25 %
Total for Septic Tanks
Unit Cost Estimated Cost
4
ea. 21,000
/ea.
$84,000
110
ea. 2,200
/ea.
242,000
25
ea. 18,000
/ea.
450,000
1.8
ac. 15,000
/ac
26,300
4
ea. 60,000
/ea.
240,000
12.0
ac. 15,000
/ac
180,000
305,575
$195289000

ti: N•,Is�Xt,r.�.t„..•�• •r.•.•A--^•-...,.....r...:c1• .mot. .. ..+...:..�...,ct•:a:.tin.Ahi•SS'.'.'.�5t-16 . iic��: f:tiAC'aA;Y+3 i ,�V*:C!1�++/.�' ?P�'GA�r1iRM�:4�!i+ci "► �•'.Bsi:i�4i i.•�'i', "yrF .�+.ACJ!�1'n sv»ij�ri'Wi tX9•- 4.'Qirilt 3,i.W'
,a c•;•..iie J t�yr.,�c •..,. rs±�y• [ .i:-,.. v::.t:h ��� • r -. .
a: =•"�r�-`[-�`i�','•'�r�•}�yN,�l.,'�i•;�.rl !�T!aY�c'' •�• .� � , {j.r• .'�.w�••i. },.� �A�'rilt�'
•((�� .. . f.•� S •i ..f < 7tiw r. i..�a �.. �f ,.. •. M.r M t !: •t '•'• ..i. L., �1• ''t�11'r
': aiY 'r .: ' w;�'.? •. y., i[ S }: ._, . .�• •.,, •�; �±'-,•': • i• -1,.. f.+ •ti•c .- 'h... a
♦ via ;a� r ..; c. � e%.� �j! t t • • f' . .?. k �. ►•' ,
� .�,�«.; ,V'Y.` �w�,,. • �ii.'•.,r ���M�.•. ^►•�;t• •�,r. .. .f". • w�.•. '�:. .°� <v.•• .ti f.J.�. � �ia..•J'.. �'. �,i;` •
O i ��� i .,. '�'j, . t i~ - '.. h �, •; • .i •r. ice;.,:• . 1 �� �..� a.
EXHIBIT Q
J
SUMMARY REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL FOUNDATION
INVESTIGATION AND
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
STEEL ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK
MIDSOUTH - NC HWY 150
300,000 GALLONS
NC HWY 1501SPRING VALLEY ROAD
IREDELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
OUR PROJECT NUMBER 7718
*LIT/ mA
�L �
17 Al
SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING, P.C.
P.O. BOX 241204
CHARLOTTE, N. C 28224-1204
(704) 33"819

SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING, P.C.
P.O. BOX 241204
CHARLOTTE, NC 28224-1204
. [phone]
FAX [phone]
November 24, 1998
MIDSOUTH WATER SYSTEMS
c/o Mr. Dale C. Stewart PE
LAND DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
1700 East Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
SUBJECT: SUMMARY REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL FOUNDATION
INVESTIGATION AND
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
STEEL ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK
MIDSOUTH - NC HWY 150
300,000 GALLONS
NC HWY 1501SPRING VALLEY ROAD
IREDELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
MO ]-**AdZ01Ji=
Dear Mr. Stewart:
Subsurface Engineering, P.C. has completed the foundation investigation and
analysis for the subject tank. As we understand it, this tank will have four (4) to
six (6) legs with a center riser. This report summarizes our Findings and
Recommendations.
Three (3) soil Test Borings (ASTM D-1586) were drilled at the subject site as
shown on the attached plan. This is a wooded site.
The following general soil strata are present at the Test Borings:
(1) Topsoil and root zone is 0.5 to 1 foot thick.
No fill soil was encountered at this undeveloped site. This is not projected
to be a problem.
s
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL

r , . SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING, P.C.
PROJECT NUMBER 7718
Subsurface Engineering, P.C. is not responsible for undetected existing fill
soils between the Test Borings.
(2) Weathered in place or residual soils of the Piedmont Physiographic
Province underlie the topsoil. Texturally these are clayey silts at Test
Borings B-1 (1' to 3'), B-2 (0.7' to 3') and B-3 (0.5' to 3'). With depth there
is a rapid transition to sandy silt. The sandy silt is the primary deeper soil
texture.
There is a surface crust of very stiff to hard soil in the surface 5.5 to 6 feet.
With depth the consistency decreases to stiff. With continued depth the
consistency increases.
(3) Partially weathered rock was encountered at 13 to 23.5 feet below
existing grade at all Test Borings. Table 1 lists locations an depths. The
partially weathered rock is a residual soil with Standard Penetration
Resistance (N) greater than 100 blows per foot.
Auger refusal was met at all Test Borings at 17 to 23.5 feet below existing
grade. This strata was not diamond cored to determine its nature or
continuity, but is projected to represent boulders or bedrock.
Auger refusal at Test Boring B-1 was initially met at 1 foot deep. This
boring was then offset 201 and drilled to 17 feet. A rock outcrop is present
at the surface in the area of Test Boring B-3. In summary, a knobby rock
boulder condition is projected near the surface.
Groundwater was not encountered at the 23.5-foot depth sampled. Groundwater
levels tend to fluctuate 3 to 5 feet with seasonal moisture variations and are
generally highest in the late winter and early spring. During and after wet periods
ground -water may become trapped near the ground surface and form an
apparent shallow water table. This trapped water will eventually migrate to the
deeper true groundwater table.
The elevated steel tank with a steel frame is projected to have leg loads of 40 to
60 Kips per leg.
Cuts and fills, as we understand it, will be minimal over the present site grades.
2

SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING, P.C.
PROJECT NUMBER 7718
The Recommendations given in this summary report are based on the
assumption that the existing subsurface conditions at this site do not vary
substantially from those indicated by the Test Borings. These Recommendations
are subject to review of the design plans and specifications at which time we
reserve the right to make revisions. In addition, these Recommendations are
based on competent field engineering, inspection and testing during
construction.
This Opinion Letter may be relied upon by you only in connection with and for
the purposes set forth herein an may not be used or relied upon by any other
person, firm, or entity for any purpose whatsoever than in connection with
regulatory requirements or in response to a court order without, in each instance,
my prior written consent. Subsurface Engineering, PC is not responsible for the
independent conclusions, opinions, or recommendations made by others based
on the field exploration, sampling, and laboratory analyses presented in this
report.
If you have any questions on this summary report or if you need additional
information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
SUBSURFACE ENGINEERING, P.C.
Edward S. Cummings, III
Engineering Irit
William G_naith, Pg6F.
.. .
President' ;
ESC/WGS:ff-S, .'.,MM..G :••�;;•
4

NOMENCLATURE AND SYMBOLS
SYMBOLS
Undisturbed sample (UD recovered
11 Undisturbed sample (UD) not recovered
Standard penetration resistance (ASTM-D 1586-67)
Penetration resistance obtained using the horizontal penetrometer. This value is
approximately the same as the standard penetration resistance.
100/2" Number of blows (100) to drive the spoon a number of inches (2)
AX,BX,NX Core barrel sizes which obtain cores 1-1/8, 1-5/8, and 2-1/8 inches in diameter,
respectively.
65% Percentage of rock core recovered
RQD Rock quality designation of core segments 4 or more inches long
Water table at least 24 hours after drilling
Water table one hour or less after drilling
A& Loss of drilling water
PENETRATION RESISTANCE RESULTS
SANDS
NO, OF BLOWS, N.
0-4
5 • 10
11 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 50
OVER 50
0-1
2-4
5.8
SILTS AND CLAYS 9 - 15
16-30
31 • 50
OVER 50
APPROXIMATELY
VERY LOOSE
LOOSE
FIRM
VERY FIRM
DENSE
VERY DENSE
APPROXIMATE
CONSISTENCY
VERY SOFT
SOFT
FIRM
STIFF
VERY STIFF
HARD
VERY HARD
DRILLING PROCEDURES
Soil sampling and standard penetration testing performed in accordance with ASTM-D
1586-87. The standard penetration resistance is the number of blows of a 140 pound
hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch 0. D., 1.4 inch L. D. Split Spoon Sampler one
foot. Core drilling in accordance with ASTM designation D 2113-62T. The undisturbed
sampling procedure is described by ASTM Specification D 1587-67.

