WQ0006085_Response to Notice_20240524

BRUNSWICK COUNTY
Mr.Tom Tharrington
Assistant Regional Supervisor
NCDEQ, WIRO
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
May 24, 2024
RE: Brunswick County Permit No. WQ0006085-Notice of Violation
Tracking No. NOV-2024-PC-0290
Dear Mr.Tharrington,
We have received your letter dated May 07, 2024 indicating a Notice of Violation based on the recently
completed Compliance Inspection of the Ocean Isle Beach (0113) Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).
Please see our response below:
Brunswick County is acknowledged as the regional wastewater treatment and disposal provider in the
county, having acquired many of the smaller municipal and "package plant"type treatment facilities over
the past 20 years. Regionalization of these sometimes-struggling systems occurs due to many challenges,
including the need for infrastructure improvements, capacity, and ultimately, long-term viability of these
systems. Brunswick County has been at the forefront of merging these systems utilizing the regional
approach. The 01B WWTP was conveyed to Brunswick County in 2012 by the Town of Ocean Isle Beach
and the County has been working to upgrade these facilities since that time but has hit one roadblock
after another in implementing its improvement plan. A synopsis of the issue follows:
The Problem
The original OIB WWTP technology utilized facultative lagoons on 14 designated effluent disposal spray
fields. The facultative lagoons were later replaced by a 1.05 MGD Sequencing Batch Reactor(SBR)WWTP
with 9 additional effluent disposal spray fields. The problem effluent disposal spray fields are all part of
the fields associated with the original facultative lagoon WWTP where secondary treated wastewater was
applied for decades. These spray fields cannot accept effluent in sufficient quantities to meet the
permitted treatment amount of 1.05 MGD during all seasons without some ponding.
County Actions—Existing Site
In 2020, Brunswick County proactively pursued optimization of the existing spray site by enlisting Ed
Andrews and Associates who was the original soil consultant for the 1.05 MGD OIB WWTP, to perform
borings, model the existing system, and investigate alternate disposal methods such as high-rate

infiltration basins (HRIBS) which require less land for application. The study, which is included with this
letter, concluded there were no viable alternatives within the existing site for additional reuse
opportunities.
County Actions—New Disposal Sites
Additionally, in 2022, the County both budgeted funds for the purchase of land and performed a study
through Ed Andrews and Associates as well as ECS Southeast on several tracts of land adjacent to the OIB
spray fields that appeared to have soils conducive for HRIBS. Soil samples were taken but indicated that
the soil was not as conducive to effluent disposal as initially thought. Moreover,the presence of wetland
pockets and the setback requirements as outlined in the NCAC 02T rules further reduced the viability of
these sites. Other parcels were investigated but due to continuous development most sites that might
meet the requirements for reuse disposal were under contract for purchase, recently sold,or unavailable.
In July of 2023 the County selected an engineering consultant to evaluate additional land for effluent
disposal to replace the lost disposal capacity of the existing OIB spray fields. The analysis considered land
over 7 miles from the OIB WWTP and considered additional effluent disposal for expansion of the OIB
WWTP up to 5.0 MGD. A desktop analysis performed by the consultant identified 27 vacant land parcels
within 7 miles from the OIB WWTP and evaluated these sites utilizing a ranking criterion for reuse disposal
as well as property owner input. Of those 27 sites, only 5 were identified as adequate for further
investigation. Soil testing was performed on these sites and the results of those tests indicated that all
were non-viable for HRIBS.These 5 sites had marginal soils sufficient for minimal spray effluent disposal,
but due to the limited soil permeability and distance to the sites, the effluent disposal costs make this a
non-viable option. In total, 2,647 acres were identified resulting in a preliminary cost estimate of
approximately $112 million for land acquisition and effluent disposal infrastructure improvements; any
additional treatment facilities would be an additional cost.
County Action—NPDES Permit Evaluation
Due to the challenges finding acceptable viable land for effluent disposal,the consultant was tasked with
evaluating discharge options through an NPDES permit. The County directed the consultant to consider
all possibilities including discharge to the Shallotte River, discharge to the Waccamaw River, and even an
ocean outfall. The County has had multiple meetings with DEQ Division staff in Raleigh, performed in-
stream analysis as recommended by DEQ staff, and has committed over$1.53 million in consulting fees
to identify a reasonable path forward. Direction from DEQ staff has wavered from suggesting that 1) the
Shallotte River Basin appears to be a viable discharge point, 2) the Waccamaw River Basin is non-viable
due to potential conflicts with South Carolina, and 3) an ocean outfall is out of the question TO 1) the
Shallotte River is non-viable and should be listed as 303d impaired waters, 2) the Waccamaw River may
be viable despite having to pump effluent 18 miles to a discharge point, and 3) an ocean outfall may be a
consideration.
Only after Brunswick County completed baseline testing of the Shallotte River and additional testing
protocols for further evaluation were approved was there an announcement from DEQ that the Middle
Shallotte River has been identified for reclassification as a 303d impaired water which would essentially
eliminate any opportunity for a discharge. Our consultant has indicated a timeline of at least three years
to get to a point at which we may be able to apply for an NPDES permit. The complexity of the task is
daunting with no assured outcome and would mean that an actual constructed solution to the effluent
disposal issue is many years away.
2

County Action—Disposal Agreements
In 2006 Brunswick County entered into an agreement with Ocean Ridge whereby the County could
discharge 900,0000 GPD of treated effluent on the Ocean Ridge Golf Course. To facilitate that effort,
Brunswick County has designed and permitted an extension of the existing reuse water piping from the
OIB WWWTP to the golf course. Currently however, the owners of Ocean Ridge do not consent to
utilization of the golf course for effluent disposal despite the previous agreement and there is no likely
imminent resolution.
Brunswick County has actively pursued strategies at significant cost to mitigate the existing site conditions
to meet permit requirements. Ultimately,the prospects of non-discharge application sites available in this
region of the County are extremely limited. We formally request that NOV-2024-PC-0290 be rescinded
based on continued efforts by the County to provide a reasonable solution to the issue at hand. Moreover,
we request both regional and central DEQ staff to consider the issue together and consider what viable
remedial option(s) exist and communicate those to us. We have provided the options known to us,
performed engineering analysis to determine their feasibility, but have received no consensus on a
reasonable path forward with any assurance of likely regulatory approval. We appreciate the effort by
NCDEQ staff in assisting the County to find a reasonable solution to the problem at hand.
If you have any questions or require additional documentation, please do not hesitate to contact me via
phone at(910) 253-2657 or by e-mail at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
JOHN NICHOLS, PE, CPESC
Public Utilities Director
910.253.2657
[e-mail]
CC: Donald Dixon, Deputy Director Wastewater Operations
Krysden Burden, Environmental Compliance Officer
Matthew Henry,Wastewater Superintendent
Steve Stone, Brunswick County Manager
Morella Sanchez-King, NCDEQ WIRO Regional Supervisor
Bryan Lievre, NCDEQ WIRO Engineer II
Elizabeth Biser, NCDEQ Secretary
Attachments:
Ed Andrews and Associates-Site Evaluation of OIB WWTP, 11/16/2020
Ed Andrews and Associates/ECS Southeast- Preliminary Assessment of HRI Potential, 10/27/2022
3

HYOROGEOLOGY ENIVIRONNEKFAL SCIENCES
GEOLOGY SOILS
EDWIN ANDREWS & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.
CONSULTING HYDROGEOLOGISTS
P.O.BOX 30653
RALEIGH,N.C.27622-0653
PHONE:[phone]
November 16, 2020
Rhonda L. Olsen -
Project Coordinator
Brunswick County Public Utilities
P.O. Box 249
Bolivia,NC 28422
Re: Site Evaluation, Ocean Isle Beach WWTP - Brunswick County
Brunswick County, North Carolina
EAA Project WW- 0520A
Dear Ms. Olsen:
This evaluation identifies and characterizes potential High Rate Infiltration basin sites, to be
integrated with long term irrigation in order to maximize waste water capacity. The evaluation
focuses on Fields 1,2/3 and 17(Figure 1 Site Map)(Figure 1,3D Site Map using USGS DEM data).
The following results are presented for each site. There was no site specific surveying performed
on the test locations, rather we used a level to establish a Relative Elevation based on the Level
height, not actual elevation (Mean Sea Level). This analysis is for comparison and planning
purposes only.
1) Site 1 - Field 1:
• Soil and Geology- Site 1:
Field 1 (Site 1 for this analysis)was tested using to determine is a suitable sandy surficial aquifer is
present beneath the Baymeade soils. Three test hand borings inspected the soil to determine if there
were shallow clayey sands that could impact potential high rate infiltration basins. There were few
sandy loam and loamy sand steaks that contain interstitial clays. These could erode from the side
walls of potential infiltration basins leading to deposition on the infiltration surfaces at or near the
bottom of each basin(Table 1, Soil Profile Description). The underlying potential surficial aquifer
was described based on wash sample(Table 2;Lithology Log),and a geotechnical boring(Table 3,
Geotechnologies, Inc.- Geotechnical Boring Description). A "Very loose gray, orange & brown
clayey fine sand"was encountered from 6 to 12 feet. Silty sand extended to twenty feet below land
surface.

• Hydrology Water Table Mapping - Site 1:
These hand borings were completed, installing slotted pipes as piezometers so that we could map
groundwater flow. These relative elevation values were incorporated with the Observation Well
level from the aquifer testing that was performed on Site 1 to develop a Water Table Contour Map
(Table 3A,Relative Water Level Data)(Figure 3A,Water Table Contour Map-Relative Elevation).
• Aquifer Hydrology- Site 1:
The soils were nearly saturated largely due to interstitial solids near surface, distance to drainage
outlets and overall hydraulic loading(Table 4, September Water Conditions from the NC NDAR).
Using temporary pumping and observation wells at Site 1, a twenty four hour aquifer test was
completed to determine Transmissivity (T), Hydraulic Conductivity (k), and Specific Yield (SY).
(Table 5A,Aquifer Test Results- Site 1). These coefficients,T=48.1 sq. ft./day,K=6.01 ft,/day
for 8 feet of sand aquifer and a Sy Of 0.116 were used to begin calibration of a Visual MODFLOWTM
simulation. Based on the calibration model,two infiltration areas of 9,959 square feet(+/- 1/4 acre)
were loaded at 0.8 gallons per day per square foot. One infiltration area(basin)was analyzed with
a drain constructed at a distance of 100 feet. The other infiltration area was analyzed with a drain
constructed at a distance of 25 feet (Figure 4, Model Map). Hypothetical observation wells were
placed in the center of each basin,"B 1"for the basin with the drains offset 100 feet and"L1"for the
basin with the drains offset at 25 feet. (Figure 5A, Site Map Site 1). The results using a relatively
wet year(8`h in 10 wettest year)revealed that the mounded water level in the basin with the 100 foot
offset to drains was approximately one foot higher than the basin with the 25 foot offset(Figure 6A,
Time vs. Water Level - Site 1). The modeled water levels are NOT calculated Water Elevations
(Mean Sea Level). This estimated loading of 0.8 gallons per day per square foot calculates to less
than 8,000 gallons per clay.
• Discussion and Conclusion - Site 1
Because of the clay lenses and poor soils the loading areas will need to be small relative to the
drains. In the alternative with the drains at 100 foot offset, each basin/drain would consume
approximately two acres. I had tried a simulation with no drains for one of the sites with a mound
approximately three feet higher than the 100 food drain option. With the high water table depth, 1.3
to 2.67 for early October, this option is not feasible (Table 3A, Water Level - Field 1).
2) Site 2 - Field 2:
• Soil and Geology- Site 2:
Field 2 (Site 2 for this analysis)was tested using to determine is a suitable sandy surficial aquifer is
present beneath the Baymeade/Leon soils. Three test hand borings inspected the soil to determine
if there were shallow clayey sands that could impact potential high rate infiltration basins. There
were few sandy loam and loamy sand steaks that contain interstitial clays at OW2 and P2(most like
Baymeade). There were low chroma spodic horizons at P2-1 (most like Leon)and P2-3 (most like
Murville). In the Baymeade are, the clay associate with tse loamy sediments could erode from the
side walls of potential infiltration basins leading to deposition on the infiltration surfaces at or near

the bottom of each basin (Table 1, Soil Profile Description). In the areas containing the Leon and
Murville soils, it was not possible to excavate to a depth to determine if any clays were present
below the boring depth. The underlying potential surficial aquifer was described based on wash
sample (Table 2, Lithology Log), A geotechnical boring was not completed at this site. However,
a stiff gray clay was encountered in Observation Well OW-2 from 5 to 8 feet below land surface.
• Hydrology Water Table Mapping - Site 2:
These hand borings were completed, installing slotted pipes as piezometers so that we could map
groundwater flow. These relative elevation values were incorporated with the Observation Well
level firom the aquifer testing that was performed on Site 2 to develop a Water Table Contour Map
(Table 3B,Relative Water Level Data)(Figure 3B,Water Table Contour Map-Relative Elevation).
• Aquifer Hydrology- Site 2:
The soils were nearly saturated largely due to interstitial solids near surface(especially near P2-3),
distance to drainage outlets and overall hydraulic loading (Table 4, September Water Conditions
from the NC NDAR). Using temporary pumping and observation wells at Site 2,a twenty four hour
aquifer test was completed to determine Transmissivity(T),Hydraulic Conductivity(k),and Specific
Yield (Sy.). (Table 5B, Aquifer Test Results- Site 2). These coefficients, T= 30.2 sq. ft./day, K=
3.78 ft,/day for 8 feet of sand aquifer and a Sy, Of 0.264 were used to begin calibration of a Visual
MODFLOW"' simulation. Based on the calibration model, two infiltration areas of 9,959 square
feet (+/- 1/4 acre) were loaded at 0.8 gallons per day per square foot. One infiltration area(basin)
was analyzed with a drain constructed at a distance of 100 feet. The other infiltration area was
analyzed with a drain constructed at a distance of 25 feet (Figure 4, Model Map). Hypothetical
observation wells were placed in the center of each basin, "B 1" for the basin with the drains offset
100 feet and "L1" for the basin with the drains offset at 25 feet. (Figure 5B, Site Map Site 2). The
results using a relatively wet year(8"' in 10 wettest year)revealed that the mounded water level in
the basin with the 100 foot offset to drains was approximately one foot higher than the basin with
the 25 foot offset(Figure 6B, Time vs. Water Level - Site 2). The modeled water levels are NOT
calculated Water Elevations (Mean Sea Level). This estimated loading of 0.8 gallons per day per
square foot calculates to less than 8,000 gallons per day.
• Discussion and Conclusion- Site 2:
Because of the clay lenses and poor soils, the loading areas will need to be small relative to the
drains. The better soils degraded quickly to the north, east and south In the alternative with the
drains at 100 foot offset, each basin/drain would consume approximately two acres. 1 had tried a
simulation with no drains for one of the sites with a mound approximately three feet higher than the
100 food drain option. With the high water table depth, 0.29 to 1.22 for early October,this option
is not feasible (Table 3B, Water Level - Field 2).

3) Site 3 -Field 7:
• Soil and Geology- Site 3:
Field 7(Site 3 for this analysis)was tested using to determine is a suitable sandy surficial aquifer is
present beneath the Baymeade soil. Three test hand borings inspected the soil to determine if there
were shallow clayey sands that could impact potential high rate infiltration basins. There were
several sandy loam and clay loam steaks that contain interstitial clays in all of the soil borings(most
like Baymeade). 1n the Baymeade area, the clay associate with the loamy sediments could erode
from the side walls of potential infiltration basins leading to deposition on the infiltration surfaces
at or near the bottom of each basin (Table 1, Soil Profile Description). The underlying potential
surficial aquifer was described based on wash sample(Table 2,Lithology Log),and a geotechnical
boring(Table 3,Geotechnologies,Inc.-Geoteclinical Boring Description). A Stiff gray fine sandy
CLAY"was encountered from 6 to 8 feet,overlying four feet of sand with clay streams. Silty sand
extended to 17 feet below land surface.A very stiff marine clay formed a significant confining layer
from 17 feet toe 25 feet below land surface.
• Hydrology Water Table Mapping- Site 3:
These hand borings were completed, installing slotted pipes as piezometers so that we could map
groundwater flow. These relative elevation values were incorporated with the Observation Well
level from the aquifer testing that was performed on Site 3 to develop a Water Table Contour Map
(Table 3C,Relative Water Level Data)(Figure 3C,Water Table Contour Map-Relative Elevation).
• Aquifer Hydrology - Site 3:
The soils were nearly saturated largely due to interstitial solids near surface, distance to drainage
outlets (major cause),and overall hydraulic loading(Table 4,September Water Conditions from the
NC NDAR). Using temporary pumping and observation wells at Site 3,a twenty four hour aquifer
test was completed to determine Transmissivity(T),Hydraulic Conductivity(k),and Specific Yield
(Sy.). (Table 5C, Aquifer Test Results - Site 3). These coefficients, T= 15.7 sq. ft./day, K = 3.14
ft,/day for 5 feet of sand aquifer, and a Sy, of 0.0383 were used to begin calibration of a Visual
MODFLOWT"r simulation. Based on the calibration model, two infiltration areas of 9,959 square
feet (+/- 1/4 acre) were loaded at 0.8 gallons per day per square foot. One infiltration area(basin)
was analyzed with a drain constructed at a distance of 100 feet. The other infiltration area was
analyzed with a drain constructed at a distance of 25 feet (Figure 4, Model Map). Hypothetical
observation wells were placed in the center of each basin, `B 1" for the basin with the drains offset
100 feet and"L1" for the basin with the drains offset at 25 feet. (Figure 5C, Site Map Site 3). The
results using a relatively wet year(8`h in 10 wettest year)revealed that the mounded water level in
the basin with the 100 foot offset to drains was approximately one foot higher than the basin with
the 25 foot offset (Figure 6C, Time vs. Water Level - Site 3). The modeled water levels are NOT
calculated Water Elevations (Mean Sea Level). This estimated loading of 0.8 gallons per day per
square foot calculates to less than 8,000 gallons per day.

• Discussion and Conclusion - Site 3:
Because of the clay lenses and poor soils, the loading areas will need to be small relative to the
drains. In the alternative with the drains at 100 foot offset, each basin/drain would consume
approximately two acres. This is the site where, I had tried a simulation with no drains for one of
the sites with a mound approximately three feet higher than the 100 food drain option. With the high
water table depth, 1.41 to 3.65 for early October,this option is not feasible(Table 3C,Water Level-
Field 3). This spray field be a good candidate for installation of under-drainage, similar to golf
course design in areas with loamy soil.
Discussion and Conclusions:
The test results indicate that high rate infiltration is not a good option on the three fields that we
investigated. The soils and aquifers have degenerated over 30 years of operation, resulting in wet
conditions. Outlet drainage was determined to be a key factor because of the lower hydraulic
conductivity values. The following discussion if for the purpose of explaining the function of
groundwater drainage by comparing two hypothetical options:
The small infiltration basin configuration appears to have limited potential at a loading rate
of 0.8 gallon per day with drainage. Need to appraise these loading rate to the total area
needed for drains. In the event that the drain are 100 feet from the basin a quarter acre basin
would use approximately two acres(96,600 square feet) . In the event that the drain are 25
feet from the basin a quarter acre basin would use approximately on half acre(24,121 square
feet). Adjusted loading rate for the basin/drain options are approximately 10,000 gallons per
day over two acres or one half acre.
100 foot offset - Calculates to 0.1 gallon per day per square foot for the total basin
plus area to each drain (96,600 sq ft),
25 foot offset-Calculates to 0.4 gallon per day per square foot for the total basin plus
area to each drain(24,120 sq ft),
The averaged irrigation loading rate of 91 inches per year calculates to 0.249 inch per day
or(0.249 inch per day *27,153 gallons per acre inch *7.86 acres)or 53,177 gallons per day
for each of these fields. Assuming that four infiltration basins can be configured for each
7.86 acre field, the capacity would be approximately 40,000 gallons per day(an advantage
for this option is storage would not be required for the 40,000 gallons per day.
If disposal options using drains at 25 feet, 15 basins could be located on each 7.86 acre Field.
This option would be approximately 100,000 to 150,000 gallons per day(lower elevations
may limit the potential for this disposal option).