TABLE 1
TEST BORING SUMMARY
STEEL ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK
300,000 GALLONS
NC HWY 150/SPRING VALLEY ROAD
IREDELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
FOOTING FOUNDATION
DESIGN DATA
PARTIALLY
TEST
WEATHERED ROCK
AUGER REFUSAL
FOOTING BEARING
DESIGN SOIL
BORING
DEPTH BELOW
DEPTH BELOW
DEPTH BELOW
BEARING
NUMBER
PRESENT GRADE
PRESENT GRADE
PRESENT GRADE
PRESSURE
FEET
FEET
FEET
PSF
B"1
13
17
5
4000
B-2
23.5
23.5
5
4000
B 3
6 TO 13 SEAM
17
22
5
4000

C
REMARKS: NO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF BORING
OUR PROJECT #7718
W
21 W6 SOIL DESCRIPTION
BORING NO. B-1
BORING TERMINATED 11/18/98
> PENETRATION RESISTANCE
ui (BLOWS PER FOOT)
W 0 10 20 40 60 80 100
1.0
3.0
6.0
8.0
13.0
17.0
TOPSOIL
l
!
1
0
VERY STIFF MOTTLED BROWN ORANGE
CLAYEY -SILT (MH) - RESIDUUM
HARD GRAY WHITE SANDY SILT (ML)
-
STIFF SPECKLED BROWN ORANGE SANDY
SILT (ML)
VERY STIFF SPECKLED WHITE GRAY TAN
SANDY SILT (ML)
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK SAMPLED AS
VERY STIFF SPECKLED WHITE GRAY TAN
SANDY SILT (ML)
AUGER REFUSAL
BORING TERMINATED
TEST BORING RECORD
SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS, INC.
r.;:0TFr'i. Nlr•ei t=ntrtNFFRS
SHEET OF

:MARKS: NO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF BORING
OUR PROJECT #7718
BORING N0. B-2
BORING TERMINATED 11/17/98
PENETRATION RESISTANCE
u! (BLOWS PER FOOT)
al"16 u&abnsr @ own 0 0
10
20
40
60
80
101
0.7
3.0
6.0
8.0
3.0
?3.5
ASPHALT PAVEMENT & STONE BASE
1
STIFF RED BROWN CLAYEY SILT (MH) -
RESIDUUM
STIFF SPECKLED WHITE TAN RED SANDY
SILT (ML)
VERY STIFF SPECKLED TAN RED SANDY
SILT (ML)
STIFF SPECKLED TAN RED SANDY SILT (ML)
VERY STIFF SPECKLED WHITE GRAY
SANDY SILT (ML)
--
AUGER REFUSAL
BORING TERMINATED
Lm
TEST BORING RECORD
SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS, INC. SHEET OF
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL

REMARKS: NO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF BORING
OUR PROJECT #7718
BORING NO. B-3
BORING TERMINATED
11/17/98
` W PENETRATION RESISTANCE
SOIL OESCRIMONui(BLOWS PER FOOT)
� . A •w ww .w ww ww �u
TEST NORING RECORD
SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL
SHEET OF
25/3 of

Iredell County
(Revised 'M9/99)
EXHIBIT R
PROPOSED PUMP STATION BASIS OF DESIGN
Pump Station Design Calculations
I. PROJECTED WASTEWATER FLOWS
Rive ark Flow Requirements
Multi -Family
42 1 BR @ 120 GPD
— 5,040 GPD
18 Studio @ 120 GPD
— 22160
108 2 BR @ 240 GPD
= 252920 '
36 3 BR @ 360 GPD
= 12,960
Subtotal
462080 GPD
Commercial
15.3 Ac. @ 20 people per Ac. @ 100 GPD
= 302600
Light Industrial(Distribution Only)
21.5 Ac. @ 10 people/Ac. @ 100 GPD ea.
= 21�.50_0
GPD Total
982180 GPD
Average Daily Flow 98,180 GPD .
— 68.7 gpm
Peak Flow
— 172.5 gpm
Proposed Design Flow -
— 175 gpm
H. PUNT STATION DESIGN
1. Force main discharge elevation
874.6
2. Force main high point.-
874.00 '
3. Force main length
61025' .
4. Force main profile
Yes- .T '
5. Air relief valves
No
6. Cover over force main
Min. 3"
7. Fillets provided in wetwell
Yes
8. Check and gate valves provided
Yes
auzaa�. ssoa t�or .eon
LANDnESMnsGOGEMMSERV=s .