One potential option would be to install potential infiltration basins or other disposal options in the
buffer areas surrounding the spray fields. The installation of basins and associated drains will need
to be offset from the adjoining irrigation area. (Offset from irrigation to groundwater control drains
is 100 feet per15A NCAC 2T.0505). Therefore,It appears that a hybrid system would be difficult
to configure due to setbacks to needed drainage, and aquifer degradation in lower elevations
The alternatives are very limited because of the requirement of 100 feet to groundwater controls for
any permitted activity permitted under 15A NCAC 2T or 2U.
Recommendations:
High Rate Infiltration is not recommended because of; 1)setback requirements to drains,2)the low
loading rates (0.8 gallons per day per square foot), 3) the small basin size because of low aquifer
coefficients and thin aquifers, 4) setback of the drains to neighboring irrigation (100 feet), and , .
If you have any questions please contact my office.
Very truly yours,
Edwin Andrews &Associates, P.L.L.C. SOIL SCI
Edwin E. Andrews III P.G.,N.C.L.S.S.
Consulting Hydrogeologist and Soil Sci sent.3 _
122 %encl. LOG�� �.�
\� NON err /�/ •`ueee'� ` `�
.i• % & Aew
• `,iC3-224 a:
'9
= x

� � 9
j I � y4v7iAl+e. s .,F.:•" gj� 1,U." .��1 ,i,},*.
� � ";.fit ` � ••
ilk"A
�tll-M
Wt
of VIA 17
IAL
} ,
J r t
a 4� %rR# 3 t}►;�i�+
7 • l'•t
s
. 111 111lw ColU 11 111 . 11 .• 111
1
1••1 1� 1 � 1 1

I
0
N
0
ss9rt � tA 'o
an
LL (n W
s9r�
^ OON
19
r� u
% 000 J
t Fd
V)
-, 00, a z�
° c
c�Lo '9l o
'f N bio
06
' N �
9 •�
LIJJ
O C Y
a v ro
Ln
0 0 °
0
c 0
Os�9 u u
L o fU
0 0
m
41 v
v vim-.
O41. v
C
Q N p u
9 O
� Z
4
c ::3
O Q
L
� Ccu
41 U C
u0
N 4�
c 'n
m m

d
155 Ft 1.65 Ft
N O
N �
1.65 Ft d '''
ry
--1.75 Ft-- -----
-- tCD
o
to
vi
1�56'T ri
l�Sp•Z y
sir o
Tj ST•Z LOLn
0
W
S
!A
4 O
nN o
L
0. o to
CO N N O
L `
m
aJ N N
m N C
4 �y L
4� c: M N O
`V O
G Q C
4-J O
.0 0 m U
4J QJ O O O n- O OLO ry
Ln C) Ln
O
L 'I la0 ko la0 l0 la0
3
0 m
u N >
CO J
L �
C N 4-J ~
m
L
m �Q)♦ `N` �J?y �i{ �i o
N N
O to
d '�-1
Pad 7 j • N
bC.
p' °s
Q lyto
a a
)f OP
bjO �a
Ye e o
add �
is �yV N
e
C a~ to
O ii �y Qe o
10
41
> e pS
w O ^! 'fie •:e Qe e�a��,e� io
Ln o ° o tr°j 0�
co ¢e A� �S� oo
�' op ��Je�`
4.1
y I C
a
41 ARe\a ri L.
O
m O
m v
U
N N I- r1 O
v v v v v
In ID ID ID lD

O
0 o n ,o
d
Lo 1
� r!
N LL LL LL N
G O Ol W /h
LYi- W LL LL LL LL �- 4� O O O O O
W N co N N N m ro M W kD
.i y ,1
d cr K KK CCQ L 04 N
CA• LO d N m 00 L0 'T y b
M (n MMV)NNN Q•
to Ln Ln Ln Ln VI
O ro
N-!S; O O
4'J CC- M M
N ^V LL. v v
d
Ln
N fl. `� > `1 LL ,-L
! N N
A CO v h
N p NLN ri O
O = C N O O.N r n. O
�I♦ 4 Li LL LL Ld
00 0
f0 N O N O O Vl V1 N
Ln
QJ L a O O
v3i N aJ ; a a o
LO
i C ° a ` � LL � N $ a o N $
m co 41 -°i
u m �oro � o 0
ry Cc irO > 4J LL O ti..
Q� N hM Ln LN N N Ldp N h� V Y
> h Ln
1 > L N L
O
m > O r O
+' O 4- 41C
i m ni U C] m C U
to
O Ln O Ln O LOn N O N O Ln
O CD
O Ln
N LL Oi 00 00 1� n kc m W 00 Lnll� n LO
Lm0 lMD tm0 lM0 WLmD Lm M 0 LO W LMO LLO W

f
N
• O
O
0. N
Vf
l0
'.i
N
ti 7y��
g
a� -t
L;
W
2.6 Ft. N
a
IV O
O
8•Z O
V1
to
ei
L N
ro ry � v, $
O LL o
O N
N m O
a 4-1N 6 a
C LD
Y L, LL
rV 'y
C lD co LL fy M N
G Q N N M M 31®
L �
O
3 a m O
O O O O O O O p N
O G co n �o L' v
LO W k cq to W
v a
C � C
o s c
V v �
te � >
m J
V1 N -ALn
cv
0 N
to
m 3
V > v �V7$ V 7S�
0 7 _
� e\aC\JeFti Re\ati��e�k Jt M,5�17 0
V N
M
L1 51.7 Relative Ft. M>S>F> o
co O
> vi
U1 �o
IL w '
N'
S.
tS o N
, o
v �
v MI N 41
cj� 3� 1
o —
O L
{ O :3
00
O O O O 0 CD O O O N O
O Ol O 1� lD to
M N N LDD` nj
0O

64,500 '44 (44 IvIf-146
77
48
0 I '
64,000
•�, 1 . f rtX � A •j�',
63,500
3� 3 4 �'
,i'
ow-3 P-340
` 44 a�
62,500 r
�. P
62,000 ',` t� dr R. L
61,500 ;;.t•..•
2,163,000 2,163,500 2,164,000 2,164,500 2,165,000 2,165,500 2,166,000
N
Brunswick County Ocean Isle Beach WWI'P Edwin Andrews & Associates, PLI.0 Figure4
Scale as Shown
Model Map ConSulting I lydrogeology and Soil Science WProj.WWO520

a-J
C- Q
U
CU
m �
Q) Q
c
� G f
ateJ '
U N
O a. k..
'�
C M
r : N
O �
V
L
C
m

i
C' .-r
V p
co
Q
C I
iz
0C
-N 4-J
� m
O Ln
U
W
U M
N
D
L.
m

F
4-J
U 0
m a 0
(1) J
m (1)
CU O
N .9,*2-
m
(1)
O Q-
m
a- J
ar
=3 V
O 'n
U
m

4 Lr)
Al
>
a)+.j
fu 0
0
0 V •.`� _y
a>)
E Fu
tw
CL
=3
E
U- 0

CL
CU � •
LI1
V) N
J ^
to
O
U
- E - v '
j CL a ss .
bA E _. `• ^
O
U
F
r, tr r
.IMP=.1
co

• --• -
�cu
m � - - -
v� N -
cn 421
CU
r-I >
O
� u � m
a n:
0 o
U
��I

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 1 - OW 1
0 to 6 inches; Very dark grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2) silt loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 12 inches; Yellowish brown (1 OYR 5/6)sandy loam, subangular blocky, with many medium
light brownish gray(I OYR 7/2)depletions
12 to 18 inches; Very pale brown (I OYR 7/3)sandy loam, subangular blocky, many medium reddish
yellow (5YR 7/8)concentrations,
18 to 24 inches; Very pale brown (I OYR 7/6)fine sand, many medium subangular blocky structure
reddish yellow(5YR 7/8)concentrations
24 to 62 inches; Gray(I OYR 6/1) fine sand
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 1 - P1-1
0 to 6 inches; Dark grayish brown(I OYR 4/2)silt loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 14 inches; Light brownish gray(I OYR 6/2)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
14 to 22 inclies; Light gray(1 OYR 7/2) loamy sand, subangular blocky,
22 to 42 inches; Dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4)fine sand, subangular blocky,
42 to 50 inches; Very pale brown(I OYR 7/3) fine sand (I OYR 5/2)depletions
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy hnvestigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County- Ocean Isle Beach W WTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 1 -P1-2
0 to 4 inclies; Very dark gray(10YR 3/1)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
4 to 10 inclies; Grayish brown(I OYR 5/2)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
10 to 27 inches; Yellowish brown (1 OYR 5/4)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
27-36 inches; Brownish yellow(1 OYR 6/8)sandy loam, medium subangular blocky structure
36-48 inches; Light brownish gray(1 OYR 6/2) loamy sand, subangular blocky
45-52 inches; Very pale brown (I OYR 7/3)sandy loam, subangular blocky many medium yellowish
red(5YR 5/5)concentrations
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 1 -P1-3
0 to 6 inclies; Dark yellowish brown(10YR 3/4)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 12 inclies; Gray(1 OYR 5/1)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
12 to 15 inches; Brown (1 OYR 5/3) loamy sand, subangular blocky,
15-26 inclies; Dark yellowish brown(1 OYR 4/8) loamy sand, subangular blocky
26-30 inches; Brown(1 OYR 4/3) loamy sand, subangular blocky many medium cask gray
(I OYR 4/1)depletions
30-44 inches; Brownish yellow(10YR 6/6) sandy loam, subangular blocky
44-50 inches; Light gray(1 OYR 7/2)fine sand,
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County- Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 2-OW-2
0 to 4 inches; Very dark gray(I OYR 3/1)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
4 to 8 inches; Dark grayi (10YR4/1)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
8 to 12 inches; Yellowish red (5YR 4/6)sandy loam, subangular blocky,
12-16 inclics; Yellowish brown(10YR 5/4) fine sand
16-28 inches; Very pale brown(I OYR 7/4) loamy sand, subangular blocky
28-48 inches; Light brownish gray(I OYR 6/2)sandy loam, subangular blocky
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: moderately poor Particle Size Class: sandy loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Metliod: hand auger Date: October 20, 2020
Weatlier: Clear Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 2-P2-2
0 to 4 inches; Dark gray(I OYR 4/2)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
4 to I I inches; Brown (1 OYR 5/3)sandy loam, subangular blocky
I I to 20 inches; Gray(I OYR 6/1) loamy sand, subangular blocky,
20-32 inches; Light yellowish brown(1 OYR 6/4) loamy sand, subangular blocky
32-42 inches; Very pale brown(1 OYR 7/4) loamy sand, subangular blocky many medium yellow
(I OYR 7/8)concenetrations
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: moderately poor Particle Size Class: sandy loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: band auger Date: October 20, 2020
Weatlier: Clear Livestigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 2-P2-1
0 to 5 inches; Black(10YR 2/1)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
5 to 14 inches; Very dark gray(I OYR 3/1) sandy loam, subangular blocky,
14 to 22 inches; Brown(1 OYR 4/3) sandy loam, subangular blocky, many medium brown
(1 OYR 6/2)
22-50 inches; Pale brown(I OYR 6/3) fine sand
Soil Series: Leon Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: poor Particle Size Class: fine sand
"Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Aerie Alequod
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 20, 2020
Weather: Clear Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 2 -P2-3
0 to I0inches; Black(1 OYR 2/1)sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 28 inches; Very dark gray(1 OYR 3/1) sandy loam, subangular blocky,
Soil Series: Mill-Ville Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Very Poor Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Umbric Endoaquod
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 20, 2020
Weather: Clear Investigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 7 - OW-3
0 to 6 inches; Black (I OYR 2/1) silt loam subangular blocky tine roots
6 to 12 inches; Gray(1 OYR 6/1) sandy loam, subangular blocky,
12 to 21 inches; Brown (I OYR 5/3) sandy loam, subangular blocky„
21 to 30 inches; Very dark grayish brown(I OYR-3/2) fine sand, subangular blocky
30 to 44 inches; Brown (1 OYR 5/3) fine sand
44 to 52 inches; Dark grayish brown (I OYR 4/2) fine sand
52 to 70 inches; Brown(I OYR 5/3) fine sand
Soil Series: Bayineade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 3, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 7 - P3-1
0 to 6 inches; Very dark gray (I OYR 3/1) loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 14 inches; Gray(I OYR 6/1) fine sand, loose,
14 to 24 inches; Very dark grayish brown (I OYR 3/2) line sand, subangular
blocky spodic few faint dark yellowish brown (I OYR 4/4) concentrations
24 to 42 inches; Dark yellowish brown (I OYR 2/1) loamy sand, subangular blocky,
Soil Series: Bayrneade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 1, Soil Profile Descriptions
Field 7 -P3-2
0 to 4 inches; Very dark gray(I OYR 3/1) sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
4 to 12 inches; Grayish brown (10YR 6/1) sandy loam, subangular blocky,
12 to 15 inches; Gray(10YR 3/4) sandy loam, subangular blocky, many medium very dark
grayish brown (1 OYR 3/2) depletions
15-36 inches; Brownish yellow(I OYR 6/6) sandy loam, medium subangular blocky structure
36-52 inches; Pinkish gray(1 OYR 7/2) sandy loam,medium subangular blocky structure
few medium yellowish red (5YR 5/6) concentrations
36-48 inches; Light brownish gray (I OYR 6/2) loamy sand, subangular blocky
45-52 inches; Very pale brown(I OYR 7/3) sandy loam, subangular blocky many medium
yellowish red (5YR 5/6) concentrations
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews
Field 7 -P3-3
0 to 6 inches; Gray(I OYR 6/1) sandy loam subangular blocky fine roots
6 to 10 inches; Light gray(I OYR 7/1) sandy loam, subangular blocky,
10 to 15 inches; Very dark grayish brown(I OYR 3/2) loamy sand, subangular blocky,
15-20 inches; Dark yellowish brown (I OYR 4/6) loamy sand, subangular blocky
20-23 inches; Brown(I OYR 5/3) loamy sand, subangular blocky
23-32 inches; Light brownish gray(1 OYR 6/2) sandy loam, subangular blocky
32-48 inches; Pale brown (I OYR 6/3) fine sand,
Soil Series: Baymeade Landscape: Coastal Plain
Landform: low lying areas of the lower Coastal Plain
Parent Material: Fluvial, underlain by Marine sediments
Drainage Class: Poorly Particle Size Class: silt loam
Temperature Regime: thermic Subgroup Classification: Typic Endoaquult
Examination Method: hand auger Date: October 1, 2020
Weather: Cloudy Investigators: Ed Andrews