EXHIBIT S
150 RIVERPARK EXPENSES
_HIGHWAY
COMPANY
ITEM
PRICE _
WATER
R
E. McLean Tank ,500,000_pl.
495,100.00
626,302
•30,000
gal 1
13,500.00
....... 17,078
_ .. .. --�
17,500
gal
7,500.00
9,488'
Edwards
Pipeline
1
455,051.71
69,250_00
328,114
30,841
Owsley_ Sons !Generator
Pro Weter Systems _! _ I
Gibson Crane
343,292.31
300.00
380
ry
Patterson Brewer Sueyors
2,200.00
PC_P_
2,770.95
.
Land De_siAn Eng. _
67,735.00
38,119 i
Mitchem & A$sociates
19,Z13.75
Roy Price Well Drillinj
_
_ 17.490.00
22,135
Robert Moore
!Easement 25.000.00
25,000
_
Weber Plumbing_
_
Labor 20.843.40
24,257
Smith Setzer
_
456.45
577
SubBurface lnvesti ations
_ _ .
_ .__1,178.00
11490
Water-Tec
_
725.00
_ 917
Claremont Wholesale^
_
_ 341302.22
26,035
Pete Du & Associates
48,291.22
Hughes Supply
-�_206,292.26
_ 165,020
Bill May Electric
_ j 19,545 00
�8,
_ _ _ 12,362
Martin Marietta
Gravel 816 26
G
_._ 2, 788.
Charlotte Crane
.. _
_ 580.00
754
_
McLeod_ Construction
_ _ 8,139.49
_
Material Supply _
6,381.20
Consolidated Pipe
__. 16,192.73
_
Cod Cvrn ap
2,087.10
_
Sherwin Williams_!.._
472.44
Saris Long, Attorney
i iredell County M_
_
12,659.50
_ 29988
_ 8,007
205
-_
' Lowes _
Wilson, Tom
95.84
121~
'Well
_
Lot 90.000.00
90,000
_
Wilson, Tom
Sheet Metal
Sewer Lot 45,000.00
`.Sewer Lid 1,090.74
_
,Conover
Benco Steel _ _ ; 281.11
-
3,866
ESCO
Elect. parts _ 14,546.43
_
Mid South Utilities
or bor _ ^ _�110,264.00�
Lab
83,690
Allison Fence ^_
!Fence _ 8,000.00
-
Consulting Fees Y
46,000.00
29,095
SEWER
---247,525
_ 58, 761
~434,265
2,783
3,505
47,568
24,305
2.112
_ 17,357
_ 61,088
95,340
12,362
8,364
Sales Tax -Claremont WhoiesalelHu hes 14,435.67 8,647-
TOTAL EXPENSES
10,298
8,072
23,014
2,640
8,007
174
45,000
1,380
356
14,535
-. 55.794
10,120
29,095
21237,379.66 11556,484.4� 1,2271574.37
Columns D & E reflect a 15% mark
on overhead and 10% proflt

EXHIBIT T
:ID SOUTH UTILITIES, Inc.
Fehtuarg 7, 2000
post OfNice Box 788
NorthStatesville • :•: 1
RE: aond Requitement fat Wastewater Tceatment Facility
Quiet Cove Road, Mootesvde. North Carolina
'arn�'"
Thousandhalf
Dollars and noll 00'
..•. , . ZoTting
• inning:
located•i of .North
i ..
,We und,,� that this cash bond u,
should.: .. toanother
this bond being teplaced b4 a sureti ac� to Irpriell Count'i and theit Board of Cofnmissioners
If 4ou should have arvi quesd0n5, please do not hesitate to contact me at 82&478-2785.
Vzvj TcW4 Your.
Thomas Cattail .-''___'ilkMidSouth `itilides u � n
TC'W:j w
Enclosure. Check
P.O. Box 127 • 3502 Mt. Pleasant Road • Sherrills Ford, NC 28673 • [phone]