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 2, Lithologic Logs
Aq a ifer Test Site 1
Depth Description
0 - 5 ft. Brownish gray silty clayey sand poorly sorted
5 - 8 ft. Gray clayey silt
8 - 15 ft Yellow fine to medium well sorted sand
15 - 18 ft. Gray fine sand
Aquifer-Test Site 2
Depth Description
0 - 5 ft. Brownish gray silty clayey sand poorly sorted
5 - 8 ft. Gray clay
8 - 16 ft Gray fine to medium moderately well sorted sand
Aquifer Test Site 3
Depth Description
0 - 5 ft. Brownish gray silty clayey sand poorly sorted
5 - 7 ft. Gray clay
8 - 15 ft Gray fine to medium moderately well sorted sand
15 - 16 ft Gray silty clay
16 - 19 ft Gray fine to medium moderately well sorted sand

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 3, Geotechnical Borings
By Geotechnologies, Lic.

Geotechnical and Construction Materials Testing Services
October 15,2020
Ed Andrews
EDWIN ANDREWS&ASSOCIATES
P.O.Box 30653
Raleigh,NC 27622
Re: Submittal of Test Boring Data
Ocean Isle Wastewater Disposal Site
Ocean Isle,North Carolina
GeoTechnologies Project No. 1-20-0738-EA
Gentlemen:
GeoTechnologies, Inc. has completed the authorized soil test borings at the approximate locations indicated
on the attached site plan,Figure 1. The borings were located in the field by Ed Andrews.The borings were completed
with an all-terrain vehicle mounted drill rig utilizing rotary mud drilling techniques. The soils were sampled at
selected intervals using standard penetration test procedures designated in ASTM D-1586.
The borings were extended to depths of about 20 to 25 feet below existing grade. The soil samples were
visually classified in the laboratory by an experienced engineer utilizing the Unified Soil Classification system. The
attached Figure 2 presents a graphical smuniary of the test results.Detailed descriptions of the conditions encountered
at the individual test boring locations are presented on the attached soil test boring records.
In summary, subsurface conditions on the site were characterized by the presence of very loose to medium
dense slightly silty to silty sand in the upper 6 feet. From 6 to 12 feet the soils transitioned to clayey sands or sandy
clays. Below 12 feet the soils in B-1 consisted of very loose to medium dense silty to slightly silty sands that
extended to the 20-foot termination depth. In boring B-3 t11e soils from 12 to 17 feet consisted of very loose silty
sand. At 17 feet boring B-3 encountered very soft silty clay that extended to the 25-foot termination depth.
Penetration resistances within the soils varied from 0 to 22 blows per foot (bpf). Groundwater was encountered at
about 3 feet at the time of completion.
GeoTechnologies, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to provide you with our services during this phase of the
project. Please contact us if you should have questions regarding this information or if we may be of fitrther
assistance.
Sincerely, \N CARO''�,,
GeoTechnologies,Inc. • •O ti 9
SEAL
L 14319
�7 o/�z/lezo
David L. srael,P.E. •'
NC Registration No. 14319 ''"Ji"ftl NE�e'P���``
DL1 ��rtt��tttt�
Attachments
L A 1190975 EA11190975ea
3200 Wellington Ct.,Ste. 108•Raleigh,NC 27615•Phone [phone]•Fax [phone]•wm.geotechpa.com•License No.C•0894

JI
f
W ,
n U a
`NIA j' ♦'^
- a•. '
skofle
o
0
o
0
j U
N
a a �
.o
(>3
Y,^ v
V/
r
�J 1•
a 1

s+ N m
N 'V1
Y �
Q
3 c d
a
d
Z u L
LU
(' (L n. a c
W o g T c M 'o
■ U ® ® ® ® ❑ a,
M
W
Ll j O U-1
I � �
v) , u,
O
W
CD
N N W N N N O (V •
ce) •
f/J
W
N
J
W P
Z
W
•N
�a
0
a
N ca
0
L ..Q
00 m 0
LI c �:
O U
N O[F cocoO N �t t0 00 O N (D�
e- c- 04 N N 04 0. 0 �_)

TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTII DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(FT.) (FT.) (BLOV1'S/Fr.) SIX INCITES
0.0 0 10 20 40 60 t 00
0.1 Topsoil SP .f•. —
Gray to Brown Slightly Silty Fine SAND SIM 'I
-
2-2-1
6.0 . I:
Very Loose Gray,Orange S Brown Clayey Fine SC 1
SAND
i
� I3
12.0
Very Loose Light Gray Silty Fine SAND SM
0-0-1
14.0
Loose Light Gray Silty Fine SAND SA4
>-4-3
0
17.0 _
Medium Dense Gray Slightly Silty Fine SAND SP
Slat
• 6-5-10
20.0 I'
Boring tenninated at 20'
N
Z
Q
I
F
Groundwater encountered at 3'at time of boring.
JOB NUMBER 1-20-0738-EA
BORING NUMBER 13- 1
DATE 10-12-20 f
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

TEST BORING RECORD
DEPTH DESCRIPTION ELEVATION PENETRATION BLOWS PER
(yr.) (Fr.) (BLOWS/PT.) SIX INCHES
0.0 0 10 20 40 60 100
0.1 Topsoil SP .f.
Loose Brown&Gray Slightly Silty Fine SAND SM 'I
2.0 2-2-3
Medium Dense Dark Brown Silty Fine to Medium Sit
SAND v
6.0
Stitt Gray Fine Sandy CLAY CL
3-1
8.0 -6
Loose Gray Clayey Fine SAND w/Clay Seams Sc
12.0
Very Loose Gray Silty Fine to Medium SAND Sl\1
2-I-I
17.0
Very Soft Dark Gray to Dark Brown Silty CLAY CI I
0-0-0
M
0
F
(�9
r
(9
a
25.0 0-0-2
- o
Boring terminated at 25'
z
a
i
F
Groundwater encountered at 3'at time of boring.
JOB NUMBER 1-20-0738-EA
BORING NUMBER B-3
DATE 10-12-20 f
PAGE 1 OF 1 3200 Wellington Court,Ste 108
Raleigh,NC 27615

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WW'I-I'
Table 3A, Water Level - Field 1 (Site 1 )
East North Water Elevation Water Depth Measuring
State Plane State Plane Relative Point
NAD 83 (Ft.) NAD 83 (Ft.) Feet M.S.L. Feet (Ground)
2,165,026 64,252 52.07 2.67 OW-1
2,165,243 64,287 50.11 1.3 P-1-1
2,165,198 1 64,018 48.65 1.69 P-1-2
2,164,944 1 64,103 46.69 1.53 P-1-3

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWII'
Table 313, Water Level - Field 2 (Site 2)
East North Water Elevation Water Depth Measuring
State Plane State Plane Relative Point
NAD 83 (Ft.) NAD 83 (Ft.) Feet M.S.L. Feet (Ground)
2,164,194 63,875 54.66 1.22 OW-2
2,164,528 63,942 54.10 1.14 P-2-1
2,164,234 63,644 50.70 0.29 P-2-2
2,163,890 63,685 51.78 0.35 P-2-3