PURCHASER'S RECEIPT - RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS
- Peo lecBank
.t'ww NOTICE TO PURCHASER 201101
NEWrW N!C = 2885 M'r The purchase o, en fndemn bald wH be
PURCHASED BY, ch
a hN4ea in ftt p baMt wtp be ►
• � �• d or etoten. a . � . . ,tip •�
66-486/631'•. + ;
••J.� OV aA• ily +t� �;.fi, �f '. ,.. J��'i�lt��Yh iT,- .' -• � y:; ��.•.
- s r UrilitieA- Inc. c.
ATE ;
PAYABLE TO Iredell County `:,:.:': 4*:.'4yy,•
.. .„... .. ,- 100 0000600
' ��;r� �''�:' •'''''f':r^•',,; :4•:;v. ,v:M .jr� :ti ��:ti} :• ,:i�r, �,� a. , ` -•: '� '�lti .• ,tiij� � '
. ....:.: ... :... :;:.... ,'t;. ; :.:._ :..�; r .,� • .... DOLLARS
may.. .� ^1 •��:.....• .- _
: ~' r •<' ��!L FORS/�'�`'� Z.�-.ORANDUM
�...•,r Ir
Cashier's Check T :'-- ?
I000 20 110 a' 1• •0 r, - NOT NEGOTIABLE
1 5 3 104869i. 59 9.99996 2115
RIP
,,.. f
PURCHASER'S RECEIPT.'RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS
Peo lesB 'j
p,„ ank NOTICE TO PURCHASER 2 01101
..• ..;• ) :. •me purchase of en tr►dertsntty Iona wEn be red
NlEVV1'ON• No 28858.0�87 before an offlclal check of thts bank wf3 be aced -
PURCHASED BY or refunded to the avant tt to toat, wd or atoten.
• ► . 66-48Ml
MidSouth Util,tlee Inc. -
DATE
. PAYABLE TO,- Iredell County
100,000.00
I '� :••% ;}•,'.;ii• {{?: •�.{.•:•:•: .� �' iS .,� ..Y. •.Tr y I. •,h ,,. � • • •• �.h ti• ., ��.: t�.L�1' ••A �Nt
DOLLARS
Cas _ FOR -• .����.�_
_ hier s Check"
0 P9 PY a n I • 'i i r•- - r'1 r- - -• . vI
NOT NEGOTIABLE
RIP
,,.. f
PURCHASER'S RECEIPT.'RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS
Peo lesB 'j
p,„ ank NOTICE TO PURCHASER 2 01101
..• ..;• ) :. •me purchase of en tr►dertsntty Iona wEn be red
NlEVV1'ON• No 28858.0�87 before an offlclal check of thts bank wf3 be aced -
PURCHASED BY or refunded to the avant tt to toat, wd or atoten.
• ► . 66-48Ml
MidSouth Util,tlee Inc. -
DATE
. PAYABLE TO,- Iredell County
100,000.00
I '� :••% ;}•,'.;ii• {{?: •�.{.•:•:•: .� �' iS .,� ..Y. •.Tr y I. •,h ,,. � • • •• �.h ti• ., ��.: t�.L�1' ••A �Nt
DOLLARS
Cas _ FOR -• .����.�_
_ hier s Check"
0 P9 PY a n I • 'i i r•- - r'1 r- - -• . vI
NOT NEGOTIABLE