Brunswick County - Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 3C, Water Level - Field 7 (Site 3)
East North Water Elevation Water Depth Measuring
State Plane State Plane Relative Point
NAD 83 (Ft.) NAD 83 (Ft.) Feet M.S.L. Feet (Ground)
2,164,852 62,725 50.99 3.65 OW-3
2,164,814 63,021 52.72 2.1 P-3-1
2,165,222 62,737 52.65 2.08 P-3-2
2,164,785 62,374 51.42 1.41 P-3-3

Brunswick County-Ocean Isle Beach WWTP
Table 4,September Water Conditions
Site 1 Site 1 Calculated Site 1 Site 1 Calculated Site 1 Site 1 Calculated
Rainfall Irrigation Combined Input Irrigation Combined Input Irrigation Combined Input
Date Inches Inches Inches Gallons Inches Inches Gallons Inches Inches Gallons
1-Sep-20 0.07 0.16 0.23 49,087 0.13 0.2 42,685 0.05 0.12 25,611
2-Sep-20 0 0.16 0.16 34,148 0.2 0.2 42,685 0.15 0.15 32,013
3-Sep-20 0 0.161 0.16 34,148 0.21 0.2 42,685 0.161 0.16 34,148
4-Sep-20 0 0.17 0.17 36,282 0.2 0.2 42,685 0.19 0.19 40,550
5-Sep-20 0 0.2 0.2 42,685 0.25 0.25 53,356 0.18 0.18 38,416
6-Sep-20 0.02 0.16 0.18 38,416 0.23 0.25 53,356 0 0.02 4,268
7-Sep-20 0 0.16 0.16 34,148 0.21 0.21 44,819 0.1 0.1 21,342
8-Sep-20 0.58 0.16 0.74 157,933 0.2 0.78 166,470 0.15 0.73 155,798
9-Sep-20 0.44 0 0.44 93,906 0 0.44 93,906 0.18 0.62 132,322
10-Sep-20 0.01 0.16 0.17 36,282 0.21 0.22 46,953 0.17 0.18 38,416
11-Sep-20 0 0.11 0.11 23,476 0.21 0.21 44,819 0.15 0.15 32,013
12-Sep-20 0.07 0 0.07 14,940 0.22 0.29 61,893 0.15 0.22 46,953
13-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.26 0.26 55,490 0.15 0.15 32,013
14-Sep-20 0.18 0 0.18 38,416 0.22 0.4 85,369 0 0.18 38,416
15-Sep-20 0.01 01 0.01 2,134 0.23 0.24 51,221 01 0.01 2,134
16-Sep-20 0.72 0 0.72 153,664 0.08 0.8 170,738 0.11 0.82 175,007
17-Sep-20 3.59 0 3.59 766,187 0 3.59 766,187 0.191 3.78 806,737
18-Sep-20 0.01 0 0.01 2,134 0 0.01 2,134 0.161 0.17 36,282
19-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.21 0.21 44,819 0.151 0,15 32,013
20-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.21 0.21 44,819 0.15 0.15 32,013
21-Sep-20 0 01 0 0 0.21 0.21 44,819 0.15 0.15 32,013
22-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.22 0.22 46,953 0.15 0.15 32,013
23-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.24 0.24 51,221 0.15 0.15 32,013
24-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0.25 0.25 53,356 0.2 0.2 42,685
25-Sep-20 0.43 0 0.43 91,772 0.17 0.6 128,054 0.2 0.63 134,456
26-Sep-20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.26 0.26 55,490
27-Sep-20 0.05 01 0.05 10,671 0 0.05 10,671 0.25 0.3 64,027
28-Sep-20 0.07 0 0.07 14,940 0 0.07 14,940 0 0.07 14,940
29-Sep-20 0.21 0 0.21 44,819 0 0.21 44,819 0 0.21 44,819
30-Sep-20 0.01 0 0.01 2,134 0 0.01 2,134 0 0.01 2,134
Sept.Input 6.47 1.6 8.07 1,722,320 4.56 11.03 2,354,051 3.89 10.36 2,211,0581
Aveage Daily Darcy Flow/ET 57,411 78,468 73,702
calculation based: field 1-7.86 acres field 2-7.86 acres field 7-7.86 acres

N Pj
O O O O O
ui
N
O
N
O
a
a
N
d b
<DO O I I -
F.
d
O
m
UI
y U f7
O
p X
M O
iv
O
O d. W
N `0
X
—
N t .>�. (D
v
v
O N
p
O
O
O
L.
(0 Q7
E m w o
Z N 3
c l T O
C IV
d Z $ v
0
4 0
\ y i
\ � X
�U
X
p O
00 O
v
\ 2' 00 o
x
c
0
a o 0
N M
O O O O O
E
f0
CP (V'8n'Vn)M
N
3 0 �
N Z O
O
�C7 cN0 N fN
coU C OOf
2
O Q
;m v E
wa W a O

N
m
a
N
N
a
F-
O
N
m
---------- -------------------------
O
y0y
Ucud N N O C) (D n W 0 N N d W n n n 0 0 M N N n N W n n n 0 0) O m O O W 0 O N M N N l0 N
N z pj O '- N N N M M M M M M V V V d V V V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ID N (O (D N (D l0 (D t0 c0 cD [o Q (D
O G
N c >. -
0 2 n
Ci m
ti )
m o
o a W
N c
6 3
N O
D �
N 3 3
o O
N C
O E
D
o �
E
c
N
� O O
O d N N O M (D n W 0 N (D n o o o o M N N n N co n n n o m O O O O co O - O N M N N (D N
M M M (M M M V V V V V 'V V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (D N (D cD N (D lD lD (D (D (D lD (D (D
N
O
s a
N N
3
v
Qj
T U 4�.
� E �v
z 3 K
E_ �3
azD
W n w dd M N r O m W n o M O o W n (D V M N o m co n W vv co N O O w n w V M N r O m w n W M
n N Ol M n r N W N D O W N (O O M f� N m M n N W N (O O W N (O O M n N O) M n N W N o o V c0
N VV N W co W r N M N (D W 011 O fNV C) N (O 1� T O M (O n W O M N n W O N V�} N w W m N M N (O W O O
0 0 0 0 0 o N N N N N N M M M M M M V V V yy d N N N N N N N N l0 (D (D (D (D W W n
O O O O o o r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 O O
O O O O O O O O O O O O o o 0 0 0 n n o o 0 o o o 0 o o 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o (D 0 o o
O
U E D
a � m
u
c
E � a
� o
ptj rn o
d (n o
j
M Z o
W �
o z c mrx
3
O. L U
3 m E U r N M V N (D n o0 o r N M I;t IV tD n c0 o O ryry M V N cD n c0 Ol o N M V N (O n OD Of O N M cc�� N (D n W Ol O
W p. tt Q. 0 M � I � � �
r N N N N N N N N N No M o) M M M M M M M d a d V V V V V V d N

$ , F \ \
/ Z
\ �
/
§ ! � }
0 . . ,
) \ \
e e
6 = 7 ,
A ! ] /
a
cli
� � !
#
\ \ )
k
� \ \ _ e -
#
e
� 0 P ,
k 12 . a
°
t4 w
®(; { \ }
/k\f \\
(L+5a
\\ %
I �
\ x
\ co
<\ § / e
» f %
\ � —
® k
a © # )
:
9L
] e 7 ) \ )e f # 2
k 0%
/ { �
2 e \ (5j+'r)»
2
)\ §
.0 E g /
wEJ 0. m A

N
0 0 0 0 0
�I
a F
U I
O
n � 1
� o
cu
O o
U
Y O i I
�-
O
X
o Q W
I �
O � S
7 M
O
Ul
C o
O �
L d o
pa
0
E m m o rj
o'O 3 1 N O
C
U,g
v
aZ 8� ?,
0 0
X
O
M
X
O
Yi tQ
n Zj X
OMO
y 8 M
N U r
7
J M C
Lo � 00-
O
IL o o _ ¢ in
U ry O N M
�E
u6 �
rn
(5l'0n'Vn)M
3 Z
N
ID N O
O N fV
C7 U ~ 0 O
6
o_ pX ?
M
O n L
3 A E m c�

HYDROGEOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
GEOLOGY SOILS
EDWIN ANDREWS & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.
CONSULTING HYDROGEOLOGY AND SOIL SCIENCE
Y.O.BOX 30653
RALEIGH,N.C.27622-0653
PHONE-[phone]
October 27, 2022
Annemarie C. Crumrine, PE
ECS Southeast, LLP
6714 Netherlands Drive
Wilmington, NC 28405
Re: Preliminary Assessment HRI Potential, Bnais Vick County,NC
To support ECS Southeast,LLP-EAA Proj.0422A
Dear Ms. Cllunrine:
Edwin Andrews&Associates,PLLC has completed the evaluation of the approximately 10
geotechnical borings provided by ECS Southeast, LLP. These boring descriptions are attached.
The purpose of these boring was to determine if a sand aquifer is present on this site. The site is a
combination of several parcels near PIN 106603405079. The 10 geotechnical borings are shown
on Figure 1, Site Map. Review of the boring logs basically estimates the amount of clay present
at each site. The discussion of the borings follows:
1. Boring B -1 has clayey soil near surface to a depth of 8 feet will be difficult to control
during high rate infiltration basins. The sand aquifer, could be degraded by eroded clay,
suspension and deposition.
2. Boring B-2 has clayey soil from 5 to 7.5 feet below land surface can erode during
construction.
3. Boring B -3 has a clayey from 12 to 17 feet below land surface. This layer can limit the
sand aquifer if extensive.
4. Boring B -4 has clayey soil from 8 to 12 feet below land surface can erode during
construction.
5. Boring B - 5 has significant clayey deposits from 5.5 to 17 feet below land surface. This'
area is not suitable for high rate infiltration basins.
6. Boring B - 6 has clayey soil from 5.5 to 8 feet below land surface can erode during