> e 2
amrdev" ,/10
�s hay�f�«a��
/j
i/S/vr
oqV

fnCE OF PUBLIC HEARING
/ TO BE HELD By
THE NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL
+
MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
SUBJECT. A pudic heating has
been scheduled concerning the
proposed renewal and issuance of
the fodowirg NPDES Permit
Permit number NCO074900 to $e
Mid Swrh Water Systems for the
Highway 150 Wastewater
Treatment Plant located In
Shem16 Ford (Iredafi Crony) for
the discharge of treated domestic
wastewater Into the Lake Norman
(Catawba River).
PURPOSE This facilities has
applied for renewal of their
NPDES permit for the discharge
of Treated dansfic wastewater
into waters of the Catawba River
basin. On the basis of preliminary,
staff review and application of
Article 21 of Chapter 143, General
Stables of North Carolina, and
other lawful standards and regula-
tions, the -North Carolina
Environmental Management
Commission proposes to issue a
NPDES permit for each facility
subject to specific Pdlutaat limita-
dons and special candhti m The
Director of the Division of Water
Quality pursuant to NCGS 143-
215.1(c)(3) and Regulation 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0100 has
determined that it is in the public
Interest that a meeting be held to
receive all pertinent public com-
ment on whether to Issue, modify,
or deny the permit.
'
PROCEDURE: The hearing will
be conducted in the following
manner.
1. An explanadon of the North
- Carolina Environmental
Commissions
Per -Management
matting procedure vn'a be present- .
'
ad by the Division of Water
Quality.
2. An explanation of the action for
which the permit Is required may
be made by the applicant.
3. Pubic Comment - Comments,
statements, data and other Intor-
orcalling:
madon may be submiffed In writ -
Ms. Christie Jackson, INC Division
ing prior to or during the meting
of Water Quality/NPDES Unit,
a may be presented only at the
1617 Mail Service Center,
meeting. Persons desiring to
Raleigh, North Cardin 27699-
speak will indicate this Intent at
1617
the time of registration at the
Telephone number: (919) 733-
meeting. So that all persons
50113, extension 536
desiring to speak may do so,
The application and other inlor-
lergthly statements may be limit -
mad, am on file at the Division of
ed at the di gallon of the meeting
Water Quality, 512 North
officer , Oral presentatbns that
Salisbury Sal Room 925 of the
exceed three nurtures should be
Archdale Building in Raleigh,
accompanied by three written
North Carolina and at the
copies, which will be filed with
Division's Mooresville Regional
Division staff at the fine of regis-
"ice (919 North Main Street in
elation,
Aooresville). They may be
4. Croes exarrinallon of person
Inspected during nrmal office
prasendng testimony will not be
hours. Copies of the information
_ allowed; however, the hearing offl-
on file are available upon request
car may ask questions for darif-
and payment of the costs of repro-
St cation.
ducton. At such wmments and
z� ., S. The hearing record may be
requests regarding this maller
pied at the condusim of the
should make reference to the par-
meeting.
mil numbers) listed above.
WHEN: June 29, 2000 at 7:00
x May 31
pm
v
WHERE: Mooresville Chfaen
Center - Joe V. Knox Auditodm,
-�C
215 North Main Street,
Q'e
Mooresville, North Carolina
INFORMATION: :A copy of the,
draft NPDES permits) and a map
showing the location of the tits-
charga(s) are available by writing
or calling
Ms. ChM1sde Jackson, NC Division
-' 01111iNMp0E5 Unit.
-- —
NORTH CAROLINA ,11
IREDELL COUNTY
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County
and State, duly commissioned, qualified, and authorized
by law to administer oaths, personally appeared
W. Allison Bumgarner who being first duly sworn, de-
poses and says: that she is an employee authorized to
make this statement by Media General Newspapers,
Inc. engaged in the publication of a newspaper known
as the Statesville Record & Landmark published,
issued, and entered as second class mail in the city of
Statesville in said County and State, that she is
authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement;
that the notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy
of which is attached hereto, was published in the
Statesville Record & Landmark on the following dates:
MAY 31, 2000
and that the said newspaper in which such notice,
paper, document, or legal advertisement was published
was at the time of each and every such publication, a
newspaper meeting all of the requirements and qualifi-
cations of Section 1-597 of the General Statues of North
Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the
meaning of Section 1-597 of the General Statues of
North arolina.
��7NE ThiS1 s dad i 1 \ . 20 00
Sworn to and subscribed before-T'e this 1st
JUNE 00
day of 20
//1�'
��N ary Public'
'
Commission expires:

AFFIDAVIT OF MICHAEL JOHN MYERS
Michael John Myers, first having been duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. My name is Michael John Myers. I am an Environmental Engineer II in the NPDES Unit of the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. In this capacity, I was responsible for the review of the application of Mid South Utilities,
Inc., for the reissuance of North Carolina NPDES Permit no. NCO074900 (the "2000 permit").
2. The DWQ review of Mid South's application for the 2000 permit's reissuance was extensive, detailed
and, in my judgment, thoughtful. As a practical matter, there was no difference between DWQ's
scrutiny of the 2000 permit as a "renewal" rather than a "new" application either in terms of the
information provided by Mid South, or the level of review and consideration by DWQ. Indeed,
because of the significant public interest and the pending contested cases over the 1996 issuance of
NPDES Permit no. NCO074900, the 2000 permit application was, as a matter of prudence, treated in
effect as a "new" permit in the event that petitioners were successful in challenging the 1996 permit.
3. Specifically, Mid South provided DWQ with all requested or required information, including the
following:
(a) Application "Short Form D" (the same application required of "new" applicants pursuant to rule
15A N.C.A.C. 2H.0105(a)) (Exhibit A, attached);
(b) An Engineering Alternatives Analysis received on or about September 22, 2000 (Exhibit B,
attached) which included:
(i) A description of the origin, type and flow of waste which is proposed to be discharged,
with justification and demonstration of need for flow volumes, with flow determined
according to rule 15A N.C.A.C. 2H.0219(i);
(ii) A summary of waste treatment and disposal options considered and the reasons for the
selection of the proposed system ;
(iii) A narrative description of the proposed treatment works including type and arrangement
of major components, in sufficient detail to assure that the proposed facility has the capability
to comply with the permit limitations;
(iv) A statement related to the financial qualificatins of Mid South, i.e., its posting of a
$100,000.00 bond with Iredell County;
(c) A general location map of the facility's orientation and a scale location plan of the site showing
the location of the proposed treatment works and point of discharge (previously on file).
4. In addition, records of the facility's compliance with applicable operating conditions were retained and
reviewed by DWQ.
5. DWQ requested no special studies or modeling from Mid South.
6. In connection with DWQ's permit review, I also investigated the new potential operator of the facility
(Philadelphia Suburban), by contacting other State regulatory authorities. These sources indicated that
Philadelphia Suburban's operating record was exemplary.
7. DWQ further required Mid South to obtain a local government sign -off pursuant to rule 15A N.C.A.C.
2H.0105(I). This filing is, by its terms, generally required only for new domestic wastewater discharge
permits. Exhibit C.

8. The 2000 permit contains important new conditions on the facility's operation, in part as a result of
public expressions of interest. Exhibit D, Special Conditions A(2), (3), and (4).
9. It is my professional judgment that the facility's operation in accordance with these conditions and the
other conditions in the 2000 permit will adequately safeguard public health and water quality.
This the-,�?i day of November, 2000.
r e
ichael John My rs
Swo to and subscribed before me this th day of November W,,
IPOA
Karen Beitar
Y —6 .•..� .:�
My commission expires: � ,.,.• a
"t"n��� 0�0000®iOOONr ti� 1 .

To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Michael Myers
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
Date: June 12, 2000
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
County: Iredell
NPDES Permit No.: NCO074900
MRO No.: 00-26
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
(,o.c: AIA-564K UC-Wi-.5—ICna446 1,0.nAi43 WuITP
1. Facility and Address: Highway 150 WWTP (formally Knotts Landing WWTP)
c/o Mid South Utilities, Inc.
Post Office Box 127
Sherrills Ford, N.C. 28673
2. Date of Investigation: April 3, 2000
Report Prepared By: Michael L. Parker, Environ. Engr. II
4. Person Contacted and Telephone Number: Carroll Weber, [phone].
5. Directions to Site: From the jct of NC Hwy. 150 and Quiet Cove Road in southwestern
Iredell County, travel = 100 yards on Quiet Cove Road and turn right onto a gravel access
road. The Highway 150 WWTP is located at the end of this access road.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge Points: -
Latitude: 350 36' 17"
Longitude: 80° 56' 35"
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No.: E 15 SW
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application: Yes. The WWTP was
constructed on= 3.5 acres. There is area available on the existing site for future
expansion, if necessary.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): The WWTP site is not located within
a flood plain or below the high water elevation of the receiving stream (Lake Norman).

1
•
Page Two
a
10.
Location of Nearest Dwelling: The nearest existing dwelling is - 250 feet from the
WWT? site.
Receiving Stream or Affected Surface Waters: Lake Norman (Catawba River).
a. Classification: WS-IV, B CA
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 030832
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The receiving
stream (lake) is used for both primary and secondary recreation with frequent
bodily contact. The discharge enters the main channel of the Catawba River
adjacent to the Hwy. 150 bridge. The outfall pipe is anchored to the bottom of the
channel just south of the bridge for better dispersion and mixing of the effluent
with the river's water.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
rA
3.
a. Volume of Wastewater: 0.300 MGD (Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity: 0.100 and 0.300 MGD
C. Actual treatment capacity of current facility (current design capacity): 0.100 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous ATCs issued in the
previous two years: NIA
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: the existing
WWT facilities consist of a flow equalization chamber followed by dual 50,000
gpd package type WWTPs each having aeration (diffused), secondary
clarification, and an aerated sludge holding tank. These facilities are followed by a
dual cell tertiary filter, post aeration (diffused), chlorination, and dechlorination.
The facilities were approved in an ATC issued on November 24, 1997.
f. Description of proposed WWT facilities: there are no additional WWT facilities
proposed at this time.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Chlorine is used for disinfection,
however, dechlorination is also provided.
Residual handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Residuals are removed by Roberts
Septic Tank Service and taken to the City of Newton POTW for disposal.
Treatment Plant Classification: Class II (based on existing treatment facilities).
4. SIC Code(s): 4952 Wastewater Code(s): 05 MTU Code(s): 06107

Page Three
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved (municipals only)? No
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None at this time.
3. Important SOC/JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation
a. Spray Irrigation: Insufficient area, poor soils. The existing WWTP site was a
spoils area for a now defunct quarry. Adjacent property is either unavailable or is
restricted by topography for on -site disposal.
b. Connect to regional sewer system: There are no immediate plans by the Town of
Mooresville or Iredell County to provide the subject area with sewer.
C. Subsurface: Insufficient area, poor soils (see 4a. Above).
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The permittee has requested renewal of the subject Permit with no modifications. Since
the Permit was last reissued, the permittee has applied for and received authorization to construct
a 0.100 MGD WWTP. The WWTP has been constructed, certified by the design engineer, and
placed into operation. Corrections to the new permit should include a change regarding the
location of the WWTP from SR 1197 (Oak Tree Road) to Quite Cove Lane, and a change in the
name of the WWTP from Knotts Landing WWTP to the Hwy. 150 WWTP. These changes to
the permit will correct existing errors in the permit that occurred during a permit modification
that was issued December 9, 1996. The discharge location, which was correct in the December
9th modification, should remain the same. The WWTP is currently serving an existing apartment
complex with plans to serve future residential and commercial development in the surrounding
area
At the time of the December 9, 1996 permit modification, staff with this Office were
informed by the permittee (Mid -South Water Systems) that it was their intent to eventually
eliminate the nearby Pier 16 Marina WWTP (NC0074535) by converting the WWTP into a
pump station and pumping all the wastewater back to the Hwy. 150 WWTP. However, prior to
the current permit renewal, Mid -South sold the Pier 16 WWTP to Heater Utilities. Since Mid -
South no longer owns the Pier 16 WWTP, it is uncertain whether this facility will be connected
to the Hwy. 150 plant, however, we understand that Heater Utilities is interested in connecting to
the Hwy. 150 WWTP. It is also our understanding that it is the intention of Mid -South to sell the
Hwy. 150 WWTP when the reissuance of the permit is complete and litigation regarding the
facility has been resolved.

Page Four
There is an existing development within the service area of the proposed Knotts Landing
WWTP, which has been issued an NPDES Permit (Pinnacle Shores - NC0076350). Although
this development is well under construction, existing homes are being served by on -site septic
systems, which means the developer - Crescent Resources, Inc. may not have any further need for
the NPDES Permit. This Office has already recommended that Crescent's NPDES Permit for the
Pinnacle Shores development not be renewed due to the availability of the Hwy. 150 WWTP to
accept flow that may eventually be generated by future development of the Pinnacle Shores site
(expansion of the Hwy 150 WWTP may be necessary depending on flow).
There has been a significant amount of interest in the renewal of this permit by the
citizens living in the adjacent Spring Shores development, other area residents, and the media.
The Catawba Riverkeeper, Donna Lisenby has also raised objections to the reissuance of this
permit; however, her allegations regarding inadequate WWTP design, lack of monitoring,
malfunction equipment, and health concerns regarding the discharge of bacteria are so far
unsubstantiated and lack any engineering merit. A public hearing is planned for June 29, 2000 to
receive public comment on the renewal of this permit.
Pending a final technical review by the NPDES Unit, it is recommended that the request
to renew the Permit bapproved.
Signature of Re reparer Date
/,), a S L /Y/-, 0 �- 0/ // Y/00
Water Quality Regiv&A Supervisor Date
h:ldsrldsr001hwy 150.dsr