construction. Also, a clay layer was encountered from 12 to 20 feet below land surface.
The sand aquifer is not sufficiently thick to support high rate dispersal. This area is not
suitable for high rate infiltration basins.
7. Boring B - 7 has significant clayey deposits from 5.5 to 12 feet below land surface. This
clayey soil will need to be controlled to prevent erosion,suspension and deposition,
coating the underlying sand aquifer.
8. Boring B - 8 has significant clayey deposits from 3 to 12 feet below land surface. This
clayey soil will need to be controlled to prevent erosion, suspension and deposition,
coating the underlying sand aquifer.
9. Boring B - 9 has clay at the surface to 5 feet below land surface. A second clay layer is
encountered from 8 to 12 feet below land surface. This clayey soil will need to be
controlled to prevent erosion, suspension and deposition,coating the underlying sand
aquifer.
10. Boring B - 10 has clay at the surface to 5.5 feet below land surface. A second clay layer
is encountered from 8 to 12 feet below land surface. This clayey soil will need to be
controlled to prevent erosion,suspension and deposition, coating the underlying sand
aquifer.
Figure 1, Site Map shows a spatial schematic of the borings. 1n conclusion,the evaluation of the
soils and underlying sediments. The site is very heterogeneous, with changes laterally and
vertically. In addition, topographic changes can pinch out sand aquifers as groundwater
discharges to streams.
Aquifer test sites were located near B -6 and B - 8 (attached),revealed average hydraulic
conductivity of less than 5 feet per day. The sum of the clayey sand and sand aquifer thickness
(est. 12 feet) was used to build a steady state MODFLOW simulation, using a reduced hydraulic
conductivity of 4 feet per day. As a preliminary model, initial water levels were not calibrated,
but approximated beneath land surface.
Two configurations for dispersal of effluent were simulated to determine the relative change to
the water surface. 1: Six High Rate Infiltration Basins(100 by 200 feet)were simulated using
drains placed at 36 feet above mean sea level at a distance of 100 feet from each basin. 2:
Twelve subsurface drainfields(100 by 200 feet)were simulated using drains placed at 36 feet
above mean sea level at a distance on 25 feet from each basin.
Both simulations were evaluated using a loading rate tip to 1.5 gallons per day per square foot. A
hypothetical observation well was placed in one of the basins to record water level changes over
time.

Figure 2,High Rate hnfiltration Basin Time vs. Water Level shows an increase from 41.19 feet
above mean sea level to 42.69 feet above mean sea level. Providing a reasonable estimate that
high rate infiltration basins are feasible.
Figure 3, Water level map of the time period with this elevated water level shows individual
mounding and influence of the drains.
Figure 4, Subsurface Disposal (LPP)Time vs. Water Level shows a decrease from 41.19 feet
above mean sea level to 41.00 feet above mean sea level. Providing a reasonable estimate that
subsurface drainfields are feasible. The space between the drainfields and the drains result in
lowered water levels at maximum loading.
Figure 5, Water level map of the time period with this modeled water level shows individual
mounding and influence of the drains relative to the drainfields.
Based on this preliminary analysis, the site can support small infiltration basins or drainfields
(20,000 to 30,000 gallons per day per site). The heterogeneity of the soils/sediments make
construction difficult. There is a possibility the costs could be high to control clay migration and
link water bearing sand deposits(aquifers).
Thanks for the opportunity to help with this. Please contact my office if you have any
questions.
Very truly yours,
Edwin Andrews &Associates P.L.L.C. �''—�
Edwin E.Andre% s Ill, P.G.,N.C.L.S.SCe
. ,-
w224
Consulting Hydrogeology and Soil Science e� - %0
y. .
encl.
7► N�i�M,1��!/1 '�i
�,:i
P
SEAL
�r► 3 `
lfy, ` •rrr11,i1`•,'````
2

ECS Southeast LLP Proposal 921202.2A
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED.Edwin Andrews&Associates,P.C.(Edwin Andrews&Associates,P.C.)and/or its subsidiaries,
affiliates,branches,or divisions,as an independent consultant,agrees to provide Client for its sole benefit and exclusive use
consulting services set forth in our Proposal.
DEFINITIONS.When used herein the terms'We","US",or"our'refer to Consultant and the terms"you","your',"he","his","it"and
"its"refer to Client.
RIGHT OF ENTRY AND RIGHT TO PROCEED. Client grants a right of entry from time to time to Consultant, its agents, staff,
consultants,and contractors or subcontractors, for the purpose of performing and with the right to perform all acts, studies, and
research including without limitation the making of tests and evaluations,pursuant to the agreed services.Client represents that
he possesses all necessary permits and licenses required for the continuation of its activities at the site.
BILLING AND PAYMENT. Unless otherwise indicated in our Proposal. Our billings will be based on actual accrued time, lest
costs,and expenses.Client agrees to pay invoice upon receipt.Should payment not be received within 30 days,the amount due
shall bear a services charge of 1 1/2 percent per month or 18 percent per year and the cost of collection, including reasonable
attorneys fees, if collected by law or through an attorney. If 1 72 percent per month exceeds the maximum allowed by law, the
charge will automatically be reduced to the maximum legally allowed. If Client has any objections to any invoice or part thereof
submitted by Consultant, he shall so advise us in writing giving his reasons within 14 days of receipt of such invoice. Client
agrees it will not exercise any right of set-off it has under this Agreement,any continuing agreement with Consultant,or any right
of set-off provided by law. No deduction shall be made from Consultant's invoice on account of penalty, liquidated damages, or
other sums withheld from payments to contractors or others. Payment of the invoice shall constitute final approval as to all
aspects of the work performed to date as well as the necessity thereof. If the project is terminated in whole or in part then we
shall be paid for services performed prior to our receiving or issuing written notice of such termination, in addition to our
reimbursable expenses and any shut down costs incurred. Shut down costs may, at our sole discretion, include completion of
analysis and records necessary to document our files and protect our professional reputation.
DAMAGE AT SITE.We will not be liable for any property damage or bodily injury arising from damage to or interference with
surface or subterranean structures(including,without limitation,pipes, tanks,telephone cables, etc.)which are not called to our
attention in writing and correctly shown on the plans furnished by Client in connection with work performed under this
Agreement.Client recognizes that the use of exploration and test equipment may unavoidably affect,alter,or damage the terrain
and affect subsurface,vegetation, buildings,structures and equipment in, at, or upon the site. Client accepts the fact that this is
inherent to our work and will not hold us liable or responsible for any such effect,alteration or damage.
STANDARD OF CARE AND WARRANTY. Professional services provided by us will be performed, findings obtained, and
recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering principles and practices. THIS WARRANTY IS
IN LIEU OF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES,EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED.
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY. Client agrees to limit our liability to Client or any third party arising from negligent professional
acts,errors or omissions,such that our total aggregate liability shall not exceed$50,000 or our total fee,whichever is lesser.
UNFORSEEN OCCURRENCES.If during the performance of services, any unforeseen hazardous substances or constituents or
other unforeseen conditions or occurrences are encountered which, in our sole judgment significantly affect or may affect the
services, the risk involved in providing the services, or the recommended scope of services, we will promptly notify Client
thereof.Subsequent to that notification,Consultant may:
(a) If practicable, in our sole judgment, complete the original Scope of Services in accordance with
the procedures originally intended in the Proposal;
(b) Agree with client to modify the Scope of Services and the estimate of charges to include study of
the previously unforeseen conditions or occurrences,such revision to be in writing and signed by the parties
and incorporated herein;or
Terminate the services effective on the date specified by us in writing.
CLAIMS. In the event that Client makes claim against us at law or otherwise,for any alleged error,omission,or act arising out of
the performance of our services,that cannot be mutually resolved without resort to litigation,and Client fails to prove such claim,
then Client shall pay all costs incurred by us in defending ourselves against the claim, including, without limitation, our
personnel-related costs, attorneys'fees, court costs, and other claim-related expenses, including, without limitation, costs, fees,
and expenses of experts.Client agrees that for the purposes of this Agreement it has failed to prove its claim when the judgment
in litigation is for a sum of money less than that sum offered by us to resolve the matter without litigation.
DOCUMENTS.Client will furnish or cause to be furnished such reports,data,studies,plans,specifications,documents and other
information deemed necessary by us for proper performance of our services.We may rely upon Client-provided documents in
performing the services required under this Agreement;however,we assume no responsibility or liability for their accuracy.Client-
provided documents will remain property of Client.All documents,including but not limited to,drawings,specifications,
3

AA
Oo
qel
•.`� rap'a•,.► si .:� �
(ell tKW,
rt�'��� m I I I-1 �'� 1%}•'' I- J V
W
1 U w
� Z)
EO H

x
i'
E
F
v ..
7
SI
N
ate+ O
•bU N
x �
� Q
0
�o
> b
+
..
c�p
f— M
N n 3
ir�uai

lc�
C�
cn

fl
i
I
I
r
i
p
0
� S
m a ' N
iC/]d
F N •�
py
0 00
aC
a A 0
nil
a�
'IrknC4
• .r Ir a a tc po > �.
�Il[MI Fly A A

rL 0 2)(
i
ILC
ILI
\ o
/ N
cd
on o
x �
� N- - N i
�-4 En
cn
vi cad

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET: ��E
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 B-01 1 of 1 E
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
100>
5tone's Throw Drive,Ocean isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF CIRCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
BOTTOM OF CASING
m Cl-LU
Z ZtZ p uqulDUMR
H y > l0 X PLASTIC UMTT
= Z LU p W J Q j ®STANDARD PENETRATION BIOVKJFT
LU a LU > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL � F ? zD 40 FO so 103 0 CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TSF
Q CL Q d Q W m ROCK gUAItTY DESIGNATION T 2 3 4 5
N V<a1 .� RECOVERY
LL 0 WATER CONTF6SF
ROD [FINES CONTENT]f
REC i0 20 30 4'O 50
Topsoil Thickness[3.00 )
11 ,t
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
brown,moist,loose ; f 104-6
S-1 SS 18 18 (10)
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
r
gray/brown,moist to saturated,very W011-1-1
S-2 SS 18 18 loose,with shell fragments (2)
5 -5
WOH-WOH-1
S-3 SS 18 18 (T)
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
saturated,very loose,with clay lenses 2-2-2
S-4 SS 18 18 and weathered limestone (4)
1
10 -10
(SP) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,very loose,with weathered
limestone
3-2-2
S-5 SS 18 18 (4)
15 — -15
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,gray,
saturated,very hard
S-6 SS 12 12
' 6-50
END OF BORING AT 19.5 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
V WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 212022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
t WL(Completion) 4.50 BORING
COMPLETED: Oct 212022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
SC WL(Seasonal High Water) _
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
IF WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 B-02 1 of 1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR: EC
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
IODY
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF CIRCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
BOTTOM OF CASING
Or
COZ Z W LL - LIQUID UM"
II-- �j Z �(PLASTIC LIMIT
= Z J p W J O ®STANDARD PENETRATION BLOSVS/FT
F w n w DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL Of
1 zo 40 0 Ea LDD O UUBMTFO PENETROMETER iSF
w d a U I O ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&
Q w Q w Ca RECOVERY 1 2 3 4 5
TQ (Aw WATERCONTENTU
RQD [FISES CONTENI[Y.
_ REC 10 20 30 40 W
Topsoil Thickness[4.00"]
(SP)FINE TO MFDIUM SAND,gray,
moist,loose I-1.
S-1 SS 18 18 (6)
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
moist to saturated,loose,with clay 8-5 4
S-2 SS 18 18 lenses (9) }�
5 -5
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
gray,saturated,very loose,with shell .:• woR-woRa
S-3 SS 18 18 fragments (3)
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,medium dense,with shell 8-8-10
S-4 SS 18 18 fragments (18)
8
10 -10
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,dense,with clay lenses and
shell fragments
13-13-18
S-5 SS 18 18 (31)
3,
15 -15
(SP) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray, laor
saturated,very loose,with weathere [-Z.,
S-6 SS 18 18 limestone (3)
3-1-1
S-7 SS 18 18 (2)
2
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
4 WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 212022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
WL(Completion) 4.50 BORING
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED: Oct 21 zo22 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY:
S'Z WL(Stabilized) Track OMA DRILLING METHOD:Mud rotary
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO,: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 B•03 1 of 1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
100>
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSSOF CIRCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING. STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: BOTTOM OF CASING
Uj
{--� CO W Z Z A UQUIDUMIT
LL } N } ('1W' �p X PLASTICEIMR
a wZ W Ei OfJ 0 In ®STANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/PT
a J > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL w ¢ o 20 40 E0 fa 100 O CAUBRATEOPENETROMETERTSF
W d d 0 H m ROCK QUALITY OESIGNATION 6 S 2 3 4 5
N 2 - Q RECOVERY
Q Q w 0 WATER CONTENT%
In .1 +ROD
[FlNES COiITENTJ%
REC 10 20 30 40 b0 _
Topsoil Thickness[3.00")
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown
to gray,moist to saturated, loose to 2-4.4
S-1 SS 18 18 medium dense (8)
4-4.5
S-2 SS 18 18 (9)
5 -5
9-13-15
S-3 SS 18 18 (28)
28
(SP)MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND,gray,
saturated,loose,with clay lenses
S-4 SS 18 18
10 -10
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
gray,saturated,very loose
S-5 SS 18 18
15 f' 15
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated, loose,with weathered
limestone
1-4-4
S 6 SS 18 18 (8)
a
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 212022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
1 WL(Completion) 4.00 BORING
Z WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED: Oct212022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY. DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
NZ WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 1 B-04 1101`1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
016 WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
LOSS OF CIRCULATION IODI
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
80TT0\t OF CASING
Of
_ DO W z Z A uQU1DufAIT
j } } w Z X PLASTIC tIMIT
w OC J O ®STANDARD PENETMTION BLOW$/FT
= W
J
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL
H W CL W 0 Q p )D 40 Fn £0 1G) Q CALIBRATED PENETROMETER iSf
O Q. Q M ¢ w DO ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION IS 1 2 3 4 5
Q Q Of3 W RECOVERY WATERCO.NTENTSS
Ln t ROD (FINESCONTENT1%
REC t0 20 30 40 50
Topsoil Thickness[2.00"I
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, brown/
gray,moist to saturated, loose 2-3-2
S-1 SS 18 18 (5) 60
v 2-4-s
S-2 SS 18 18 (9)
5 -5
343
S-3 SS 18 18 (2)
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,brown,
saturated, soft 1-1-2
S-4 SS 18 18 (3)
10 -10
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
saturated,very loose,with clay lenses
WOH-tvOH-
S-S SS 18 18 p WOH
(0)
15 1�i
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
saturated,very loose
1-WOH-WCH
S-6 SS 18 18 (0)
20
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 20 2022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
t WL(Completion) 4.00 BORING
Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED:
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
NZ WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 1 B-OS 1 of 1 Ec i
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF CIRCULATION Laor
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
aorroM of casurG
w z
DO aW. -- ? `� � p uqulDUMN
> } > Sp X PIASTICUMEr
= Z W p w w O ®STANDARD PENETRATIONBLOWS/FT
f-. W a W > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL Dc F- 20 40 60 EO 100 O CAEIBRATEOPENETROMETERTSF
w d 2 d U H > O ROCK CLUAUTY DEMNATION 6
Q '/1 Q w m RECOVERY 1 2 3 4 5
< ROD WATER CONTEM`A
LFINES COYTEMI%
REC 10 20 30 40 SO
Topsoil Thickness[3.0011]
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown
to tan,moist to saturated,loose 2-4-4
S-1 SS 18 18 (8)
3-3.4
S-2 SS 18 18 (7)
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,tan to gray,
saturated,firm to soft 2-2-3
S-3 SS 18 18 (5)
1-3-4
SA SS 18 18 (7)
10-- -10
r
r
1-1 2
S-5 SS 18 18 (3)
15 r -15
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,tan,
saturated,very loose
1AVOLL-1
S-6 SS 18 18 (1)
1
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAYBE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 202022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
1 WL(Completion) 2.50 BORING
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED: Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY:
SEZ WL(Stabilized) Track OMA DRILLING METHOD:Mud rotary
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET: Nd
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 1 B-06 1 of 1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR: EE
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
100>
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSSOFORCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: BOTTOMOFCASING
LU Z
m W — Z A UQUIDUMR
} h } lO X PLASTIC LIMU
= Z J O W J Q j ®STANDARD PENETRAIION BLOWS/fT
W a W > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL cc
F 7 20 ao En so Em Q CALIBRATED PENETROMETE0.TSf
W Ct 2 a H j ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATIONS
In W j J m RECOVERY 1 2 3 4 5
Q Q Cr > W WATERCONTENT56
to L RQD [FMISCONTEN-11%
REC 10 20 30 40 50
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown/
gray,moist to saturated,loose to
medium dense 3.4-4
S-1 SS 18 18 _ (8)
46/
S-2 SS 18 18 (13)
5 -5
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,tan,saturated,
stiff 4.6.7
S-3 SS 18 18 (13)
3
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,loose 5-5-5
S-4 SS 18 18 (10)
10
10 -10
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, ;J`:
gray,saturated,very loose
I I WWI 1
S-5 SS 18 18 l (I)
5f' 222
S-6 SS 18 18 (41
`:(+ 4
20
END OF BORING AT 20 FT l
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 212022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
t WL(Completion) 2.00 BORING
Oct 212022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED:
EQUIPMENT: LOGGEO BY: DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
NZ WL(Stabilized) Track OM
ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 2232413 B•07 1 of 1 EC p
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR: �•
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
LOSS Of ORCULATIO?! IOOI
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
BOTTOM 0f CASING
1r
DO ii z Z V w - X UQUIO LIMA
�p X PLASTIC UMIT
= z J p W W 7 (2)STANDARD PENEIRAVONBEOWS/fT
x w n W > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL Of- ?
20 40 EA EO 100 0 CALIBRATEOPENETROMETERTSf
O C1. 2 0, U Q W m ROCK QUALIFY DESIGNATION& 1 2 3 4 5
Q w RECOVERY
< '� N K W ROD
WATERCONTENT%
I11NE5 CONTENT!%
-REC 10 20 30 40 50
Topsoil Thickness[2.00")
(SIP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown/
gray,moist to saturated,very loose to 1-2-2
S-1 SS 18 18 loose (4)
_ 3.4.4
S-2 SS 18 18 (8)
5 -5-
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
brown,saturated,medium dense -8.4
S-3 SS 18 18 (12)
' ,. 2
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,brown/red,
saturated,firm 3-4-4
S-4 SS 18 18 ISI
10 -10 3
(SP) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
saturated,very loose to loose,with
clay lenses
2-1-2
S-5 SS 18 18 (3)
15 -15-
1-s-S
S-6 SS 18 18 (10)
10
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 20 2022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
7 WL(Completion) 3.00 BORING
SL WL(Seasonal High Water) COMPLETED: Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:Mud rotar
NZ WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA y
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET. �®
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 1 B-08 1 of 1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
018 W WTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
lour
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF C I RCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
BOTTOM OF CASING
Ca nw Z Z UQUlO UMIT
} p X PLASUCUMN
w > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL o y ®STANDARD PENFiRATION BL01VSji7
> 20 40 EO 60 103 O CAUARATEOPENETROMETERTSE
w (L O- U ►- j _1 ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATIONS
Q � Q j DO 1 2 3 4 5
7 w0 WATERCOMENT%
In RQD
(FltiES CONTENi(iS
REC 10 20 30 40 50
Topsoil Thickness[3.0011]
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
moist to saturated,very loose 1_2_1
S-1 SS 18 18 (3)
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, ;,l
brown,saturated, loose 2-2 4
S-2 SS 18 18 ' (FI
5 -5
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,gray/brown,
saturated,stiff to firm 2-3-6
S-3 SS 18 18 (9) }
1
3.4 4
S-4 SS 18 18
10 -10
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated, loose
1-1-4
S-5 SS 18 18 (s)
15- - -- 15-
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,very loose,with clay lenses
3.1-1
S-G SS 18 18 (2)
2
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 20 2022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
1 WL(Completion) 4.00 BORING
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED: Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT- LOGGED BY- DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
I'Z WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET:
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 1 B-09 i of i
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
100>
5tone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF CIRCULATION
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION: '
BOTTO\10r CASING
K
CO a Z E A UQUIDUMiT
w io X PLASTICUMN
w W Z j STANDARD PENETRATIONSLOWS/ET
w a w j DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL 7
Cl J w Q 10 40 fJ7 F7 ICO O CALIRRATEOPENETROMEIERTST
w Q W Q w CO ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION B 1 p 3 4 b
O
Q to Q RECOVERY
In N w WATER CONTENT'A
RQD LFIVES COYTENII
—Topsoil Thickness[3.00"] REC 10 20 30 40 50
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,brown,moist
to saturated,soft
S-1 SS 18 18 (4)
'= I
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
brown/gray,saturated,loose 2-3 4
S-2 SS 18 18 (/)
5 .f -5
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,brown,
saturated,loose,with clay lenses 1-1-4
S-3 SS 18 18 (s)
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,
gray/brown,saturated,very loose 4-2-1
S-4 SS 18 18 (3)
-10
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray/
brown,saturated,very loose,with
clay lenses
1-WOH-WOH
S-5 SS 18 18 p (0)
15 — -15
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,loose,with clay lenses and
shell fragments
3-4-4
S-6 SS 18 18 (a)
R
20
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 20 2022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
3E WL(Completion) 2.50 BORING
COMPLETED: Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
SF WL(Seasonal High Water)
( EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY- DRILLING METHOD:Mud rotary
S'Z WL Stabilized Track IOMA
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

CLIENT: PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: SHEET-
Brunswick County Public Utilities 22:32413 18-10 1 of 1
PROJECT NAME: DRILLER/CONTRACTOR:
OIB WWTP Infiltration Basin Mid Atlantic Drilling,Inc.
SITE LOCATION:
Stone's Throw Drive,Ocean Isle Beach,North Carolina,28469 LOSS OF CIRCULATION lour
NORTHING: EASTING: STATION: SURFACE ELEVATION:
BOTTOM OF CASING
w W Z
^ m a Z W LL _ A LIQUID LIMIT
LFL- �p X PLASTIC LIMIT
= Z W w 0 A ®STANDARD PENETRATION BLOWS/FT
f W a > DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL F_ 3 zo e0 En Ea 10o O UOBRATFD PENETROMETER TSf
CL _,W LJ
Q O Q w m ROCK QUALITY DESIGNANONBLZI 1 2 3 4 5
Q to Q W J RECOVERY
Ln In W WATERCONIENTU
� ROD IFINESCONTENTI%
REC 10 20 30 40 50
Topsoil Thickness[3.00")
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, Gf
brown,moist to saturated,very loose N/OH-WOH-
S 1 SS 18 18 WOH
(0)
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,gray,
saturated,soft WOH-1-1
S-2 SS 18 18 (2)
5 -5
(SP) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,medium dense,with clay 2.6.8
S-3 SS 18 18 lenses (1•:)
la
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,gray,
saturated,stiff 1-6.3
S-4 SS 18 18 (9)
10 -10
(SP)FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,gray,
saturated,loose,with shell fragments
1-4-4
S-5 SS 18 18 (8)
15 -15
1-2.4
S-6 SS 18 18 (6)
20 6
END OF BORING AT 20 FT
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENTTHE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOILTYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL
SZ WL(First Encountered) BORING STARTED: Oct 202022 CAVE IN DEPTH:
t WL(Completion) 2.50 BORING
SE WL(Seasonal High Water)
COMPLETED: Oct 20 2022 HAMMER TYPE: Auto
EQUIPMENT: LOGGED BY: DRILLING METHOD:Mud rota
NZ WL(Stabilized) Track IOMA ry
GEOTECHNICAL BOREHOLE LOG

O o
rn
a
a
m
i
� o
LN I ,
U
m
v �
p N O N
y D O
o U
Q O X
�l o
N
y N r
.o m
o a w
8
N o
x
>
V C •�
w
1 U T
o
N
tt O
1 O
O
o
10 7/ Q r O
E m v I
rnZ c 3
7 w ' a
a.z Z)-�o
0
Y
4 0
0
x
N
X �
n r0 O
O
O N N u
O � U
•� U
o S_
w
J c 7
a a oo
N N
U O O O O O O
C
E
l�
(V'8n'VA)M
w
C� N
Q C7 U ~ N
C x Z C O
` N
3-00 E
'wCL c,c a ¢ 6

v�
a
a
0
a
F
0
N
L
Q�I
d
N ry N V
NM M N N c
NN N NO M N NN V N
NN N
N N N N '- N N N N •- .- N N N N N N
N (a T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
O Zoj; a
N Y,.
o a` w
0
N C
i 3
N 0
N
3 3
� o
N a
'o E
0
c o
o =
o
a
c
INc N V Cq N O N M R O M N N g V N N q M v M v o M M
(`J N N N N N N N N N N N �- N N N N N N N N N N N N N CV fV N N N N N N .- N N N N '- (y N N N N N
QN
L
N � Qj
co E N N
Z C >
n
We
T
a Z 7 v
n l0 M N O M fM n W M N O M M n to ('� O M W n fD a M N O M
f0 t0 O M N r N N (o O a0 (VV f0 O M n N M n �- N w N w O 00 l0 O M ^^ N T M n Ln w
O M h M W O M a} l0 n O� 0 M n w O N a N to w M e- N M N fo W O ��vf{ to to n 01 O M aa f0 n w
a0 CO 00 M W M M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N lV N N N N M M M M M M M
� � � rr °n° nnnnnnnnnt� naococococororor000aowooweoa00000eoromrorowaowromw0)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0
0
E TO
a �
N � E
6QQS F �
a
m o
p� rn o
N _ N
N H p 4
�C{CO N Cl)
X Z C O
C o �{ ^ a �}
d K d Q p fn N N N h N h N tOo t0 tN0 �Mp t0 two 1M0 cno N fMo r n�n n n n n�n ^ nO r W 00 W aM0 00 w w w w w o O� QNi Ql m OMf O
N N N N N h N N N N N N N M �) N N N N M N N N N N N N h N N N N N N N U) vi 40 N 0

a
d
N
O
c0
F- ryry
O
N
U
N
CD
v
VI N (M 0 WN (0 N (0 m l0 (D O N C` N N N N N N A. M a O O N N O c0 O O O N O N C) N a �"
N M M M M M M M M M M 0 M M a a a M M M M M M M M M MA
0M M M M C) MN N M N M M M M N - N N �
N T
o n
O
N Yn
d W x
N C
o
N
N v
0 3
a �
N O.
o E
0
a
C N
O L
O
N
j O
C G
N M N (O N 0 N (D m (0 1' N O N f� N N 0 N 00 M O O N N O N O O O N O N Q N a
M M M C) M M M M M M M M a a a M M M C) M M M M M M C M M M M M M C) N N M N M M M M N M N N
O
CQ
L N
N G y
S �
L w Ory >
n Q L U
� Eco
d w ri bi
z
a;5-; � 3
T
7 W
d Z 0 v
O m N (- N a M N O m N C` N It M N
r` NN a M N O O N (O D
C)
(D O NryW O M N O
M co 0 M NNWOOMnNlaNWM1 N 2 NO MN (0)0N ON ON ON ON N N Vol M M MMM a V a a aN N ON (O NO w ND f0 0D O 1- I- t- 1� f-
mmmmrn M m m m m m m M m m 01 M 01 01 0) 01 m mmmm M m m m m D1 m m m o) M. M m M. M. m m m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 T. 0 o 0 o 0
0
0
U � �
J v �
M o m
N � a E
a m o
N uj o
3 0
N z O >
O N
V N N Cj
O U ~ O
e o —
m 6 E (r3 u N M aa N M m O N M ee�� N (0 t� pppp m 0 N M a N to n N m 0 N M yy N (D I� N m 0 N M N (0�11-
0 > 0 ri7 N N N (0 N N N N N (D l0 (0 10 t0 (D (O (D (D (p t� I� r n n r t` (� t` N OD M N (O N N N N a0 m O) m m O) m m m m m
W 0_ fL (L Q O !n (D to to (D (0 (0 (D (0 (0 (0 (0 m N (O (D (D (D (D (0 fD l0 (D (O (O (O lD (O N l0 l0 (0 (O (D (O l0 N (D (0 (0 (0 T (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (O N (O

N
O O O O O
_ N
N O
� I
Q..
N
4/
� O -
I �
I
� O
N �
(O
N �
IN �
N y O o O
C; U o
O
N � �
[� a` w g
O
N � N
O C V
.7
F- N
N
I'I�
I
N
N
t.w
5 ^E ,� O
0)0
C ,o
a Z 8 v
b
I I o
x
0 0
1 I �
x o
10 o
v 0) N
N '5 F 'S
12
O 0 T 'v
O CJ O O O c0
C
06 cn (Sl'8n'Hn)M
N
3 0
0
�Np N d fV
Z O c
C o nco
3 m �' s
wa a. ¢ S

O O
Iy
U _
O
a
ru
N
Q
N
Co
U N
(N� h
p C p
N p T o o N
o a p o
p
O X
N
N v
O
O a` w
ry o o } p
O o
N
N 5 co
O O
N
V
O 8 N
U
U
` r
o I ,
I �
a
I�
� pwo
E ro p
Z
.a< �i. op
T v
d Z Z)v
o
11
O
1 O
O
`\ IN
O N W V O
O \ O
D^ 5 ( O
U/ co
5 8 t
N E 12 w 5
J 0
IL o o _ ¢ 05
C O O O O O O
C
•E
io
vi (Sl'8n'vNM
d
Z o
0
Q M U ~
Z Ol
3m
a
v�
W as E
of 0- N o

N
01
a
rn
N
N
O
P7
F-
CV
tQ
U
O7
6
m
M w n co w m N r- V V N M O O w r- w s} N a} O N U m m N N
O C O N Ol (n O) lT m a, m a, 00 OD UJ U7 CO N 6I, U) CO F-
� O d
N � j
O j
o c
0 3
N O
� U
3
N � O
V c
N a
o �
n
c O
O t
G E
O
v
r_
8 N
o o _
U) N t` CO aa}} N aa}} O N O Ot - (n O N N � N
O) N (n Ot lT lT (!) (n O) N (7t Cn 0] lT) (T O O1 U) f0 co CO co 00 lb U7 CO O lb n UJ In f` co r CO U) O) M
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N N N N N N (V CV N N N N N N N N N N
N
o
n
'C N
2 C
T O�
N E N
Nvl 'p R�1 r
m Q C C
�W8
z
IL D
�v
0 0 0 0 0 o o o 0 0 o o 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 o o o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CV C (D W O N 't CD CO O N V w0 CO CJ N w0 N O N a CO w O N V w w O N V w 00 o N 'V w
M M M M C) M M M M M M M M CM M M M M M C c) M M M M M M M M C) M M M M 11 M
O
U E v _
d 3
0 o .a
c A �
n o
a
aj o 0
(3n'
G M Z O >
O 4
5-0(No N U A
V�
C x 21 3
O cO. CL��7 U_ �} (p C. C� a�
O O - wA C�J N N (M V VNI O V1 N h COD O (NO (MO V (NO COD w COD w r, n r r r ^ t` n W�;;
coN OMO V W 000 CnCpp pppp Puj a (Y a N O O O (D (D CO tD CD fD O Co' O (D O fD tD CD tp CO lD fD tD lD O O O O (O O CD tD l0 O O tD (D (D (D CD